The undercover video, organized by the group Live Action, of which Lila Rose is president, and posted on Michelle Malkin's blog, purports to catch Planned Parenthood employees in a variety of lies. Below, we break down some of Live Action's claims.

Claim 1: Planned Parenthood lied about the distinction between a fetus and a baby.

Abby Johnson, the Planned Parenthood director-turned-anti-abortion activist, says, "Planned Parenthood really tries to instill in their employees and the women that are coming in for abortions that this is not a baby." Obviously, the fetus/baby distinction is a key part of the abortion debate. A Planned Parenthood doctor does appear to muddy the waters a bit when he says on camera that a fetus becomes a baby "when you're like seven months pregnant or so. Six, seven months pregnant." This does indeed sound arbitrary and confusing. Another Planned Parenthood employee gives a better response:

A fetus is what's in the uterus right now. That's not a baby. A baby is what's born at forty weeks.

No matter what you believe about abortion, "fetus" is the correct medical term for the developmental stage between embryo and birth. If anti-abortion activists don't want to use it, that's up to them — but it's not a lie.

Claim 2: Planned Parenthood misled women about the risks of abortion.

The video shows the Planned Parenthood doctor telling his patient that an abortion at around ten weeks is "very, very safe. Safer than having a baby, actually." Michelle Malkin calls this "abortion-first 'counseling' by a "ghoulish abortionist." Here's the most recent data: in 2002, the CDC recorded 9 deaths out of 845,573 abortions. That's a little over 1 in 100,000. Also in 2002, the CDC recorded 8.9 maternal deaths for every 100,000 live births. So, at least in 2002, carrying a child to term was about 9 times more dangerous than having an abortion. Of course, we might be able to reduce maternal mortality if we implemented the "Demcare" Michelle Malkin hates so much. But for now, the idea that abortion is safer than having a baby isn't "abortion-first" rhetoric — it's the truth.

Claim 3: Abortion is an industry designed to help organizations like Planned Parenthood make money.

In the video, Abby Johnson says Planned Parenthood is "really trying to increase their abortion numbers because that is the most lucrative part of their business." This claim is common — back in 2008, an ad for Republican Senate contender Steve Pearce called Planned Parenthood "a billion-dollar abortion business." Here's what FactCheck.org has to say about that:

That's misleading. Planned Parenthood is a nonprofit organization with gross revenues of nearly a billion dollars, but abortions account for a small fraction of the services it provides – 3 percent in 2006, according to the group's annual report.

It's important to reiterate that Planned Parenthood is a nonprofit, so nobody's getting rich off the abortions it provides. And especially in the wake of Dr. Tiller's murder, you'd have to be crazy to become an abortion provider for the money. The occupation isn't particularly lucrative, especially given the constant risk of social stigma, property damage, psychological trauma from dealing with protesters, and even death. But of course, Lila Rose and Michelle Malkin aren't interested in portraying the difficulties faced by those who continue to offer women reproductive choices despite mounting obstacles. They're interested in demonizing those people — even if they have to stretch the truth to do it.

Predators Of Planned Parenthood, Pt. 99,997 [Michelle Malkin]

In early October, the Wall Street Journal published the list of 45 artworks destined for 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. It included several bronze sculptures by Edgar Degas, eleven paints by American painter George Catlin, a piece by Louise Nevelson, a Rothko, and for the East Wing, Watusi (Hard Edge).

Naturally, political and art bloggers examined the entire list, searching for cues about the Obama's personal taste. Art News reports that there was a conscious effort to assemble a collection with "wall power" - art that packs a punch. As Robin Cembalest reports, there was also an emphasis on showing the best of American art:

"The overarching theme was trying to offer the president and Mrs. Obama the best of America," Smith told me in a telephone interview, describing the First Couple as "unbelievably curious and interested in a lot of types of art." It was a lengthy back and forth. Works by well-known artists on some early wish lists, including Edward Hopper, Charles Burchfield, Jackson Pollock, Franz Kline, Romare Bearden, Brice Marden, and Agnes Martin, fell by the wayside, either for conservation reasons, or because they were currently on view or promised for loan in the next four years. So did works on paper, photography, and video art.

The New Yorker deemed the entire collection "upper-middlebrow in an O.K. way." Obviously, Michelle Malkin had some much harsher words. She, along with several other bloggers, felt that the inclusion of Watusi was a telling example of Obama's general cluelessness. In a way, Alma Thomas, who spent most of her life teaching children and later became the first black artist to show at the Whitney Museum, seems a perfect artist for the First Family to support. However, the composition of Watusi is very, very similar to that of a late Matisse, which Thomas openly admits was the inspiration for her painting. Despite the fact that Thomas has clearly reworked and remade L'escargot in such a way that while it may resemble the original, it is a lot more than a mere copy, some still view Thomas as a thief and a fraud. Malkin ended her blog post on the whole matter with this charming comment: "I know, I know. Cries of "RAAAAACIST" in 3, 2, 1…" Others accused the Obamas of being too clueless to notice the influence, or "turning a blind eye because the artist was black."

Originally Watusi was supposedly going to hang in Michelle Obama's office, but sometime in late October, it was removed from the list. It's been confirmed that the painting was sent back, but Art News was unable to find out why. However, Cembalist does conclude that "the story behind this painting may also presage the cultural politics of the Obama administration." Considering the comments on Politco's post - which range from "Leave the painting - its emblematic of this phony, deceitful administration" to "The right wing hates this president so much they criticize some paintings? Really?" - this seems rather likely.

Critics Nix Obamas' Pix Mix [Art News]
White House Ditches Painting [Politico]

If I'd read this profile without knowing anything else about her, I might even think Michelle Malkin is someone I could get along with, despite our political differences. That right there should tell you there's something terribly wrong. It reminds me of the recent Washington Post piece on NOM director Brian Brown, of which Kay Steiger wrote, "The main thesis of the profile seems to be that NOM's director isn't a crazy, fire-breathing, foam-at-the-mouth right-winger." Sure, it's possible to construct that argument if you don't dig too deep, but why would you?

As profiled by Grove, Michelle Malkin is the "charming, funny, vulnerable" daughter of hard-working, Reagan-loving immigrants. She first began taunting liberals at Oberlin College, where, let's face it, even liberals could taunt liberals. She's been a victim of racism all her life, and notes that "there is no such thing as post-racial America." She told Grove "she'll use good information from left-wing sources - even Salon and ACORN," and that she's "always thrived on digging up stories and shedding light on information that's not getting out there." Like many female bloggers, she's been the target of vicious, sexist attacks, including having her head photoshopped onto a bikini-clad body (about which she told her kids, "This is what I'd look like if I didn't have stretch marks"). Even more troublingly, she's received death threats, and now worries a lot about her family's security.

