Around the Horn
- James Webb has proposed a debate. George Allen declined in the format proposed, and many have picked up on it. Yet, what seems to be misunderstood is that Allen is looking for a debate that is broader in nature, covering both foreign and domestic policies, as noted by Chad. Other Democrats appear to have taken offense to the idea that George Allen would want to the debate done differently, asking "Do voters really care about these issues?" My guess is that, yes, they do indeed. Democrats came out in force (albeit a fairly small force) to support James Webb this past Tuesday, but it was based almost entierly on (1) James Webb's opposition to the War in Iraq and (2) Webb being the guy who isn't George Allen or Harris Miller. This might seem great to those who choose the primary candidate, but will many Democratic voters be one-issue voters? Is the War in Iraq going to do it, or do Democratic voters also want a high-spending, liberal Democrat in office that can excite not only the base but many voters, the way Allen energizes Republican voters? The debate proposed by Allen might be able to provide some answers.
- And speaking of Senate races, Joe Lieberman has a couple of races ahead of him, it appears. The Kos-supported Ned Lamont is challenging Lieberman in a primary, and appears to be making this a real race. Should Lieberman win, he will face what appears to be a relatively weak Republican candidate in Alan Schlesinger, and handidly win the general election most likely. If he loses the primary, what happens? It appears to be much of the same. Lieberman could run as an independant; Lieberman remains one of the most popular Democratic candidates among Republicans, mostly due to his stance on national defense, and could pull a number of Democratic votes from Lamont. Lamont would likely beat Schlesinger as well, so it is a valid question as to wonder if many other Republicans would also vote for Lieberman, recognizing the alternative.
- Staying on the topic of the Senate, but returning home to Virginia, I commented yesterday on Shaun Kenney's view of the primary election. It appears I was not the only one, as Republitarian has done the same, also finding fault with some of Shaun's perspective. I cannot say I agree with everything he has to say, but it is another interesting viewpoint towards the primary.
- Finishing off the Senate races, Kilo has a post similar to that I pointed out earlier from Chad. It appears that the Duck is now shacking it up with James Webb. Any response to this Lowell?
- I recently posted on Net Neutrality, concerned about increased federal regulation. Evan Coyne Maloney has the same concerns. He does take issue with the way some ISPs operate, but it is obvious that, he too, feels that greater regulation will be bad for the internet.
- And speaking of the internet, has anyone seen that a teenager and her mother have decided to sue MySpace? What next, are car makers sued because a kid gets picked up by a stranger in a car? Parents need to watch what their children are doing, because MySpace cannot. MySpace literally has millions of members; it would be impossible to be certain that people are who they say they are (barring background checks, which can take months to finish) and to monitor every conversation. It is quite simple; people over 18 (such as myself) are legally self-responsible, and minors are not, requiring that a parent takes responsibility for the actions of the child. I have a real problem with child predators, but MySpace cannot act as a third (or second, based on the home situation) parent, so the other two (or one) need to get their acts together.
- Michelle Malkin notes how the Dixie Chicks have gone off of the deep end. The Dixie Chicks do not get why they are being criticized? Imagine if Martin Luther King Jr. had pulled a 180 and instead criticized the civil rights movement. Never attack your base, because the backlash will be swift, and there are some things that people never forget.
- And finally, ABC marks the end of the Metrosexual Era with the beginning of the Machosexual epoch. Some might laugh if I claimed to be part of the machosexual group, but it certainly fits better than metrosexual. On that note, read Wild at Heart; it defined the machosexual (i.e., man) well before this cultural shift.