Another Day, Another Example of the Tiny Little Tents Which House the Republican & Democratic Parties.

Today's example comes from the Empire State, where New York conservatives are beating up one of their moderate fellow republicans (link below). This sort of thing, to me, always begs the question of why someone who is non-liberal or non-conservative would ever want to join either one of these two parties in the first place? Especially since the two parties are completely controlled by their extremes and have no place for you if you are not a part of that extreme. It also speaks to the need for Independents, non-conservatives and non-liberals to start uniting with a view towards running viable independent and/or third party candidates for elected office. The climate in the country right now is perfect for this to start occurring (dems continue to lose popularity, while repubs aren't exactly making huge popularity gains). It continues to be a crying shame how so many people never question or rebel against the far right and far left dominated two-party system that we allow to control this wonderful country. But regardless, I'll continue to make it a devoted principle.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28071.html

Can the Far Left Really Tolerate No Federal "Public Option"?

It would appear, at least with respect to the so-called "Baucus bill" currently in the final stages of development in the Senate, that things are heading the way of a bill that does not include a federal "public option," but rather only a "public option" administered by individual states or groups of states (see link below). I find it hard to believe that the far left would sign off on this, and if it appears that they are doing so in the days to come, I for one will be highly suspicious of what's really contained in this bill. But in the meantime, I'm not going to worry about it too much, since the senate finance committee hasn't been sharing any bill language with you or me at any recent juncture. (As resolved in this space several weeks ago, I'm not inclined to debate the merits of theoretical constructs such as "cooperatives" and "state options" until there's actually a concrete written bill available to the public and which appears to be a serious bill that will actually get to the senate or house floor). Stay tuned...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/07/state-run-health-insurance-plans-gain-support/

Strange Bedfellows.

The two ideologues from opposite political extremes squared off tonight on Hannity's show. It was actually a fairly calm, somewhat rational, and generally civil exchange. For being able to express themselves without anger, bitterness, name-calling or hatred -- i.e. what you typically see from these types of people (although perhaps not as much when you get a couple of them together in same room) -- I give them credit. As for the "debate" itself -- a bit bland since they talked almost the entire time about mortgage and lending industry issues (the subject of Moore's current documentary), which was interesting for about two minutes. I would have liked to have heard more about some of the other hot issues of the day, such as health care reform and Afghanistan, but that's only a small complaint.

I've Heard of the Bunker Mentality, But This Is Ridiculous!

The latest accusation in the sordid David Letterman scandal: That he had a "bunker" at the Ed Sullivan theater where he would take young staffers to have sex. Although it was referred to by staffers as "the bunker" (allegedly), apparently it was actually a makeshift bedroom high atop his show set. I wonder if Biff the Stagehand (if that guy's even still on the show) guarded the door? Regardless, sick stuff from a much older boss in relation to his much younger underling employees (these weren't some gals that he met in a bar). And this guy actually has had the nerve on a weekly basis to run a monologue asserting that Sarah Palin is deranged?

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv/2009/10/04/2009-10-04_untitled__4dave04m.html#

Weird Stuff from TV Network ABC.

Related two-part strangeness from television network ABC:

1. ABC's decision in the first place (which I'm just hearing about) to remake the obscure 1980's series "V" -- which concerned an extraterrestrial alien invasion of the world. "V" wasn't exactly the greatest example of 1980's television. It wasn't terrible, but it was fairly bland and mediocre. As such, it would seem odd to pick that series for a remake.

2. But hold on! A rumor being reported on the first link below is that the remake series, which is currently scheduled to start airing in November, is running into hesitancy at ABC because the series deals with "aliens," even though apparently the show's characters are not allowed to use the "A" word on the show. And if there's any truth to that, then why did ABC send the show into production in the first place (as the same link also notes)? Weird, weird, weird.

http://io9.com/5373641/is-v-in-trouble-because-abc-is-scared-of-aliens

http://www.seattlepi.com/tvguide/410544_tvgif25.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQoSCEMzJYE

Look at the GOP Non-Conservatives Raisin' a Ruckus!

