In spite of O's call for unity, reminding us we're all in this together, the losers who voted for McCain, in large numbers, are going to spend the next four years doing their best to pull him down. We'd be doing the same if McCain (shudder) had won.

Bottom line, I don't think this kind of crap (the Blagoff stain really isn't going to connect, but something else may) is going to distract Obama from his goal. It doesn't matter what the papers and the wingnuts say -- it's all about getting Congress to play ball. Personally, I recommend we not leap to Obama's defense every time one of these ludicrous accusations comes along -- we're only talking to ourselves.

Let's say you're as incredibly well-informed as you say you are. Why are senators -- according to every news source I've been able to check -- demanding that the UAW CUT Detroit's union wages to BRING THEM DOWN to parity with non-union wages paid in the southern states? Arithmetic doesn't work that way. And dammit, you can sound as smug as you want, but I have to believe those senators (yeah, yeah, they're incompetents and crooks, yeah, yeah) have access to the real numbers, i.e. who's being paid what and where.

So, professor, since you feel you've already said everything worth saying on the subject, please point to your post containing the mathematical fudge factor that allows lower wages to be cut in order to equal higher wages.

Or are you just taking the piss out of us?

Tom, are you sure about the foreign factories paying better than UAW? That's sure the first I've heard of that.

Don't you think Corker and Colby'd be getting phone calls from the folks at Toyota and Nissan, advising them to let Congress leave GM's wages right where they are? The notion that someone's being manipulated just because they're not making sense...maybe. What do you see as the deeper strategy of those dark actors doing the manipulating?

I just heard Robert Reich on Rachel talking with her about how the Senate deal currently on the table is the GOP's gambit to bust the union -- that the reason those Southern Senators who have foreign factories in their states want the UAW to take big cuts in wages is precisely because they have foreign factories in their states and want to "increase the market share" of their patron companies.

But wait a minute -- one of the big reasons Toyota and Nissan and Hyundai have been kicking Ford and GM's ass is that the American companies have to pay UAW wages. Why, if your competition is crippled by high wages, would you pull a big "Gotcha!" by making them lower their wages to your level? One of the reasons big bailout bucks probably won't save Detroit is precisely because the systemic problem of high wages and benefits is what's killing them. I don't get Corker and that other cracker with the lopsided mouth -- why they're fighting a package that leaves Detroit as ill-equipped to compete with their home-state factories' products as before.

Can someone enlighten me?

You're welcome to your opinion. I cannot (and am not planning to) change the way I was wired. Pubes meant a girl had become a woman, and that sent a lot of signals and meant a lot of (mostly exciting) things. Bald pussy I associate with unsexy things -- not, in your overheated imagination, pervy things.

I'm sorry if my feelings lower me in your highly-prized (I'm sure) esteem, but that's what makes horse-races, ain't it.

...is that anyone with enough brains to realize that "24" is fiction doesn't already know: torture doesn't produce worthwhile intelligence. It. Does. Not.

We just had our 9kw system installed, at great expense. There is nothing sweeter than watching that meter run backwards, though. It's worth every penny.

There are plenty who will cry, "He's not progressive enough! He's not on our list of approved progressives! Shame! Shame!"

Bare snatch = prepubescence. Bad boogie.

That said, when I moved to Europe in my youth, I was astonished by underarm hair on women. So uncivilized.

But it's different. After having a daughter and after changing her diaper a thousand times...no. I don't want to see bare snatch on grown-up women.

It's creepy.

Barfbarfbarfbarf!!

I have scanned the letters here, I have read a number of other articles and postings concerning the Left’s discontent with Obama’s picks so far – but I have yet to see much in the way of suggestions about whom Mr. Obama should pick in order to give his appointments the proper progressive flavor. It’s easy to grumble, but do any of us have any idea who would make a great CIA director, right now today? A great SecDef ready to take over the job in a month? Housing and Human Services? A great Undersecretary of YouNameIt? I sure as hell don’t -- most of the people I like are already doing great jobs and need to be right where they are (Waxman and Frank come to mind). But I do know that I called loudly and in several locations for Eric Shinseki to be remembered as a guy who was right and got a raw deal – lo and behold three weeks later he had a job in the new administration. But seriously, why don’t those who feel Obama’s picks are insufficiently liberal start throwing out some names? Otherwise, it’s better to do as Hildebrand says, i.e. shut up and let the man we elected do his job.

DeMINT.

That, or he's really one of them. Either way, drivel like this will always find a voice to voice it and ears to listen.