Well it’s that time again. Time for me to pack up my bags and take a much-needed and, if I may say, well-deserved vacation. I’m leaving for Big Bend tomorrow morning to celebrate the 4th of July and my new solidarity middle name. Because today, we are all Hussein.

I’m sure it would amuse many of you to think of me hiking and camping in 120-degree weather. Well, JOKE’S ON YOU, because I have rented a sherpa and am planning on Sandy Pittman-ing myself up the mountain.

As most of you know, I rarely venture outside Austin city limits and am quite excited about this foray into the wild. I’m sure I will come back with stories and pictures and tales of bravery, and — this was supposed to be a surprise — little trinkets for all of you.

See you Monday. If the desert doesn’t win.

*UPDATE* — This is not actually Sarah Palin. I regret the error. And I regret the fact that so many of you know who the Overstock.com girl is. But she kind of looks like her. Here’s the actual Palin.

I responded to a commenter in yesterday’s post concerning McCain’s possible VP picks and whether or not there is a vast media-wing conspiracy that is touting Romney as the most likely candidate because they want to see McCain lose. Let me just state for the record — there is NO WAY that McCain will pick Romney, whose middle name is purported to be “Joseph Smith.”

Alaska governor Sarah Palin, on the other hand, could really help McCain’s ticket. A McCain-Palin ticket could also lure Diane Mantouvalos and her ilk, not that the ilk really need to be lured. Palin is young (at 44, she’s the youngest governor in Alaskan history, as well as the first woman), and is hugely popular in her state, known for her tough anti-corruption and reform record as governor. This could boost that whole “maverick” thing.

She’s also a woman. Just one more reason why Obama needs to pick Hillary. If, after this whole messy primary, McCain picks a woman for his running mate (Palin, KBH, former HP CEO Fiorina), and Obama picks some guy, how does that look for the D’s?

Palin has a compelling story to boot. A pro-life mother of five, she recently gave birth to her fifth child, who has Down’s syndrome. She’s a hunter, fisher and a former state champion basketball player who earned the nickname “Sarah Barracuda” on the court. She also won her hometown beauty pageant (bonus). She became mayor of Wasilla in her early 30’s.

Palin eats moose burgers and rides snowmobiles, and has admitted to smoking pot. The cool factor. She’s a lifelong member of the NRA. The cool gun factor. Plus, although she opposes same-sex marriage, she admits to “having gay friends.” The cool gay factor. She’s married to a fisherman. The cool “I’m married to a fisherman” factor. Finally, she’s got that whole “dirty librarian” thing working for her.

Damn, man. This chick could’ve been a character on “Northern Exposure.”

So yesterday I’m sitting outside reading the Sunday NYT (yes, outside — my A/C broke down AGAIN and it was actually cooler outside than it was in my freaking oven of a house) when I ran across this article of kids who have decided to take Hussein as their pseudo-middle names. At first I thought I was suffering heat stroke.

Apparently there’s a movement afoot to informally adopt Obama’s middle name in a show of solidarity. Aren’t there more constructive ways to support your candidate? The point is to diffuse the name Hussein as a political liability by taking it as your own while spending the rest of your life trying to convince friends and family that you’re not, in fact, a terrorist. Or, God forbid, a Muslim.

It all began with some DailyKos diarist who wrote a call-to-arms manifesto entitled “We Are All Hussein,” which prompted a bunch of kids on Facebook to add “Hussein” to their names. NOW how are all your old classmates supposed to find you??

Some of the new Husseins say they were inspired by the movie “Spartacus,” about a Roman slave who is protected by his peers who cry out “I am Spartacus!” when the Roman soldiers come to get him. Right. I’m sure these kids were able to tear themselves away from “The Hills” long enough to watch Stanley Kubrick’s 1960 classic.

Did I mention that John McCain’s middle name is Sidney? No one confuses him with an Islamofascist, just a big dork.

There’s a reason they call this the Dog Days of summer (July to early September, unless you’re in Texas, where it’s late March to mid-October). And every summer I say the same thing. OH MY GOD GET ME OUT OF THIS HELL ON EARTH. I AM ENGULFED IN FLAMES. And every fall I think, why, isn’t it lovely here? I believe the same thing happens when women decide to have second children, completely forgetting the pain of delivery. I will not be making that mistake as I have a very low threshold for pain and a very long memory.

Of course, the other Dog Days refers to the fact that there is nothing I mean nothing going on in politics. I would shut this blog down temporarily but then I’d have to give up my supplemental income (subscribe now!).

