Great. Just what the Weiner scandal needed - Gloria Allred.
This story makes Stephen Jay Gould look very bad.
Gosh, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is a lot of fun. After saying that the economy was turning around she proudly proclaimed that Obama and the Democrats "own the economy." Yup. They sure do. Somewhere Michael Steele is thrilled that some other party chairman is having a worse debut than he did. I guess we have seen the end of blaming Bush, right? Just check out this chart contrasting the situation on Obama's inauguration day and today. Yup, Peggy Noonan was right: "He made it worse." And now the chairwoman of the DNC proclaims that the Democrats own the economy.
George Will explains why Texas Senate candidate Ted Cruz is as good as it gets and would give Marco Rubio a run for being the most promising young Republican Senator.
None of the Republican candidates is all that popular in his or her own state. Another plus for Rick Perry.
Now the ATM industry is upset with Obama. And Philip Klein explains how Obama's comments on ATM's replacing workers demonstrates how he not only doesn't understand employment at banks or how jobs get created in the first place. But we knew that, didn't we?
Vulnerable Democratic Senate candidates are trying to duck commenting on the NLRB's ruling against Boeing moving to a right-to-work state. Many of them represent such states, but they don't want to tick off their union overlords.
Isn't it funny that some of the same people who supported campaign finance laws and were in a tizzy about the Citizens United decision are now arguing that John Edwards is simply a jerk but that he hasn't broken any campaign laws. Apparently, their position is that it is illegal to exceed the $2300 donation limits in 2008, but it isn't illegal for someone to give a candidate almost a million dollars to a candidate to try to hide his mistress's pregnancy from his wife and the public. Don't they understand the concept of fungibility of money? And isn't it a delicious irony that the laws that Edwards supported in the first place are coming back to bite him now?
It's cute how Obama raises money while proclaiming that he doesn't raise money from special interests all the while he's raising money from special interests. I guess it depends on what the meaning of special is.
And it's all of piece with the frequency with which Obama gave jobs to donors to his campaign. The more someone gave, the higher the probability that he or she would get a job in the Obama administration. Of course, all presidents reward their supporters. Obama in two years appointed as many of his top bundlers to jobs as Bush did in eight years. How's that for change? Think of the ads that will be made in the coming year simply contrasting what Obama has said on the campaign trail and in speeches with what he actually did. The ads will just write themselves.
Stuart Rothenberg refutes the CW that unpopular Republican governors will hurt the chances of the eventual Republican nominee for president.
Victor Davis Hanson explains why Barack Obama is a reactionary president. He keeps advocating policies that have failed in the past.