I especially appreciated the line regarding the alluvial plain. I hadn't noticed any of this regarding Gregory, and I only thought he was another pretty face until now. Light dawns on Marblehead. Thanks.

Which, by the way, should tell you that Dailykos doesn't speak with one voice, meaning that they didn't have an "official policy" about bashing or praising Hilary Clinton.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3/17/12417/1285

Kos himself: "As such, as far as I'm concerned, she doesn't deserve 'fairness' on this site. All sexist attacks will be dealt with -- those will never be acceptable. But otherwise, Clinton has set an inevitably divisive course and must be dealt with appropriately."

Other than not stopping the sexist attacks, he was true to his word.

Oh, but please tell me how that's not technically site policy, and whatever other blah, blah, blah you can come up with to cover up for the crappy turn the leftysphere and the (tiny) lefty media took this year.

Mike Sulzer

It is propaganda. It serves the interests of those who own the media, as well as making a profit.

As I suggested in my prior comment, there is at least reason to hope that an increasingly progressive 24-54 demographic will lead to more diverse programming in venues where profit trumps ideology.

Fox News is a real anomaly in some ways, the cable equivalent of a Hearst/Pulitzer rag from a century ago: its message and methods very much an expression of one wealthy man slightly to the right of Mel Gibson's father(ably assisted by one devoted sidekick in the Burns/Smithers mold) who wants what he wants, who ultimately may not care that his shows look tired and outdated and are losing audience, and who probably has enough clout to keep Fox on life support until he finally sighs his last "Rosebud".

Murdoch and the American public had a brief moment of mutual adoration that is coming to an end. Fox's once outsized popularity was due at least in part to the unusually conservative generation that came up under Reagan, and kids brought up on Comedy Central aren't going to take their place. Murdoch also capitalized on the upsurge in previously underrepresented Conservative expression, part of the blowback Perlstein discusses in Nixonland but which is now, finally, losing steam from economic implosion, Democratic concession and war weariness(I'm with Paul in KY that anyone on the progessive side with real-world aspirations should read that book, with a pad handy to take notes on how not to promote high-minded causes).

How progressive MSNBC and other corporate entities are willing to become, and for how long, is of course an open question. But the same corporations that don't mind hawking sexually provocative clothing and accessories to pre-pubescents or [insert your own example of soulless profiteering here] aren't likely to adhere to some kind of high-minded Victorianism if Olbermann and Maddow can capture the eyeballs and serve the bottom line.

-It was actually amazingly easy, and nothing is easy in Brazil. Just a couple of veterinarian's certificates that they had various vaccines and they went right through immigration and customs - not even an hour of quarantine.-

Likewise in Mexico.

I worked their for 4 months in 2005 and my dog and I crossed back and forth into Texas by road every other weekend.

Not once was I asked to produce any documentation in either direction.

The Correntebot misses you.

GG says

"Ever since MSNBC's extremely suspect and viewpoint-based cancellation of Phil Donohue's Show in the run-up to the Iraq War,..."

Keith Olbermann says the show was killed because Donahue had a live audience. He even insisted he wasn't kidding.

Well, you won on points that last round which isn't too difficult considering your opponent. But I would ask, just what is your point? Granted, I haven't been able to (nor would I like to if I was able to) read the thread from beginning to end, but it seems like you have an axe to grind about the way Hillary Clinton was treated. I agree with you that I witnessed many people outdoing themselves in going after her, when just a few months earlier they had no strong feelings toward her (Olbermann for one). On the other hand, I do hate her (her public persona, anyway) and what she stands for and I'm glad I don't have to wince all the way through this election at the countless hypocritical comments she would undoubtedly make.

This is not to say I heart Obama either, nothing could be further from the truth. But the math seems pretty stark and simple. Just what is it your after? What would you like to see happen this election? Just to set down the issues of the debate.

My pleasure. Sometimes it's hard to gauge greatness in one's own time. Just please remember: "Ask not who he Stretch for, he Stretch for thee."

Don't you think said example is more damning of your university than of the student? That is, how could a young person who has so little knowledge of history that they don't know of the existance of such former place, enroll there to begin with?

Even top universities like mine aren't immune from budgetary woes, in spite of their huge endowments. So, while I agree that my university could be a little pickier when it comes to undergraduates, it views undergraduate students who can pay full tuition as means to other ends. That being said, I think that this student's ignorance about the existence of East Germany is a fluke. Still, I am shocked at how students don't follow current events as closely as the stock market or real estate market. Believe me, it gives me pause regularly.

When my husband and I found Rachel Maddow several years ago on Air America right

after Bush was re elected in 2004, it was like finding water in the desert. She pulled us

through a rough time politically.

Rachel Maddow was then and is now a breath of fresh air. She is brilliant and quick and

has a very creative mind and a great sense of humor.

Rachel is cream that will rise to the top and stay there and too bad that those jealous

of her talents can't simple admire and enjoy her contribution to our political discourse.