I know! It's all quite scandalous! And, to make matters worse, Sunday's Washington Post featured an article by Dana Milbank praising Rahm Emanuel's work as Chief of Staff and bashing every other hominid in government…

Obama's first year fell apart in large part because he didn't follow his chief of staff's advice on crucial matters. Arguably, Emanuel is the only person keeping Obama from becoming Jimmy Carter.

And, wouldn't you know it, but some people of a somewhat suspicious bent find this article to be a tad suspect…

Dana Milbank transcribed an article written by Rahm Emanuel yesterday in The Washington Post. Never has an article been more clearly written to support a political benefactor…

This is basically Rahm saying on his way out, I was right all along and these guys were wrong. Maybe it's a last minute attempt at a Hail Mary to swing the decision in his favor if he can start a conversation in DC about how he had offered better advice than the other three to Obama (by the way, everything he claims to have been right about inside the article was disastrous advice that led Obama further and further away from his voters). But either way, that means he thinks he is very close to being on his way out the door.

What? A Rahm-less White House?! What would we ever do without him?! Just imagine if we didn't have him holding the Democratic Party together this past year? Why they'd be in complete disarray and on the verge of losing their majority power in both houses! I can't even imagine what that would be like!

The Washington Post — needing someone who could make sense of complicated statistics, understand technical jargon and had a deep enough understanding of the scientific method to write an opinion piece on this — obviously jumped at the chance to print a re-hash of Sarah Palin's latest Facebook rant.

From the actual fucking Washington Post real newspaper…

"Climate-gate," as the e-mails and other documents from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia have become known, exposes a highly politicized scientific circle — the same circle whose work underlies efforts at the Copenhagen climate change conference…

This scandal obviously calls into question the proposals being pushed in Copenhagen. I've always believed that policy should be based on sound science, not politics…

In his inaugural address, President Obama declared his intention to "restore science to its rightful place." But instead of staying home from Copenhagen and sending a message that the United States will not be a party to fraudulent scientific practices, the president has upped the ante. He plans to fly in at the climax of the conference in hopes of sealing a "deal." Whatever deal he gets, it will be no deal for the American people.

Oddly enough, lots of commentators were less with impressed with The Post's decision to print Palin's dishonest, anti-science op-ed for some weird reason…

Shortly after the op-ed was published online, Post media reporter Howard Kurtz tweeted that his paper was being "ripped for running Palin op-ed." Kurtz highlighted a blog post whose author refused to link to the op-ed because "[t]hey shouldn't be rewarded with the clicks, which is pretty much what this is about, I figure."…

The response to the op-ed was even more critical from science writers. ScienceBlogs.com's Tim Lambert chose to headline his piece on Palin's op-ed: "The Washington Post can't go out of business fast enough."

I beg to differ with Lambert. I do think The Washington Post can go out of business fast enough.

By the way, this post from Media Matters does an excellent job of picking Palin's piece apart and explaining reality.

In the latest turn of events, the Washington Post reports that despite the summer of outrage a clear majority of Americans now support the public option:

Americans remain sharply divided about the overall packages moving closer to votes in Congress and President Obama's leadership on the issue, reflecting the partisan battle that has raged for months over the administration's top legislative priority. But sizable majorities back two key and controversial provisions: both the so-called public option and a new mandate that would require all Americans to carry health insurance.

However, one resident of Washington, DC — it's unclear if his opinion was included in this poll or not — seems to think that a public option is okay, but not necessarily necessary…

Obama "will obviously weigh in when it's important to weigh in" on the possibility of a public option, chief of staff Rahm Emanuel said. Added Obama senior adviser Valerie Jarrett: "He's not demanding that it's in there. He think it's the best possible choice."

Right. And if all you have to go on is your belief that a public option is the best possible choice, and data showing that a majority of Americans also believe it's the best possible choice, you wouldn't want to make an unreasonable demand like that.

Or are they, Fox News?

The doctor made a White House call Monday — 150 of them, in fact, all costumed in white hospital coats — to try to help President Obama administer a booster shot to his ailing health care reform drive.

Yes, "costumed," almost as if this were some sort of "staged event," the kind of thing presidents rarely — if ever — do. Let us turn now to the Washington Post's theater review…

Obama said little new about his signature domestic policy initiative, but he used the choreographed event to put some momentum behind reform proposals taking shape in Congress. The key Senate Finance Committee may vote this week on its version of health-care reform legislation.

The roughly 150 doctors assembled wore white lab coats under the brilliant fall sun, some sheepishly carrying them under their arms as they made their way to the folding chairs. In opening his remarks, Obama called them "spiffy."

