Bush Library Looses Domain Name on the Internets

You'd think a guy who regularly uses the google on the internets would be savvy enough to secure and renew his domain names. On the other hand, I wouldn't want to be the squatter sitting on their domain name. I can see an IRS audit possibly, an NSA phone tap, and maybe a free trip to Gitmo with waterboarding included in their future.

Michael Mukasey's Bull Pucky

Did Rachel Maddow say bull pucky on air? Twice? I mean I know it's got to make your blood boil to hear the Bush administration blatantly use 9/11 to justify "shredding the constitution" with rationalizations that are either the most palpable lies imaginable, or a stupefying admission of guilt in the lead up to that tragedy. But to have to listen to language like this in explaining it. Rachel, clean it up.

Wal-Mart Seeks Worst Public Image Ever

Wal-Mart made Keith's Worst Persons list again today, that clip is not yet available. This one's from yesterday. Keith is threatening to put them on the list every day until they relent. The clip below is a little fairer to Wal-Mart and gives their side of the story, such as it is. I can't see much good coming out of this for them no matter how they spin it unless they decide to change their minds. They'll get more than $400k worth of ill-will and bad PR from this move. And it isn't as if they didn't already have some PR problems to start with. Makes you wonder what goes on in the legal departments and board rooms of companies like this. Are there people there who are like cartoon evil villains? Scrooge, the Grinch and Cruella De Vil all wrapped into one. Or are they that disconnected from the public perception of their companies? It's hard to fathom how they rationalize this to themselves. One more reason to hate them and a good reason not to buy anything from them.

O'Reilly's Ambush of Huffington and Olbermann's Response

I have to say what irks me most in the video above is that Arianna runs from this clown as if she actually has a reason not to talk to him. Making it look to all who swallow O'Reilly's nonsense whole that she is what's being portrayed.

Though Arianna Huffington is in no need of a knight in shining armor to come to her rescue, she's tough enough to rescue her own share of knights, Keith Olberman sure looks like one in the video below.

McCain Gets Facts Wrong on Iran

McCain is Worst Person in the world on Countdown with Keith Olbermann.

Keith Olbermann's Special Comment on Hillary Clinton's Campaign and Geraldine Ferraro

Again Keith saying exactly what needs to be said the way it must be said. Not holding back, not mincing words, not fearing the consequences. I just hope those to whom it is directed are listening.

Clinton Crosses the (Party) Line

I can understand a hard fought campaign during the primaries. I can understand that Hillary Clinton wants to be and believes she is the best qualified person to be president. What I don't get is her not only giving ammunition to, not only supplying a tactic for, but actually praising the likely Republican nominee for president. She just said that the potential Republican nominee may be a better choice than the leading democratic party candidate. To me this is beyond the pale. It is fractious to the party. And it gives aid and comfort to the enemy. I fail to see why I should have loyalty to a Democratic Party candidate who has no loyalty to the leading candidate for nomination of the party.

I believe and sincerely hope Clinton's campaign will be over tonight. But for me, at this point, she's made it nearly impossible for me to support her should a miracle occur and she ends up being the nominee of the party. I would find it impossible to have any enthusiasm and to get behind her candidacy. After the race bating and "fairy tale" remarks of her husband. After the mocking performances at her rallies. After the picture of Obama in Somali garb surfaced that was said to have come from her campaign, and wasn't immediately denied, I have pretty much lost all respect and good will I had for both Clintons. I would guess, the only thing I could possibly surmise, is that if a miracle does occur and she is the nominee, that she's counting on offering Barack Obama the second spot on the democratic ticket in order to mend fences. I have to say that I would almost still be disinclined to vote for her. I couldn't vote for McCain, of course. I think I may just vote for Ralph Nader or just stay home. I might take the attitude about voting that I disagreed with George Carlin over in a recent post.

In the video below Keith Olbermann, without a great deal of effort, takes apart Hillary Clinton's main selling point, her experience. And Rachel Maddow makes the point that it behooves all the candidates left in the race to be rather nebulous about their experience in military and foreign policy matters. None of them have real experience to point to. If it was what mattered, she points out, we'd be choosing someone like Chris Dodd or General Wesley Clark. What she says at the end of the clip shows just how utterly disloyal and frankly stupid

Hillary Clinton's statement comparing Obama's experience with McCain's was. She says, it's what you say when you want to be John McCain's running mate, not what you say when you want to be the democratic nominee. Hillary Clinton talks about going into the general election campaign as a unified party, but how she's conducted her campaign shows she'd rather destroy the party than loose.

Trending Away from Microtrends

An interesting and ironic analysis of why Barack Obama is winning by Arianna Huffington at Huffington Post. If you're tired of poll after poll, and coverage of tit-for-tat bickering between the candidates, and the other useless information you get from the best political team on television, or as I've just this moment decided to start calling them, the best political team in show business, and the rest of the MSM (of course except for the man Keith Olbermann), and want to read something that won't reduce your IQ by 5 points, check out her post.

Bill O Apologizes for Lynching Comment

Bill O'Reilly casually apologizes for using the word "lynching" in defense of Michelle Obama, excusing it by reaching way back to remarks made by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in 1991. Thomas referred to a "high tech lynching" in defending himself against sexual harassment charges by Anita Hill during his Senate confirmation hearings. There's a major difference in this case.

Beyond the fact that it was 16 years ago and the standards were a little different then, Clarence Thomas is black. Without addressing whether you think Thomas was correct in using the metaphor in his case, it can appropriately used by a black man referring to himself in a befitting circumstance. Meaning said black man is describing a situation where someone did something to him akin to lynching. Not by a white man about a black woman, as in Bill O's case.

It isn't much of an apology, if this clip is all he said. It's almost flippant, using the justification that in Michelle Obama's defense, context justified her statement. Somehow he believes that context justifies his. Except he conveniently leaves out the fact that he made no reference to Clarence Thomas in his original statement about Michelle Obama. So how does it fit into the context of his statement about her? Also, it's a qualified apology, which is no apology at all. And it makes no acknowledgment of the offensiveness of the word and that it should never be used.

It's more of a justification than an apology. The word came out of his mouth. But in the context of, "If I offended anybody", and the Clarence Thomas also said it defense, it's not really an apology at all. Context, Bill, is everything.