Did you notice all the chatter on TV about Donald Rumsfeld saying he didn’t know what Condeleezia Rice was talkimg about? 

Neither did I but there it was in the Washington Post.         

One reason why nobody on TV was talking about it was because they were talking about the self-indulgent foolish actions of a liberal Democrat.

And that’s why the Cynthia McKinney story is important.

Because this "progressive" who cares about poor people, who wants to end the war in Iraq put her personal demons ahead of all those issues she cares about.

Last week in response to an entry of mine about Andrew Cuomo, someone wrote:

AGAIN this 1977 thing comes up. Why?

THINK FOR A MINUTE: Not one person in this whole wide world has ever kept a copy of any of those so said posters. How come? Wouldn’t they be collector’s items? And also different people who recollect seeing them have diff descriptions . It’s another URBAN POLITICAL LEGEND.

I direct all to this Daily News column –

"Alas, there is still one big sore spot, and Cuomo raised it yesterday: signs that appeared on Queens lampposts in 1977, saying "Vote for Cuomo, not the homo." The issue threatened to derail Koch, who denied on TV he was gay. Koch believed the Cuomo camp was behind the signs, while Cuomo has always denied it. He said yesterday he thinks he knows who did it, but that there is no point in identifying the person now."

Rarely do I harbor thoughts of divine intervention, but after spending over two hours composing, refining and polishing a study of the failings of Congressman Edolphus “ET” Towns, only to have it disappear in a matter of seconds due to my computer illiteracy, I am now almost convinced that there is a God, and that God firmly supports Ed Towns as the lesser of the evils in the 10^th Congressional District. So, before I try again, let me make this offering to the force Reform Jews refer to as “Our Parent, Our Ruler”: "Ed Towns is the political equivalent of indigestion; Charles Barron is a heart attack. Supporting Charles Barron as a cure for the ills of Ed Towns is like curing a hangnail by amputating your foot." That offering being done, I will now proceed.

Since there has been a lot of talk recently about whether statewide Democratic candidates will get 25% of the vote at the State Committee or will have to petition and whether receiving the designation of the State Committee was worth anything, I thought it might valuable to look at the history of Statewide Democratic Primaries.

The history does not go back far. Statewide Primaries began in 1968. Up until then, each party’s State Committee chose candidates with voters having no direct say in the process.

The change continued the Committees having a role but not a decisive one. Each Committee would have a meeting (or convention). Candidates receiving 50% or more of the vote became the Party’s designated candidate. Any candidate receiving 25% or more could also run in the Primary. Others could submit petitions signed by enrolled Party members to vote. The original petition requirements were harsher than they are. But it is still a difficult task. Now candidates in the Democratic or Republican parties must submit at least 15,000 signatures, with at least 100 signatures from ½ of New York’s congressional districts.

If you haven’t seen it, liberals should read this item from AMERICAblog.

In it, John  Aravosis takes his felow liberals to task for their knee-jerk defense of Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, who makes our own Ada Smith seem sane.

It’s good to see at least one blogger criticize those on his own "team".

The NY Sun has a column today by Michael Barone

In it, Barone says – 

"I remember a conversation I had with a broadcast news executive many years ago.

"Doesn’t the fact that 90 percent of your people are Democrats affect your work product?" I asked.

"Oh, no, no," he said. "Our people are professional. They have standards of objectivity and professionalism, so that their own views don’t affect the news."

"So what you’re saying," I said, "is that your work product would be identical if 90 percent of your people were Republicans."

Last week I criticized the Post. Today I’ll go after the News for an article in Sunday’s paper – “War Chests as Toy Chests”. The article claims state legislators are using their campaign accounts for “exotic travel, champagne lifestyles and personal pleasures”. And some of the examples, like Joe Bruno’s trip to Italy do sound like abuses. But many of the others sure look like legitimate expanses to me.

 For example:

 Assemblyman Richard Brodsky uses campaign money to buy meat that he then serves at a barbecue for his supporters. That’s clearly a campaign expense. The News complaint seems to be that he buys the meat while in Montana visiting his wife’s family.