"It's Barney the purple dinosaur's speech at the next Bloomberg Nonpartisanship Symposium."

Kaus no le gusta el nuevo anuncio de John McCain.

Unless square is a compliment, this is negative toward John McCain. It is interesting that the ad in question has been removed from youtube.

"Chris Matthews, Seriously. (O.K., Not That Seriously)."

Seriously?

"Could it be? Might she really be talking to me?"

Not bloody likely.

Is MSM sexist toward Hillary?

Perhaps but is that relevant to my endeavor?

"Hard being a superdelegate, huh?... No sense staying neutral this long if you don’t end up picking the winner, right?"

Staying neutral is hard work.

"Clinton and her husband, Bill Clinton, were furious with Penn..."

Clinton fires a top campaign adviser because he is (basically) a lobbyist (Penn) and takes a position different than her's. We will see if Prof. Althouse similarly comments on the ouster of lobbyists from other campaigns.

"What I've also said is: I will always listen to the commanders on the ground."

"The Republican National Committee releases an effective video juxtaposing statements about Iraq by General Petraeus, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama." Sounds bad for Clinton and Obama.

"Condoleeza Rice has been actively campaigning" to be John McCain's VP pick.

It's a veepstake.

McCain is "implicitly attacking Obama for basking in self-glory, when the Obama campaign is very much predicated on 'we' and not 'I.'"

Prof. Althouse links to a Bloggingheads episode featuring Bill Scher (liberal) and Conn Carroll (Heritage Foundation) discussing a McCain ad. Prof. Althouse doesn't like the criticism of McCain's ad whether they are from the liberal side or the conservative side. Obama on the other hand has devised "a magnificent, marketable political persona."

"On one day in Canada, he made $475,000 for two speeches, more than double his annual salary as president."

A few years ago, that line would have elicited from me: "Sure he $475,000 in Canadian money but that is worth a lot less in real money." Today, that comment would even be stupider and less funny on so many levels.

Air America suspends Randi Rhodes for using nasty language not on her show, but in a comedy performance.

Randi Rhodes insults Clinton. Prof. Althouse insults Air America.

Obama has to deal with an annoying man.

Very cool.

Hillary as Obama's benefactor?

Prof. Althouse links to Maureen Dowd piece regarding whether Clinton is helping Obama's candidacy in the long run.

John McCain gets back at David Letterman.

The Redlasso link didn't work so Prof. Althouse replaced it with a youtube clip.

I said it 3 days ago, and now Hillary is saying it: Hillary is Rocky.

Is there anything more fun than saying you are right? Key takeaway: Obama can't bowl.

"I don’t want them punished with a baby."

Obama tries to discuss discussing sex with one's children. Always uncomfortable. Better to just ignore it and hope for the best!

McCain ad labels him — literally — Episcopal.

"With all this trouble Barack Obama has been having with his connection or seeming connection to religion that either is or seems extremist, wouldn't this be a good time to remind folks that John McCain's religion is the most mild-mannered Christianity: Episcopalian?" Sure, if you want to take one of the central points ("I will not lie") of McCain's ad and make it a lie.

Prof. Althouse is less effusive in her praise of this McCain ad but takes the opportunity suggest the real reason behind the ad is Jeremiah Wright.

I didn't see that connection. Personally, I think the ad was designed by an Obama operative to reinforce the fact that McCain is old. Black and white photos (I love black and white photos but these look like they are black and white because they are old photos not because of an aesthetic choice). A formerly youthful McCain in a football uniform which looks like it is from the period where they didn't wear helmets. Ted Williams? I love Ted Williams. Ted Williams definitively is an American hero but I doubt that half of American men under the age of 40 can tell you why off the top of their head. I bet more people under the age of 40 vaguely remember that there was a family feud when he died about whether or not he should be cryogenically frozen. Yes, rock stars can be our heroes but I won't show you a picture of one because (1) I can't find one who agrees with my policies and/or (2) I can't find one who you will recognize who belongs in the group photo with the other heroes.

New McCain slogan: "I will not cheat." (Except on my first wife and maybe on my second.

March Monthly Total

Here is the summary for March:

Clinton Negative (3)
Clinton Neutral (39)
Clinton Positive (2)

McCain Neutral (9)
McCain Positive (3)

[The 3 McCain positives did appear more driven by aesthetics: here, here, and here.]

Obama negative (9)
Obama neutral (50)
Obama Positive (2)

[The Obama positives were very marginally positive: here and here.]

