Links to Those Better than I

I'm sure none of you come here to find out what other blog postings I've found particularly insightful on any given day. I'm sure you all come to for my unique and inspiring wit, intelligence, and sass. That said...

These two posts by Josh Marshall over at Talking Points Memo Media are too good not to pass on.

Post 1
Post 2

My Uncoolness

I got to meet arguably my single favorite voice in the blogosphere tonight, Matt Yglesias who blogs for Atlantic.com and just wrote a kick ass book on American foreign policy called "Head in the Sand".

We were both at a DC zoning board hearing to discuss city parking (partying like a rock-star I am), and I talked to him for a quick minute as we were leaving. I was shocked to learn that he's a year younger than me (he's 27), and that he's kind of a dork, which is in no way a bad thing. Though I don't know if I'm one to be throwing stones in that area, as I'm the one talking about how sweet it is that I randomly met my favorite blogger.

Regardless, I thought it was really cool, and hope I get the chance to run into him in the future.

McCain's Final and Dumbest Mistake, or a Misreport

I don't know if anyone has seen or heard about this report by David Kiley over at BusinessWeek. Hopefully, by now we've all seen or are aware of the negative ad run by the McCain campaign that falsely claimed that Obama canceled a visit with wounded troops in Germany last week because the Pentagon wouldn't allow him to bring reporters.

Kiley writes:

What the McCain campaign doesn’t want people to know, according to one GOP strategist I spoke with over the weekend, is that they had an ad script ready to go if Obama had visited the wounded troops saying that Obama was...wait for it...using wounded troops as campaign props.

After talking about it with my friend DB, a fellow political junkie, I think there are two salient points.

The first is that if this is true -- if this "ad script" exists, if McCain was even vaguely aware of this strategy, I think the race might be effectively over for him. Putting aside my personal feelings for a moment, and considering just the political ramifications, this plays extremely badly, and right into the worst possible narrative for John McCain at the worst possible time. It is the naked, absolute, height of political cynicism and negativity. I think Jon Q Voter will react viscerally and negatively toward it, and I don't know how you win them back. This is ethical bankruptcy in its most obvious form, and it's not even hard to explain or understand.

The second point is that I have to question the veracity of this strategist's claim. Everything I wrote in the previous paragraph is utterly predictable. Though I believe some campaigns are capable of actually doing something this diabolical (perhaps even McCain's), I simply have a hard time believing that this was anywhere approaching a formal strategy. I think it is more likely that someone from the campaign was making a barroom boast to the effect of, "we'll get him either way", or that this GOP strategist was simply conjecturing what they believe McCain camp would have done had Obama gone through with the troop visit. It's very difficult for me to swallow that this ever rose to the point of formal discussion of any kind, much less that preliminary work was undertaken to execute such a strategy.

I'm assuming we'll know in the coming days. Stay tuned.

Post Script: To quote Will Ferrell -- am I taking crazy pills or something? Though I've seen the story mentioned on a couple of lefty blogs, it hasn't gained any serious traction anywhere. How is this not a big deal? I don't pretend to have my finger perfectly on the pulse of American media or public, but I guess I seriously misjudged the inertia of this. If anyone has ideas about why this isn't an issue, or at least why the Obama campaign isn't indirectly making it one, I'd love to hear them.

Extinct Blog of the Day

Today's featured extinct blog is Cassandra Angel's modeling blog "Eye Candy" which contains but a single post with the unfulfilled promise of more to come.

I tried googling her name, to see if she'd made it big as a model or as something else, only to find this site, registered with her own domain, which was seemingly abandoned as well.

Ramblings

*I return to TPBP today after having applied for roughly ten thousand jobs in the last twenty four hours.

*The MLK library in downtown D.C., not to mention the DC's central branch, is by far the worst central library I've ever been to. I gave my cheap two year old desktop computer away before moving here, thinking I wouldn't have the space for it (which was true) and that I'd be able to use the computers at the library if I needed to. Not so much. I'd estimate there are fewer than 50 computers with internet access, 10 of which cannot be used for more than 15 minutes and none of which can be used for more than an hour. In my experience the wait for these computers is often around an hour, due to the number of patrons that need them. Printing is really expensive, and there is no way to fax anything. The building itself is rundown and uninviting. I'm not complaining as such, I know the district is amazingly strapped for cash, but when you combine that with a pretty awful public school system, it's sure not helping the district's domestic population any. Don't know if any of my readers regularly make charitable donations, but if you do keep the library in mind. You can donate here.

