Is what Karl Rove says really important or relevant to the 2008 campaign?

While he may have once been involved in GOP campaigns, Karl Rove does not work for John McCain's campaign, or any campaign. Karl Rove isn't officially involved in the 2008 campaign. He denies being anything but an interested observer, which places him among dozens of such people with political experience similar to his. His opinions carry no more importance or weight that that of Carville, Baker, et al.

So why does Karl Rove's opinion matter?

It doesn't. But Karl Rove voicing such an opinion gives the hack POS Koppelman an excuse to repeat a foolish comment, one with which he himself obviously agrees. A superficial racist and indefatiguable sore loser, attack poodle Alex Koppelman (and his owner, Joan Walsh) simply cannot get over the fact that a black man defeated his favorite white woman. In order to continue flailing impotently for his lost cause, Koppelman is willing to transgress journalistic ethics and his own self-stated values in order to get in another dig at Obama (or his supporters, who are mainly the source of poor little wiffleboy Alex's spoiled brat venom these days.)

Dig up Alex Koppelman's definition of "newsworthy," which he provided to us several posts back.

By Koppelman's own admittedly juvenile and naive criteria, does this story merit the status of "newsworthy?"

No, it does not.

But it does provide us yet another example (in a pile that is now taller than Joan Walsh) of dishonesty and bias on the part of the talentless hack Alex Koppelman.

Two talented, successful, professional politicians are smiling in a photograph, taken at a 'photo op' designed to generate coverage depicting the politicians in a favorable light, and you take this as evidence of affection or affiliation?

You are an even more incompetent journalist and analyst than I had previously imagined.

...interviewing members of Congress on topics about which they are supposedly passionate is not an experience that provokes much confidence in our federal government.

For once I agree 100%. If you ever get the chance to interview Barack Obama, you'll find the opposite in true (although I doubt finding one intelligent, competent member of Congress will restore faith in the sorry lot of them). His intelligence is broad and embracing of many subjects, and his ability to discuss even those things which don't interest him is impressive. He reminds me of the last intelligent President we had, in fact, whose interests are also broad and encompassing of the entirety of American history and experience.

Nice to know that Brits are just as idiotically over-reactive prudes as Americans. I guess the apple didn't fall far form the tree, eh?

Serai: don't get your facts from Bob Fosse movies! It's a great bit by a very funny pseudo-Lenny Bruce, but the change made for comic pacing is not in fact representative of the Kubler-Ross model of grief. All That Jazz isn't all that accurate.

The five stages are in fact, in order: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance.

Breathed's strip is positively redolent with irony when you consider the various factors involved in grief. While the model was initially concerned with the emotional responses of those facing a terminal diagnosis, it has over the years become expanded to describe reactions to almost any significant life-change which requires extraordinary change, sacrifice, or loss on the part of an individual.

Not newsworthy. Irrelevant to the campaign and, well, just about anything. Said irrelevance is even admitted by the author!

But then, why be surprised about non-newsworthy, content-free, irrelevant items which amount to nothing more than ad hominem attacks, appearing on Salon.com?

This comes at a time when the AP has announced they are considering new rules by which bloggers are allowed to quote AP stories. AP feels some bloggers violate fair use provisions by quoting too much of an AP article. (As if the AP determines copyright laws!)

I wonder how they feel about someone using the entire piece and rewriting it. One must note, however, that the initial targets of AP's interest are primarily "liberal"/"leftish" bloggers, and that insiders have suggested a conservative/infotainment change at the AP over the last few years, so it's unlikely these Freeper-like fools will get a C&D from the AP.

Sometimes, the irony is so overwhelming, I have to wonder if the political scene is some kind of satirical performance art and I'm just not in on the joke.

With all due respect, Steve: you - and every member of the political media - are part of the joke. In this matter, you seem to take the role of "straight man," whose indefatigable common sense renders him gobsmacked at the antics of his comic cohorts.

While it is indeed your job to point out the absurdities and ironies of the politicians, an even deeper irony is that without their foibles your own task would be moot, perhaps even purposeless.

But that's what makes it a good joke, see? The emperor indeed has no clothes, and the guy pointing it out is wearing see-through clothing.

Ha-ha!

The incorrect story is a top item on Yahoo's news page, in its RSS feed and other outbound sources. It also appears at or near the top of other news or portal pages which feature an AP feed.

With the AP running stories like this (it ain't the first big "mistake" they've made recently), the GOP no longer needs Fox News and stupid-con punditry to spread false memes. "Respectable" institutions like the AP, NYT, etc. carry that water now.