There are so many things that are keeping me up at night that I'm finding hard to find a single topic to write about, so I'll just put a bunch together, buffet style.
I think my favorite idea that the press is throwing around these days is the "why doesn't Obama have a bigger lead" storyline. It is almost identical to the "Why can't Obama close the deal" storyline of the primary season. I love it when the press throws around terms like, "the public still doesn't know him". I mean WTF??? The public doesn't know any of the people that run for President! Personally I'm still waiting for George Jr. to come to my house for dinner so that I can get to know him (of course I'm not sure he'd like what I'd have to say). The public knows him just as well as they "know" John McCain or Hillary Clinton or Mitt Romney. The reason for his lack of a lead is as plain as the color of the nose on his face and everyone in the press knows it. As I've stated before, I don't think that the majority of people who will vote against Obama are racists, but the life long Democrats who are now refusing to vote for Obama are certainly taking more than just his voting record into account. Does that mean that they want to string him up from the nearest tree? Of course not. But there's a big difference between wanting equal rights for minorities and wanting that minority dating your daughter or living next to you or (heaven forbid) representing you as your President. As my co-contributor Sandy would say, there are those who believe that a vote for Obama is a vote for a big black di@k in your mouth. The McCain campaign has shown over the past few weeks that their strategy is clearly going to be to make the American public as uncomfortable with Obama as possible (I'm still waiting for the ad that says, "Barack Obama is Black, and you know what that means America. Vote McCain, or else. "), so that even those Independents or Republicans who might be predisposed to vote for Obama will be given reason to pause once they get into the voting booth.
Tim Kaine (Governor of Virginia) would be a less than inspired choice for VP by Obama. He currently polls under 50% in his home state and I don't think that he would be able to deliver it in the election. Also, he is practically an unknown across the country, brings no foreign policy experience and would do nothing to assuage the anger of the multitude of disappointed Hillary Clinton supporters. Personally I think his name is being put out in the press as smoke screen for the real work being done. The Obama campaign has dreams of turning the red states of Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Missouri, North Carolina, Indiana and Colorado into a blue heaven of sorts. In order to even have a chance to flip half of those states, his VP choice has to be a little more inspired than the unknown, unpopular Governor of Virginia, regardless of how well they get along. I've already made my opinion known on this subject and I would be shocked if Obama actually ended up picking Tim Kaine as his running mate. Of course, I have been wrong before.
The vote by the Judicial Committee in the House (to recommend a contempt charge against Karl Rove) is just another example of sound and fury signifying nothing. Nancy Pelosi has already stated that she won't even consider submitting this recommendation to a vote until September (when Congress gets back from it's month long summer vacation. It must be nice.), and even then there is no guarantee that it will make it on to the agenda. There are two reasons why Karl Rove will never have to testify in front of this Congress; first Nancy Pelosi is terrified of stirring up the Republican base and secondly Congress is afraid of being exposed as having no actual authority to compel testimony. The Justice Department certainly isn't going to force Rove to testify (having already decided that once the President even thinks the words "executive privilege" they are powerless to do anything), and the Congress doesn't really have any other way to get Rove to appear before them. Everyone on the Judicial Committee is aware of this fact, so this was all for naught. And seriously, what's with the Republicans on the Committee voting against the contempt recommendation? Karl Rove has ignored a subpoena to appear before Congress. Whether you agree with the reason for him appearing or not, it would seem a no brainer to vote to try and bring some sort of sanction against an individual who is openly defying the authority of the Legislative branch. Karl Rove is just laughing his fat jellyroll ass off at this whole thing.
By the way, did you guys know that Bill Clinton is planning on opening up a counseling center that will focus on teaching couples the importance of fidelity and the sanctity of marriage? No? That's because it's not true, but it should be just as believable as Pat Robertson having his own Law School for Christ sake!!! I still can't get over that one. Perhaps we should put Karl Rove in charge of the Center for Ethics in Politics. To quote Karl Marx, or was it Don King who said, "Only in America!".
And last but not least, I have a few more words for our distinguished Speaker of the House. Hey Nancy, I hope you enjoy your vacation. And while your taking a month to celebrate Labor Day (most of the rest of us have to make do with a long weekend), I want you to think about the fact that Congress' approval rating is even lower than that of our esteemed President. Think about that. This President, who has led us into an unjustified war, cost thousands of people their lives, rung up the biggest deficits in history, destroyed the Constitution and left our economy in tatters, is more popular than you and your associates (by a wide margin, in fact) who claim to represent the interest of the American people. Do you think that trying to enforce the laws of the land or protect the interest of the American people could really do you more harm than good? Just something to think about.