*Those who feared for my (and all District dwellers) well being will be happy to note that according to weather.com's 10 day forcast it will no longer be 103 degrees next week -- it will only be 97 for two days in a row. No plant alert either. That sound you hear is my basil's sigh of relief.

*I don't know whether the McCain campaign's Paris Hilton/Brittany Spears ad had a subtle racial dynamic or not, but I'd be lying if I said that this post by John Wiley wasn't a little compelling.

Sabbatical

I'll be taking the day off today to focus on a couple of job application deadlines. I'll try to post this evening again at some point, but that may not be possible. Fear not dear reader(s), I'll be back in force tomorrow to bring you the news of the asinine.

And, no Dome, this in no way means that you won't owe me a dollar come Saturday. Long live The Pseudo Body Politic.

Protect Your Plants?

So, I'm looking at weather.com before I go to bed to see what kind of ridiculous temperatures are in store for me tomorrow. I decided to pull up the ten day forecast as well. On the right side of the little temperature scale, they'll sometimes have warnings, such as warning people to mind the pollen count or the air quality.

As I scrolled down the days, I found to my horror that next Monday is going to be 103 degrees. The warning next to that day reads, "Protect Your Plants From the Heat".

Huh? My plants? What the hell is going to happen to my plants? Will they spontaneously combust? Will they melt?

Now arriving at...

Reader Kate Moss brought to my attention that the Anchorage International Airport is in fact, the Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport. Really, you deserve the embarrassment you get for naming the largest airport in your state after Ted Stevens. Whatever happened to waiting until someone was dead to name something after them? Notice his name is still prominately displayed at the top of the website. Anyone want to bet how long that will last?

Seriously though, what do you do if you're in charge of the Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport (that's too much fun to write to even think about abbreviating it)? Who's in charge of naming airports? The state government? I'll keep abreast of the naming situation and let you know if there are any further developments.

Obama VP Choice - II

Reader aaron comments:

So you're counting out Sebelius? She seems like a fairly safe pick, too.

It seems interesting to me, though, that we're talking about a campaign that might not have a Southerner for once. Sebelius and Bayh are both Midwesterners, even if they both come from some pretty conservative states. You don't count the appeal of having an additional white, Southern man on the ticket? I suppose that Obama's strengths in certain segments of the South kind of preclude that kind of appeal to the non-Obama supporting segment of the population.

To address the first point, I would really be shocked to see any woman on the ticket other than Clinton (who I believe is unlikely). I like Sebelius, and am glad to see her getting some national attention, I just don't see Obama trying to break through the gender and color gap at the same time.

The second point is quite interesting. I think, on some levels, there's simply no one to pick. The Democratic party brand was so bad over the last 15 years in the south that there really aren't any Dems with a lot of national prominence in that region. Claire McCaskill's about the best choice I can think of, and a popular senator in a swing state to boot, but again, I'm just not seeing her as having a strong chance.

I also believe that conventional wisdom about Dems needing a southerner on the ticket (or white, male, southerner) to succeed is prefaced on too few data points to be anything approaching an axiom. This is because any discussion of the "Democratic Party" prior to the party realignment that occurred during the Civil Rights movement is in many ways talking about a different party and especially a political climate that doesn't exist anymore. So for me, using in the '60 election shouldn't really count. This point is predicated upon only two people, Carter and Clinton -- not nearly enough examples to make any sort of inference. Let's also not forget Gore's 2000 run, where I think he'd really lost the "southern" label to the point that he lost his home state of Tennessee, had a VP candidate from Connecticut, and still got 500,000 more votes than Bush 43. If Gore becomes president in 2000, I think to a large extent the Democrats-need-a-southerner argument wouldn't be nearly as prominent.

The Internet is a Series of Tubes -- Linking to Your Indictment

In an event only surprising for its timing, Senator Ted Stevens (R - AK) was formally indicted today on seven counts of making false statements.

Though it's already been a rough day for him I can't help but link to everyone's favorite Ted Stevens moment. If, somehow, you haven't heard it before, you're in for a treat.