No matter. These slow days are a perfect time to play… who’s going to be the alternate who steps up when the president gets clubbed in the knee by an angry ice skater’s ex-husband?

According to Politico, here are some long-shots, since we all know the short-shots.

Obama:

• Robert Rubin (Former Treasury Secretary. Endorsed Hillary in the primary. Now feels stupid.)
• Timothy Roemer (Former Indiana congressman. Pro-life and socially conservative. Says his favorite Supreme Court justice is a hybrid of Thomas and Scalia.)
• Donna Shalala (Former Health and Human Services secretary. Daughter of Lebanese immigrants. Most likely a terrorist.)
• Colin Powell (Let’s just roll the tape of his WMD presentation to the UN.)

McCain:

• Bill Gates (Pocketbook. But Steve Jobs will probably release the new 28th version of the iPod and get more attention.)
• Meg Whitman (Former eBay CEO, distant relative of Walt Whitman and acclaimed author of “Leaves of Ass.”)
• Rep. Eric Cantor (House’s chief deputy. Jewish. From Virginia. Jewish? From Virginia?)
• William Cohen (Former Defense Secretary. Also best man at McCain’s wedding. Liability — mentioned McCain’s ex-wife and farm animals in his drunken toast.)

Wild card: NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg for either ticket. As far as we know, he is not involved in an international prostitution ring.

My guesses. Obama — Hillary, Mark Warner, Evan Bayh (assuming the ITPT curse can be lifted), Bob Casey, Joe Biden, Bill Richardson. McCain — Olympia Snowe or Susan Collins, Mitt Romney, Charlie Crist, Kay Bailey, Mike Huckabee.

Wild card: Chuck Hagel for either ticket.

Well, I think they looked beautiful up there together. Was I the only one standing up and singing, “Sweet Home, Hillobama!”? Yeah. I thought so.

I know you all hate to hear about these Hillary supporters who have yet to OH MY GOD GET OVER IT, but today’s article in the WashPost is specifically about Hillary bloggers and anti-Obama activists and other women willing to die alone for the cause.

Women like… Diane Mantouvalos, a very tanned PR consultant in Miami. She’s the co-creator of Hireheels.com, which describes itself as “a forum of power chics for Hillary.” Its slogan? “We adore shoes, but LOVE Hillary.” More: “Gloves are off, stilettos are on, and they’re 5-inch sharpies!” I’m thrilled to hear of a women’s movement that is centered around their love of shoes. It’s about time we were taken seriously.

On the Evening That Is Not To Be Mentioned Again, the fateful night that Hillary conceded the race, brassy blogger (position has been filled, thank you very much) Mantouvalos organized a Hillary conference call, which went something like this: CALLING ALL CRAZIES.

Later that night, Mantouvalos, who says her age is “north of 35,” (now why didn’t I think of that), launched a new website, JustSayNoDeal.com, which has become a veritable clearinghouse (dumping ground) for the rebel forces.

Some of the groups are planning marches at the Denver convention (I swear I know nothing about that). Others are organizing a Clinton write-in campaign. Others will vote for McCain.

“Oh, we’re up to no good,” Mantouvalos says mischievously. “We just can’t stop ourselves. What can I say?” Why you saucy little minx (position has been filled, thank you very much).

Here’s Mantouvalos on FOX (I’ve got to give her credit, she looks much better than I did in my bloggingheads debut. Who does her hair?). When asked if this is all just “sour grapes,” she bristles at the comparison, then responds, “It’s more like Napa Valley filled with vineyards filled with sour grapes.”

Just so we’re clear.

I’m so nervous I’m about to vomit. Hillary and Obama are in Unity, N.H. today for a joint appearance that is scheduled to take place in the next 10 minutes or so. Due to my job responsibilities, I’ll be live-blogging this historic event over at Poll Dancing, assuming I’ll be able to stop hyperventilating long enough to see my keyboard. I came in this morning wearing my Hillary goddess t-shirt but apparently I’m the only one who WORKS ON FRIDAY.

(Oh, yeah. I’m also excited to see Obama speak. I hear he might be the nominee.)

Click here to see how fast I type.

We are raising a country of drunks. Well, I hope you all are proud of yourselves.

According to a new study released Thursday, many of the nation’s 10.8 million underage drinkers are easily getting alcohol from their parents or other adults. You mean I waited out in the 7-Eleven parking lot in downtown McLean flagging down anyone who would buy beer for a girl who looked 12 years old FOR NOTHING?!

