Your generous
donations help keep
this site running.
Visa/MC/PayPal accepted.
The Head Elf turns back to his iPad. "Mitch McConnell says he wants some media attention. He complains they all ignore him and run to John Boehner instead. Boehner, on the other hand, wants less attention paid to the fact that he can't control his own caucus."
As always, if you disagree with any (or all) of my picks, feel free to make your own in the comments. The categories are completely open to interpretation, and don't forget that there will be a "Part 2" column next week, so I can likely squeeze things I forgot in there.
Feel free to suggest anyone or anything you'd like. The only rules of interpretation for what the categories mean are your own. If I think they're the best suggestion I've heard, I may use some of your suggestions in this Friday's column. We'll be returning to this subject next week, for part two, with a whole new set of categories. For now, who would you select for any or all of the following? Post your choices in the comments!
You know, it strikes me that this week may be one politics-watchers look back on when proving the thesis: "Anything can happen in politics, and usually does." I can picture seeing some wise pundit a few years down the road making the historical reference: "Yeah, but remember when Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul were leading the polls in the Iowa caucuses? Anything can happen... just anything..."
President Barack Obama gave a speech today in a small town in Kansas. The reason he chose this venue for this speech was to draw historical comparisons with a speech given there by Teddy Roosevelt, over one hundred years ago. While you may see some clips of Obama's speech in the news, few will bother to look up the original speech. Which is a shame, and which is why we present it today. We leave comparisons with Obama's speech to others, for now, mostly because the speech itself is a long one. But it is worth reading to the end, to see where the real (capital-P) Progressives stand in American history.
While the subject of which American politician's sex scandal came first is a debatable one (such as: did Benjamin Franklin's dalliances in Paris count?), most agree that the sex-and-blackmail scandal of Alexander Hamilton was the first with any impact, from George Washington's time onwards.
We'd like to begin today with an issue that we regularly get incensed about here, mostly because it flies under the radar of just about everyone -- including the entire media universe. Because for once, Democrats are making the attempt to use the issue to make some political hay (even though, in this regard, they're admittedly almost as bad as the Republicans).
A corporate leader passed away this week, and millions mourned his passing and celebrated his life.
The protesters in the Occupy Wall Street movement have been getting criticized for not being focused enough, or not providing a list of demands, or not having leaders, or any number of other things by the media. But this can be forgiven, because the media are now at least paying attention, rather than just completely ignoring the protest. What surprises me is that the media (at least so far) haven't realized the frustration the protesters feel is the real story here. Call it free-floating rage, if you will. Or, even better, call it an updated Howard Beale moment.
Since the president is not facing a primary challenger, and since the president has raised a whopping big pile of money already, and (most importantly) since the president has rediscovered the joys of speaking directly to the American people about his agenda -- why not buy some political ads, now?