Re: "[Philly Steve]...what are your problems? This item was meant to be funny, and it sort of is."

I thought it was hilarious. It's the kind of thing I used to read in National Lampoon or even Mad Magazine. It's up there with Chastity Belts with the Playboy logo.

I just was commenting that, among the Radical Right, there is earnest, sincere belief that, assuming a couple got far enough for one partner to actually read the thong (assuming the lights are on), that this would actually make a difference... Or that the person who would be wearing this would "get this far".

There is actually a (large) segment of the population that believes this, along with "secret satanic messages" in rock music and if you never tell teenagers about condoms they won't have sex.

My comment was that the Radical Right is impossible to parody. If we were to try to make up something that is so outlandish that “no one in their right mind would believe it”, the Radical Right will.

For example, suppose we proposed a line of condoms, with Biblical verses printed on them pertaining to marriage and procreation. That way unmarried couples will read the verse as they put it on and suddenly abstain from sex, or married couples will read the verse and take the condom off so they will have babies (if they are Catholic).

That is so ridiculous that National Lampoon would reject it as too weird. But I would bet that the Radical Right would get a grant from the Bush Administration to put them out.

That was my only point.

Ronald Reagan has his "Reagan-Democrats".

George W. Bush has his "Blue Dogs".

Meanwhile, The Bush White House did not even blink at tossing aside the Republican Senate nominee in favor of "Independent Democrat" Joe Lieberman.

Republicans understand that power wins votes. The Democratic leadership of Congress appears to believe that weakness does.

As a Democrat, I am not at all confident that we will not see both a Republican Congress and Republican White House come January 2009: They have the media on thier side as well as power and money (no matter what you see now, Republcans will, overall, reais and spend 1.5:1 against the Demcorats this year... the good news is it won't be 2:1).

And we will deserve it, even though America will not.

I can't wait until the mainsteam media starts to declare this a "problem" for Senator Obama.

Various writers have, for many years, made declarations that the Radical Right (Religious and otherwise) are difficult to parody because it is, in Lily Tomlins' words, "impossible to keep up".

I am now one of those believers. The Onion might just as well lay off their writing staff. The Religous Right is now writing their copy for them.

Re: "Novak is the only columnist with sources in the paleo-con crowd and Republican ranks generally who is capable of breaking stories others in the media can't get"

Like revealing the names of covert CIA agents, which is a violation of federal law?

What we are seeing reflects recent poll numbers regarding the likelihood of having a President Obama next year vs. President McCain.

If a Democratic candidate is elected (Barak Obama), then naturally the Washington Post, and every other mainstream media outlet will suddenly become the most vigilant watchdogs of personal liberty and rectitude in the history of the US. They will be on guard for even the slightest stretch of the truth and apply the most rigorous standards of conduct, integrity and respect for human rights, within the US and abroad. They will also demand clear, 100% successful results in Iraq and Afghanistan within five weeks and will suddenly remember that Osama bin Laden has not been caught (FoxNews will start a “Days Free” counter on every newscast) nor has the anthrax mailer been identified.

Of course, if we have President McCain, there will be no media watchdog. Instead we will retain our current media lapdog, since “John McCain can’t be held responsible….”.

Re: "... if McCain is savvy enough to exploit the opportunity"

Such a track would mean a personality-based campaign: Going away from current Republican results and trying to get Americans to vote on fact-ignoring emotion and media hype.

Of course Senator McCain will do it!

Re: "People need to keep writing about this. Obviously the message is not getting out to enough women."

They must. As long as John McCain can count on his Base to maintain the Maverick and Straight Talker image, he will never have to fully reveal what his policies will really be: A more radical conservatism than the current administratin, on all fronts.

That won't happen. During any run up to the political conventions, names are floated, officially and by those with an ax to grind. In the end, IMO, Barak will be fairly conventional in that he is likely to pick someone who is safe in that he (or she) has no major negatives, and the positive that will bring in voters on the edge.

That likely precludes anyone currently registered as Republican, or any of his opponents in the primaries. It will likely not be anyone in the Senate, both because the Democrats will not want to risk losing a seat when the newly elected VP has to resign and to broaden the choice: So one of the governors is likely.

John McCain will certainly take a similar track. However the Media (John’s Base) will declare how terrible it is that Barak is doing such a thing, and love and justify whomever Senator McCain picks.