Which, if it works, could conceivably end in a scenario in which Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the Democrats work to redefine Obama as a Republican so that he actually stands a chance in the 2012 elections. No, really. It could happen. I mean, they’re already working on tying Marxism to Reagan. Is touting Obama as a Republican alternative to Republicans really that farfetched?

I can’t make it to the Occupy Wall Street protests — my mom backs the Man and so won’t buy me a plane ticket, the bitch — so I’ve decided to occupy our den. Demand 1: Hot Pockets! **** update: Demand 2: Move the microwave into the den to make better use of Demand 1: Hot Pockets! **** update 2: What do I want? Hot Pockets! When do I want

Or, in other words, Reid and the Dems propose to vote on a bill that allows them to take money from private citizens and manage it themselves, divvying it up in order to, in effect, purchase the kinds of jobs they believe the market needs. Like for instance, more solar panel factories, or more money for teachers (and therefore teachers’ unions. And therefore right back to the Dems, newly laundered).

Okay. So I made up that last bit. Still.

Somewhere, Professor Ric Caric struggles for ways to declare Arnold S. Trebach, Chief of the Administration of Justice Section, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1960-63, an unreconstructed racist — “race neutrality” being, as it is, the height of racism, while political racialism and racial racketeering is the mark of the highest form of racial consciousness. Trebach: For decades this nation has followed a bizarre racial path in which discrimination in

Well. That certainly explains the facile and puerile policy positions Michelle tends to stake out, doesn’t it? Next up: Michelle Obama calls on Congress to name November 23 “Miley Cyrus Day” — with retailers directed to take at least 50% off all Hannah Montana merchandise, so that “like, poor kids who eat nothing but beans and stuff, can love love love Hannah Montana just like the rest of the normal

Obama jobs bill, page 135: millionaires & billionaires? Newly defined as married, making $125k year and filing individually. Because under the President’s “jobs” bill, deductions for such people would be limited to 28%. (Alternately, those not married but rather “living together” and operating under the same financial circumstances? Don’t become millionaires or billionaires until they make $200k. So there’s that). Just so’s you know.

Pass this bill now? Hell, I think we’d settle if the Democrats would just agree to vote on this bill now! But then, doing so would take away Obama’s entire campaign strategy — because a number of Democrats would break ranks and sink it, making it a bi-partisan repudiation of what everyone knows is a tax bill camouflaged by investment socialism. (h/t Mark Levin and Jim DeMint)

Most transparent Administration evah! Daily Caller: On Tuesday’s Laura Ingraham Show, Attkisson said DOJ spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler and White House associate communications director Eric Schultz yelled and screamed at her over the story. “The DOJ woman was just yelling at me,” Attkisson said. “The guy from the White House on Friday night literally screamed at me and cussed at me. Eric Schultz — oh, the person screaming was Tracy Schmaler.

WSJ, “Why no one wants to repeal a program that everyone knows is a fraud”: Since the CBO says Class’s front-loaded collections cut the deficit to the tune of that $86 billion, HHS has to pretend that the program is still alive to preserve these phantom savings. Some Republicans are also nervous about repealing Class because, under CBO’s perverse scoring, they’ll be adding $86 billion to the deficit. Others would