Not only is this "doctor drama" less exciting than Clooney-era ER, it is also completely invalid as a political statement, because those doctors ambled around that lawn on Barack Obama's invitation, not Glenn Beck's, q.e.d.

I didn't mean "quitting." I meant "cap-and-trade." Ugh, take three. Of course I meant "cap-and-tax." Well here, Governor Palin explains it all for you…

There is no denying that as the world becomes more industrialized, we need to reform our energy policy and become less dependent on foreign energy sources. But the answer doesn't lie in making energy scarcer and more expensive! Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy.

Why is Nobama hell-bent on destroying our economy! What's in it for him! I guess he just gets some kind of sick pleasure from seeing everyone suffer!

Even Warren Buffett, an ardent Obama supporter, admitted that under the cap-and-tax scheme, "poor people are going to pay a lot more for electricity."

Warren Buffett did say that, and he is rich, so he must be right. The Congressional Budget Office thought otherwise, but the CBO is not rich, so screw them.

This op-ed has not found religion yet.

We must move in a new direction. We are ripe for economic growth and energy independence if we responsibly tap the resources that God created right underfoot on American soil.

I will forgive Sarah Palin for taking eleven paragraphs to get to God, but only because she knows more about energy than probably anyone else in the United States of America.

It just kinda sorta makes you look like a tool…

Plouffe was listed as the keynote speaker at the luncheon yesterday for "Transition 2009," sponsored by Georgetown University and Politico. The public was invited to the event — students free of charge and everybody else for a fee. But at the last minute, Georgetown announced that Plouffe's speech would be "closed press," even though the speech was being given in the National Press Club ballroom, described on a plaque at the door as "the sanctum sanctorum of American journalists."

National Press Club President Donna Leinwand fired off an e-mail to Plouffe and his agents stating her "strong opposition" to the press banishment from its own club. "If Mr. Plouffe wants to keep secrets," she said, "Mr. Plouffe should stay at home."

The Washington Post's Dana Milbank (definitely the ugliest female reporter I've seen in a while) was having none of it…

For what it's worth, the National Press Club comes off looking just as douchey.

* What if George Bush and Ron Paul were the stars of a comic book adaptation of the movie Roadhouse from 1989? Yeah, but what if?

* Playing poker with Harry Reid has got to be the best money-making enterprise ever invented.

* Turns out that it was Tina Fey and Katie Couric who were the ones exploiting Sarah Palin's manufactured image as a down-home hockey mom maverick. You owe me a Coke.

* The Washington Post is calling Barack Obama "Nixonian" — conservatives, liberals alike despair for appropriate reaction.

* Barack Obama decides to keep yet another Bush appointee on staff.

* Politico: "Daschle floats through Senate hearing" — Sounds to me like somebody needs to call a paranormalist.

For years, newspaper sales had been plummeting all around the country. It seemed that today's news consumers simply preferred getting the latest information from newfangled media sources like TV and brilliant, cutting-edge websites.

But all of that changed Wednesday morning when America woke up after Obama's historic victory and decided to revive a dying industry. They snapped up every copy of the newspaper in sight, causing the following to happen…

* The Washington Post printed an additional 700,000 copies over Wednesday and Thursday in order to meet demand that had thousands of people lined up outside of their headquarters.

* Bidding on EBay skyrocketed to $590 for a copy of Wednesday's New York Times. (The crossword puzzle had been left intact, making it especially valuable.)

* Even the Daily Oklahoman, dubbed "the worst newspaper in America" by the Columbia Journalism Review, and previously best known for its infamous "You Have Cancer" series, sold out.

* A man in Bellingham, Washington bought 10,000 copies of the Bellingham Herald in the hopes of selling them to finance his retirement.

Meanwhile in Detroit, seeking to cash in on the election-fueled economic burst, desperate automakers announced plans to ramp up production of the Obamamobile.

"In the July 2007 CNN debate, his face turned sharp and keen with his impassioned call to send troops to Darfur, a frustrated pair of vertical lines in his brow… debating Sarah Palin, we heard similar anger in his voice… but saw a tranquil brow."

I wonder what could have caused that tranquil brow? Maybe it's being on a winning ticket? Maybe it's his faith the country will prevail through tough times? Or maybe it's Maybelline?

"Barry Cohen, a Rockville plastic surgeon, is more blunt. "He clearly has had Botox," the doctor, a Republican, told us. 'The lines are gone on his forehead. There is no way makeup or surgery could do that.'"

Nope, definitely not Maybelline.

Why a Republican doctor? Couldn't they find a Democrat doctor willing to sell out the party for a cheap plug to their practice? After all, we know Democrats love plugs.