My Obama VP Prediction

Most political observers expect Obama to announce his running mate in the immediate future (almost certainly before the Olympics begin on August 8th). The WaPo had a front page article today talking about those widely believed to be front-runners.

My prediction is Indiana senator Evan Bayh. As I posted recently, I think Obama sees this race (correctly or not) as his to lose. Above all, he's trying to avoid mistakes -- to be careful. Given the choice between boring and bold, he's going to choose the former. Because of this, I think some of the usual suspects don't have a snowball's chance in hell. The clouds of an infidelity scandal seem to be hovering around John Edwards. The Clinton's throw too many new ingredients into the stew, and threaten to change the focus of the Obama campaign away from the actual candidate, and Joe Biden is notoriously hard to keep on message. Jim Webb (who doesn't really seem to want the job) and Sam Nunn have both said too many stupid things in the past.

That leaves only Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine, and Bayh. These choices would be a little more of the traditional politic, pick-a-candidate-that-helps-you-win-a-swing-state, strategy. It conspicuously avoids Obama picking a candidate that helps him with his foreign policy bona fides, perhaps slightly ramping up the McCain attacks on this front (which weren't ever going to stop, regardless of his VP pick). And, this is obviously conjecture, but I think Obama sees foreign policy as one of his strengths in comparison to McCain (who routinely screws up basic facts as they relate to foreign affairs), especially after his most recent trip and practical endorsement by some of the most important heads of state in the world.

So why Bayh over Kaine? Bayh is simply the most vanilla, likable, politically moderate person that's ever been born. And, he's extremely popular in Indiana, a state that I believe he could deliver, whereas I think Virginia, while winnable, is more polarized and I'm less sure Kaine puts Obama over the top there. I also think Bayh is the slightly more recognizable national figure.

I guess we'll see soon.

The New Election

I remember discussing electoral politics with my father when I was in my mid-teens, and during the course of a conversation in which we bemoaned the quality of presidential candidates we came up with...an alternative selection method.

First: Any potential candidate would have to go through a series of psycological tests to determine basic sanity. I'm not talking about the kind of stuff they put astronauts through, just making sure you're not clinically depressed and that you don't worship a statue of Martha Stewart you carved out of a loaf of bread or anything.

After that, you'd be subjected to the most rudimentary skills/education test. Again, I'm not talking about the MCAT or anything. Just making sure you're literate, and can maybe pass a citizenship test or something (which would unfortunately exclude the vast majority of Americans).

After you'd passed this battery of tests, you'd be taken out to a Kansas field during a summer lightning storm and given your own metal "election pole", extending 100 feet into the air, to firmly grip with both hands. If your pole was struck by lightening, well, you were out of contention. You were obviously free to voluntarily let go at any time as well, though that would disqualify you from office. Last person gripping their pole is president.

It kind of combines the Greek election by lot with a sort of trial by ordeal. Sadly, it eliminates our democracy, as going to the polls (pun intended) ceases to be necessary. But, at least you'd find out who really wanted it.

To further consider this farce of an idea, referring back to the beginning of the '08 election cycle, out of all major party candidates, who do you think would have emerged victorious and why?

Shameless Witch Plug

I'll be seeing Skeletonwitch tonight at "DC 9", in central DC. I met the band in Athens, OH during graduate school, and I can't recommend them highly enough. If I happen to have any readers in the district, I encourage you to come to the show. And I encourage anybody, anywhere to check out their music, which I believe is available pretty much anywhere.

McCain Ad Reactions

Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo Media had this post talking about MSM response to McCain's most recent ad. Sadly predictable I guess. It's hard to see how it's a good thing when media outlets go out of their way to be fundamentally uninforming.

I should mention that if you're unfamiliar with TPM you really should check it out. When I first began regularly reading political blogs a couple of years ago TPM was among the first ones I read, (on the advice of my friend Van Dorn). I've barely missed a post since then. Josh Marshall is, in my opinion, the most insightful person writing blog commentary anywhere on the web.

Extinct Blog of the Day

In fairness, this blog had a post a month or so ago, but as I'm in charge of the selective criteria for what constitutes a retired blog... Messenger and Advocate is a Mormon blog about politics and law. The last couple of posts were about the LDS church's response to the California constitutional amendment initiative seeking to nullify all same sex marriages and revert back to their previous Heteros only definition.