(Interestingly, among younger teens, slightly more girls reported drinking than boys did. Which means that soon we’ll be getting a new crop of bloggers. FRESH FISH!)

When teens were asked who was supplying them with cheap domestics (beer, not illegal powerwashing nannies), 40 percent reported they got it from adults. For free. Unless you count sex. Of the 40 percent, one in four said they got it from an unrelated adult, one in 16 got it from a parent or guardian and one in 12 got it from another adult family member. And roughly 4 percent take alcohol from their home.

Let me tell you something about growing up in the Smith household. Once I turned 16 and could take care of myself by making toast for dinner and shuttling myself around in my Colt, my father would go away on business trips, leaving me in the house alone.

The only alcohol he kept around, however, was gin. Martini guy. So, naturally, I would make myself gin and cokes. My stomach still turns when I think about it.

I rarely ventured out and went to parties, mostly because I was too busy creating new cheerleading routines and OK I WAS NEVER INVITED. Plus my sister’s fake ID didn’t work for me. They would look at it and ask, “OK, so who’s the pretty girl who gave you her license, you little toad?”

Still, I consider it a great tragedy that so many underage teens are engaging in drinking. There’s simply not enough for all of us.

Apologies for the slow blogging today on In the Pink. I’m just trying to make my other adopted blog feel like part of the family, and In the Pink’s a big girl now (3 1/2 years old!) so she can take it. But I’m working on a post that’s so totally hilarious you’ll just die laughing and by “working on,” I mean “desperately trying to come up with something.”

In the meantime…

Meet Me in Ohio!, We’ve Only Just Be-gun, and Race Against Time.

Not for nothing, I’ve noticed some profanity over in Poll Dancing’s comments so you’ll probably feel right at home. (No, I never thought I’d stoop so low either. Trying to lure you somewhere with the promise of a f*uck.)

The Supreme Court today overturned D.C.’s restrictive ban on handguns, 5-4, because what D.C. really needs to make the city safer is MORE FIREARMS. This is the first time that the Court has affirmed the individual right to possess a gun. Thank God. I was so sick of carrying around my taser.

The D.C. ban had prohibited residents from keeping handguns in their homes, and required legal guns like hunting rifles to be registered and kept unloaded in a locked area. Good news for families with kids! Who wants to play tea party when you can play target practice?

Naturally the McCain campaign immediately seized on the issue to paint Obama as just another elitist gun-hating, white-talking, polysyllable-using, goat-cheese-eating liberal who wants to take away the right to bear arms and shoot innocent people by mistake. The RNC plans to use Obama’s position on gun control in rural battleground states to portray him as “the most anti-gun candidate in American presidential history.”

The Obama campaign, meanwhile, is distancing itself from a statement the candidate made last year to the Chicago Tribune that “Obama believes the D.C. handgun law is constitutional.” Spokesman Bill Burton said that the statement “was not worded as well as it could have been,” adding that Obama “loves guns.”

In a previous interview, Obama had this to say: “I think it’s important for us to recognize that we’ve got a tradition of handgun ownership and gun ownership generally… I think there is nothing wrong with a community saying we are going to take those illegal handguns off the streets, we are going to trace more effectively how these guns are ending up on the streets, to unscrupulous gun dealers, who oftentimes are selling to straw purchasers. And cracking down on the various loopholes that exist in terms of background checks for children, the mentally ill.”

Nothing wrong with that. I think Obama should stand by it, making a clear distinction between McCain’s opposition to the D.C. gun ban, and Obama’s rational stance.

McCain released a statement saying, “Unlike the elitist view that believes Americans cling to guns out of bitterness, today’s ruling recognizes that gun ownership is a fundamental right — sacred, just as the right to free speech and assembly.”

Sacred, even! OK, let’s hear from gun owners out there. I know DMWP packs heat — and sometimes she even carries a gun. LOL!

I’m not sure where Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana falls on the list of possible VP candidates for Obama, but I do know this: he has been marked with the dreaded ITPT curse, which ensures that any candidate photographed with myself or other readers, especially Andy Brown, will never go any further in his career.

On Tuesday, Bayh, a former Hillary supporter, admitted he would take the job if offered. “I don’t think it’s the kind of thing you say no to… the answer to that is yes,” Bayh said in an interview on MSNBC. “If you care about serving your country, that is the kind of thing that you do.” He hastily added that he still loves “his day job,” in a thinly-veiled attempt to keep his benefits.