I'm relating to this woman. I'm sympathizing with this woman. What the hell?

And the cherry on top is, she even made a disparaging statement about "liberal bloggers" that I agree with:

I think that the racism and the sexism, particularly of liberal bloggers, is really something to behold. I think that so-called progressives who think it's funny to make Filipina barmaid jokes and somehow use my maiden name as some sort of cudgel or proof of hypocrisy-it's completely ridiculous. But I get that on a daily basis-you wouldn't believe the crap in my email box.

Obviously, I wouldn't paint all or even most liberal bloggers with that brush, but she's absolutely right that there's a thriving strain of fauxgressivism within the lefty blogosphere, and I've seen everything she's talking about coming from people who are ostensibly on my side. Wielding her maiden name as an insult, in an assbackward attempt to highlight her racism and xenophobia. Tossing all sorts of gendered epithets her way, and then excusing the sexism by saying she deserves it, unlike good liberal ladies who are not skanks and whores. No. She deserves to be criticized out the wazoo for her half-baked ideas, her paranoia, her incitement of wingnuttery, her bald-faced lies, but nobody, no matter how odious, deserves to be attacked for her race or gender. The fact that a non-zero number of self-identified liberals can't understand that distinction drives me up a fucking wall.

But you know what else drives me up a wall? Feeling any impulse whatsoever to defend Michelle Malkin. What is up with that? Grove does refer to her as "shrill," "smug" and "schoolmarmish" — two of which, I'll note, are highly gendered insults, even if they're not as bad as "skank" and "whore" — and reminds us that "She did, after all, once write a book defending the World War II internment camps for Japanese-Americans, and calling for racial profiling of Arabs in the war on terror." That says a whole lot more about Malkin's character than the cute line about stretch marks, if you ask me. But the acknowledgments of her extremist, "bomb-throwing" persona are mere pretensions to balance in an article that begins, "The last thing you'd expect Michelle Malkin to be is charming, funny, or vulnerable," and goes on to paint her as reasonable, misunderstood and sort of adorable.

Michelle Malkin, as a rule, is none of those things, but the really scary thing is, in the era of teabaggers and birthers, she does sound almost rational and mainstream by comparison. We just can't forget that she's one of the most prominent people feeding them lies and egging them on.

Michelle Malkin Has Feelings, Too [Daily Beast]

This is a question I've been wrestling with since the last election cycle showed an implosion of the Republican party. While a lot of my early mentors leaned a bit right, the Republicans have shown less and less of a desire to be the party of small government and fiscal responsibility, and more of an inclination to embrace as much hatred and bigotry that they can find.

As I laughed watching the GOP blatantly pander by promoting Michael Steele (probably trying to trade on some of that "Barack the Magic Negro" sparkle they thought was falling from Obama), and cheered when Christopher S. Buckley decamped from the GOP, I still felt a twinge of sadness.

I strongly believe that we need at least two viable political parties to have a constructive dialogue about governance in this country, and that has not been the case for a very long time.

Meghan McCain seems to agree. Through her blog and her columns on the Daily Beast, McCain has been trying to steer the party away from the demagogues and back toward relevance. She strongly calls out pundits like Michelle Malkin and Ann Coulter who trade in intolerance:

To make matters worse, certain individuals continue to perpetuate negative stereotypes about Republicans. Especially Republican women. Who do I feel is the biggest culprit? Ann Coulter. I straight up don't understand this woman or her popularity. I find her offensive, radical, insulting, and confusing all at the same time.

McCain is right to express bafflement - the personas that Coulter and Malkin use to promote themselves and their work are inherently sensationalized, valuing sound bytes and screaming over thoughtful, reasoned arguments.

Sometimes, the rhetoric is so ridiculous, I start to think that maybe Ann Coulter is just making all of this up:

Okay, so maybe it didn't happen like that. However, Ann Coulter is so over-the-top it is difficult to find any semblance of argument within her rantings and distortions. If she admitted this was all for publicity, it would be a relief. Examining Michelle Malkin's work doesn't provide much more to work with - after all, someone who wrote a tome defending internment during World War II in order to justify using racial profiling in the wake of 9/11 is obviously ready and willing to overlook inconvenient things (like facts) to make a point.

McCain's columns, by comparison, tend to be a breath of fresh air. In a very basic and personal way, she explains some of the key components of the GOP platform and explains why she embraces (or, in some cases rejects) these planks. Her discussion of the divide between Dems and Repubs focuses mainly on age and religion. But, she did speak out against Audra Shay titling her piece "Do NOT Elect a Racist," noting, "She represents the same old stereotypes about "young Republicans"-apparently racist and more middle-aged than youthful. In short, disconnected from the real youth of this country."

I suppose "the real youth" didn't show up to vote - Audra Shay won the election, putting yet another nail into the Republican coffin.

McCain herself seems to recognize this, often questioning is there room for a moderate in her party of choice. As she ends her latest piece against Michelle Malkin, she notes:

It's true that Democrats make being a member appealing in a much different way than the Republican Party does. The Democrats seem to have mastered inclusiveness-whereas Republicans, like a country club, seem to require a litmus test. But if people like Michelle Malkin and Ann Coulter think they can bully me into giving up this fight and what I am doing, they are going to be severely disappointed. And I can assure them that unless they start being realistic about the cultural and generational differences between the two sides of the party, there will not be a new generation of Republicans.

Is Meghan going to be the future? Her assertions in her piece are correct. She does represent a clearer vision of the youth in this country than anyone currently ranking in the Republican party. And she does pwn Michelle Malkin on Twitter - Meghan has 53,664 followers on Twitter, versus Michelle's 25,897 (which may, as she states, be a better indicator of demographic clout that the New York Times bestseller list.)

But if we have seen anything over the past eight years, then we know that the Republicans aren't really interested in understanding the times.

As Christopher Buckley wrote in his send off note last fall, "to paraphrase a real conservative, Ronald Reagan: I haven't left the Republican Party. It left me. "

Meghan, your party has left you.

Perhaps it's time stop trying to reform the old and look at creating something new.

