It sounds like Sarah Palin could really benefit from the Fairness Doctrine coming back. I wonder if she wants to push for it.

Dean succeeded because he was a radical thinker whose primary concern was setting up the Democratic party for success now and into the future, regardless of whose toes he had to step on.

Now that the DNC is back in the hands of establishment types who are more concerned with image than winning, expect the Dems to go back into the wilderness. It was a nice little run, but obviously no lessons were learned. Let's just say learning isn't the mainstream Democrats' thing.

I'm a male who wears a ponytail. (Or maybe it's a "pony-male" har har.) Obviously it means I hate women. Nevermind that I did it because my girlfriend prefers long hair on a guy and I don't give a damn either way. I must hate her too.

@bigguns, I and probably the majority of American men have had genital mutilation done to us and we didn't have a choice either. So obviously our society hates men. I guess?

(Note that I never really gave much thought to circumcision. I don't care one way or the other. Clit clipping sounds pretty awful, and I don't condone it, but circumcision would probably sound pretty awful too if it weren't so common. So I dunno.)

"Post-partisanship" is nothing of the sort. It's Republican operation through and through. When a Republican is in power, he can be far right. When a Democrat is in power, he needs to be center-right. Everything about that is partisan, and particularly Republican.

If both sides were willing to move to the same spot, that'd be post-partisan. That's kind of the definition. But that's not the case. There's a divide, which makes it partisan, even if that divide is defined by one side.

Anyway, so it's been determined that Obama is going to carry on the anti-American Bush practices in Guantanamo. Is he going to carry on the war crimes? I know he's said he's against torture, but that's what Bush and Cheney say. And if it's "hard" to close Guantanamo, wouldn't it also be "hard" to stop the torture? And if you're intending to set up a court that admits evidence obtained by torture, why not continue gathering that evidence?

I didn't expect much from Obama, but I didn't expect him to be unamerican (which he's said he will be) or a war criminal (which is yet to be determined). So he's even disappointed my low expectations for him.

Advanced statistics have heightened my enjoyment of the game manyfold. I understand what's going on in front of me so much better than I used to. I liked to watch baseball when I was younger, but hey, I like to watch Australian Rules Football now, and I only have a vague sense of what's happening.

Advanced stats put things in much better context, so I know I don't have to rely on my (or anyone else's) lying eyes. But then again, I'm intelligent enough to understand the biases in what I see and what I recall. Without this I could certainly enjoy the game, but I wouldn't understand it. I enjoy things a lot more when I can put them in context.

Any time someone who is white, rich, male or Christian complains about discrimination, that person is clearly too clueless to get whatever job/position/admission that was being applied for.

"They are biased towards sad, sad stories. Points are given for these- death, disease, poverty is fabulous and the more of it in a young life the better..."

And of course these kids have learned far more outside the classroom than some other people could ever hope to learn inside the classroom. I thought that was the point of counting this experience. But from your bitterness, I guess you think the point of counting this experience is to hold back the white man.

Oh, the poor, poor white man. Where will he go if he can't get into Harvard? Oh no, not Cornell, please, anything but Cornell!

The American Psychiatric Association does nothing of the sort:

"The validity, efficacy and ethics of clinical attempts to change an individual's sexual orientation have been challenged. To date, there are no scientifically rigorous outcome studies to determine either the actual efficacy or harm of 'reparative' treatments. There is sparse scientific data about selection criteria, risks versus benefits of the treatment, and long-term outcomes of 'reparative' therapies. The literature consists of anecdotal reports of individuals who have claimed to change, people who claim that attempts to change were harmful to them, and others who claimed to have changed and then later recanted those claims.

Even though there are little data about patients, it is still possible to evaluate the theories which rationalize the conduct of 'reparative' and conversion therapies. Firstly, they are at odds with the scientific position of the American Psychiatric Association which has maintained, since 1973, that homosexuality per se, is not a mental disorder. The theories of 'reparative' therapists define homosexuality as either a developmental arrest, a severe form of psychopathology, or some combination of both. In recent years, noted practitioners of 'reparative' therapy have openly integrated older psychoanalytic theories that pathologize homosexuality with traditional religious beliefs condemning homosexuality."

http://www.psych.org/Departments/EDU/Library/APAOfficialDocumentsandRelated/PositionStatements/200001.aspx

It turned out that was based on erroneous exit polling, and blacks supported Prop 8 in similar proportions to a few other groups.

As for the government getting out of the "marriage business," are you trying to tell me that as an atheist I shouldn't be able to get married? You want not just to make sure gays never get that right, but you want to deny it to others as well? All because it's somehow too confusing that "marriage" actually has two definitions?

How about this - people stop being stupid bigots. I much prefer that over a workaround that makes the problem worse.