Bayh is the a former governor of Indiana, which will most likely be a key battleground state in this election. He serves on the Armed Services Committee, is a political moderate, and looks good in photo-ops. Plus, he helped his girl Hillary win his state by a whopping 1.12%!! Thereby handing Obama the election! No wonder he likes him.

Evan, I’m sorry to have to do this.

“Fancy” Nancy Pelosi (Hey, she might’ve been born just plain white trash, but “Fancy” was her name) said that she favors bringing back the Fairness Doctrine, but right now the House’s docket is too cluttered with other bills when it comes back from summer recess.

In case you’re not familiar with the Fairness Doctrine, it allows the FCC to regulate anyone with a broadcast license if the agency thinks a controversial issue of public importance is not being discussed in a manner that’s honest, equitable and balanced, which is ultimately defined by FCC Chairman Kevin Martin.

In related news, Kevin Martin is also wanted in the State of Texas for stealing Evan Smith’s DNA.

Anyway…Congress and the FCC first introduced the Fairness Doctrine in 1949 during the Red Scare as a stipulation for granting a broadcast license. In the 80’s, the Supreme Court later repealed it over a series of decisions that came when Studio 54 closed and Justice Brennan suggested everyone read the Bill of Rights.

Today, left-leaning Congresspeople like Richard Durbin, John Kerry, and Pelosi want to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine in order to shut up conservative talk show hosts like Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh, and this brings up several important questions like…

1) Since the FCC is only supposed to regulate non-governmental broadcasts, will NPR and PBS get a free pass? Shouldn’t censorship and oppression be a treat that’s available to everyone?

2) How will this affect online media outlets and blogs? Keep your hands off us bloggers you damned, dirty government!

3) What’s the criteria that determines if something is “honest, equitable and balanced?” (Stand down FOX News, nobody called on you!)

4) Don’t these Democrats realize that this law would…uh…also apply to THEM?

No matter what Pink Lady writes on bathroom walls, I’m no lover of Hannity or Rush. However, I do love their constitutional right to say whatever they want, no matter how inane or retarded. In fact, I’m pretty sure that being able to say something inane is also the foundation for the freedom of religion.

To Fancy, Dick, and Kerry, I suggest utilizing the “Off” switches on their radios. It’s a technique politicians have been using for years to tune out of both broadcasting and reality.

In an interview with the Rocky Mountain News on Monday, Ralph Nader accused Obama of trying to “talk white” and appeal to “white guilt.” Must be all that polysyllabic mumbo-jumbo that Obama tends to employ in his Caucasian-tailored speeches.

When asked about Obama’s pledge to reject campaign contributions from registered lobbyists, and whether this makes him different from other Democrats that Nader has vilified, he had this to say:

“There’s only one thing different about Barack Obama when it comes to being a Democratic presidential candidate. He’s half African-American. Whether that will make any difference, I don’t know. I haven’t heard him have a strong crackdown on economic exploitation in the ghettos. What’s keeping him from doing that? Is it because he wants to talk white? He doesn’t want to appear like Jesse Jackson?”

I mean, as a BLACK man, Obama should make a CRACKdown on the GHETTOS his top priority.

How does one talk white? By talking like a Kennedy? Because I’ve been trying that my entire life. I have never forgiven my parents for putting me through speech therapy to get me to pronounce my R’s. I could have BEEN SOMEBODY.

Finally, Nader went on to question why Obama hasn’t been campaigning in low-income minority communities because, you know, he’s black.

“He wants to show that he is not a threatening… another politically threatening African-American politician. He wants to appeal to white guilt. You appeal to white guilt not by coming on as black is beautiful, black is powerful. Basically he’s coming on as someone who is not going to threaten the white power structure, whether it’s corporate or whether it’s simply oligarchic. And they love it. Whites just eat it up.”

Oh you silly whites sipping on your lattes and driving your volvos and feeling all good about yourselves for being so progressive as to support a black man for president. You’re probably even trying to “talk black” to look cool.

[via MSNBC]

As we all know, caffeine is a precious, precious thing that helps get us through our days — and our nights, if you’re a single woman who can’t bear to go to sleep, knowing that you’ll just dream about the impossible: a man.

A new study shows that Americans are consuming caffeinated beverages as never before, including double lattes, energy drinks, sodas, shots of espresso, and, in some cases, breast milk. (Come and get me, lactivists!) A cup of coffee usually contains 80 to 150 mg. But an energy drink like Rockstar, whose sales have risen 40 percent, contains up to 360 mg of caffeine per can. DAMN, man, how much caffeine do you need in a day? Is your job really that boring?!

