I haven't read a load of do-do this contrived and transparent in a long, long time. It made me yearn for the kind of stuff they used to fabricate about Reagan when he was president... twenty years before they finally figured out that HE was the brilliant one and those who sought to undo him were just plain silly. Thanks, Mr. Unger, you actually made me laugh out loud several times this morning.

(I just LOVE watching "progressives" eat their young.)

Is it not entitled: Schumer: Arrogance or impotence?

That's almost funny. Z-z-z-z-z-z-z.

Did you say something? (Yawn)

I'll need to get out more.

For asking a hard question? Pah-leeze.

Giuliani: "There were mistakes made with Bernie Kerik. But what's the ultimate result for the people of New York City? ... A 74% reduction in shootings, a 60% reduction in crime ... What Bernie Kerik did wrong did not implicate what the results were for the public."

Joan: "That's classic Rudy, stubborn and arrogant."

Good God! If I had posted the kind of numbers Giuliani did as mayor, I'd be stubborn and arrogant, too! I lived in (or should I say survived) New York under the embarrassingly incompetent, do-nothing Dinkins administration. And I experienced first hand how miserable things were back then (i.e. crackheads smoking rock and defecating in my midtown lobby). I also lived there to see the absolutely phenomenal difference Giuliani made (i.e. crackheads gone, the city finally clean of crime). It was night and day. The man, however flawed, had a vision and knew how to transform it into a reality. He's a proven leader who I'd vote for in a New York minute, warts and all.

New Yorkers have always called being their mayor, "The Second Toughest Job in America" -- and that was before 9/11. I think Rudy is more than ready to move into the toughest job of all.

In a world of canned responses to questions that candidates plant in the audience, Rudy's rough edges and streetwise candor would be a welcome change.

"Mussolini made the trains run on time too."

Yes, Garry, of course you're right, as usual. Giuliani is Mussolini. And Bush is Hitler. And Cheney is Goerbals. And black helicopters are everywhere.

Goerbals... Goebbels... Gerbels... You get the idea.

I guess if it's in Widipedia, it MUST be true.

As the son of a New York City cop, and having had the privledge to have known so many of New York's finest growing up, I must say your wild-eyed "New York Death Squad" description is exceptionally lame and antiquated. In fact, it seems like a throwback to something only an old, washed-up, stuck-in-the-sixties hippie might say just before taking another hit on his bong.

Do you honestly think the cops who showed up at the scene were blood thirsty and chomping at the bit to kill this poor deranged boy?

What you have here is a terrible tragedy that I'm sure will haunt the cops involved for the rest of their lives, not to mention the poor boy's family and friends. Your point of view is pathetic.

From the Peter Berkowitz piece:

"Hating the president is almost as old as the republic itself. The people, or various factions among them, have indulged in Clinton hatred, Reagan hatred, Nixon hatred, LBJ hatred, FDR hatred, Lincoln hatred, and John Adams hatred, to mention only the more extravagant hatreds that we Americans have conceived for our presidents.

"But Bush hatred is different. It's not that this time members of the intellectual class have been swept away by passion and become votaries of anger and loathing. Alas, intellectuals have always been prone to employ their learning and fine words to whip up resentment and demonize the competition. Bush hatred, however, is distinguished by the pride intellectuals have taken in their hatred, openly endorsing it as a virtue and enthusiastically proclaiming that their hatred is not only a rational response to the president and his administration but a mark of good moral hygiene."

My god, has Berkowitz nailed it. Read the entire article (without the sleezy Greenwald filter) at realclearpolitics.com or opinionjournal.com. It's well worth it.

Besides leaving you enlightened, it'll leave you with the sad realization that Mr Greenwald isn't fit to shine Mr. Berkowitz's shoes.

If Mr. Greenwald can publish everything positive he's ever written about Bush and it doesn't fit on the head of a pin, then I'll be happy to say I'm wrong. But that's not likely to happen. And it really doesn't have to. The posts on display right here, spilling over with Bush vitriol, is proof enough.

I can't think of any other president in modern history who has actually had a disorder (Bush Derangement Syndrome) ascribed to those who hate him.

PS: Mr. Greenwald is SUCH a second-rate writer. I can always count on his pieces to be as unsurprising as they are overwritten. Which, of course, is why Mr. Greenwald writes for a blog and Mr. Berkowitz writes for the Wall Street Journal.

Joan, I assume you're talking about Bill Clinton. But what does he have to do with this?

"ask editors why Marc Santora was allowed to give John McCain a big wet kiss today for promising to run against Hillary Clinton "with civility," without mentioning that just last week McCain called a supporter's query about how to beat "the bitch" (Clinton) an "excellent question" -- Joan Walsh

What does McCain's pledge yesterday have to do with some rogue supporter's idiotic question last week? McCain's response came only after a full minute of nervous crowd laughter and eye rolling from a disapproving McCain. His "Excellent question" comment was obviously sarcastic. And if you simply watched the tape you'd know that. Besides, Joan, do you really think McCain can somehow control the words that come out of the mouths of people in the crowd? Everybody knows only Hillary can do that!

PS: The Hildabeast is now BEHIND Obama in the Iowa polls.