I'll say this on every single post that addresses the issue of Edward's affair, without focusing on the far more important issue of how that matter is mishandled by the worthless eunuchs of the Democratic Party.

Here's delicate little ballerina Dan Fowler, clenching his anus extra-tight while doing his best to denounce John Edwards and jam his tongue up the asshole of the Republican Party at the same time:

"If there is not an explanation that’s satisfactory, acceptable and meets high moral standards, the answer is 'no,' he would not be a prime candidate to make a major address to the convention."

Is there any creature on the face of the planet more craven, more scheming and unprincipled, more completely lacking in a single atom of dignity or self-respect than the shit-for-brains apparatchiks of the Democratic Party? Here's a novel idea: leave all prissy observations about meeting "high moral standards" to your party's candidate - who obviously can't dirty his hands personally - while you take the exceedingly rare step of doing your fucking job. The way you go about that is simple: every single time the issue of Edward's affair comes up - let me repeat that; EVERY SINGLE GODDAMN TIME, without any exception ever - you respond with a variation of the following:

"John Edwards has acknowledged his responsibility and regret for this conduct; after all, we're not the Republican Party, which obviously has no reservations about the fact that their party's nominee is a serial adulterer, and calls his wife a cunt in public. The bigger question is whether there is anything the corporate media won't do to throw the election to their personal hero, John McCain. Why else have they focused on this story so intently, while still refusing to say a word about John McCain's far worse conduct."

See the difference, Dan?

I'll say this on every single post that addresses the issue of Edward's affair, without focusing on the far more important issue of how that matter is mishandled by the worthless eunuchs of the Democratic Party.

Here's delicate little ballerina Dan Fowler, clenching his anus extra-tight while doing his best to denounce John Edwards and jam his tongue up the asshole of the Republican Party at the same time:

"If there is not an explanation that’s satisfactory, acceptable and meets high moral standards, the answer is 'no,' he would not be a prime candidate to make a major address to the convention."

Is there any creature on the face of the planet more craven, more scheming and unprincipled, more completely lacking in a single atom of dignity or self-respect than the shit-for-brains apparatchiks of the Democratic Party? Here's a novel idea: leave all prissy observations about meeting "high moral standards" to your party's candidate - who obviously can't dirty his hands personally - while you take the exceedingly rare step of doing your fucking job. The way you go about that is simple: every single time the issue of Edward's affair comes up - let me repeat that; EVERY SINGLE GODDAMN TIME, without any exception ever - you respond with a variation of the following:

"John Edwards has acknowledged his responsibility and regret for this conduct; after all, we're not the Republican Party, which obviously has no reservations about the fact that their party's nominee is a serial adulterer, and calls his wife a cunt in public. The bigger question is whether there is anything the corporate media won't do to throw the election to their personal hero, John McCain. Why else have they focused on this story so intently, while still refusing to say a word about John McCain's far worse conduct."

See the difference, Dan?

"Obama has a much better command of the language than Bush," says Jesse Sheidlower, editor at large for the Oxford English Dictionary.

Yes, undoubtedly. Just as, for example, the typical doctoral candidate in particle physics at MIT has a better grasp of sophisticated mathematical concepts than a grunting baboon at the Bronx Zoo.

The idea that congressional Democrats are going to even consider health care, energy, or "entitlement reform" policies that are increasingly hard to distinguish from those of George W. Bush is laughable.

And why the hell not, exactly? If they follow the governing strategy the DLC has used to castrate the Democratic Party for well over a decade, that's precisely what they'll do. After all, in response to insoluble gridlock, the Republicans will simply blame the Democrats for a refusal to "compromise" and a lack of "bipartisanship," and we can never have that, now can we? Why should the party's stance on health care or energy be any less flexible - i.e., any more principled - than it is with respect to such trivialities as civil liberties, the Constitution, or the war? Nope; the policy of the DLC - whose members are busy trying to weasel their way into control of the Obama campaign since Her Royal Highness was deposed - will dictate, as it always does, that the Democratic Party denigrate, marginalize, and spit the face of its own supporters, while kissing Republican ass in its eternal and inspiring quest to claim the holy "center."