According to what Klein says about Broder, correct me if I'm wrong, his method is to seek out low information voters, and then he declares that their opinion is what counts. Seems to me that's backwards journalism. It would be useful if that were a starting point to a column or article explaining why these people think the way they do and tried to correct it; but from what I've seen, Broder thinks his job is to bring politicians down to this lowest common denominator. (The LCD from the point of view of facts, of course; in terms of language, only the most polite and decorous exchanges will do for this forty-plus year resident of the Beltway who, when convenient, portrays himself as a homespun Midwesterner )

It's an illuminating insight in the High Broderist worldview, actually. Everything is like the movie "Dave", where balancing the budget is easy if everybody just agrees to work together (a friend of my father's, a lawyer (and GOP donor) with a very successful corporate practice in Chicago, thought that scene was the gospel truth.

From there, we move on to the notion that Iraq is easy to solve, if Democrats and Republicans work together. For Broder, the problem, and the solution, are not found in Baghdad, but at a joint meeting of AEI fellows and Brookings' resident scholars, presided over by Joe Lieberman and John McCain, with Himself approvingly taking notes in the back row.

Then over to Sally Q's for orange blossoms and shrimp toast to celebrate.

They do their presidential election in two rounds, the first with anybody who can get (I think) 5,000 elected officials (mayors, deputies, town councillors, etc) to sign their petitions; the two top vote getters then have a run off. They had 85 per cent turn out in the first round, I doubt it will get that high in the second

Far be it from me to defend the modern Repubilcan South--I'm a firm believer in Schaller's look away from Dixie theories--but I do seem to recall that Jefferson and Madison, who were pretty familiar with Montesquieu and Locke and Hume, were from Virginia.

I thought it was a great ending. Pullo was always a character with one foot in epic and one foot in comedy. That ending would have been totally unfit for the gloomy Catonian Lucius Vorenus, but it was pretty well done for the cheerful epicurean brute Titus Pullo.

As for Cesarian living in the TV show and being killed in history, I don't think his real father was a random centurion who got lucky with a princess one night under the pyramids... Also, I've looked around a bit and found no evidence that Caesar Augustus's mother was a wildly entertaining, politically manipulative, nymphomaniacal cynical alpha bitch, but Polly Walker was a lot of fun to watch.

The ending showed she was down but not out, and the hat tip to Servilia as she squashed her daugther in law was a nice touch.

Is this a new feature? I like it.

Especially interesting how Grassely specifically asked that the record show his vote counted as "aye". Is this SOP? It seems unusual, like he's sending a message to the White House, his constituents, or just history [in a small way] and his conscience. I've always thought Grassley was better than his record in the Rubber Stamp Caucus suggests. I hope he stays on the right course, maybe he can drag a few others along with him.

And Arlen Specter. "I have my independence from the President." Adorable. Is the Cowardly Nittany Lion going to break into a few choruses of "Courage" next? I wonder if the poor, pathetic clown actually believes that crap when he says it. I understand he abstained from this vote. I can't think of anything that better captures the spineless, confused desperation of a sad little man caught between Rove-CheneyCO and his own conscience. What a sad way to end a career in the US Senate. I actually have more respect for brazen hacks like Trent Lott.

he was one of the quickest to adopt "cut'n'run", and has at various points carried a lot of water for this administration, and they treat him like this?

When is the MSM gonna get that loyalty is a one-way street with the Busies.

I must be a nicer person than I thought. I actually feel sorry for the desperate, flailing old coot.

"I'm not informed enough on it. Let me find out ... I'm sure I have taken a position on it in the past ... I have to find out my position on it ... I am sure I am opposed to government funding. I am sure I support the president's policy on it."

PS: No mention of Tom Coburn, McCain's advisor on matters of health and sexuality, without a mention of his belief that pubescent lesbians use the bathrooms of middle schools as their recruiting grounds of evil.

I'm a committed lefty, and I have some problems with Michael Moore (see Nader, Ralph). I thought "Fahrenheit 9/11" was funny and moving, and should be used in film schools to show would-be auteurs why they need editors.

That said: Is it fair to accuse Moore of "sandbagging a senile Charlton Heston"? IIRC, he announced that he had Alzheimer's after "Columbine" was released, which means he was interviewed probably a year before (?). If Heston's condition was cause for concern at the time, someone in his family or circle of friends should have spoken to Moore or stopped the interview.

Paul Simon proposed that the AG be appointed along the same line as the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, for five year terms with Senate approval (maybe sixty votes to ensure good candidates?), beginning in an odd numbered year, as I recall. I thought that made a lot of sense.