My Message for Michelle Malkin [The Daily Beast]

Related: Barack The Magic Negro [Wikipedia]
My Beef With Ann Coulter [The Daily Beast]
Do NOT Elect A Racist [The Daily Beast]
Sorry Dad I Was Fired [The Daily Beast]
Screed: With Treason, Ann Coulter Once Again Defines A New Low In America's Spiritual Debate [Spinsanity]

• A mob of 50 young men in Kathmandu, Nepal stripped a woman naked, beat her, and paraded her through the streets. Although the victim's identity is unknown, it is believed that she may have been a sex worker, or they may have mistaken her for one. • Eight of Jacqueline Kennedy's drawings of her husband, John F Kennedy, from 1961 are going up for auction today. • In 1993, Richard Allen Davis was convicted of the kidnapping and murder of 12-year-old Polly Klaas. Today the California high court voted to uphold the original ruling and keep Davis on death row. • A recent report has found that although American women are fairly responsible about cutting back their drug and alcohol consumption during pregnancy, many return to their previous vices soon after giving birth. • "For someone with her sensitivity and her intellect — she was such a people person. To get a disease like this and become increasingly passive and out of touch, it breaks my heart," said Jeanne Phillips of her mother Pauline Philips, more commonly as Abigail Van Buren, aka "Abby" from the Dear Abby column. After Pauline was diagnosed with Alzheimer's, Jeanne took over the job of advice columnist and the "Dear Abby" title. • New research shows that breast cancer survivors who are taking the cancer prevention drug tamoxifen face a higher risk of having the disease return if they are also on certain anti-depressants, including Prozac, Zoloft, and Paxil. •  Although women now out number and outperform men in UK universities, they are still likely to earn a lower wage than men upon graduation. •  A report released Friday by the Human Rights Watch states that crimes committed against transgender people in Honduras often go ignored by the police. The group calls on the police to seriously investigate the crimes and punish all involved, which in some cases includes members of the Honduran police force. • Sterling Terrance Hospedales, a sergeant from Fort Lewis, has been charged with sex trafficking of a child and attempted sex trafficking of a child. He is accused of taking prostitution money from one juvenile and arranging to fly another girl in from Wyoming to work as a prostitute. • The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved a new regulation which will require companies that use insects in their food dyes to list them as an ingredient on the label. Leaders of a Washington watchdog group are pleased with the measure, but would still like to see the insect-based dyes banned. • Folic acid may be even better for babies than previously thought, new study says. Doctors believe that the supplements can be helpful in preventing premature birth and heart defects, among other things. • Lt. Col. Christopher Garver said Friday the Army is investigating allegations that eight male soldiers at Fort Dix took pictures and video of a group of female soldiers showering in their unit. So far no charges have been filed. • Iranian presidential candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi announced recently his intention to "reform laws that are unfair to women." He also voiced his support for women's rights groups that are working to stop violence against women. Mousavi is one of four candidates approved to run in the elections, which will be held on June 12th. • A survey of 88 Darfuri women living in refugee camps found that a third reported or showed signs of rape while most reported fear of rape or sexual assault. The vast majority of the rapes occurred while the women were away from the camp gathering firewood. •

JASON: Ugh. I am awake.

MEGAN: I feel you there. I was about to say how it gets worse the longer the week goes on, and then I realized it's only Tuesday. I might cry now.

JASON: Both of us are home sick today. It's a Christmas miracle.

MEGAN: Oh, damn, that sucks. I'm glad I didn't ask you guys if you wanted to get dinner last night.

JASON: We would have declined politely, but it's always nice to have someone thinking of you when you're sick.

MEGAN: I have a biohazard suit somewhere in my car, I think, let me know if you need a chicken soup delivery or something. Otherwise, we should probably discuss Caroline Kennedy's tattoo, which I think — despite being published in the New York Post — is another piece of annoying evidence of how conservative D.C. really is. Also, sexist: tell em Ben Nighthorse Campbell didn't have a tattoo or two.

JASON: Well, remember how worked up everyone got about Elizabeth Kucinich's piercing? Didn't she have a navel piercing or something? You note how I barely remember? That's because I lived in Richmond, WHERE EVERYONE HAD A TATTOO OR A PIERCING.

MEGAN: Tongue piercing. At least then the subtext was that Dennis was getting more blow jobs than the average male D.C. political reporter, present company exempted since I'm sure you and your wife have crazy hot sex all the time. Except when you're sick.

JASON: Not tongue studded sex, and I'm fine with that. My wife has a tattoo on her back (of Eve sitting naked bestride a giant apple) and a navel piercing. Both obtained in Richmond. (My friend Amy gets credit for the art of the tattoo. I was at work one day when our manager Dave came in on his day off, and he was all: "I have to SHOW you something!" And I said, "What, what?" And he lifted up the leg of his pants to reveal a tattoo of a flaming spork on his calf. And I said, "It's a flaming spork." And he looked at me and said, "It came to me in a dream!" Capitol Hill's culture is more conservative, yes. But it's also the culture of a unfrozen idiot caveman. Everything terrifies it. About the only thing it's okay to be out of the closet on is sci-fi fandom. And of course, it's not okay to be out of the closet on being gay.

MEGAN: Flaming spork, huh? Is "dream" some sort of Richmond code for "LSD-induced haze"? But, to the point, I know people in D.C. that speak of their love of sci-fi in D.C. in hushed terms more befitting an admission of a love of S&M at a White House Christmas party. Actually, that probably happens a lot.

JASON: At least on the GOP side.

MEGAN: But no one admits to being gay in D.C. — you can catch a Hill staffer with a dick in his mouth and he'll still try to tell you he tripped.

JASON: Generally speaking, yes, most significant Richmond dreams are chemically induced. Well, it's like that dude who paid a cop twenty dollars to have it off. What was his name again?

MEGAN: Bob Allen. God damn, why do I remember these things? Let's not forget Larry Craig, though.

JASON: You remember those things because you used to write for Wonkette. But, yeah, Bob Allen. This guy will take his whole insistence on not being gay all the way to the Supreme Court. He'll be gobbling Alito's dong, and testifying, "I hate this! I don't know why it's HAPPENEEEEENG!" But, look, I think we all got a little covered with spermatazoa yesterday... Can I just mention that we live in a world of HERO PUPPIES?

MEGAN: But what a great transition to the Supreme Court non-case over Barack Obama's citizenship. I'd bet more than a few not-gay Republicans would've gobbled Alito's dong to get that case heard. Yeah, I'd rather talk puppies, too.

