'But today, Cronin says he is no longer certain he can support Bush. As he put it, "I have had some doubts about the wisdom of this administration."'

One question: What took you so long?

Support for the Swift Boat Veterans for "Truth"??!! This means you WEREN'T questioning the wisdom of this administration as recently as 2004??? Great, the scales have fallen from your eyes.

Give me a f***ing break...

Having been in the public eye for decades, Archie was playing it smart and safe on Sunday night (as was Olivia).

They both knew that every 14.5 seconds NBC would pan the camera in their direction, and any hint of emotion had the potential to be mis-construed and over analyzed by the press (yourself, quite obviously, included).

Peyton made a touchdown pass. They cheer. They must be rooting for the Colts.

Eli throws a pick. They look dejected. They must be rooting for the Giants.

Not to mention in his playing days, Archie's also been burned by the public and media perception quite recently. How about how he got raked over the coals with the whole Eli to San Diego vs. New York thing?

It's not that they weren't enjoying themselves, it's that they knew that a) they couldn't be happy with either team winning or either team losing, and b) they couldn't give the perception that they were rooting for one son over another. Not a bad situation to be in from my armchair, but it has its evident and gut-wrenching difficulties nonetheless.

Whoever comes into power -- be it 2007 and the legislative branch, 2009 and the executive branch, or 20XX and the judicial branch -- will never, EVER demonstrate the testicular fortitude to bring any charges against anyone from the Bush administration, legality and legalese notwithstanding.

They'll just say something like, "for the good of the country, we must move on" (MoveOn...that's catchy...I like that), or the ever-popular, "we don't want to over-burden John and Jane Q. Taxpayer."

It just ain't gonna happen...

(as much as you or I would like it to)

We are too quick to accept "expert studies" as fact, and you have done a great job of breaking down the flawed methodology of this one...

As a research analyst focused on consumer behavior (specific to technology) I see this all too often. I wonder what the motivation was (seemingly they were only seeking to bash the iPhone one way or another, robust methodology be damned...or maybe a large client that happens to make a rival phone "sponsored" the study)?

Controversy is good, but creating it for its own sake just doesn't make sense. Thanks...

...and Iran hasn't given us any trouble since. They've been a perfectly fine friend to the US, through good times and bad. Nope. Nothing to see here.

Clandestine regime change indeed. Did these guys even go to history class??

Isn't this kind of like when Hank the Angry Drunken Dwarf won People's most beautiful people online contest?

McCain Version 2000 would have no problem saying W was/is a fool.

Version 2004 took a slightly different, more expeditious tack.

So are we to believe Version 2008? Methinks not.

Read Lizza's article...this is par for the course. The agent for change has rapidly become the lesser of two evils. Far lesser, granted, but evil (in the political, not nec. personal context) nonetheless.

who would I cite? Blackwell, or the Post?

Florida 2000, Ohio (and Pennsylvania for that matter) 2004. It just doesn't seem to be on the Obama team's radar, or they at least aren't addressing it publicly.

Maybe for fear of being seen as influenced by "conspiracy theorists"? If that's the case, then the Repubs win twice: they get to suppress the vote with impunity and also get to pull the "Dems talking crazy" card...

This is a serious problem in Philly -- operatives driving around in unmarked vans scaring people away from the polls and similar tactics. TALK ABOUT IT, Obama team!!!

Wow, I get to root against the Redskins for more than one reason?! Life is good.

A: More of the same from the boneheads on the hill. Lots of talk and nothing backing it up.

f**k Lieberman, f**k Harry Reid and f**k the testicularly challenged Democratic Caucus.

I'm officially an independent as of this very day.

@ totallyblase

no...not literally, metaphorically.

sometimes when you have them, you have to use them, and in doing so they become exposed, but you have to take that risk. Protecting them (i.e. not using them) for the sake of the caucus is where I lose all respect.

More than half the world (methinks quite a few of the "better half") would also allow artistic license without crying sexism.

"Republicans will insist on our basic right to participate in the legislative process. The Republican Conference intends to protect the Senate's history of full and open consideration of major legislation, which includes a fair amendment process and the opportunity for debate."

You mean like we all had with the PATRIOT act, and other POS legislation you jammed down our (and the then Democratic minority's) throats?

Slimy bastard that one...

...that there's no such f-ing word as "incentivizing"!!!!!

If you're going to make no sense whatsoever, at least do it with correct grammar and diction. Dumbass.