1. Newsweek runs the cover you see to your right. The text reads "How Do You Solve a Problem Like Sarah? She's Bad News for the GOP — And For Everybody Else, Too." They illustrate this statement with a portrait from Palin's recent Runner's World photoshoot. In the picture, Sarah Palin is wearing running clothes, grinning, clutching two Blackberries and leaning casually on an American flag.

2. Sarah Palin, the person who posed for this picture in the first place, is angered. The photo was meant to be "all about health and fitness," she Facebooked, and Newsweek's "sexist and oh-so-expected" re-use of the image "shows why you shouldn't judge a book by its cover, gender, or color of skin." She cannot name any books that have genders or skin (but then, who can?). Nor does she explain what the Blackberries have to do with "health and fitness."

3. Various people around the internet agree with Palin that the cover is sexist. Other people disagree. Some of us remember the last time Newsweek caused a controversy with its cover image of Sarah Palin.

4. An Indecision blogger and her editor spend almost an hour instant messaging about the Sarah Palin Newsweek cover. At one point your blogger's editor asks her to 'role play' a hypothetical meeting in the Newsweek editorial department.

5. We all know that Sarah Palin leaps at any chance to play the victim (it's cardio), even when she's invited the scrutiny, prompted the inquiry or posed for the photo. Also, any time a major political figure agrees to be photographed in an unusual setting, wearing anything less than a power suit, and those pictures are made public, they will be seen and published and republished. In public.

6. Yet here we have a political-type lady wearing shorts, on the cover of a national news magazine. That seems sexist.

6a. Or not.

7. All this discussion, and still no definitive answer to the big question: Did this photograph of Sarah Palin violate flag protocol?

Fox News, the most important name in shouting, has been under attack from the White House, and has attacked the White House back, but what about you, the people? Where is your perspective in all this? Aren't you supposed to decide?

Well, the Pew Research Center asked, and Americans have spoken. A recent poll surveyed attitudes toward television news networks, and the findings will not surprise anyone who watches Fox regularly…

The Fox News Channel is viewed by Americans in more ideological terms than other television news networks.

Nearly half of Americans (47%) say they think of Fox News as "mostly conservative," 14% say it is "mostly liberal,” and 24% say it is "neither in particular."

That's right, 14% of us are on to the lefty ideology being pushed by folks like Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Neil Cavuto and Gretchen Carlson — what, you haven't noticed? Please. I'll give you an example. Just the other day I was watching Fox News and the anchors were talking about Nancy Pelosi. See what I mean? Talking about her, with words, just like liberals do.

Which means they weren't setting fire to her house even a little bit.

How's this for publicity-seeking? In the wee hours of the morning President Obama flew out to Dover Air Force Base to witness the return of the bodies of 18 Americans killed in Afghanistan, and as usual with this guy ("Paris Hilton"), the whole thing was a massively choreographed media spectacle…

The overnight trip was not announced in advance. The president, wearing a dark suit and long overcoat, left the White House at 11:44 p.m. A small contingent of reporters and photographers accompanied Mr. Obama to Dover, where he arrived at 12:34 a.m. aboard Marine One.

As the Commander-in-chief stood on the darkened tarmac and saluted, the flag-draped case was unloaded from the cargo plane in what the military calls a "dignified transfer," as six soldiers in white gloves and camouflage fatigues carried the remains in precision. Mr. Obama and uniformed officers stood at attention as the case was placed in a white mortuary van parked nearby.

The transfer of the bodies — a solemn, 15-minute proceeding — took place after Mr. Obama spent nearly two hours meeting privately with several family members in the chapel of the Air Force base.

What a disgraceful circus.

Say what you will about George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, but none of them would have done such a thing.

We've seen some fiery skirmishes in the War on Fox News, especially now that Fox's commanders are rallying their troops to go on the offensive, but today we have an actual bombshell: Fox has unearthed explosive! detonating! evidence of Barack Obama's campaign communications team's SECRET STRATEGY for media terrorism.

You see, Barack Obama's campaign communications team (led by Anita Dunn, seen here PLOTTING with David Axelrod), did not simply allow reporters, including those of Fox News, to write whatever the hell they wanted about their candidate. This is unheard of in democracy. A non-Stalinist campaign would simply lead its candidate onto a stage, sit him down, and let the assembled press pool make up whatever fun stories they wanted to, based on his appearance.

But Candidate Obama's nefarious communications generals had a different plan, a strategy known to "insiders" as "controlling the message." These people don't want you to know that they did this, or how they did this, but one Fox News footsoldier marched into the trenches of Google, I'm guessing, and dug up a video of Anita Dunn speaking at a conference earlier this year…

She explained that the campaign favored live interviews so that Obama's words could not be edited — "so that what the voters heard we determined, as opposed to some editor in a TV station."

"Whether it was a David Plouffe video or an Obama speech, a huge part of our press strategy was focused on making the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to why the campaign was saying it," she said.

Chilling! How many more times has Barack Obama covered up his efforts to waterboard the media? Next I suppose Fox News will reveal that those big blue "Yes We Can" rally signs were not the spontaneous handiwork of Real Americans, but were instead distributed by campaign operatives! (I believe that would be grounds for impeachment.)

Call me crazy, but I think the New York Times has taken a giant step forward by replacing a guy who once predicted the Terri Schaivo fiasco would be a "revolution," for right-to-lifers, declared that "the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have been won decisively and honorably" and promised us that "Hockey Mom knows best," with a guy who hasn't said any of those things.

Ross Douthat, 29, a senior editor and conservative blogger for The Atlantic magazine, has been hired by The New York Times to write a regular column online and then fill the weekly Op-ed slot occupied by William Kristol during 2008.

A New York Times spokeswoman confirmed the hiring to E&P this afternoon. Andrew Rosenthal, editor page editor, asked by E&P's Joe Strupp why Douthat had been picked, cited his youth, Republican politics, "iconoclast" leanings and intelligence.

I'm thrilled that Douthat will finally get the chance that youth, Republican politics, "iconoclast leanings" and intelligence really do go together like chocolate, shredded cod, rama-lama-lama and cray-pas.

Mr. Obama, if you're listening, Rob Riggle has some actionables you should consider queuing up tout de suite:

Just how much further can the Clinton camp jam a wedge among the party faithful?