JASON: Just leave that link there for the Jezebel Nation (who got a shout out in the Peanuts Christmas Special) to click on when they need to feel like secret, cuddly, heroic forces are at work in the world. The Obama citizenship case proves just how far you can come in life when you have the right motivation. The folks behind these suits are hopeless, paranoid, dumbasses, and Clarence Thomas was there for them in his hour of need. You know Souter, I think, originally denied the petition. Thomas was all: "You know? I'm going to allow this!" Antonin Scalia probably got misty-eyed: "Look at my idiot protege, he's gettin' to be all grown up!" Then he probably babbled a few sentences in Latin to the false gods of his Opus Dei crackpot religion. "Semper ubi sub ubi!" Then he was wracked with Saint Vitus Dance. AND IT WAS ANOTHER TYPICAL DAY AT YOUR SUPREME COURT!

MEGAN: You know what's hilarious? One of my friends was trying to argue to me that if they had just shown the crackpots his original birth certificate, none of this would have happened and I was like, they're crazy. Are you kidding me? They probably would have lit it on fire, run out of the room and begun screaming about how they now had evidence that it doesn't exist.

JASON: Or they would found something, anything to brand it counterfeit. You see, evidence does not shut these dimwits down. Adding exculpatory material to the pile just excites them anew. They need to be ignored, or sent out to sea on ice floes (which is currently illegal, I think, or they'd have solved social security by doing it with retirees).

MEGAN: Mike Madden took one for the team and went to their press conference yesterday. His reporting, I think, proves your point.

Two and a half hours later, as dentist-slash-lawyer Orly Taitz harangued reporters for not investigating whether Obama's mother was actually dead, that hope had been obliterated. It was crushed by a torrent of half-baked legal theories, vague platitudes about the Constitution and sinister "facts" assembled by a collection of true believers so extreme that even Michelle Malkin wants nothing to do with them.

JASON: I'm sure Malkin wavered for a second or two.

MEGAN: Dude, seriously, Latoya and I were talking about this last week! We're not sure whether the other commentators on the right are just so crazy now that her crazy seems reasonable, or if she's actually been becoming somewhat reasonable lately. It's a little scary. I'd ask you to hold me, but you're sick. I mean, when this is the competition:

At one point, [Taitz] asked why the government had fined broadcasters for Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction," but didn't intervene to force the media to report on Obama's allegedly phony birth certificate. She claimed Obama holds passports from at least four countries, compared him to Black Panther leader Eldridge Cleaver, equated the "controversy" about Obama to Watergate, and finished her tour-de-force presentation by saying that if Obama can claim he's a U.S. citizen and win an election, then so could just about anyone. "If a person can become a presidential candidate only based on his own statement," she said, "then somebody like Osama bin Laden, theoretically, can come and write a statement, 'I'm eligible,' and we should put him on the ballot, too?"

JASON: It's an airtight case! OF UNSHUNTED HYDROENCEPHALITIS, anyway!

MEGAN: You know the world's gone mad when the AP is reporting that Susan Rice is trying to set up her own fiefdom at State, which is just, like, either Susan Rice has gone completely insane or Ron Fournier is typing while giving Cheney a rim job again.

JASON: Wha? Susan Rice?

MEGAN:

As Secretary of State-pick Hillary Rodham Clinton and U.N. envoy-choice Susan Rice separately visited the diplomatic agency's headquarters in Washington's Foggy Bottom neighborhood, persons familiar with the transition said that Rice wants to install her own transition team inside the department.

Such a move by an incoming U.N. ambassador is rare, if not unprecedented, because the job is based at the United Nations in New York, where Rice already has a small transition staff, the sources familiar with the incoming administration.

The push by Rice, an early Obama supporter whose position the President-elect wants to elevate to a cabinet post, is also a signal that she intends to use her influence with the new president to play a more significant role than previous U.N. envoys, they said.

You'd think Rice might know things like that it doesn't work that way, having worked at State before.

JASON: Interesting. I'm afraid I haven't the knowledge on hand to grasp the full implications of that. The Obama administration has a different conception of U.N. Ambassador. The article casts this fundamentally at odds with Clinton. And it may! Of course, I suppose Clinton can do little else than accept the way Obama chooses to set his foreign policy team up. I take issue with "cracks" in that they've actually not yet appeared, figuratively.

MEGAN: Well, but if it's just two people having meetings, there's no story! There must be a fight! They have to still hate each other! What else will they talk about?

JASON: I'm afraid that this probably goes back to what Media Matters calls the Clinton Rules For Journalism. Say, a house burns down in Clinton's neighborhood, but firefighters manage to save everyone inside. The headline the next day is supposed to read, "CLINTONS NO HELP AS FIRE CAUSES EXTENSIVE PROPERTY DAMAGE."

MEGAN: For real, though, what else aren't they going to talk about? Charlie Rangel's new ethics problems? Ha! He paid his son $80,000 for doing nothing? So what!? Not going to step down from his Chairmanship because, he says, "I don't think reporters should be in the position of removing Chairmen.”

JASON: Getting your son money for doing nothing is an ethics violation? For white people, it's called Late Night Shots.

MEGAN: Hey, Doolittle took heat for it. (His wife, not his son). And so did DeLay. From Rangel, even. When did the lions of the Democratic party start emulating the Republicans we all despised 4 years ago?

JASON: When they took power!

MEGAN: Damn Lord Acton for nailing that one.

LATOYA: Where do you want to start this morning? We've got a piping hot plate of hot mess to go through.

MEGAN: Well, being as this is a women's blog, we should do something woman-y, and I nominate the news that the McCain campaign spent $110,000 on hair and make-up for Sarah Palin in 10 weeks and $180,000 on clothing and accessories for the Palin clan — which is $30,000 more than initially reported.

LATOYA: Oh, I forgot to tell you.

MEGAN: That, by the way, means they spent more on hair and make-up and clothing and accessories than my condo is worth.

LATOYA: I have personally instituted a ban on discussing anything to do with Palin. As far as I am concerned, she is irrelevant. If she manages a resurrection and comes back to haunt us in 2012, so be it.

MEGAN: What are you going to do when she opens up an exploratory committee in 2010?

LATOYA: But until then, I'd love to see her fade into obscurity. She should be remembered, fondly, like Ross Perot.

MEGAN: Ok, but can we discuss that kind of money?

LATOYA: Thanks for the memories of shout outs at VP debates, but you need to mosey along now. Take your folksy ways and return to the ice cave. I mean, we can discuss the money. But somehow, I can't muster up indignant outrage.