Apparently the LDS Church sent out an official memo of sorts to be read in "sacrament meetings" urging the congregation's support of the amendment. Far out. This guy's blog links to an article in the San Fran Chronicle talking about it.

Though I recognize that it's perfectly within the church's right to engage in political advocacy of this nature, I'd be lying if I said it didn't creep me out.

McCain's New Ad -- A reader comments

Reader pw writes:

McCain seems to be working here to build an anti-Obama narrative unencumbered by much consideration of actual events. But then, considering his campaign week was highlighted by cruising around with Bush Sr. in a golf cart while Obama was speaking in the Tiergarten, reality really isn't getting McCain very far. What's sad is that there are probably people who will see this ad and believe it uncritically - hopefully, most of them are just having pre-conceived notions reinforced.

In my opinion, this is where media coverage so often falls flat on its face. Issues such as the veracity of McCain's ad claims are far too often presented as a dichotomy, e.g. McCain's interpretation is X, while the Obama campaign is arguing Y.

Nevertheless, and perhaps it's just my political disposition, I can't really imagine someone who had genuinely not decided who to vote for using this as the basis for hopping over to the McCain side of the fence. It might work the last week of October, but with over three months until the election? It just seems like too much time for Obama to expose the ad for what it objectively is: a disingenuous slander.

It also begs the question of where does McCain from here? Will those aforementioned late October ads make veiled references to a secret Obama/Bin Laden sex tape?

On a more serious note, I believe this strategy originated from the fairly decided change in tone HRC embarked on in the middle-end of the primary season, and which it could be argued yielded some results. The difference of course is that the primary season is a lot more fluid. You get a very limited amount of time to craft a message (be it yours or your opponents) and then you move on to address the dynamics of a completely different electorate in a completely different state.

We Are Not Alone

Or so says Edgar Mitchell, one of only twelve people to have walked on the moon, in this report from Reuters. My favorite part of the video was his declaration that the government lied about finding aliens because we didn't want the Soviets to know (otherwise I'm sure they would have put it in the President's radio address).

My favorite part of the written report was the line, "NASA denies it is involved in an alien conspiracy or cover up." No shit? I'm surprised they didn't come clean. Can you imagine actually asking the NASA spokesman, "So, is NASA part of an alien conspiracy or cover up?"

Meet the Press Review

I don't know how many loyal watchers of MTP there really are out there, though here in the District I'm sure there are more than a few. As I watch pretty regularly, I'll be doing a sort of MTP roundup/review on Sundays. MTP, and sometimes This Week with George Stephanopoulos (which I can't watch because I'm currently without a DVR) are almost the only programs on MSM I regularly watch. Other than anything with Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity of course.

Guest: Barack Obama (for the full hour)
Host: Tom Brokaw

Commentary: Seems like Obama's trying to be amazingly careful. I've always thought of him as a pretty opinionated guy with a sharp intellect, but I thought he was really thoughtfully (and not very successfully) trying to weigh his words to such an extent that his statements and occasionally even his message started to sound a little muddled, particularly in the foreign policy section.

Also: This surge stuff is not a winning rhetorical angle for him. It feels like he just wants it to be yesterday's news, which is impossible as McCain's entire campaign revolves around the issue. The politically expedient thing to do is to try to minimize it. Here's what you say if you're Obama:

"Thankfully, the security situation in Iraq has significantly improved. I don't think it's possible for anyone to know whether those improvements were due to increased troop deployments in Baghdad, the Sunni Awakening, internal Iraqi politics, or any number of other factors. Certainly, and I'm sure Senator McCain would agree with me on this, it was due to a large number of different factors, and trying to attribute it to one, whatever it might be is the same kind of simplistic X = Y, black-and-white mentality that's served us so poorly under the Bush administration. I will say this though -- I was skeptical as to whether increased deployments in Baghdad would be productive, as were a great many number of others, both inside of politics and out, including a majority of the American people. And, if my skepticism was unfounded I'm glad. I want increased security for our troops in Iraq, far, far more than I want to score a political point, which was exactly why I opposed our initial involvement in the Iraqi war, another in a long list of issues where John McCain found himself without skepticism -- in that same black vs white, good vs evil mentality that has characterized Bush/McCain policies over the last eight years .