Wright (14)

"There is no repentance on the part of The New York Times. There is no integrity when it comes to The Times."

Twofer!!! Prof. Althouse links to Capt. Ed who gets to bag on both Wright and the NY Times.

Prof. Althouse is neutral on Obama but goodness can I please get some more links to something that looks bad for Obama?

Was Barack Obama a "law professor"?

More importantly, if a tree fell in the woods and nobody was there to hear it, would it make a sound? Not sure what I am supposed to think.

All this talk about Al Gore as a compromise candidate...

Prof. Althouse wonders what the heck all the talk about Al Gore is.

I am giving this an "Obama positive" because she says that Obama is taking the appropriate stance but I think it is very close to neutral.

"Don’t listen to people when they tell you not to run anymore. That’s just political bigotry."

Because Clinton can not get better advice than people who heldped defeat Al Gore in 2000.

Obama says the primary season is like "a good movie that lasted about a half an hour too long."

Ogres are like onions.

According to Newsweek, "it's only fair to conclude" that the Obama campaign is not trying to flip Texas county convention delegates.

A Newsweek blogger looks into the Texas democratic primary process. Prof. Althouse thinks the piece plays and fast and loose with the facts as she knows them. negative toward the media, not as clear on the candidate.

Mickey's Unified Obama Theory.

Tengo una teoría unificada que Kaus piensa que Obama lo forzará a hablar español.

Professor Althouse links without comment to a negative review of Obama's performance by Kaus.

Let's contemplate Mitt Romney as McCain's VP.

"I think they look [positively]great together."

"I remember landing under sniper fire..."

Too tongue in cheek to be negative.

"The idea here, which McCain can’t say, but I can, is to essentially kill the U.N."

Prof. Althouse links to this "Think Progress" post about Krauthammer's interpretation of what McCain means by a new League of Nations Democracies.

Let's see, linking to a lefty site talking about a conservative commentator talking about the Republican nominee . . .

"We can't let them win more delegates just by not telling us when the convention is!" — more Texas county convention maneuvering.

Prof. Althouse publishes an "alarming" email exchange from her son Chris. Apparently a nefarious Obama Delegation Chair failed to keep Chris in the loop on the caucus process.

I wonder if all Clinton Delegation Chairs fully communicated with Obama delegates? I bet so, because a Clinton would never play fast and loose with the rules.

How incompetent is the Clinton campaign? She consistently lets herself be out maneuvered in the caucus process by the junior senator from Illinois.

As an aside, while I do think there are some serious problems with the caucus process, there is some value in it as well. I suspect (though I am not certain) that the process produces more people who will actually work for the campaign than the primary. Anyone can take an hour or so to vote but if you are going to "waste" 12 hours on a decent spring Saturday in Austin, you probably are more likely to actually commit to doing certain things (e.g. phone banking, canvassing) that the party will need in the fall.

"George Bush called this the ownership society, but what he really meant was 'you're-on-your-own' society."

Pithy could be a compliment or an insult.

Fraud in Texas? "It looks like there was data entry error. You ended up being coded as BOTH a Hillary Clinton and a Barack Obama delegate."

Prof. Althouse updates her readers on the Texas caucus process and her son Chris' experience with it. It is clear that they both aren't buying the Obama campaign's explanation that it was an innocent mistake but I can't say she is explicitly negative toward the candidate.

As an aside, how incompetent is the Clinton campaign? Apparently some of "her" delegates are getting literature from Obama but not from her campaign. That is really incompetent.

"I don't understand why in this industry of politics, I am an airhead."

It makes John McCain better, doesn't it?

Ramussen poll says 22% of Democrats think Clinton should drop out... and 22% say Obama should drop out.

It is a link to Drudge (which just goes to the basic Drudge site and therefore, lost in the internet {or to his archives [if he has them] which I am not going to search}).

Can a link to Drudge be neutral? I'll tentatively say, yes.

In Texas, the Obama campaign tries to win over Clinton's county convention delegates.

I get the sense that Prof. Althouse's son (Chris) is negative towards the Obama campaign because he believes they are trying to poach (my word, not his or hers) some Texas delegates during the state caucus process. I don't believe that Prof. Althouse is being particularly negative about Obama. Prof. Althouse says: "I don't think the Obama campaign is doing something wrong, but this mailing shows that the Obama campaign is fighting to flip Clinton delegates in Texas. Is Clinton doing the same thing and will some delegates slip away?"

