Jim . . . dimmed.

Prof. Althouse links with no commentary to a story about Jim Johnson resigning from Obama's VP selection committee. No commentary so it has to be neutral, right? But how many times does she link to stories about concerns about the people and lobbyists around McCain. I'll call it neutral for now.

"I've been to 57 states."

Obama is bad at math, civics or both. Prof. Althouse notes: "Who's losing it now?" But has she (since her vow of cruel neutrality) been negative toward McCain for "losing it"?

"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."