MEGAN: Like, I will guarantee that there's no way on God's green earth that I have spent $110,000 on hair and make-up in my lifetime, even though I've been highlighting my hair for about 6 years.

LATOYA: Maybe if I had bought that whole "salt of the earth, of the white people, heartland of real America" tripe they were selling. Homegirl was just an opportunist. Cindy McCain was rocking nice clothes — why shouldn't she?

MEGAN: Totally. Look, if RNC donors want to give me $180,000 in clothes, I will totally run for office as a Republican. They can even call me A Maverick over and over again because of my support of reproductive choice.

LATOYA: And it's obvious they had the money. If the first card maxed out and they let her keep going, I say get what you get. Credit Cards come with limits.

MEGAN: But Republican money never ends!

LATOYA: That's why they're Republicans. They're supposed to have money, want to keep money, spend their money the way they want, and tell the gov't to mind their damn business. That's what I expect from Republicans. It's comforting that way.

MEGAN: Yeah, I get that. So, moving on, want to talk about NOW and the Feminist Majority Foundation going metaphorical balls to the wall to promote Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy for Clinton's Senate seat?

LATOYA: Why not? Obviously, the dice are lucky.

MEGAN: Because I don't like the idea that a woman's seat ought to be filled by a woman, but McCarthy does have an established record on women's rights issues and is generally cool. But, mostly, I wish to continue pressing the point that Attorney General Andrew Cuomo is an unmitigated casual racist not deserving of elected office but certainly not deserving of an appointment to a lifetime Senate seat by David Paterson, the state's first African-American governor.

LATOYA: Hmm, well, I am not so sure about Cuomo. Then again, I'm only thinking about his record at HUD.

MEGAN: Well, then, there's a question. If you have a good record of doing decent things for the community as a whole while tossing around the phrase "shucking and jiving" in reference to an African-American candidate for the Presidency, followed by a steadfast insistence that it is actually not a racist term after the world notices that you said it, what should a politically active person do? Because I choose to call him a racist and think that he should go fuck himself.

LATOYA: Oh, I wasn't sure about the appointment, not your comment on casual racism. I think his HUD record proves he doesn't care about black people.

MEGAN: Then, yeah, fuck that guy.

LATOYA: But back to the original point, I understand what you're saying about not wanting to do this tit for tat seating thing. But I can understand where NOW is coming from, especially with the whispers of sexism around this bailout committee.

Frank credited the current resistance to doing more about foreclosures to ruffled male feathers. “I think part of the problem now is that, to be honest, Shelia Bair has annoyed the Old Boys Club.” He likened the situation to several regulators “up in the treehouse with a ‘No Girls Allowed’ sign.”

MEGAN: I know! I could not believe that shit when I heard it from Moe. I was like, wait, the new Democratic Treasury Secretary is mad about the (technically independent) FDIC chair telling Bush to go fuck himself while she's trying to save Real Americans?

LATOYA: Pretty much. Just call it the "Fuck that bitch" doctrine. She is showing people up so she has got to go.

MEGAN: Also, I think saying that she has to go is akin to when McCain said he would fire Chris Cox at the SEC. I mean, it's their fucking government, you think they could learn who is supposed to be independent — and therefore given a term — and who is supposed to be a sycophant. Tim Geithner either needs to say a bunch more stupid shit so Obama withdraws his name, or get his head screwed on straight. Yo, Tim, you can throw all the money you want at Wall Street and get them to lower interest rates, but if no one has a fucking house in 2 years, the economy is still going to be fucked, and that's what Sheila Bair is trying to prevent, you dumb cunt.

LATOYA: I think prevention is a dirty word to some people. Kind of reminds them of socialism.

MEGAN: But the Republicans promised that we were electing a dirty socialist! They promised!

LATOYA: The Republicans are promising a lot of stuff, but one hand doesn't know what the other hand is doing. Like this rift between the religious right and the ...um...regular right.

MEGAN: This part is kind of awesome.

Ponnuru acknowledges that social conservatives “could present themselves more attractively,” and “pick their spokesmen more wisely.”

No, asshole, at the end of the day, you're still advocating for a fucking theocracy and I am gonna notice no matter how much you pay for Sarah Palin's stylists.

LATOYA: She even used the term Oogedy-Boodgey.

First, to the origins. “Oogedy-boogedy” was bequeathed to me several years ago by my dear, departed friend, political cartoonist Doug Marlette. We were doubtless talking about our shared Southern heritage, about which one does not speak long without mentioning religion.

And, you betcha, oogedy-boogedy.

Marlette, whose childhood was spent among Pentecostals, Baptists, and other passionate believers, had religion in his bones and forgot more scripture than most preachers can recall on a given Sunday. He also won a Pulitzer Prize for his lampooning of Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker (peace be upon them) and their “PTL Club.”

If Jim and Tammy Faye put you in mind of oogedy-boogedy, you’re getting warm.

Now, I'm going to be saying Oogedy Boogedy all day.

MEGAN: And, Republican dudes, if you can't figure out what it means, I don't think you get to call me an Un-Real American anymore.

LATOYA: Rick Warren, talking about capping foreign leaders because the bible says so? Oogedy Boogedy!

MEGAN: Also, how is the world not fucking scared of that shit? Spencer said it best: if it was a Muslim preacher saying on national TV abroad that the Koran says they need to suicide bomb us, we would be flipping the fuck out. But a white guy? No, that's cool.

LATOYA: Selective memory. Side effect of the oogedy boogedy.

MEGAN: So, is the oogedy-boogedy something you catch from the Bible, or from other Jeebus-freaks?

LATOYA: Apparently, the bible is OK. It's the freak part that leads to the oogedy boogedy. There have been other strange happenings as well, outside of religion. Like Michelle Malkin talking sense.

MEGAN: Michelle Malkin has been talking some sense on and off again all year and it is sort of freaking me the fuck out in general.

LATOYA: She's done this a couple times before. I'm always kind of shocked, because I can't reconcile a sensible column with the author of "In Defense of Internment." I don't know whether to read or avoid. On her worst days, she makes me want to put my eyes out, Oedipus style, so I do not have to see what senselessness has wrought. But on other days, I wonder if I should move her and Kathleen Parker into regular rotation.

MEGAN: Is it terribly condescending to think that Malkin grew up a little? That after wallowing around in all that scary, informed-only-by-fear filth she sort of looked around at her compatriots, commenters and ass-kissers and thought to herself, damn, these people are crazy?

