Zing.

I can't remember what "That was a shot" is from. Some show or movie, and a guy wasn't sure if the girl was joking or really criticizing. She would be like "You are really an idiot," and the guy would be like "That was a shot." Home IMprovement or something?

Earlier I posted about how the whole concept of the "slogan" Global War on Terror being pushed aside for Global Struggle Against Violent Extremists was made up news. Well, the New York Times notes that, you know, the administration isn't actually doing any such thing. Is this a sign that the venerable New York Times was wrong? The question, she answers herself, no?

Of course the NYT wasn't wrong. The President didn't change his wording because he is now at war, or in a struggle, depending on how you look at it, with his own Administration. Over grammar. Seriously, what are the odds of that?

It's the political silly season.

For those needing a reminder, here is our National Security Strategy. Published in December, 2001. See if you can find any indication that the idea of the war on terror being bigger than just sending troops to fight is something brand new.

At 84. Well, this should be interesting.

Some wag said a while back, before the election, that you can really tell the economy was doing better because the media were no longer calling it the "Bush economy."

Here's an indicator - Sebastian Mallaby, a columnist in the Washington Post is damning George Bush for his (good) luck:

When it comes to economic policy, George W. Bush has all the luck. He's like a drunk who wanders across a six-lane highway and somehow never quite gets smushed.

Now let's ignore all of the unfortunate aspects of that opening paragraph, and look at the column - Mallaby is confounded that Bush economic policies are working, because, you know, tax cuts never work! He wants Bush to be "punished" for his policies - meaning that he wishes a worse economic outcome for you and me.

But that's fine. This is the only way that the Democrats can address good news - begrudgingly.