Wednesday, 8 Nov 2006
- Glenn Greenwald offers his analysis of the midterm elections with an eye on crushing incorrect bits of common wisdom popping up.
-
Man, Chris Matthews can say some really dumb things but I was glad to hear someone challenge talk of “bipartisanship”:
Earlier this evening, I saw Chris Matthews hit some Republican — I think it was Bill Frist — with an interesting remark. The Republican, conceding that the Democrats would probably control the House, spoke of the need for the two parties to work together on a “bi-partisan basis” and he described some of what he hoped would happen. Matthews said something like, “You’re not describing a bi-partisan basis. You’re talking about them giving in to you on everything.”
Sadly, that’s been the definition of “bi-partisan” for the last five years, often going unchallenged. Hopefully, Matthews will continue to remember what it means.
- Shakespeare’s Sister’s Paul the Spud indulges in some midterm election shadenfreude by visiting the Free Republic website. Normally, I’d waver between feeling disturbed or snickering at comments like “I feels like I am watching 9-11 again on my TV.” But for a few hours, I’ll let myself laugh. Okay. Sometimes you’ve got to laugh at the BSC… or never stop crying.
- I didn’t think anything could give me a lower opinion of Laura Ingraham than her history at Dartmouth, but encouraging her listeners to undermine our elections is an absolute low.
- Added: Glenn Greenwald asks, didn’t Jeff Ganon say the same thing about Harry Ried?









Monday tidbits:
Fail:
Dear CW, your video site sucks:
Cupid's coming!:
Now... this? Is hillarious.:
I have a new favorite lesbian comedian: