Sullivan, best known for bashing Mel Gibson, has decided now to become an expert on the Obama transition. Here's a little clue to watch for.. you'll never ever, not once, hear the president elect refer to the "criminality" of the Bush administration.

The much questioned swing to the right by Obama on matters of terrorism has to do with only one thing.. he's now getting security briefings and he's taking his job as the upcoming chief executive seriously.

Something that people of Sullivan's ilk have never understood. We live in a dangerous world, a world that would be a lot more dangerous except for George W Bush.. and that's a legacy that Obama fully intends to continue. Sorry lefties.. the presidency is for adults. Bush's aggressive stance on the war on terror has kept another 9/11 style attack from happening.. but the bad guys out there haven't stopped trying and Obama being president won't stop it either.

I don't share Matthew's political views, but I do find him an energetic and interesting person..

He'd probably do pretty well and he's not a neophyte politically, having worked as a congressional staffer for years..

All that being said, he'd be a consistent liberal vote.. and we already have a senate full of those..

I don't get the Al Frankin comparison.. Frankin is a mean-spirited, no talent jerk.. Matthews is not.

(sorry watching football while typing)

On the rest of your post.. it would be interesting to hear why on earth you'd compare Brit Hume's newscast to Pravda..

Trying to figure out if you're a rude moron, or just rude..

Bettin on the former..

First off it's Brit Hume not Brent.

You're right.. I stand corrected..

On the rest of your post.. it would be interesting to hear why on earth you'd compare

I like Fox and the biased accusations just don't wash... There's a reason for their success, and it is that they do a much better job on the news than most of their competition. I think Brent Hume is the most balanced news anchor in television. Their viewers are not just conservatives, they're people that want the straight facts.

They do have openly biased commentators.. Sean Hannity for one.. but they make no secret of it, and he's counterbalanced. (Unlike for example.. MSNBC who pretends to everyone's amusement, that Chris Matthews is as agenda free as Brent Hume.. )

While I think Oreilly would be tough to work for, he's one of the best interviewers on Television.. He sometimes rubs me the wrong way, and he can sometimes be bullying, but when people stand up to him intellectually, he shows them respect.. Obama did that during his interview and Oreilly later complimented him by defending Obama from comments of another guest by saying of Obama.. "he's a tough guy."

In his book "Biased" Bernard Goldberg says that a big influence on the news elite is not what the viewers think, but what their fellow elitists tell them at cocktail parties, and there's where I think even Murdock gets touchy about Fox.

I've had talented employees and bosses that I didn't care much for personally, but I did respect their abilities. That's what's going on with Oreilly.

By the way.. just as an aside.. another interviewer that I think is highly underrated.. Don Imus.. like Oreilly, he gets politicians to cut to the chase. A sometimes difficult job when interviewing politicians of any political stripe.

I'm not a big fan of wind farms, primarily because they're ugly and take up enormous stretches of real estate.. but forgive me for being a little skeptical of the weather change.
Radicals have a tendency to eat their own as readily as they eat anyone else..

Which is why they rarely resolve anything for anyone. There is no utopia for unlimited energy.

I'm not so sure.. Hard labels are difficult to pin on anyone.. and one tried and true way of fighting an accusation of being a socialist, or marxist, or liberal, or whatever is to drag out a dictionary, and use the literal interpretation of the word and on narrow grounds say "see, that ain't me!"

But as they, say, the devil is still in the details.. or perhaps better said, in the interpretation of the details.. What Obama seems to indicate, is that he's favorably disposed to a modern European style of socialism. Not quite so harsh as more strident brands to be sure, but certainly leaning a lot more toward it than anyone else has recently.

Where enforcing fairness, not of opportunity, but of result is the goal that overrides individual accomplishment. (except for the ruling political class of course)

It's a milder form to be sure.. but it's still poison and I'm not convinced yet that Obama, aided by a liberal congress won't try to administer it.

Funny thing... when Liberal Dems lose... no one seems to suggest that they change their core beliefs.. and they don't.

Politics runs in cycles.. and the pontificaters were ALL wrong this time.. (remember how Hillary had this locked up?)

Conservatives should simply remain true to principle, and not nominate another moderate.. the politics will swing back (remember Carter?) and maybe next time, we won't spend money like democrats, expand government, and adopt the newest du joir philosophy pretending to be science.. (global warming)..

The term "neocon" is silly. Conservatives are not new, any more than are liberals. (but for some reason we don't seem to hear the term "neoliberal" )

The only thing "new" was that Republican conservatives won the hearts of the American people after the nightmare of the Carter presidency, where before, conservatives were as likely to be Democrats.

It's a stupid, meaningless term, used by people that substitute slogans for thinking.

"McLoser tried to sucker Obama into signing a pledge to take Fed Money for the election-so his fund raising would be limited-when McLame himself wouldn't sign on-Obama went his own way."

Only one little problem with your analysis.. Obama DID pledge, McCain didn't sucker him into anything. Obama backed out, and if anyone was 'suckered' it was McCain.

I'm not one that believes this made that much difference in any case, but keep the facts straight.

I think McCain/Feingold is an infringement on free speech, and is designed to protect established party figures and incumbents. It is ironic that it turned out to hurt its biggest backer. I hope it is overturned.

The fake news probably had more readership.

Excellent article. The oft repeated political advice to new congressmen, "say nothing that can't be explained in a sound-bite" comes to mind.

Thomas Jefferson, arguably the most intelligent person to ever hold the office of president, could never get elected today.

I don't know the answer to this, but somehow, we Americans need to get past American Idol, and start paying attention to our history and founding principles. Politics is downstream of the culture; and the culture is shallow.

idiot

What's most scary about this, is that the Supreme court only upheld this by a 5 to 4 vote. One more lib on the court and annoying a whale trumps national defense.

I like Steele.. he's articulate and conservative.

This is disgusting, and it didn't start with the gulf war(s).. I remember years ago some vietnam vets started investigating the shabbily dressed "vets" hanging out in public places and found that many of them were total fakes..

I'm a Vietnam era vet, but didn't serve in Vietnam.. I've always been very careful not to pass myself off as a "Vietnam Vet" although I've seen others do it.

Guys and gals that have done combat duty deserve all of our respect; fakers that try to collect money should be prosecuted.

An environmental limousine liberal nutcase..

great choice.. lose a few million more jobs to help out the economy..

If I were a liberal democrat (and I'm not) and I wanted the dems to maintain control of congress (and I don't) .. I would be praying that Franken is defeated. He will be the Senate's version of ex-congresswoman Cynthia McKinney.. a huge embarrassment for the democratic party.. (except that McKinney is a more pleasant person)

Probably one of the few things that liberal democrats and I would agree on.

Hey, to the winner go the spoils.. not a surprising move..

I don't know if any of the talking head pundits know anything.. but the pundit take is that Rahm sees himself as presidential timber, and could undermine Obama.

But who knows.. if those guys had been correct, Hillary would now be the president elect.

I'm just praying the more moderate Dems will curb some of the move-on people excesses.. like card check for one..

I remember an interview in which Crichton was asked what he'd found most interesting about Hollywood. He said that he was shocked at how dumb actors in general were. The host tried to give him an out by softening it a bit, but Crichton said, "no, I mean 2 plus 2 equals five dumb, really stupid."

I started liking him then..

His books were terrific... very smart guy.

I generally vote Republican, but in most cases I can understand someone voting for a dem.. many of them are principled decent people, who just have a different worldview than me..

But, Franken is not decent, principled, cultured, smart, or even funny.

He's a bitter unhappy useless person, that will bring nothing to the senate but name calling, pettiness, and meanness.

The people of MN must either be doing this as a sick joke, or else must be the most idiotic people on the earth.

Wonder which..

"TFD, I did not accept W in 2000 (obviously stolen)."

Idiot

mccain concedes gracefully.. peaceful transfer of power, fortunately something we can take for granted here in the US..

Oh well.. four years and we get to play the game again..

I'm sick about it.. but from what Dick Morris and Fox News are saying.. Ohio was McCain's last shot.

Oh well... God Bless America.. we'll need it.

Lincoln was unpopular until he was killed. People of conviction usually are. I fault Bush for only one thing.. he spent money like a democrat, but anyone that thinks that would have improved had Kerry or Gore been elected is delusional.

Tax revenues increased under Bush and the economy was pretty strong for most of his presidency MAINLY BECAUSE OF HIS TAX CUTS. He inherited a recession and managed to avoid it deepening.

We have not been attacked again, and our reputation, far from being tarnished worldwide is pretty good. We have a pro american president in france, and the arabs respect and fear bush. No-one feels the need to "test" him (quoting Biden about Obama)

The credit meltdown, is much more about Democrats than it is about Bush.

What I'll be curious to see, IF (God help us_) Obama gets elected, is who the Liberals will be blaming once Bush is gone, and assuming Obama and the dems make good on their promises to raise taxes and redistribute the country's wealth. (virtually insuring a deep and horrible recession.. think Jimmy Carter)

History, not the self proclaimed intellectuals on this board, will judge Bush, and he'll probably be judged pretty well.