In the past few days, both John McCain and NY Times columnist David Brooks (pictured second above) (both of whom I very must respect) have been seriously pissin' off the conservatives, including fellow Missourian Rush Slimebaugh (links below). The way I look at it, if you're getting under Slimebaugh's skin, you're doing something right. Couple this with how the democratic Blue Dogs have been angering and enraging to no end the ultra-radical-left-wing of the democratic party (they call themselves "progressives"), and we have the makings of some very nice stuff goin' on 'round here! Now, here's the next step we need to see: Some of the non-conservative repubs having some very serious discussions with the non-liberal dems, and realizing they have a ton of common ground, both amongst themselves and with a huge swath of the population of this country. I'm looking for a starting point for a very viable, very serious, very groundbreaking, centrist third party. I think the conditions are ripe for it, if only the political players will realize what they could accomplish if they went down the road I outline above. To quote one of my favorite rock stars and songwriters of all-time -- you may say I'm a dreamer, but [hopefully] I'm not the only one. I'm very encouraged by a lot of what I'm seeing out of the non-extreme-positioned politicians and pundits nationwide these days.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/27832.html
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/27844.html

Were University of Kansas Jayhawk Fans Behind the Obama Hammer & Sickle Billboard in Kansas City?

After all, KU fans have previously shown the high level of obsession necessary to drive a group to spend money on billboards that taunt people they don't like (second pic above). So I suspect the Jayhawks! But in all seriousness: The far right needs to take a chill pill. It is actually possible to criticize Obama & The Dems (as I do frequently) without inserting communist or other vile imagery/rhetoric. It is actually possible. And it's also advisable. Because when you resort to the sort of silliness on display in the current billboard, any merit and bona fide substance that may exist in your message is completely lost. And not that you would care about this, far right, but as an Independent, I do: When you engage in this kind of foolishness, you only provide the far left with ammunition in its effort to paint everyone who disagrees with it as an extremist. And especially for that, shame on whomever it was that bought this billboard (and I still suspect the Jayhawks).

http://www.kctv5.com/news/21176602/detail.html

What A Guy!

David Letterman today reveals on his show that he's had multiple sexual relationships with show employees, and then he tries to play himself off as the victim since one of those employees tried (allegedly) to extort money from him. I can recall one of Letterman's old catch phrases from back in the day (when he used to be funny, cutting-edge, and without all the far left bitterness and anger) -- "Phone the neighbors, wake the kids!" Well, these days, he should probably change it to "Leave the neighbors alone, and hide the kids!", because this dude is a slimeball. Folks, he is the TOP BOSS on this show -- since it is HIS SHOW -- meaning that when he's going around sleeping with employees, he's sleeping with underlings, i.e. employees over whom he's the boss. That would appear to be textbook sexual harrassment. Lord only knows how many employees this slime has hit on who were not interested in sleeping with him. "Victim"? Good one, Letterman. More like predator, you piece of slime. How sad what you have become. I used to love ya in high school, back in the day. Now, you just make me sick.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33131361/ns/entertainment-celebrities/

If You Have a Problem, If No One Else Can Help, And If You Can Find Them...

I just saw today that filming is now underway on the New A-Team movie (first pic above), of course based on the popular TV series from the early-to-mid-1980's. Previously, about the only thing I'd heard about this was that a movie was in the works and that Bradley Cooper (most recently in The Hangover) would play the Faceman character. The below link has some great photos from the initial filming. I'm intrigued by UFC fighter Rampage Jackson as Mr. T's character, Bosco "B.A." ("Bad Attitude") Baracus. He may be perfect for that role. I think Cooper should make a great Face. Liam Neeson as Hannibal? Can he get "on the jazz" as well as George Peppard? We'll see, I guess. And I've never even heard of the Murdock guy (Sharto Copley). Looks like Jessica Biel as Amy Allen. Hopefully the movie will be well made and fun to watch. They certainly have some decent star power going in the cast. I'd assume that the plan is for a summer release next year, although the linked article doesn't say. Gotta love it when a plan comes together.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1217409/Pictured-Silver-haired-Liam-Neeson-commands-The-A-Team-new-look-cast-seen-time.html?ITO=1490

Consigliere?