What has been surprising to me throughout this process is how unable, or inept or unwilling the Clinton campaign has been at participating in the caucus process in Texas and elsewhere.

Thomas Sowell puts Barack Obama's association with Jeremiah Wright into a larger context.

Prof. Althouse tries to remain neutral on the Wright matter. But most (all?) of the people she links to seem to put the relationship in a negative context for Obama.

What will Hillary Clinton put us through for that 5% chance she has of winning the nomination?

Speaking from the future I will say: quite a bit.

Prof. Althouse links to a David Brooks piece suggesting that Clinton should get out of the democratic primary race and suggesting that Clinton's failure to do so represents a certain sort of selfishness. Prof. Althouse defends the Clinton position for staying in (while not defending the candidate).

In the post, Prof. Althouse also links to two bloggers who want Clinton to stay in but for different reasons.

Prof. Althouse suggests that "Obama's problem with Jeremiah Wright is something important about him that we need to think through" which is different than saying "the association with Jeremiah Wright should trouble us.

"If you think Jeremiah Wright is gruesome..."

Prof. Althouse links to a Hithcens piece where he points out that in addition to Wright, there is another abhorrent pastor linked to Obama. This pastor "has been an Obama supporter, and his church has been an occasional recipient of Obama's patronage."

Now, as I pointed out in a comment at Prof. Althouse's site, the professor is going to blog about whatever she is interested in. Further, I understand (and appreciate) her desire to keep blog posts shorter whenever possible. That said, the paragraph that she quoted from Hitchens' piece continues (without being quoted by Prof. Althouse):

"Meanwhile, the Republican nominee adorns himself with two further reverends: one named John Hagee, who thinks that the pope is the Antichrist, and another named Rod Parsley, who has declared that the United States has a mission to obliterate Islam. Is it conceivable that such repellent dolts would be allowed into public life if they were not in tax-free clerical garb? How true it is that religion poisons everything."

Bayh's test: Which candidate won the states with the most electoral votes?

Wherein a Clinton supporter puts forth an argument favoring Clinton. I'd be almost as surprised if an Obama supporter offered up an argument in favor of Obama.

"Misspoke."

Liar, liar pantsuits on fire.

Is the Hillary-Obama fight wrecking the Democratic Party?

Beats me, but I suspect that morphed photo will keep me up at nights.

This would be an interesting theory...

Geometry was my favorite subject in ninth grade.

Doug Kmiec, conservative lawprof, counsel to conservative presidents, endorses Barack Obama.

Doug Kmiec does not appear to be neutral, but Prof. Althouse does.

"I'm used to Greenwald misrepresenting me wholesale, but being savaged for a post I didn't link to is a new one."

I don't know where Prof. Althouse stands on the Wright matter. Maybe just bored with it at this point.

Rainin' McCain, trickin' lefties.

McCain supporters go after the gay vote on youtube. (Boy that one Weathergirl did not age gracefully. Though I am glad they were able to lose some weight.)

"They're tired. Dog-tired. The stallion makes heart-stopping speeches. And the beaver just beavers along."

Stupid fricking metaphors.

"Mr. Richardson’s endorsement came right around the anniversary of the day when Judas sold out for 30 pieces of silver..."

It's like ten thousand spoons when all you need is a knife.

"How do you rate Obama’s speech? Excellent, good, fair, or poor?"

Must talk about the Obama race speech more. It's a failure.

Okay. I'm back. Let's see what I need to catch up on.

MMMMMMMMM, tasty links.

"An aide to John McCain was suspended from the campaign today for blasting out an inflammatory video...."

A McCain campaign aide pushes the envelope on race (and gets "suspended"). Prof. Althouse hopes the McCain camp steers clear of such games. My guess is that the campaign will avoid that game, but others won't and McCain will sit there and say "hey what am I supposed to do." We will see how believable he is.

A couple of idiosyncratic asides. If you really want to piss off middle class white guys by playing this song, don't just play the refrain. Drop the lyrics (from about 2:30):

Elvis was a hero to most
But he never meant shit to me
Straight up racist that sucker was
Simple and plain
Motherfuck him and John Wayne

Finally, I am still amazed that people who call themselves "conservative" are more interested in using Malcolm X as a boogeyman to scare white folks than they are in using Malcolm X's words to convert others to their way of thinking. There is much in his speeches that will resonate with conservatives.

Mickey Kaus on the Obama speech: "I thought it was a disaster for him."

Aquí aprendemos que Mickey Kaus entiende bien el pensamiento de "non-college-educated white male voters, especially in Pennsylvania".

"To equate what I said with what this racist bigot has said from the pulpit is unbelievable," said Geraldine Ferraro.

Obama throws grandma from the train.

Good luck finding anything interesting in the newly released Hillary Clinton records.

A different take on Hillary Clinton's experience than this take.

Should the Democratic Party hold a caucus of the superdelegates?

Caucuses suck but a caucus of superdelegates, that would rock.

"I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother."

Prof. Althouse links and writes (at some length for her) about the "big" Obama speech on Wright and race. On the whole it is neutral but she does link to this Mickey Kaus piece where "Mickey Kaus does a terrific job of identifying many of the contradictions you weren't supposed to notice." Unfortunately, because Kaus now is forced by his Latino overlords to write exclusively in Spanish, I was unable to read it.

A "yoga-practicing, public-radio-listening, Wrigley Field-visiting, Wes Anderson-movie-watching, Arrested Development-championing white dude"...

Apparently white Obamatons like Obama so they hate blogs about things that white people like. Immediately I suspect that Prof. Althouse will refer to McCain supporters as "McCainiacs" in her next post.

Unlike Republicans, Democrats are neglecting to rewire our neural links.

My neural pathways are clogged.

"But that's what makes Obama's association with Wright so significant. He's not from Alabama."

And I thought I had her figured out on the Wright thing. Guess not. Then again, maybe she has figured it out either.

Bill Clinton says: "Celebrate!"

Fretting? Not so much. Bored? You bet. Clinton is duplicitous in what he says but he is not the candidate.

"We are the ones we've been waiting for."

I am sure Prof. Althouse has an opinion about Obama's slightly odd phrase. I just don't know what it is.

So, for "Meet the Press" this week, how about an Obama supporter and a Clinton supporter?

Obama supporter wipes the floor with Clinton supporter on "Meet The Press". Talk about misogyny (if I could use footnotes like the cool kids, I would footnote that I am kidding about the misogyny¹).


Not Funny: There is nothing funny about misogyny. But Prof. Althouse is often accused of it (or at least of having commenters who espouse it).

Hillary Clinton wants the Democratic Party to check into the irregulaties in the Texas caucuses.

Caucuses suck. My theory on Prof. Althouse's hostility to caucus is that her son is involved and he thinks his side is getting screwed. Of course it could be because his side is getting screwed and he is actually able to give her insight into that.

Prof. Althouse's evolution on the Wright controversy interests me. She was late to the party and apparently didn't think much of it initially, (her first post on the subject was the first time I gave a "Obama Positive" rating), then she received an email in the middle of the night from one of her favorite commenters, then she derided Obama's explanation of the relationship and how he sought to move on. Now "the association with Jeremiah Wright should trouble us." (italics in original)

"I knew him and know him as somebody in my church who talked to me about Jesus and family and friendships."

Maybe the email got to her.

Self-censorship for censorship.

Let's all look at what the kos kids are talking about.

"There once were two cats of Kilkenny/Each thought there was one cat too many..."

When I clicked on the link for the postit went to the generic Newsweek page. Perhaps the point is lost in the internets.

Race and religion, Barack Obama and Clarence Thomas.

Prof. Althouse quotes at length from an email from an email from one of her most favored commenters. The commenter is not an Obama fan and (at least to me) that comes through in the email. It doesn't mean that Prof. Althouse is negative on Obama (though I have a hard time seeing her giving a pro-Obama email from a commenter similar prominence with so little comment {in large part I don't know that there are any pro-Obama commenters who are in her good graces).

Lawprof Patricia Williams is giving a talk called "Moaning in America."

Prof. Althouse attends a speech given by a really smart person. I am only smart enough to conclude that I didn't see anything positive nor negative about a candidate.

Barack Obama responds to the criticism over Jeremiah Wright.

Prof. Althouse wades belatedly into the fray. Isn't that enough?

Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro. She's important!

On Barack Obama's mother.

"Adventures in Identity Politics."

I am not obsessed.

"I am sorry if anyone was offended. It was certainly not meant in any way to be offensive. We can be proud of both Jesse Jackson and Senator Obama."

We do know how Prof. Althouse loves the language of apologies.
Will Geraldine Ferraro ever leave? My guess is not until late May.

Mickey says...

Andrew Sullivan = Geraldine Ferraro in drag (just to be clear, I added the "in drag" part). Duh! Prof. Althouse hates Andrew Sullivan finds Andrew Sullivan tedious does not usually find Andrew Sullivan persuasive. That does not mean she hates Obama.

"The Obama campaign is attacking me to hurt you. I won't let that happen," says Geraldine Ferraro.

Geraldine Ferraro resigns from the Clinton campaign. Prof. Althouse views the tit for tat (can I say tit on this blog?) as a bit childish. But, hey, every junior high needs a class president.

"Would I want Hillary answering the red phone in the middle of the night? No, bloody not."

Prof. Althouse reviews Camille Paglia's tome on the Clinton "3 a.m." ad. Most of what Paglia says is not favorable to Clinton. Prof. Althouse injects that Paglia "says it very well." While some might see this as agreement (thereby necessitating a dreaded "Clinton Negative" rating) I don't. It is perfectly ok to recognize that a writer writes something well or makes a good argument without signing onto that argument.

"Saying that Hillary has Executive Branch experience is like saying Yoko Ono was a Beatle."

Prof. Althouse sorta kinda defends Hillary Clinton on the experience factor.

Mitt Romney says he'd be "honored" to serve as Vice President to John McCain.

Time to talk about possible republican vice president candidates. I vaguely recall that Professor Althouse has some fondness for Romney (who knows, maybe it is contempt and I am misremembering) but it does not infect the cruel neutrality.

Why so much talk about Silda standing by her man Eliot? It is really about Hillary and Bill?

The media is talking about Spitzer's wife. The inevitable comparisons come up about Bill and Hillary Clinton. Prof. Althouse concludes (I think) that the Washington Post piece paints Hillary Clinton in a negative light because of the comparison. But criticism of the media is not criticism of the candidate.

"The further backward you look, the further forward you can see."

I will not double count.

Prof. Althouse quotes a conservative contemporary economist (Greenspan) quoting a conservative politician (Churchill) and it reminds her of the "brilliant" McCain ad.

Polls close in Mississippi and they say Obama's winning.

The Mississippi polls close and Prof. Althouse also talks about Geraldine Ferraro telling us how lucky Barack Obama is to be a black man and not a white woman. The professor does not seem to find Ms. Ferraro's argument persuasive but doesn't appear to blame the candidate (in this case Clinton) for the comments.

Harvard sociology prof Orlando Patterson sees racism in Hillary's 3 a.m. ad.

Prof. Althouse links to a piece by Harvard sociology professor talking about race in the primary race.

Eliot and Hillary.

Pondering the implications of the Spitzer hooker scandal on Hillary Clinton. On the one hand Prof. Althouse is neutral and on the other hand she is neutral.

Mississippi!

Positively neutral.

John McCain and Barack Obama: "Each sees the other as a posturing phony."

Prof. Althouse links to a Michael Crowley piece about what Obama and McCain think of each other. Offers little opinion except on Crowley's use of mild language.

Those chaotic caucuses. (Just another opportunity for Hillary to be sleazy?)

Prof. Althouse blogs about the chaotic Texas caucus process and takes issue with Josh Marshall for his pro-Obama/Anti-Clinton rhetoric.

"TPM Cuts Female Writer Not Making Case for Obama."

Prof. Althouse considers some inside baseball argument from over at TPM.

"But if you use the word pal — or worse, the phrase my friend — in my kitchen, it'll make people paranoid. My friend famously means 'asshole'...."

Prof. Althouse wonders about all of John McCain's "friends".

And I was just going to call attention to the Daily News headline...

Prof. Althouse shows us pictures from a NY newsstand and some NYC architecture.

What exactly did the Democratic candidates pledge with respect to Michigan and Florida?

Prof. Althouse links to Jeralynn Merritt who thinks the delegates should be seated "as is".

Monsters and demons.

Prof. Althouse reviews part of Bernstein's book on Clinton ("A woman in charge"). She specifically focuses on the period when Clinton was trying to push Hillarycare (Prof. Althouse does not call it that) and notes how Clinton "demonized" opponents. Just politics but it sure isn't neutral.

What I think of the "SNL" spoof of Hillary's "3 a.m." ad.

I read what Prof. Althouse wrote about the SNL parody. I think I understand what she thinks about the parody but it tells me little about how she views the candidates.

