Wellington Grey puts the ever-growing terrorist list in perspective.

During a segment in which Fox & Friends co-hosts Steve Doocy and Brian Kilmeade labeled New York Times reporter Jacques Steinberg and editor Steven Reddicliffe “attack dogs,” Fox News featured photos of Steinberg and Reddicliffe that appeared to have been digitally altered — the journalists’ teeth had been yellowed, their facial features exaggerated, and portions of Reddicliffe’s hair moved further back on his head.

Take a look at the changes, and they’re not even subtle. Seriously? Fox? Seriously? What are you, twelve years old?

During apartheid, the ANC was considered a terrorist group by the US government, so Nelson Mandela was officially considered a terrorist.

That ended… um, today?

No, really. Today.

Morbidly fascinated by Bill O’Reilly, but can’t stand to watch more than a minute of him?

Thanks to 23/6, you’re in luck!

Thanks to Sam for the link.

Thanks to Jesse for the link.

NEW ORLEANS REPORTER: “My understanding is that you voted twice against the creation of a commission to investigate the levee failures around New Orleans. My question is why have you voted against the creation of that commission?”

JOHN MCCAIN: “I have supported every investigation and ways of finding out what caused the tragedy.”

…The presumptive Republican nominee twice voted against a Democratic proposal to set up an independent 9/11-style commission to investigate the causes of the tragedy, opting instead for a congressional investigation.

Read on at the Washington Post’s Fact Checker.

It’s not “RTMFA”, y’all.

In a long-awaited report, the Senate Intelligence Committee rebuked President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney today for making prewar claims — particularly that Iraq had close ties to Al Qaeda — that were not backed by available intelligence.

The report, which was supported by some Republicans but criticized by many others, accuses the president and other members of his administration of repeatedly exaggerating the evidence of an Al Qaeda connection to take advantage of the charged climate after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Read on.

Let’s suppose for a minute that the popular vote matters for nominating a candidate. I say that because, of course, not all states have primaries. Some instead have caucuses, where there is no popular vote, so to give a candidate esteem based purely on the popular vote from primaries is to say that the caucus states don’t count. The people of Iowa, Nevada, Washington and Maine beg to differ.

Even then, who’s ahead? Clinton says it’s her, raising the specter of the 2000 Presidential election. Real Clear Politics differs. They’ve got six different tallies, some including an estimate of what the popular vote would be from caucus states, others dealing with the Michigan primary in different ways.

Clinton is indeed ahead, if you count the votes from Michigan – where Obama wasn’t even on the ballot. But if you count those Michigan votes for “uncommitted” as votes for Obama, and include the estimates from the caucus states, well, Obama’s ahead.

I kind of wish everyone in the nation would watch this video.

Sorry; force of habit. When a spoiler candidate is about to siphon votes away from a major candidate during a potentially tough election, I reflexively type “Nader”.

Former Georgia Rep. Bob Barr was officially nominated Sunday as the Libertarian candidate for president…. His candidacy has attracted more attention to the Libertarian Party, with some GOP observers watching to see whether Barr will draw votes away from the presumptive Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, in the general election.

“We’re not in this race to make a point, though a very important point will be made,” Barr said.

Read on at CNN.

As Obama wraps up the nomination — because Hilary, everyone but you knows that he has wrapped up the nomination — Christopher Bird provides this detailed examination of VP possibilities.

Thanks to Chris for the link.

AngryRenter.com looks a bit like a digital ransom note, with irregular fonts, exclamation points and big red arrows — all emphasizing prudent renters’ outrage over a proposed government bailout for irresponsible homeowners.

“It seems like America’s renters may NEVER be able to afford a home,” AngryRenter.com laments. The Web site urges like-minded tenants to let Congress feel their fury by signing an online petition. “We are millions of renters standing up for our rights!”

Angry they may be, but the people behind AngryRenter.com are certainly not renters. Though it purports to be a spontaneous uprising, AngryRenter.com is actually a product of an inside-the-Beltway conservative advocacy organization led by Dick Armey, the former House majority leader, and publishing magnate Steve Forbes, a fellow Republican. It’s a fake grass-roots effort — what politicos call an AstroTurf campaign — that provides a window into the sleight-of-hand ways of Washington.

Read on at that bastion of liberal bashing of Republicans, the Wall Street Journal.

Chris Matthews lays the absolute smackdown on radio talk show host Kevin James, who was parroting Bush’s offensive parallel about Obama’s diplomacy being like appeasing the Nazis. Matthews calls James on his ignorance and does not let up. This is a beautiful, beautiful piece of television.

The whole thing’s pretty good, but the good part starts around the the 4:00 mark.

The chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Joe Biden, D-Delaware, called President Bush’s comments accusing Sen. Barack Obama and other Democrats of wanting to appease terrorists “bulls**t” and said if the president disagrees so strongly with the idea of talking to Iran then he needs to fire his secretaries of State and Defense, both of whom Biden said have pushed to sit down with the Iranians.

“This is bullshit. This is malarkey. This is outrageous…”

Read on at CNN.

The Hill asked the other 97 Senators what they’d do if asked to be the VP nominee.

The responses vary between serious and funny. My favorites:

Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.)
“No, I can already preside over the Senate, and I do not enjoy spending a lot of time at ‘undisclosed locations.’ ”

Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho)
“I would say ‘No, Hillary.’ ”

Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.)
“I plan to stick with my current job until I get the hang of it.”

Via Metafilter, enjoy this collection of ads from other countries using W.

Now that the Iraq War has gone on longer than WWII, don’t you think it’s time for a new GI bill?

Congressional Democrats are pushing what could become the most dramatic expansion of college aid for military veterans since World War II… Pitched by the Democrats is a plan that would essentially guarantee a full-ride scholarship to any in-state public university, along with a monthly housing stipend, for individuals who serve the military for at least three years.

The proposal would give veterans 15 years to use the benefit, instead of the current 10-year limit, and would set up a new government program that matches financial aid by more expensive private institutions.

W, of course, is expected to veto the measure.

Cindy McCain has now made it official, telling Ann Curry she will not release her tax returns. The Democratic National Committee has quite correctly pointed out that this is unacceptable, especially when you consider that McCain has relied on his wife’s money and corporate jet to help fund his campaign.

Suprisingly, conservative magazines have attacked Mrs. McCain on this issue in an unexpected show of intellectual honesty.

The National Review’s Andrew Stuttaford writes:

Trusts and income this large, even if only partly controlled by a potential future First Lady, matter. We’ve already seen how (she) effectively helped finance her husband’s campaign, at least in its bleaker moments.

But wait. There’s a catch.