But more importantly, and this is the crux of the issue, I believe the situation as it stands now, for whatever reason, is such that we can successfully redeploy our troops to Afghanistan; the central front in the War on Terror, and back home to the United States so that their long and deeply appreciated service can be applauded by those that care the most -- their families, friends, neighbors, and communities."

A little long maybe, but I think it's a lot better than the meandering response he's been offering up on his "surge" stance as of late.

My last MTP point is about Tom Brokaw. I'm not a fan of him hosting at all, to the point that if it's ever announced that he's doing it on anything other than an interim basis (I know he's at least doing it again next week) this might become the "This Week With GS Review" instead. I don't think he's dynamic, and I think his lines of questioning and mannerisms are plodding. Full disclosure, I've been pretty sour on him since he wrote "The Greatest Generation" which I found to be really...how shall I put this...uncompelling. Why can't they give Chuck Todd a chance? Does he not want to? He's their chief political guy for god's sake. Or even David Gregory, who I feel pretty ish about (though I loved him in the White House press corps) but who is better than Brokaw and has guest hosted for Russert in the past. What does anyone else think? Am I wrong about Brokaw? Who would you like to see?

Double Standard Part II

Reader audie murphy writes:

Drew--I think you've touched the tip of the iceberg with your closing comments, viz. that presenting McCain as anything less than a foreign policy expert would be inconsistent with prior reporting. I'd take your logic a step further and say that if the news agencies to rigorously question McCain's positions on the war, then that would beg a whole host of other questions, chief among them being: is it possible for a highly decorated veteran and former prisoner of war to be wrong about war strategy? In other words, just because you are a good soldier does not necessarily mean that you're an expert in matters of policy, just as raising blue-ribbon tomatoes does not make you a master gardener. I think it's interesting that anyone criticizing McCain on the issue is always careful to say (usually in the same breath) that he is a hero and that they respect his military service. To suggest that he's wrong would be to turn the whole American notion of radical individualism on its ear by implying that experience is not always the best teacher...

A couple of points. I think audie's definitely on the right track. There might be an implicit hesitancy to delve into McCain's gaffes by the MSM because they would make themselves susceptible to impugning the military/foreign policy bona fides of a war hero and all the subsequent cries of anti-Americanism that would go along with it. Obviously, any critical eye turned toward these overt mistakes would be a non sequitur in relation to his war service, but logic too rarely dictates MSM news coverage.

Additionally, this might explain some of the MSM's hesitancy, but clearly not all, particularly as it relates to such examples as McCain's references to Checkoslovakia and repeated claims by his surrogates that "not a drop of oil was spilled" during hurricane Katrina, a demonstrable lie.

Lastly, it's worth noting that if audie's analysis is correct, on some levels this might actually hurt McCain. If the MSM started to overtly question his competence, particularly as it related to his age, the potential for a helpful "stop-picking-on-the-old-war-hero" backlash would be significant. Instead his claims get only a wink, nod, and cursory scrutiny, which allows him to be eternally (and without consequence) on the political offensive -- where he probably shouldn't be.

McCain's New Ad

Viewable here. Wow. Tough to know where to start. Probably the claim that most deserves comment is the "he made time to go to the gym, but canceled a visit with wounded troops. Seems the Pentagon wouldn't allow him to bring cameras". As has been widely reported (here's a good summary by Andrea Mitchell) this claim could barely be further from the truth.

Politically, this really seems like flailing to me. I don't know how this doesn't alienate independent voters. It creates a back-and-forth that seemingly has to favor Obama because the claim itself is just nonsense. Anyone that would be predisposed to believe that a major party presidential candidate could actually have this level of callousness for active duty troops, not to mention such a complete lack of political savvy (and believe me, these people do exist) would never have voted for Obama anyway. This illustrates the point I made yesterday -- that this is fundamentally counter to what should be McCain's core message. This simply doesn't seem presidential. McCain needs to be actively acquiring new independent and on-the-fence voters, and I don't see how this helps. This ad utterly lacks any degree of subletly. McCain at some point is probably going to have to answer questions about this ad, and I don't know how that exchange is going to make him appear as anything other than petty and dishonest.