I heard ultra-far-right conservative Michelle Malkin (pictured first above) on FoxNews tonight referring to one of Obama's Chicago cronies as Obama's "consigliere," which is of course a longstanding title in the American mafia for a mafia boss' personal adviser and confidant (see above pic from the original Godfather movie depicting Don Corleone's (Marlon Brando's) "Consigliere," Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall), interacting with his boss). OK, so how are such mindless, derogatory references, comparing democrats to mobsters, any different from the far left describing vocal opponents of their health care reform plan as "mobsters" last summer? Answer: No different. I sometimes think that I just largely fall on deaf ears because most people who read this space for some reason think that they have to chose a side between these two bullshit parties. Why? They are equally pathetic in the way they are both dominated by their radical extremes, meantime failing to represent the majority of this country in any way. And on a related note, I see this fool Alan Grayson (democratic US congressman from Florida) over the past day describing anyone who opposes the dems' health care reform plan (as I do) as supporting a "holocaust" in America. Do I really need go on here? Folks, free your minds, and free your inherent tendencies to think that have to side with either of these 2 parties, because you do not. Distrust them because they are deservant of our distrust. And keep your eyes on them always, because they are both constantly trying to slip something past the goalie. That's the best advice I can give tonight.

Postscript: Although Malkin may be a Deranged Right-Winger, I don't mean to take anything away from her -- She is indisputably hot, even if the above pic doesn't necessarily portray that aspect so well (BTW, is that pick really from 1992 -- looks much more recent?).

Three Times? Sick stuff.

Tonight on his FoxNews show, Sean Hannity aired three separate times the disgusting video of sub-human slime gang members beating a teenager to death in Chicago. It wasn't necessary to show this video once, let alone three times? Hannity's reason? To try to stick it to Obama, of course -- specifically, to question whether Obama should be pushing to bring the Olympics to a city where this sort of thing would take place (the very same angle the Drudge Report has taken the last 24 hours by posting the video on its site -- wow, how surprising). First, Hannity's argument is a stupid one. As if virtually every city doesn't have brutal murders and gang killings. Second, the video adds nothing to the substance of his point (not that there is much substance); instead, it's only calculated to play on passions and emotions to promote his far-right agenda -- sort of a Willie Horton moment. I personally found it quite distasteful and highly annoying, and Hannity ought to be ashamed of himself.

What's the Story Behind The Story on Obama's Olympics Trip?

Leaving aside the issue of whether Obama's trip to Copenhagen to lobby for an Olympics to be awarded to his beloved Chicago is truly the best use of his time (it's not) given such things as, oh I don't know, a war in Afghanistan currently lacking any dedicated or articulated plan but still piling up bodybags on an almost daily basis -- Leaving that little issue alone, I'm a bit intrigued by the whole trip because it would seem that Obama stands to lose a fair amount of face if he is not successful on this trip (accord: link below). I don't buy that Obama would take such a risk if his chances for success were truly up in the air. And so I wonder what Obama knows that we don't. I would bet (could be wrong, of course) that there is very little chance that Obama will not be successful in this endeavor.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27677.html

"I'm Blind But I'm Not Oblivious."

Great line today from embattled New York Governor David Paterson (democrat), who's being pressured by Obama & The Dems not to run for re-election in 2010 (link below). For a dem party that so revels in calling Sarah Palin a "quitter," they sure are quick to want to pressure Paterson (the country's first legally blind governor and one of the few African-Americans ever elected to a gubernatorial office) to do the same thing for which they chide Palin. But hypocrisy by either of these two parties is never much of a surprise and, besides, my focus here is on Paterson. I might not agree with most of Paterson's politics, but I credit him for sticking up to the White House (Paterson says he intends to run for re-election) and indicating that he's not just going to ride off into the sunset simply because Obama snaps his fingers. I admire the gumption.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/09/27/im-blind-but-im-not-oblivious-paterson-says/

Eating Their Own: "Liberals Seek to Defeat Democratic Congressman" For Being Too Centrist.

The linked story below details the efforts of liberal political action committee Accountability Now to bring about a defeat of non-liberal democratic congressman Jim Cooper of Tennessee. Folks, this is what the democratic party is all about. It is controlled by its dominant far left base, and to the liberals and "progressives" who inhabit that realm, there is no place in the world -- let alone in their party -- for anyone who is not also a liberal or "progressive." When you get down to brass tacks, dems are an intolerant, small tent party -- no more, no less.

