Look at how the Daily Show ripped apart the stupidity and hypocrisy of some groups and individuals during both conventions. John Oliver's scathing send-up of self-proclaimed disenfranchised Hillary-supporters should've sent them crying in the sleep.

And this week? Even better, Jon Stewart just showed what several prominent right-whingers [sic!], incl. Joe Lieberman, have said relatively recently and what they said during the convention. Now, that mad for great straight talk ...

I never understood why Democrats did not take up this strategy and just let their opponents tear themselves apart. This way the high moral standards associated with the rational approach is combined with the low punches the Hannitys, Palins and Liebermans seem to love above all.

How effective the high horse of 'we don't go there' is can be seen in the success of Al Gore and John Kerry ...

It seems to me the cheerful viciousness is not only rallying the Republican base, but the Democratic base as well. Also, I like the way some of the new Obama ads are taking the McCain/Palin stance on abortion right to the people. He seems to be taking the gloves off when it comes to the issues.

For what it's worth, I'm going to send some $$ to Obama today. Political donations have never sat well with me because in my mind there's way too much money already being spent on politics and politicians in the USA, but at this point I'm all for doing what I can to send a message that Obama's got a big, spirited and non-Rovian-led team behind him.

Thank you for pointing out that which should be obvious. John McCain is an eccentric, vainglorious character who is erratic in his views,impulsive and ill advised in his decision making,has questionable control of his temper and is given to meanness and personal attacks on those who oppose him. As such he represents a much larger risk to the country as President that the emotionally balanced, fair minded and intellectually brilliant Barack Obama. Why can't this case be made by Democrats?

That adage was proved once again by the manic celebration of Palin as "the most qualified" candidate (even more so than McCain) in the race by Republican spin doctors and GOP activists.

Presumably, their sycophancy will be instantly forgotten and directed at a new "crown prince" should Palin be forced to withdraw from the race due to unforseen -- and unvetted -- scandal.

Just yesterday he said, in response to a question about the utter absurdity of Palin's selection and lack of qualifications to be vice president, that Palin is in fact qualified.

And now he says that he was impressed by Palin's speech?

Who is advising these guys to sing Kumbaya when they get poked in the mouth?

Will they be so complimentary when they come out on the losing side of this election?

So far, Obama & Biden have completely missed a central front of attack where the republicans are so very ripe for it: the republicans will literally say anything, no matter how false or ridiculous, to bolster their chances to win and retain power (and avoid criminal prosecution). Why not indeed.

Last night Palin lied about opposing the bridge to nowhere and other pork projects; and she lied about Obama's legislative accomplishments. These lies are demonstrably false. Yet she spewed them without a second thought. Why not make her think twice about it before she does it again?

Did she remind anyone else of Tracey Flick from Election?

The Obama campaign is so filled with condescension toward average (small town, working class, etc.) Americans that they are incapable of recognizing it. This leaves a void for someone to fill, which Palin did. The result is not pretty, and the problem is not easily fixed.

I heard a McCain/Palin spokesperson on Dianne Rehm refuse to answer the question about Palin seeking to ban books. I had read the story in the NYT, and saw excerpts from the ADN on the issue. I read that the librarian who was asked about book banning declared that she would never, then was in fact fired, via a letter left on her desk, then reinstated due to public outrage. Why was the McCain/Palin spokeswoman (a conservative lawyer) claiming she wasn't going to dignify the story with a comment, implying that it was gutter journalism?

I've been taking the story as true, given the substantiation of it. Is it not true? Is this spokeswoman being cowardly?

I, for one, can't imagine Americans accepting someone who would ban books as President. What good does it do to uphold the 2nd Amendment if you're going to dismantle the 1st? The Constitution is not an a la carte menu.

I wish I could get more reporting on real issues with this Republican ticket. But that's right, they claim the election isn't about the issues.

What a fucking bizarro world this is. Community organizing is met with derisiveness, basic human civil rights are sneered at, and well educated people are looked at as untrustworthy because they are well educated. I mean if you just exit the political bubble, and look at those truths, which are the truths of the Republican party, it's hard to believe that anyone with a shred of intelligence would be a member. Yet, several speeches which reaffirmed those beliefs are being treated by the MSM as effective and home runs in terms of shoring up their base support.

God, I hope the swing voters are over this type of nonsense, and have the reason to choose the candidates that can actually get this country out of some huge messes. If they're not and we get someone who has the beliefs and hypocricsy of McCain/Palin, we're in for some dark times. Darker than they are now, because all I could smell from watching this convention was another Dick Cheney administration, and we all know where that has gotten us.

The Republicans are the captain of the football team and the hot head cheerleader ("winners") making fun of the Democrats, represented by the goth kid in the back of the classroom wearing black lipstick and writing in his journal ("the loser"). He's too chickenshit to stand up to them, so he just writes about killing them instead.