Which brings us to a whole new breed of desperate women — “caffeinated moms.” According to the National Sleep Foundation, more than 65 percent of moms drink caffeinated beverages on a daily basis. “I can definitely say without a doubt that I am addicted to caffeine,” said Sarah Kripal, mother of two. “I need about four energy drinks, three cups of coffee and a six-pack of soda every day.”

Right. A six-pack of…soda.

Author and parenting expert Stacy DeBroff claims that moms today have never been busier. Which is what moms have said since, like, the beginning of time. That garden of Eden wasn’t going to clean itself, and Eve obviously needed some help raising those boys.

“We have crammed lives,” DeBroff says. “We work full time, our kids our busier than ever, and we are finding ourselves always on the go. I’m just waiting for someone to invent a caffeine patch that we hit in the morning and we say, ‘Time to wake the kids. We’re ready to go!’ ”

Now, I can appreciate that today’s moms feel the need for speed. Not having any children of my own (YES I KNOW THE CLOCK IS TICKING, INGRATES), my days are relatively manageable. I only need one latte in the morning, and roughly 12 bags of chocolate-covered coffee beans at my desk. But if over-stressed mothers continue to drink this much caffeine, everything they say will be punctuated with exclamation points. Just wait until *this* year’s Christmas card sent out by 6-year-old Johnny.

Hi! I’ve had the best year ever!! I love my brother even when he goes poopie in his diaper!! I like getting into everything, especially things I’m not supposed to touch!! I still pee in my bed!! Mommy sure has been busy driving me around everywhere!!! Mommy thinks she might lose it!!! Have you seen my daddy?? Because he hasn’t been home in months!!! Happy New Year!!!

Our long national nightmare with Florida is apparently far from over. Yes. Elian’s back. Cuban-Americans are up in arms. This may or may not pose a problem for Obama in what is likely to be a key battleground state.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME WITH THIS? Oh, if only, my sweets. Young Elian is all grown up, and is now a dirty red commie. And kind of an orphan. Anyone else getting hungry?

I’m a little limited on time today (plus I’m wearing myself out in the public financing comments, are you guys trying to give me a heart attack?)… so I must refer you to my morning post about this on Poll Dancing.

We always knew this election would come down to one thing: a small boy living in Florida who was sent back to Cuba and is now a member of Cuba’s Young Communist Union. Yes, that boy. Elian Gonzalez.

After eight years of relative peace and quiet in Southern Florida — save for Will Smith’s catchy “Miami” ballad — Elian’s name is back in the news due to a report in a Cuban communist youth newspaper that he has become, well, a little communist, thereby reigniting the international custody saga…

Last week, Obama met with members of the Congressional Black Caucus to encourage former Hillary supporters, especially women, to get behind him. By telling them to “get over it.” OH YOU DID NOT JUST TELL ME TO GET OVER IT.

According to Hillary supporter Rep. Yvette Clarke, D-N.Y., Obama said, “I need to make a decision in the next few months as to how I manage that since I’m running against John McCain, which takes a lot of time. If women take a moment to realize that on every issue important to women, John McCain is not in their corner, that would help them get over it.”

Oh NOW I suppose he’ll tell us to be good girls and take our meds. Well, FAT CHANCE, Mister! While Clarke said she didn’t think anything of it, Rep. Diane Watson, D-Calif., a longtime Clinton supporter, found Obama’s comments “dismissive and off-putting,” and she warned the candidate not to use that terminology.

Even I can see how innocuous that “get over it” statement is. But obviously, I’m still having my own issues with getting over Hillary which I’m working through with my team of therapists, homeopaths, and hypnotists. So far? NOT WORKING.

But here’s the kind of stuff that holds me back — on Sunday, the NYT’s Public Editor singled out their own columnist Maureen Dowd as contributing to the sexist news coverage during the primaries.

Dowd’s columns about Clinton’s campaign were so loaded with language painting her as a 50-foot woman with a suffocating embrace, a conniving film noir dame and a victim dependent on her husband… Her columns this year said Clinton’s “message is unapologetically emasculating,” and that she “needed to prove her masculinity” but in the end “had to fend off calamity by playing the female victim…” By assailing Clinton in gender-heavy terms in column after column, [she] went over the top this election season.

One day, in the not so distant future, I’ll be ready to move on. Until then, I’ll probably just keep talking about public financing because it’s all I have. It’s my not-so-subtle jab at my #2 choice. But I’m coming around, even, dare I say, getting over it.