Google Ad Rules

In my contract with Google Ads I had to agree not to send out advertisements for this blog urging people to click on my advertisement links. But, I believe there was also a section in there where I wasn't supposed to click on my own links either. Here's the thing though -- one of my ads was for Lasik eye surgery, and I really want Lasik. Bit of a catch 22 huh? Obviously they have the rule so that you don't try to run up advertising revenue by yourself, and I'm sure they wouldn't mind me clicking on the link if my interest was "legitimate". Furthermore, I guess my lazy ass could simply google Lasik and get around 10 billion sites that would be happy for me to visit them. Nevertheless, I viewed it as a bit of a market failure.

Double Standard

Over the last several weeks and months there has been a lot written about the degree to which John McCain can regularly screw up commonly known facts about a wide arrange of issues (especially as they relate to foreign policy), such as repeatedly referring to Checkoslovakia (it hasn't existed in around 2 decades), talking about Iranian support of Al Qaeda (they vehemently dislike one another), referring to Iraq as the first post 9/11 conflict (what about Afghanistan?), messing up the basics of the "surge" timeline, etc. etc. Steve Benin at the Carpetbagger Report has done some good reporting and discussion of these rhetorical slip ups.

Most of these misstatements have not been of much interest to MSM outlets, and the ones that have generally haven't had much staying power. It seems to be a near consensus in the liberal blogosphere that had Barack Obama issued similarly incorrect statements, nearly any of them would have been on 24 hour news rotation, and cumulatively they would have ended his presidential chances. I mostly agree with this assertion.

Unfortunately, many liberals have simply noted this apparent double standard and moved on. I'd like to discuss (1) if this assertion is true, and (2) why that might be.

I'll bypass '1' for the time being, as I've weighed in, and ultimately it's fairly subjective, but for '2', as much as I've thought about it, I can't seem to wrap my head around it. I've often read that MSM executives tend to be disproportionately conservative, and that producers and reporters are often disproportionately liberal, which made some intuitive sense to me. But, I have a pretty hard time believing in some conspiracy theory wherein the executives of the country's largest television stations and newspapers sit around a table and agree not push the "why does McCain keep spouting overt nonsense" angle.

Ultimately MSM is in the business of making money, so I'm wondering how it could be that promoting Obama as a bumbling fool would be profitable (admittedly a conjecture), but doing the same to McCain would not be? Is it as simple as media narratives being self perpetuating? McCain is a foreign policy guru and conveying anything else isn't consistent with our previous position/reporting? I'm at a loss, and would love to hear anyone's thoughts.

Featured Extinct Blog of the Day

After considering my friend's abandoned blog I concluded that there must be a very large number of blogs that have been similarly retired. Thus I have decided to start the "Featured Extinct Blog of the Day" post. In these postings I will share with my throngs of readers inactive blogs that I come across that are (probably) completely ridiculous or (perhaps) worth checking out.

Today's featured extinct blog belongs to Judge Jru, a thirty year old "self appointed fourth judge of the Idol" who bravely took it upon (himself?) to blog, in great detail, American Idol.

Unfortunately Jru, in addition to getting a "big boy" job, was simply becoming "burned out" during season 6 of Idol, and simply felt that "Whenever I sit down to watch the Idol, it doesn't feel like fun. It feels like a chore." Judge Jru, you see, had "lost (his) Idol-Joy".

This was Jru's second retirement, so perhaps there's hope for a comeback. Perhaps we should all contact Jru at judgejru@gmail.com and let him know that his legend has not died. Or perhaps we should simply mock him. I may well do both.

If anyone out there has any future suggestions for "Featured Extinct Blog of the Day" please feel free to bring them to my attention.

The Challenge

The gauntlet has officially been thrown down. My friend Dome has wagered $1 that this blog will cease to be inside of one week. I have bravely accepted this bet, though I subsequently realized that we did not set up any actual metrics to judge the winner. Must I post everyday? Multiple times everyday? Would a total number of posts suffice (say 10) even if I were to skip a day? Clearly we are in need of a judge. If there is anyone else that has happened upon this blog that would be interested in serving in that capacity, please comment. As I accepted the bet this morning (not from the inception of the blog yesterday), I believe the bet should end at noon next Saturday, at which time I expect to have made this blog officially profitable.

Post script: Apparently Dome's lack of faith stems from a previously failed blog he attempted at some point in the past. My research indicates this blog existed here. I implore you to go check it out, and hopefully report back with demeaning comments.