Now, unfortunately, the republicans are no different. They are controlled by the far right and have little place in their party for non-conservatives. Just by way of one example: Free-thinking U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham, a republican, is very much loathed by conservatives, the same way free-thinking Joe Lieberman (an "independent democrat" who caucuses with Senate democrats) is completely despised by liberals.

In our political system, if you think for yourself and let your viewpoints come out where they may, thereby eschewing the blinded world view of political ideology, you are an outcast with no place in either of the two dominant parties. Problem is, about 40% of the country does not consider itself liberal or conservative -- a block as big or bigger than people who consider themselves liberal or conservative. And that 40% has no party that represents them, no serious candidate to vote for, and essentially no representation in our political system. They also run into all kinds of roadblocks if they even dare to try to express themselves, as we saw this past summer when vocal non-liberal/non-conservative folks concerned about Obama & The Dems health care reform plan were labeled nazis, right-wing extremists, brownshirts, racists, etc., by the far left-controlled democratic party.

In sum, both parties should be absolutely ashamed of themselves, because they do not represent a huge swath of this country. And that's a principle to which this space will be devoted 24-7, 365 days a year, until the cows come home.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/09/25/liberals-seek-to-defeat-democratic-congressman/

I've Heard of Debtors' Prison, But Government Health Insurance Hoosegaw?

As is being reported today on Politico.com (link below): Apparently in the developing Senate version of Obama & The Dems' health care reform bill, if you fail to purchase health insurance (the "public option" or otherwise) and can't pay the resulting fine that will be levied on your behind, then you could face jail time. Nice. I guess that's one way to accomplish universal health care coverage.

http://www.politico.com/livepulse/0909/Ensign_receives_handwritten_confirmation_.html?showall

Credit to Obama Twice in One Week?

I haven't seen the video or read very much about this yet, but on first blush Obama's demand today that Iran allow inspections of an apparent hidden Iranian nuclear plant strikes me as very presidential. Nice job, Obama.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/25/accuse-iran-building-secret-nuke-plant/

Missouri Governor Jay Nixon: The Deranged "Jaws" Mayor Reincarnated?

As previously discussed in this space, Missouri DNR officials for 4 weeks put the kibosh on releasing a report to the public showing unsafe E. coli levels in the Lake of the Ozarks around Memorial Day. They did so "because they were concerned about the impact it would have on tourism and the public" (first link below). The report was not made public until late June, thereby ensuring no effect on Lake tourism during the interim, and by the time the report was finally made public, the E. coli levels had returned to safe levels -- how convenient. And TODAY the revelation that Jay Nixon & Staff, despite their earlier representations that they did not know about any of this until late June, actually knew about this report the day after the MO DNR found out about it (i.e. in that last week of May) (second link below). So is Nixon the reincarnation of the demented mayor from Jaws who refused to take steps to make his waterways safe to the public (the Jaws mayor needed to close his beaches; Nixon needed to release the report) out of a concern that tourism would be hurt? Sure seems like it.

And as an aside, I've never cared a whole lot for Nixon. He's always reminded me of a dem version of Kit Bond -- A Missouri political fat-cat and career politician, just kind of hanging on forever without ever accomplishing much of anything remarkable except for perpetuating his own political longevity. I mean, the guy was Missouri AG for like 47 years (yes, I am exaggerating). I don't care too much for political fat-cats or career politicans. I say give them a reasonable amount of time to accomplish something in a particular office, and then it's time to move on. I've never understood how we embrace term limits only at the highest level of the federal and state executive branches, and rarely extend term limits to lower executive branch offices nor to the legislative branch (where it is particularly needed) . Term limits should be across the board. (Unless your name is Manuel Zelaya, of course, because our Administration supports his return to power in Honduras even despite the Hugo Chavez-influenced "I'm now President for life" mandate which he foisted on his people and which was responsible for Hondurans kicking his ass out the country).