I reluctantly turned on Meet the Press Sunday morning, thinking that if I saw Keith Olbermann sitting smugly in Tim Russert’s sacred chair, I was going to start flicking yolky bits of my hard-boiled egg at the screen and turning it off in protest. Luckily, Brian Williams filled in, although in a rather ho-hum way. He’s just not MTP material. (Tom Brokaw is apparently going to temp while they look for a full-time replacement. I think it should totally be Tim’s son.)

Joe Biden and Lindsey Graham were the guests, and Williams kicked off the debate with Obama’s opt-out of public financing. Biden’s talking point: Obama’s already changed the way campaigns raise money and has only accepted $1 donations from poor elderly ladies who want to take back the White House. Lindsey’s talking point: Obama’s decision has ruined the country and it’s all very sad.

I’m obviously not a supporter of Obama’s decision, and I had to give Biden props for not simply being a campaign surrogate (and by “campaign surrogate,” I mean “a supporter impregnated by ideas and ready to deliver”). Biden actually engaged in thoughtful dialogue on the issue, as opposed to Graham Cracker, who was too busy weeping for America.

Biden: “Look, I’ve been a strong supporter of public financing my, my whole career. I’m the first guy to introduce a public financing bill to the United States Senate in 1973. And the purpose was to get big money out of the politics. The irony is, although he has changed his position–I’m not going to color that, he’s changed his position–the fact of the matter is he has 1,400,000 contributors, the vast majority of whom contribute less than a hundred bucks a piece. So the effect of campaign financing is in place, but it’s not campaign financing.

“So in terms of the downside of his not accepting it in terms of influence and big money, there is no influence or big money in his campaign. In terms of undermining the public financing idea for everyone, it doesn’t help. It…leaves it at a place where it’s going to be harder to make the case, to be honest about it.”

They also discussed David Brooks’s column, “The Two Obamas,” in which Brooks finally uncovers the truth about this candidate voters know little about: he is, indeed, Sybil.

Barack Obama is the most split-personality politician in the country today. On the one hand, there is Dr. Barack, the high-minded, Niebuhr-quoting speechifier who spent this past winter thrilling the Scarlett Johansson set and feeling the fierce urgency of now. But then on the other side, there’s Fast Eddie Obama, the promise-breaking, tough-minded Chicago pol who’d throw you under the truck for votes.

The most split-personality politician today? Because of public financing? McCain has changed his mind on just about everything. You want to talk about split personalities — how about Maverick vs. Party Stalwart.

[Obama] is the whole Chicago package: an idealistic, lakefront liberal fronting a sharp-elbowed machine operator. He’s the only politician of our lifetime who is underestimated because he’s too intelligent. He speaks so calmly and polysyllabically that people fail to appreciate the Machiavellian ambition inside.

The fact that Brooks describes Obama’s speech as “polysyllabic” seems a little, I don’t know, borderline racist? I mean, how is Obama supposed to talk? Using words with one or two syllables? Grunts? Rap?

I think that what his column suggested has already been made obvious. Obama is a politician. There is no way that someone gets this far without stepping on a few people and breaking a few promises, or “reconsidering” positions. Anyone who thinks they can be leader of the free world has definitely got a super-sized ego. We can’t have some insecure and deferential wallflower running this country.

I think that’s always been one of my arguments regarding Obama versus Hillary. Hillary was always viewed as a consummate “politician,” an insider, someone who will say anything to get elected. Well, duh. Everyone’s in this to win this, including Obama, which is why he’s pulling out all the stops, including backtracking (yes, backtracking) on his promise that he would take public financing.

(I still miss my girl. I wake up most mornings thinking we’re still in the primaries and ready to fight and then I remember that she lost and I have to relive the phantom pain over and over and over again.)

I did read an article in the Saturday NYT that gave me pause. It profiled Floyd Brown, the guy behind the Willie Horton ad who is in the midst of an ad campaign in Michigan (apparently only one local cable station has agreed to air it) that questions Obama’s religious background. It starts out with, “Was Barack Obama ever a Muslim?” It gets better from there.

And check out this website he created: EXPOSEOBAMA.COM. The banner on the site shows images of Obama surrounded by Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan, Jeremiah Wright, and, perhaps the worst of all, Teddy Kennedy. It also has the picture of Obama running on the beach with no shirt on. I’m not sure why, save for Floyd’s obvious homoerotic fantasies.