The Weirdest Family Feud Board of All Time

Ok, so I took a break from on-line job hunting, making sure that of my 100 channels there was absolutely nothing I'd like to watch (random aside: there is absolutely no point in having cable unless you have a DVR) when I came across Family Feud. Yes, I know, I'm partying like a rock star on Friday night.

Sadly, I didn't hear the question, nor was it repeated, but the top five answers, in order, were as follows:
1) Osama Bin Laden
2) Saddam Hussein
3) Al Gore
4) John Kerry
5) Bill Clinton
(I might add that I believe one of the contestants on the family that was trying to "steal" implored their family leader to guess "Adolf Hitler", and that other failed suggestions included Jesse Jackson and Larry King)

I'm inclined to ask if anyone "out there" has ever seen this episode of Family Feud, but as I have no readers I will attempt to contact the show directly and find out what the question was. Should any information be forthcoming I will report back. In the meantime, let's speculate...
Guess #1: Michelle Malkin's T-Mobile MyFave's top 5?
Guess #2: A 2002-2003 response to the "invite any five people to a dinner party" question if you were fabulously uncreative?

Overheard Line(s) of the Day

-In line at Blockbuster-
Bravest Guy in the World (seemingly on a first date): "Yeah, it's good to be able to relax when you get home from work."
Girl: "I wish I could, but it always ends up that me and my boyfriend get in some huge fight."
Bravest Guy in the World (looking deflated): "Oh, your ex? It's gotta be tough still living together."
Girl: "Yeah, but I need to get out of there. I don't want that asshole around my kids with that shit (the "shit" I discovered moments later was drugs of some kind).

German Village Blues

I know there's been a lot of discussion about the political dichotomy created by Obama's overseas trip vs. McCain's faux-German tour, but there's an angle of McCain's strategy that I don't really understand.

While Obama has been doing the "this-guy-in-no-way-reminds-me-of-George- Bush" European rock tour, McCain has decided to participate in a string of "mirrored" events where he visits a bunch of towns in the U.S. with the name Berlin, or stopping by German Village in Columbus, OH yesterday and eating in a German restaurant/deli. I've heard people like Chuck Todd (who I like) talk about how McCain should have spent his time doing a comprehensive tour of a battleground state like Michigan instead, and how that would have been an excellent juxtaposition with Obama's events. Instead, what McCain has done makes his events look almost like parody (and total fodder for shows like the Daily Show and Colbert).

Though I agree that the outcome of these mirrored stops has been less than favorable for McCain, I think it was potentially a great idea. What has ruined it has not been the concept but the rhetoric. Here's the thing, and it's the thing that has been most responsible for McCain's poor general campaign thus far. He sounds petty. The entire point of stopping in a bunch of small towns and speaking to a couple hundred people while your opponent gives foreign speeches attracting 10's or 100's of thousands of people is that it makes you look grounded by comparison. But...it only makes you look grounded if the message is implicit. If your out there literally saying "we don't need a rock star, we need a president" and trying to throw some more gasoline on the "Europeans suck" campfire, all while directly attacking the patriotism of your opponent, it just makes you look like a nasty old man, an image that McCain should be desperate to avoid. Instead he needs to not intermittently say he's above the fray, but actually try to be above the fray. That makes you look experienced and presidential, which should be the exact image he's trying to perpetuate.

All of this back-and-forth rhetoric is simply off what should be McCain's core message (experience, familiarity, and trust), but even more than that it's counter to his actual day to day strategy.

Cliche for a New Millenium

Why not? All the cool kids are doing it, and I've always cared more about trendiness than I let on. Got an earring back in the 90's when it was cool (it was cool...right?), and a tattoo in the '00s was a given. And, though I haven't soured on the tattoo as I did the earring (long since gone), well, the decade hasn't ended yet has it?

I just moved to DC without a connection or job prospect in the world after a stint in grad school. Trying to land a job on the Hill, along with (as I've learned) legions of other better looking, younger, and more connected individuals. Though it has its intermittent moments of excitement, in general it's not the greatest of times. But, dreams being dreams, I'm sticking it out. In the meantime I thought I'd share what I had to share in the 21st century's version of the Philco radio -- a blog.

If a blog is created in a forest and nobody is around to read it does it really exist? We'll see.