"The Media vs. Howard Dean."
Salon (subscription or Flash ad viewing required) observes that the media have been doing everything in their power to attach negative labels to US presidential candidate Howard Dean. Will the adage that "there's no such thing as bad publicity" prevail? Meanwhile, the Internet is increasing in relevance as a news source
, according to a recent survey. Which websites do you peruse for political coverage, if any?
Red v. Blue v. . . . Purple?
Was America really so divided in the 2000 election? A map created as a retort to Salon's "Red v. Blue" map tells the real story. Any and all Prince references/jokes permitted.
from everyone's favorite biased website
They screw up their own point of course:"The surge of presidential candidates in the wake of Revision 11 had little impact on counties that use more sophisticated voting procedures and don't have to worry about crowded ballot space."
The problem is with the outdated voting procedures, not with third parties.
Bob Jones 2?
makes another misstep. Regardless of the outcome, the past 24 hours have been satisfying for Democrats
More Hot Nader Action Coming At You.
Because you cannot post enough links about Ralph Nader on Metafilter. The curious thing about this article comes at the end, with the analysis of Nader's message. Yeah, Ralph's against a lot of stuff, but what is he for
? What are his plans and agendas?
Yo dawg, peep Bush, he be up and on that whitecrib thang.
Believe it Yo. My pager goin off when I saw this word scribble...
Bush (shaking his head mournfully): "Dude, dude. You must be loaded, Holmes. You're cut off on the bong, ace. Your lameness is of a sameness. If every time you're sippin' on a 40 you start quoting Grouchy Marx, my man, you can't be hanging at Epsilon House. Major league bummer!"
Oh, happy day!
Just when thought the 2000 US Presidential Race was going to be a woebegone contest between Dull
, the impish whackjob returns for yet another round of merry hi-jinks and paranoiac delusions presented as fact!