ShareThis Page
The Thursday wrap |

The Thursday wrap

| Thursday, October 26, 2006 12:00 a.m

Charlie’s point: Down-the-middle political analyst Charlie Cook has some bad news for Republicans who think the party’s traditionally superior “72-hour program,” it’s get-out-the-vote (GOTV) effort, will save badly lagging candidates this cycle: “(T)he rule of thumb that campaign professionals have always used is that a strong GOTV operation is good for a point or two, certainly not much more than that.” It’s time for the GOP to brace itself.

Ozone Al, contributing: MediaNews reports that former Vice President Al Gore, now the head pastor at the First Church of Global Warming, showed up at a California rally in support of a new tax on oil in an uber-efficient Toyota Prius. “I’m here to change people’s minds on the climate crisis,” he said. Oh, included in the Rev. Gore’s motorcade — two motorcycles, two limousines and a Dodge Ram 1500 light-duty truck.

Arrrggghhh!: National Review magazine recounts the tale of one Codie Stott, 14, in the north of England. She was arrested and held in a juvenile unit for a “racial public order offense.” She and five other students were paired in a science study group. The five were conversing in Urdu, an Indo-European language she did not speak. She asked to be transferred to another group. School administrators called the police. “We … will not stand for racism in any form,” the principal said. Let us know when you’ve stopped screaming.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.