that headline writers don't seem to actually read the articles for which they write headlines.

The article itself is sorta interesting and makes the all-too-important point that "If the figurines found in an ancient European settlement are any guide."

The "if" matters a lot. These are figurines, not the clothes and jewelry themselves. Maybe they just liked "frilly" figurines. Geez, I'd hate it if some future society assumed our standard of dress by our figurines: they'd think we all dressed like Holiday Barbie in her ball gown, Superman with his undies on the outside or like those creepy little Hummel Dutch Boy figurines.

From the email:

The CNN Network, affectionately known as the Clinton News Network, has stooped to an all-time low and is gratuitously attacking John McCain for not defending Hillary Clinton enough when a South Carolina voter used the 'B' word to describe her when John McCain stopped into a luncheon yesterday at the Trinity restaurant in Hilton Head, SC.

-

A voter used a word that I would not have used to describe Senator Hillary Clinton and asked the Senator how he was going to beat her. Senator McCain first responded by saying that he respected Senator Clinton, as he has said repeatedly throughout the campaign....

As an independent news agency, CNN owes John McCain an apology because of the outrageous behavior of their network host Rich Sanchez...Senator McCain is a fighter and he is not going to back down to CNN. http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/11/_mccain_supporters_bitch_line_sparks_war_between_mccain_campaign_and_cnn.php

Poor John McCain! CNN and Rick Sanchez in particular are so sleazy for questioning McCain on the "bitch" incident!

Meanwhile, as they send out this email, they post the following press release on McCain's website:

It is disappointing that Mr. Sanchez would choose to engage in sensationalism in the hopes of generating a story. It not only reflects poorly on him, but on CNN. If Mr. Sanchez had even the faintest perspective on the race for the White House, he would know that Senator McCain has expressed his utmost respect for Senator Clinton numerous times on the campaign trail as he did at Monday's event in Hilton Head.http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/News/PressReleases/3f9f8a17-7bcf-4499-b924-99d6d6f4a6a9.htm

"Sensationalism in the hopes of generating a story" is right, but it seems to be the McCain Campaign who's guilty of it. John McCain's candidacy has been struggling and this whole incident gives him some much-needed press.

For shame, Mr. McCain.

Condemn these tactics.

Yes, some people definitely need to.

W[h]ere are the folks from the previous thread who said we should just ignore this slur? Those who suggested it was simply small and petty to criticize McCain for not denouncing it?

Is it still OK to call Hillary a bitch if you profit from it? Or is that finally crossing the line?

McCain didn't call Hillary Clinton a bitch, but he handled an individual supporter's use of the word badly. For that, I gave him a pass with some tsk-tsking.

But incorporating "the bitch incident" into your official campaign to profit from it in terms of news coverage and monetary donations is "crossing a line."

McCain needs to condemn these tactics and apologize for the conduct of his campaign staff.

FYI: This only legitimizes accusations of sexism and misogyny on the part of the candidates against Hillary Clinton. In my view, it makes her more sympathetic.

In that same press conference, Perino refers to the "radicals" in Pakistan. Says Perino, "over 800 people, have been targeted by radicals and extremists, and killed just since the month of July."

MoveOn.org & Code Pink are equal to murderous extremists. Got it.

And Perino on Bhutto and other opposition leaders in Pakistan, "We are supportive of people being allowed to peacefully protest, to assemble, and to express their views."

Supportive? Supportive? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

Aside: the word "radical" is getting tossed around far too liberally (pun!). 55% of the country can't be "radical." Quit diluting the word! We'd finally gotten it back after the "radical" and "gnarly" 80s.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/11/20071114-6.html

Typical Perino answers include:

• That's a hypothetical; I'm not going to answer hypothetical questions.
• I've already answered your question.
• I'll have to get back to you on that.
• I haven't been briefed on that.
• That's a matter under review.
• I'll have to refer you to [WHATEVER] Department.
• I'm not going to answer that question.
• No comment.

I'm not entirely sure why the White House Press Corps continues to show up. Habit, I guess. The press corps has been phoning it in the entire Bush Administration. Still, sadly, they're being more aggressive now than they were a year ago.

Keep pushing the President. These bills with so-called timetables for withdrawal are softballs and you still can't support them?

They express a goal of bringing home the troops, not a mandate. And they reference bringing home combat troops in particular. Support troops for the embassy and guarding hot-spots would remain with more troops on the periphery.

So, Mr. President, why do you hate the troops? Why don't you have at least the aspiration of an end of combat by the end of 2008? Why don't you have goals and faith, Mr. President? Why are you trying to destroy the faith and goals of the troops? Or is it your hope that war still wages in 2009? Are you a monster?

Like the Evil Monkey that lives in Chris Griffin's closet on The Family Guy?

Wow. Well said. And I like the catch-phrase.

Damn trial lawyers. Padding their wallets and thwarting justice.

Oh, wait. Does that not work when they're defending a loyal Bushie?