LATOYA: Then again, we both now she is one "banana cream pie"column (that link is NSFW) away from being in they "why did I ever think we could hang" category. And speaking of even more crazy shit — do you know they are trying to challenge Obama's citizenship?

MEGAN: I am hoping the problem is not just that other wannabe columnists have not decided to out-Malkin Malkin by being crazier, thus making her seem less insane in the process. Yeah, dude, that is some crazytown fucking shit. There are suits claiming the birth certificate is fake, and others claiming that because his father wasn't American, he doesn't qualify.

LATOYA: Remember that Colbert Report segment on Obama going to this crazy foreign nation of Hawaii? Yeah, someone must have forgotten the Colbert Report isn't real news.

MEGAN: Dude! If only! Actually, they are claiming that his mother actually gave birth to him in Kenya but faked that it happened in Hawai'i.

LATOYA: I mean, damn, the birth certificate is online. Hawaii published a column announcing it. WTF?

MEGAN: In this alterna-universe, claiming Hawai'i doesn't count is actually less cray-cray than what they are really claiming. They claim that all that stuff has been faked, as though he's an actual Manchurian candidate.

LATOYA: Oh wait, are you talking about that guy who is suing "the "Peoples Association of Human, Animals Conceived God/s and Religions, John McCain (and) USA Govt." The plaintiff previously sought to sue Wikipedia and "All News Media." Or is he just some fresh crazy? And Clarence Thomas picked up this lawsuit, to presumably dismiss it, which is making blogger like Karynthia get pissed off for having to defend him.

MEGAN: Dude, Alan Keyes filed one of the lawsuits. There are multiple strains of crazy at work.

LATOYA: I expected that. Do you want to talk about terrorism crazy now, or international government crazy?

MEGAN: Oh, it's so hard to decide. I was going to say that we should read what the nanny of the Jewish toddler said about rescuing him because it's sort of awesome in a We-Are-The-World kind of way that transcends race, but we can stick with crazy.

"First thing is that a baby is very important for me and this baby is something very precious to me and that's what made me just not think anything — just pick up the baby and run," Samuel said.

"When I hear gunshot, it's not one or 20. It's like a hundred gunshots," she added. "Even I'm a mother of two children so I just pick up the baby and run. Does anyone think of dying at the moment when there's a small, precious baby?"

LATOYA: I applaud that woman. I am also giving a half-hearted applause to Condi for calling out Mugabe and his general douchbagginess toward his people. The applause is half hearted because we only selectively seek to remove dictators that are screwing with us. Or, rather, standing in the way of something we want.

MEGAN: Right, although, if we're giving Condi a golf clap, we probably have to shout out Raila Odinga, the Kenyan PM, who sorta beat her to the punch on that.

LATOYA: He gets full applause.

MEGAN: I mean, Odinga even beat South African President Kgalema Motlanthe, who probably could have done it as his first act in office or something.

LATOYA: Meanwhile, our neighbors to the South have crazy drug war drama and our neighbors to the North have crazy Parliament drama. Is it just me, or are global current events starting to read like The Days of Our Lives?

MEGAN: OMG, Latoya, seriously, I used to watch Days of Our Lives sort of obsessively. And by sort of obsessively, I mean, once upon a time I stood in line at the mall to get an autography from and picture with Matthew Ashford. That I still have.

LATOYA: And your verdict is?

MEGAN: Days of Our Lives once featured a plot line in which Marlena, possessed by the actual devil wreaked havoc on Salem. I think it's a valid comparison to world events.

LATOYA: Hahahahahahahha — true! I'm about to go get some breakfast (Mocha Hut!) but I did want to leave with this gem. The ignored truth about Iraq is contained in an old ass booklet.

Republished in 2008 by Dark Horse Publications, the tiny booklet for troops heading to protect the Persian Gulf’s oilfields and supply routes is a pronunciation, cultural and religious survival manual whose wisdom applies to Iraq (i-RAHK) during the era of the Toyota pickup truck and Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia as much as to the age of the camel and the Luftwaffe.

“Show respect to all older persons,” writes the anonymous author.

“American success or failure in Iraq may well depend on whether the Iraqis (as the people are called) like American soldiers or not. It may not be quite that simple. But then again it could.”

MEGAN: Sigh.

LATOYA: The book is so old that Muslim is still spelled Moslem and Israel doesn't exist yet (while Iran is a footnote) and yet, the advice is still kind of pertinent.

MEGAN:

“You aren’t going to Iraq to change the Iraqis. Just the opposite.”

LATOYA: Alright — I am out. Pumpkin chai and salmon cake on a bagel, here I come. Thanks, Megan for a fun week, and thanks Jezzies, for the fun conversations. (And pics! Loved that!)

• Sarah Palin: "I'm back to wearing my own clothes from my favorite consignment shop in Anchorage, Alaska." The store's name? Out of the Closet. [L.A. Times]
• Oy. Celebrity stylist Philip Bloch christens Michelle Obama "Blackie O." [NY Mag]
• Michelle's J.Crew bump continues to push the company - because of course if you buy those separates you'll look just like her and be a potential first lady! [Racked]
• Thank God, local news is monitoring Karl Lagerfeld's Vermont activity. Apparently he's wearing the full Karl Kostume! And his neighbor is named "Loomis Beame." [NY Magazine]
• Keira Knightley carries Anya Hindmarch dust bag instead of the purse it came with. [ElleUK]