A video featured on the homepage blames Obama for the urban terrorism and gang violence rampant in Chicago. “Can a man so weak in the war on gangs be trusted in the war on terror?” Ohhhhhh, SCARY. Now, before we use this as a perfect example of why Obama needs $300 million to combat these types of attacks, here’s the bottom line: this guy Floyd Brown has virtually no money, and no big contributors waiting in the wings.

There will always be crazies. But Obama didn’t need to opt out because of Floyd, who would be Floyd, Floyd, Null and Void, no matter what.

I finally got around to reading Todd Purdum’s piece on Bill Clinton in Vanity Fair. It was all I could do to tear myself away from the July cover featuring Angelina’s enormous twins. I found my protective side kicking in, as I thought, LEAVE THE MAN ALONE. I STILL HAVE FEELINGS FOR HIM.

Many of Clinton’s friends and longtime aides were interviewed for the article (anonymously, of course), and the general consensus was, Bill has gone bat. shit. crazy. Whether it’s his questionable business associations or his congenital skirt-chasing (Gina Gershon?!), the man has finally lost it.

Now, we’ve known all along that Bill is tragically flawed. He’s reckless and selfish and egotistical. But he was also a great president and remains a brilliant and charismatic man. Please let me cling to this. It’s all I have.

Still, Purdum is quite convincing: To know Clinton is, sooner or later, to be exasperated by his indiscipline and disappointed by his shortcomings. But through it all, it has been easy enough to retain an enduring admiration—even affection—for a president whose sins against decorum and the dignity of his office seemed venial in contrast to the systemic indifference, incompetence, corruption, and constitutional predations of his successor’s administration. That is, easy enough until now.

Some allegations from Purdum’s piece:

• He’s running with a fast crowd — the world of the rich and famous and morally ambiguous.
• His business dealings and investments are questionable and possibly unethical and maybe illegal.
• He’s lost his touch — he’s no longer the political mastermind we all knew and loved.
• He’s angry.

Plus there’s a new so-called “butt boy” in town, the person responsible for being Bill’s go-to guy, his personal and closest aide. Apparently 35-year-old Doug Band has not been the best “handler” of Bill, who now requires constant parental supervision. Many of Clinton’s (one-time) inner circle blame Band for Bill’s downhill spiral.

But there are also people who defend Clinton. “The ills of the Democratic Party can be seen perfectly in the willingness of fellow Democrats to say bad things about President Clinton,” said spokesman Jay Carson. “If you ask any Republican about Reagan they will say he still makes the sun rise in the morning, but if you ask Democrats about their only two-term president in 80 years, a man who took the party from the wilderness of loserdom to the White House and created the strongest economy in American history, they’d rather be quoted saying what a reporter wants to hear than protect a strong brand for the party.”

I see some truth in that. (And, the “wilderness of loserdom”? Brilliant. As well as one of my favorite vacation destinations.) There is no real evidence to back up Purdum’s charges. I’m sure Clinton has burned a lot of bridges, especially after Hillary’s campaign (DAMN YOU BILL), and I’m sure he’s no saint, but he’s done a lot of good. A lot. This story kind of seems like a pit bull piece, kicking a man when he’s already down.

For example, was this description really necessary? But if much about Clinton is familiar to one who covered him in his prime, other aspects of his appearance and demeanor are unsettling. He is visibly older and thinner. His hair is whiter and his countenance paler. At times, as the day wears on, he makes an odd cotton-mouth sound, his tongue sticking to the roof of his mouth as he talks.

An odd cotton-mouth sound? I could have done without that.

Then Purdum goes into the lasting effects of Bill’s quadruple bypass surgery in 2004, and quotes a doctor who has never treated Clinton personally about all the problems Clinton’s probably having. It reminds me of those doctors that appear on TV giving their expert opinions on Britney Spears.

“I would think mood changes would be a big issue in his life from that bypass surgery, especially having to go back a second time,” said Dr. Thomas Traill, a prominent cardiologist. “Many people who have bypass surgery get depressed afterward, while others suffer from increased irritability. It’s very similar to postpartum depression.”

Similar to postpartum depression? Does that last for four years?

Traill adds that “it’s also true that a lot of people are never really the same again, that their mood is not right. So whether or not he’s, as they like to say, clinically depressed, his mood cannot be the same as before this happened.” I mean, these are serious allegations to make about someone you’ve never seen.

And I should know. Many of you have made several psychiatric diagnoses of me in the past and, I’m happy to say, they’ve all been off the mark. Except the one about being a compulsive liar.

Obama announced earlier today that he will opt out of public financing in the general election. Not to be outdone, McCain told reporters just moments ago that he would take public financing. When asked why, McCain replied, “Because we decided to take public financing.”