Obama wins the Wyoming caucuses.

The results for Obama are positive from Wyoming but Prof. Althouse's post is neutral.

This is not about Hillary.

Actually it's . . . not.

Why did Obama let Clinton jerk him around over Samantha Power?

Prof. Althouse criticizes Obama for his deficiencies in his handling of the Samantha Power incident. She calls Obama cowardly.

Professor Althouse also says it is "revolting and ridiculous [for] Clinton campaign hacks [to] pretend it's a giant outrage that the brilliant Samantha Power applied the word 'monster' to Hillary Clinton." Should this be considered "negative" toward Clinton? I am calling it neutral because (a) it is about the hacks and no about the candidate and (b) it is largely about the process of getting elected. Similarly, her comment about Clinton doing whatever it takes to win.

"McCain flips out..."

Prof. questions Josh Marshall's word choice.

Let's talk about the new McCain ad.

Prof. Althouse gushes about one of the first (perhaps the first) McCain ad for the general.

She takes a sidetrack by discussing Michelle Obama and her being proud of America. I don't think Prof. Althouse buys this criticism of Mrs. Obama and, even if she did, I don't necessarily think criticism of the spouse is criticism of the candidate.

"She is a monster, too - that is off the record - she is stooping to anything."

Prof. Althouse discusses Samantha Power leaving/being dismissed from the Obama campaign.

Prof. Althouse opines that "Obama deserves criticism for letting Clinton make something out of nothing and not standing up for Power."

"Does anyone want this nut answering the phone?"

Prof. Althouse links, without comment, to a Larry David piece at the HuffPo which is humourously critical of Clinton. Nothing to suggest that Prof. Althouse signs on to the criticism (other than the fact that I have some vague recollection that Prof. Althouse is somewhat fond of Larry David's comedy or sensibility) nor disagrees with the criticism.

"The battle for the Democratic Party is so bitter because it is a battle over culture."

Prof. Althouse links to an Economist piece about what the difference between Obama and Clinton represents to voters. Some commentary from the professor but nothing too positive or negative.

If you think the superdelegates should support the candidate with the most total votes, do you know whether it is Clinton or Obama?

Prof. Althouse talks about the difference between the popular vote and the delegate count in the Democratic primary.

Why are the results so different in the primary and the caucus in Texas on the same day and what does that mean more generally about caucus results?

Prof. Althouse discusses the primary and (preliminary) caucus results in Texas. She includes some reportage from her son Christopher, who is involved in the process as a Clinton supporter in Texas.

The Texas Democratic Party has a very complicated process to select its delegates. Prof. Althouse points out that Obama did better in the caucus while Clinton did better in the primary. Prof. Althouse highlights the Clinton camp's arguments and does not entertain any other explanation for the discrepancy. The reportage from her son hypothosizes that "much of that difference could be attributable to the shenanigans of Obama's base of fanatics." Sure it could be. It could also be due to any number of other factors.

As luck would have it, I also received a bit of reportage from a Clinton (alternate) delegate in Texas on the night of the primary election. Specifically, my mom. She called me as she was pulling out of the parking lot of her polling place. She never had participated in the caucus process and hadn't really planned to but she voted late on her way home from work and by the time she voted the caucus process was beginning. Someone asked her if she wanted to sign up to be a delegate or an alternate and she basically said what the heck. She didn't stay for the meeting part of the caucus as she had to get home and get dinner.

I would also point out that the Texas primary was at the beginning of Rush Limbaugh's "Operation Chaos". Now, I have no idea what percentage Clinton's primary support came due to Operation Chaos but I am pretty confident that few, if any, participants in Operation Chaos participated in the caucuses.

"An unassuming foreign country has injected itself into the U.S. presidential race."

Prof. Althouse links to the Canadian NAFTA story. No further commentary from Professor Althouse.

"I don’t think it is fair to suggest somehow that we have been trying to hide the bone on this."

Prof. Althouse links to a story on the Obama/Rezko matter. The post itself is neutral and so that is how I am labeling it.

That said, it will be interesting to see how much Prof. Althouse posts "neutral" posts about matters which are clearly negatives for the other candidates.

So did you hear the one about how Hillary Clinton's chances of winning the nomination just decreased?

Prof. Althouse discusses the Obama camp's spin after the Ohio primary and the Texas primary/caucus. Doesn't buy the Obama team's analysis but is (to my way of thinking) quite neutral on both Obama and Clinton.