• How would you respond to this query to the WSJ's style column? "I always think my husband and I should look more like a couple when we go out, with complementary outfits. But he just puts on the same baggy jeans, even though I am in dresses. What's a way for us to dress more like a couple?" [WSJ]
• Obviously copying my Halloween costume, Rebecca Minkoff cites Liz Taylor as an inspiration. [WWD]
• Angelina's stylist on her red carpet "gown": "It's two separates that looked great together, clean and simple with a pretty shape, which is what we like." [FabSugar]
• Anand Jon's (whose real last name is apparently Alexander) trial wraps up. [Breitbart]
• Narciso Rodriguez: "I don’t recall a specific thought, like, 'Oh, this is who I am,' but I was always watching my mom make clothes, and so I was comfortable with the idea of tearing into a piece of fabric. I remember a piece of black wool felt—I was making a very cool vest, and Mom walked in on me with the scissors in my hand, as I was cutting into the felt, and she freaked out: “What are you doing?!” I was ruining a lot of fabric back then." [Style.com]
• Michelle Malkin accuses the Gap of promoting "Voter Fraud Chic." [Michelle Malkin]
• Is that why The Gap has sent all its employees on a three-day vacation?! "Cutting costs" my eye. [WWD]
• Model Carol Alt loses high-profile legal battle with her ex. [Reuters]
• Obama vows "to support five key textile industry policy positions" to save the listing U.S. industry and monitor China. [WWD]
• Say it ain't so! Spies say Nina Garcia was seen purchasing slutty schoolgirl costume! [NY Mag]
• Model moments through the ages: kinda fun. [Telegraph]
• Still got time to waste? Here's a gallery of movie fashion moments through the ages! [EW]
• Crotchety WSJ writer is proud to be a shlub. [WSJ]
• What do sharks in formaldehyde and prospectors have in common? Why Damien Hirst's line for Levi's, of course! T"he 12-piece Damien Hirst X Levi’s Collection revolves around some of Hirst’s favored themes — skulls, colorful spots and tropical butterflies. Jeans retail for about 180 euros, or $230 at current exchange, with T-shirts at 65 euros, or $83." You can get it in Berlin and Milan. [WWD]
• Stefano Pilati on sex — or not — at YSL. "For me, the main factor is the seduction factor. I want to look at a woman and feel seduced. I never touch the idea of sex...Sex one of the most complicated things; it's too subjective. And if you have subjectivity, you have to balance it out - with you skills, your knowledge, the values of your brand. Sex for me is personal." [VogueUK]

Within 24 hours, I snapped and replied to some unwitting e-mailer that I found the comments disgusting and that what we really needed to think about was who we were trying to convince — and what we were trying to convince those people of. Well, if the polls that show women flocking to the McCain ticket and the response she's engendering from conservatives is any sign, we've convinced some people of one thing — that many feminists are feminist only to other feminists.

Now, naturally, few of these conservatives are exactly noted feminists themselves, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist (or a Wasilla mayor) to smell an opportunity to marginalize feminists or point out hypocrisies obvious enough to drive a wedge between liberal feminists and the very women that many of us have been trying to convince to vote for Barack Obama. Take Michelle Malkin, for example — hardly the kind of opinionated conservabloggier that I tend to agree with. Last week, she pointed out the opprobrium that rained down upon Sarah Palin's head for working late into her pregnancy, returning to work early and staying in a demanding job while parenting a special-needs child. She also pointed out that plenty of it came from female journalists who themselves have children and extremely demanding careers. Of course, she called them hacks and water-carriers for Obama, but that's Malkin for you — and it doesn't make her point less valid or accessible to the women that Obama needs on his side.

Then there's noted feminist scholar Jonah Goldberg, who manages to decry sexism and feminist hypocrisy even as he compares feminists to "stuck pigs" and says that one might resemble "a childless feminist who looks like a Bulgarian weightlifter in drag." But, he also hits up Gloria Steinem's OpEd, Cintra Wilson's screed and professor/columnist Wendy Doniger's truly offensive statement that Palin's "greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman." Because, really, there's no better way to win over independent women voters than to question their gender because of their political or religious beliefs. Women on the left should not be denying one another's womanhood because of disagreements about abortion and religion anymore than we should be allowing men like Rush Limbaugh to decide who is or is not a feminist. The problem with Goldberg's piece is not his glaringly offensive stereotypes and generalizations about feminists, it's that he can say all kinds of offensive things about mannish, childless women and it's still only barely as shocking as a feminist saying a person cannot be a Republican and a woman at the same time. And the latter bit is the only thing that's going to get a lot of traction in Central Pennsylvania, Ohio, Colorado and Michigan among the women that have swung every election for the last two decades.

Libertarian Cathy Young (who really could never annoy me as much as Goldberg or Malkin) writes a far more reasoned and compelling piece today in the Wall Street Journal asking why feminists hate Sarah Palin seemingly beyond reason. She hits some of the same shock quotes as Goldberg before her (and me before him, actually) and says that, from her perspective, Palin's "pro-life feminism [and] small-government, individualist feminism" is more attractive than a kind of feminism that requires government intervention to achieve equality. That's the kind of argument that will play well with independent women voter. It also makes its point about the feminist "hatred" of Palin without reverting to stereotypes about looks and doesn't dismiss the notion that choice is a concern for American women. This is far, far more convincing to the people that need to be convinced — you know, those 30-40 percent of voters in the middle — than arguing that Sarah Palin isn't "really" a woman.

Finally, even Elle's political blogger, Lucy Morrow Caldwell, gets in on the action, chastising South Carolina Democratic Party chairwoman Carol Fowler for saying that Palin's "primary qualification seems to be that she hasn’t had an abortion" (even as she mucks up Fowler's position in the party). Caldwell also says that no one ever suggested about Obama that "his race was the only reason he'd become a candidate in the first place," a statement that is not entirely true, as Geraldine Ferraro no doubt remembers. But few people are going to take the time to point out these inaccuracies in the politics blog of a fashion magazine, and the issue of feminists "bashing" Palin for gendered reasons allows Caldwell to gloss over the part where she herself would be "more cautious [than Palin] on certain foreign policy fronts" in favor of hitting up the mean, mean feminists.

It's not like I don't understand where the anger is coming from. I have heard often enough from liberal women that they don't understand how women can even be Republican...without, of course, ever actually asking one and listening to the answer. I also understand that, in the absence of comprehensive public record of Palin's stances on issues like pay equity or government-funded childcare, it's easy enough to attribute McCain's (bad) stances on those issues to her, especially since, as his running mate, they in effect are her new stances on those issues — and it's easy to conflate hating her positions with hating her as a person. For many women, she seems to be trying to have it both ways, to trumpet her family values and her careerism in a way that Republicans have often bashed other women for doing.

But, most of all, I think the attacks are coming from a place of insecurity that Palin (and all that comes with her) might soften the McCain campaign enough for him to triumph in November. And so if we rail against her, if we play the game of politics by their supposed rules and castigate her for the things conservatives have castigated liberal women for for decades (see: Hillary Clinton) then maybe they won't vote for her and him. The problem is that each party stands by its own hypocrites (see: Congressmen John Mutha and Jim Moran on the left and Senators David Vitter and Larry Craig on the right), so all we're doing by bashing her is inspiring a defense by her ideological compatriots and re-branding feminism as something that defends only liberal women against bias (and that denies a woman's womanliness if she dares to disagree politically, which is straight out of the Republican play book). That's not my feminism and that's not my idea of equality — and, for a lot of moderate women, it's not theirs either.