"A lot of Americans will have fewer worry lines on their faces" when George Bush is out office, [Biden spokesperson, David Wade] added. "But my goodness… can't we actually talk about the economy, the millions of foreclosures and the fact that Americans lost 2 trillion bucks in their 401(k)s this month? Seriously."

No, we can't. But can't we continue speculating mindlessly instead? Seriously.

"D.C. dermatologist Tina Alster declined to assess any one VIP face… but among her political clientele, as many men as women are getting Botox… She had to cut her summer vacation short to meet the surge in demand before the conventions…

The stuff wears off in about six months, so she expects another rush before the inauguration, 'at least among one party or another.'"

You mean Joe Biden face will likely melt off in six months?

Joe Biden's face: Too risky for America? Let's all vote for the beauty queen and call it a day.

Today, he has another one. It is equally harsh on the Republican presidential nominee, and it is classic Will in its wandering conglomeration of references. He discusses, in order…

* The Baltimore Orioles
* John McCain
* Barack Obama
* Sancho Panza
* William Ayers
* 401Ks
* Dead sheep
*Jesse Jackson
* Iraq
* McCain's mortgage buyout plan
* MSNBC
* The Electoral College results of every election in the last 108 years
* Strom Thurmond
* Margaret Thatcher

Come to think of it, it isn't really a George Will column if it doesn't start with baseball and end with Margaret Thatcher.

In just a few hours yesterday, the following vicious cycle occurred…

* In Monday morning's paper, The New York Times runs a story reporting on McCain campaign manager Rick Davis' consulting work for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which netted him $2 million.

* Davis and McCain spokesman Steve Schmidt hastily organize a conference call with political reporters, in which they accuse the Times of being "an organization that has made a decision to cast aside it's journalistic integrity to advocate for the defeat of John McCain."

* Blogger Ben Smith from Politico, who was in on the conference call, immediately writes a blog piece criticizing the McCain camp for several inaccurate statements made during the call.

* McCain spokesman Brian Rogers announces that Politico is also "in the tank" for Barack Obama.

* The New York Times writes an online news article about how the McCain camp "lashed out at The New York Times on Monday, accusing it of dropping its journalistic standards."

* Bill Keller, the executive editor of the Times, does an interview with Politico defending his paper.

* Hundreds of media sources, from The Wall Street Journal to The Atlantic to The Washington Post report on the brouhaha.

* Everyone takes a break and has lunch.

I'm not sure what happened after that because I got a really bad headache and had to lie down.

Seems that they're taking issue with an advertisement that McCain ran pointing out some information about Barack Obama, including the fact that he wants to show hard-core pornography to kindergarteners. How dare they?

Here's the Post's analysis, entitled "McCain's 'Education' Spot Is Dishonest, Deceptive"…

John McCain ad caricatures Barack Obama's education record by claiming that his only achievement is to pass legislation ensuring "comprehensive sex education" for kindergartners. It implies that its critique of the Democratic presidential nominee has been endorsed by the nonpartisan journal Education Week, when in fact it is a hodgepodge of quotes from a variety of sources stitched together to form a highly partisan political attack.

And here's the screed from the Times…

In referring to the sex-education bill, the McCain campaign is largely recycling old and discredited accusations made against Mr. Obama by Alan Keyes in their 2004 Senate race. At that time, Mr. Obama stated that he understood the main objective of the legislation, as it pertained to kindergarteners, to be to teach them how to defend themselves against sexual predators.

When will these tired, pathetic liberal sources finally shut up and let a more fair and balanced news source take over?

Are you pimping the American religious community? Is your quest for the presidency so intense that you will do anything, even muddy the so-called separation between church and state?

Will you, or would you, consent to having a similar meeting in a synagogue? Mosque? An AME church? I guess what I'm struggling [with] is… is your purpose. No pun intended… but why are you going to the church pastored by the man who is devoted to helping people find purpose in their lives? Is it because he's so famous and well known and you figure you will get a good chunk of the evangelical vote?

Frankly, I think all politicians ought to stay out of church while they're running for office.

That's right, Rev. Smith! I'm also tired of politicians seeking the endorsement of high-profiled figures who control huge swaths of voters. In fact, I'm tired of seeing any politicians doing anything to cater to any sorts of voters.

Politicians should just sit on their front porches, drink whiskey from sunup to sundown, and wait for the election results to come in.

Hey, it worked for President McKinley.

Wow, reporting and checking the facts? That's pretty wild. I guess this craze caught on because modern technology has allowed us to set fact-checking to dramatic movie music…

…and also because Hillary Clinton keeps saying stuff like "I remember landing under sniper fire" when the fact, upon being checked, reveals that she "was greeted by an adorable little girl who is presumably not carrying an M40 under her parka."

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that this fact-checking trend will last well into the fall season. High-waisted pants, not so much.