Great sound bite. I mean, it’s too easy, isn’t it? Isn’t Obama just going to sail through this election? Which brings me to my question, why can’t he just take the stupid public financing? (I wrote about this on Poll Dancing as well, wouldn’t you know it. But, alas, no video. Production just came by and stole my flip camera and said never to touch it again. Under any circumstances. Especially if I’m thinking of filming myself.)

I want to believe in Obama as the candidate who’s going to “change” things in Washington, now that my girl’s out. But I’ve always been a proponent of campaign finance reform and, I’m pretty sure Obama was at one time as well.

The McCain campaign released a compilation of Obama’s quotes on public financing since he was, like, 12, including, “I strongly support public financing” (another great sound bite); and, from a spokesperson, “If Senator Obama is the nominee, he will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.”

From Newsweek:

Obama, of course, long ago calculated that he could skip public financing. Still, there’s no doubt that the decision clashes with his “new kind of politics”–a fact that becomes painfully obvious watching Obama spin it as a matter of principle rather than pragmatism. If we “do something that’s never been done before [and] declare our independence from a broken system,” he warns, “we’ll be forgoing more than $80 million in public funds during the final months of this election”–as if we should applaud him for risking life and limb to take the $300 million instead.

I mean, hell yeah! He needs $300 million to beat McCain?! I have a theory that the only way McCain will win this election is if there’s a terrorist attack on American soil before November. If that happens, McCain wins, because people will still look at him as the man most equipped to deal with matters of national security. But barring that, Obama wins. Right? So what’s his deal?

And now this — from the AP, known for their constant editorializing. I kid.

The chance to financially swamp John McCain — and maneuver for an enormous general election advantage — proved too great an allure. Obama, a record-shattering fundraiser, reversed course Thursday and decided to forgo some $85 million so he could raise unlimited amounts of money and spend as much as he wants.

And with that, the first-term Illinois senator tarnished his carefully honed image as a different kind of politician — one who means what he says and says what he means — while undercutting his call for “a new kind of politics.”

The move could be the death-knell for the post-Watergate federal financing system designed to lessen the large donors’ influence and reduce corruption.

There’s nothing quite like watching your man swiffer the floor to get you all hot and bothered. The way he effortlessly glides that worthless dry-mop across the hardwoods, stroke after stroke, first soft then hard, slow then fast, adding the wet cloth at the end for an extra shine. GIRRRLLLL, how do you STAND it?!

Researchers at the University of Michigan have found that men are doing more housework than they used to. And, says one expert, a more equitable division of household duties may lead to more intimacy in the boudoir.

“When a man does housework, it feels to the woman like an expression of caring and concern, which then physically reduces her stress,” says Joshua Coleman, a San Francisco-area psychologist. “A guy can be completely stressed out and want to have sex to burn it off, but women are not wired like that,” he added, saying that women need to feel relaxed in order to feel sexy. And GOD KNOWS a woman can’t relax until those unsightly kitchen crumbs are dirt deviled up!

Take 36-year-old Jen Simmons of Delaware, a middle school teacher who says she loves watching her husband Danny mop the floor or hang a picture. She finds it sexy. “I am very turned on when he’s doing housework,” Simmons said, while spraying Pledge all over her naked body.

So, let’s just add another chore to the husband’s chore list: have sex with wife.

As many of you know, I have a face for blogging. When I get in front of a camera, my nerves are shot and three things inevitably happen.

1. I purse my lips and look like a schoolmarm sucking on a lemon while trying not to vomit.
2. I giggle at inappropriate times and toss my hair as if something is incredibly funny but I’m not letting you in on the joke because, well, there is no joke.
3. I pretend to know what I’m talking about when in reality I know nothing so I overcompensate for this by scrunching up my face, nodding incessantly, and repeating what the other person just said.

Since my job here at texasmonthly.com is to figure out ways to attract more readers and increase traffic, my strategy so far has been to repel them as much as possible so they’ll keep coming back out of morbid curiosity. Evan and I tried out a test “blogging-heads” video discussing the women’s vote, Obama, and McCain. So if porn doesn’t give you the “funny,” then perhaps this will. You can view it on Poll Dancing.

And, just to answer your question before you ask it, I have no idea why it looks like I’ve raided Laura Ingalls’s closet. I used to think that shirt was cute. Maybe for a member of Yearning for Zion. Oh - and your other question? No, I didn’t brush my hair. That’s fast becoming my signature.