Polls Show Big Shift To McCain Among White Women [Reuters]
Is Sarah Palin a Feminist? Friday Feminist Fuck NO. [Feministing]
Sisterhood of the Protected Female Liberal Journalists [Michelle Malkin]
Feminist Army Aims Its Canons at Palin [National Review]
All Beliefs Welcome, Unless They are Forced on Others [Newsweek]
Why Feminists Hate Sarah Palin [Wall Street Journal]
Right Angles [Elle]
S.C. Dem Chair: Palin Primary Qualification Is She Hasn't Had An Abortion [Politico]
Ferraro’s Obama Remarks Become Talk of Campaign [NY Times]

MEGAN: Morning! People has this stupid teaser on its webpage for its cover story on Elizabeth Edwards' feelings told by other people as though people like you and I are going to run out and buy the magazine? I'd be tempted to make an appointment with my acupuncturist who has a description and gets it in the office, which costs a hell of a lot more money but is more useful than a magazine. Anyway, apparently, it hurt to hear that her husband was sticking his penis in other women. Has your curiosity been satiated?

DAVID: I don't feel like I'll have a real handle on the story until Mike Allen at the Politico has interviewed Elizabeth about her Hollywood crushes, though.

MEGAN: I'll be she thinks George Clooney is cute.

DAVID: Well, clearly the lesson from all this is that we shouldn't vote for John Edwards in November. Now, can we move along, people?

MEGAN: Wait, though, can we go back to Rush Limbaugh for a second? Because I think I might be allowed to crush on Keith Olbermann after he went after Rush last night. (Skip to minute 3, if you want to see it.)

DAVID: Oh, sweet. I need to watch that. Olbermann is uneven for me. Sometimes he's awesome and then other times he goes so far over the top. Whereas my love for Rachel Maddow is unconditional and all-consuming.

MEGAN: Yes, I have to agree about Rachel, but, um, Keith could, say, call me in Denver and yell about how awesome smart women are for a while.

DAVID: So, what do you think about Arkansas? Do you feel like the shooting was politically motivated?

MEGAN: I mean, if it wasn't politically motivated, why Gwatney in particular?

DAVID: Most reports I'm seeing are refraining from speculation about motivation, but I have a sinking feeling in my stomach that this is exactly what I was talking about yesterday with the Limbots going insane and lashing out at Librull Amurrka. Of course, the fact that Righty screamer Michelle Malkin felt the need to issue a denial of involvement before the body was even cold speaks volumes to me.

MEGAN: Some Internet troll types think it's another Clinton conspiracy. For real.

DAVID: Conservatism, I am starting to believe, is a form of mental illness. Malkin is up to her old tricks again of publishing the contact information of people who challenge her. If you go down that thread and look, Malkin published some detractor's email address and full name and her commenters are bragging about looking up the guy's mother's name and threatening her.

MEGAN: Hey, you know, that shit got some dudes a NY Times Magazine cover story, so...

DAVID: Delightful people. Funny how much her denial of blame yesterday reminds me of her denial of blame in the death of UC Santa Cruz administrator Denice Denton.

MEGAN: Yes, we get it, Michelle, you are not personally responsible for all the evil in the world, not even the evil committed by your fans. Speaking of pissing off Michelle's fans, did you see that the Census Bureau came out with new figures that say white people won't be the majority by 2042? Interesting timing on that one.

DAVID: Except that she is. But speaking of trolls, did you see Larry King last night? Larry King and Paul Waldman handed Obama-bashing Jerome Corsi's his ass on a pizza.

HA! Segway jinx! Yes, 2042 is when Mark Penn's target voters will no longer be the top dogs. To tell you the truth, I'm a little disappointed because I thought that white people were already outnumbered.

MEGAN: I mean, is it just a little interesting to you that the government comes out with these figures that we've all know for ages now that prompt headlines like White Americans no longer a majority by 2042 a mere 11 days before the start of the first Democratic convention which will make Obama (an African-American) the first major- party candidate for President? Or am I just that paranoid?

DAVID: When it comes to the perfidy of corporate media, I don't think you can ever be too paranoid, can you?

MEGAN: Possibly not.

DAVID: I mean, you've got Karl Rove's buttboy in at the top of the AP, GE owns NBC and MSNBC, then there's ClearChannel and Pox News. Even public radio and television are beholden to big money donors like BP and Wal-Mart.

MEGAN: You know what's really funny?

DAVID: Really, Megan, it's all down to you. You alone can tell the world the Truth. What's funny?

MEGAN: A good friend of mine used to work at Alticor, which owns Amway (which, of course) doesn't advertise AND is heavily Republican... and they complain about the perfidy of the corporate media and the influence of advertising dollars, too.

Aaaanyway, back to topical stuff... Want to talk about how this might be the first convention since 1984 that Jesse Jackson doesn't speak at? Or that he'll watch D.C. mayor Adrian Fenty (kind of a cutie) and House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn but not House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel speak (though, the latter might be because he's had a couple of easily-foreseen ethical scandals crop up recently)?

DAVID: Oh, well, I think that might be for the best, don't you? Maybe he has a pressing gig talking about spaying and neutering at a veterinary convention. Honestly, I think it may be time for Reverend Jackson to spend some more time with his families.

MEGAN: I'm actually kind of disappointed in Charlie Rangel. It's like when people in D.C. said, "No one could be a bigger, more condescending prick who abuses the power of his office than Bill Thomas" he took that as a challenge.

DAVID: Everybody needs goals in life. Charlie was just reaching for that rainbow, living the dream. Can we really fault him for that?

MEGAN: Sort of like the owner of the gay cruising site that's maxed out to McCain.

DAVID: Well, I have a theory about that.

MEGAN: Self-loathing? Or straight entrepreneur?

DAVID: Your gay Republican types thrive in an atmosphere of repression and secrecy. They want their gay sex dirty, shameful, and totally secret. They don't want to have stable gay marriages or adopt kids. They want to get down on it Larry Craig style.

MEGAN: And so he thinks in a McCain administration his cruising site will do better? Actually, given McCain's incredibly gay entourage, that might not be too far off the mark.

DAVID: I've thought about this a lot. I never could understand why someone would be a gay Republican. It's like being a chicken for Col. Sanders.

MEGAN: God, reading that just made my stomach growl.

DAVID: But then the more I thought about it, and as more and more and more twisted gay sex scandals came to light in the GOP, I started putting together my Unified Field Theory of Gay Republicans. For them it's all about The Forbidden.

Well, that and racism.