http://independentrage.blogspot.com/search?q=deranged+mayor

http://www.kansascity.com/842/story/1466896.html

Postscript: Am I being a little hard on Nixon? After all, I've never thought he's a bad guy or anything. And I recall at least one thing on which I give him big kudos -- As AG he led the fight to prevent the old Boonville railroad bridge over the Missouri River from being torn down. I haven't exactly followed the day-to-day of Missouri state politics for a number of year now, but I additionally have little doubt that Nixon is infinitely more qualified to be Missouri Governor than the two fools who preceded him -- Blunt & Holden, who were the worst two Missouri Governors of my lifetime. Further, Nixon now is in an office that imposes term limits (2 terms), so maybe I am just being an overly Grumpy Gus tonight. Well, without any grumpiness, anger, or over-the-top rhetoric, just how boring would this blog be? [INSERT "you're right, a heck of a lot more boring than it already is" retort here].

What Lies Beneath?

I saw this fascinating story today (link below) about the underground culture of sewer dwellers below the Vegas strip. I've heard of the "urban explorer" culture that seeks to explore sewer drains and city sewer systems, but I hadn't before read about an entire community that actually lives in such places. Seems like a pretty sad state of affairs, although some of these folks do seem to be quite content with where they are.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/features/2651937/The-people-living-in-drains-below-Las-Vegas.html

Obama Hits the UN!!! (Puke.)

The constant apologizing for past American acts, without ever giving any specifics, strikes me as pure political cowardice. Hey Obama, if you want to run down our country in every single international appearance that you make (yes, I realize today was in New York, but you were in the UN), at least be man enough to cite to some examples of that which you speak. On some, I likely will agree, and on others, I won't. But point is, you continue to speak in superficial sweeping generalities, just like you did on the campaign trail, and just as you have for 8 months now as president. You and your party refuses to admit that the endgame of "health care reform" is a single payer system. You refuse to debate the merits of the very system that you seek -- i.e. a single payer system. You were quoted the other day saying you don't want to grow the size of the federal government, when in fact you want to grow it many times over. You were quoted yesterday as saying that you won't commit anymore troops to Afghanistan before you know what the plan is there, while meantime you have been sending more troops there throughout your presidency and nevermind that it's been your job as commander in chief to shape and control the plan in Afghanistan from Day 1 (which obviously you have never done). You have no specifics, no substance to speak of, on virtually any issue -- Frankly, sir, you are just another politician. What makes you dangerous is that you are the most radical president this country has ever seen. Brass tacks: I may like you personally, but I am not amongst those who were hoodwinked into voting for you (and I didn't vote for the Tired Old Man, McCain, either), and frankly, Sir, I think you have, thus far, been a terrible president, representing only a small minority of this country that espouses the far left-wing "progressive" viewpoint. That's not representative, and that's not presidential. Frankly, sir, it's pathetic.

Postscript: And for the record, the far right-wing dominated republican party can go **** itself too!!!!

A Tough Left-Wing Nut to Crack?

So let me get this straight, ACORN: You profess to apologize in recent days for your employees caught on tape doing such things as encouraging child prostitution. Then you fire those employees. And then you sue the people responsible for shedding light on those employees? (Link below). Talk about shooting the messenger. Talk about empty apologies and empty actions. What a truly pathetic, scandal-ridden organization ACORN is. Wait -- Maybe I should watch out that I don't get sued? Nah, since the truth is a defense in a court of law, I think I stand on pretty solid ground.

http://wjz.com/wireapnewsmd/APNewsBreak.ACORN.files.2.1203697.html

Random Thoughts: Obama in a George W Moment; and Clinton Just Being Clinton.

Two random items tonight:

1. This quote from Obama today (link below):

"We're not going to make a decision about any further troop deployments [in Afghanistan] until we know what exactly is our strategy, what are the tactics, how will troops be used."

That's funny, Obama, since you've been ratcheting up troop levels and spending in Afghanistan from Day 1. And so you say that you've been doing so without having any idea what our strategy is there? Why? And if you're in such a funk about the strategy, then why the troop escalation on your watch? Then why were you talking about troop increases during your campaign? And why as President of our country are you now only getting around after 8 months to questioning what the strategy is in Afghanistan? I thought you were the Commander in Chief? Shouldn't you have known that strategy and helped to shape it from Day 1? Quite frankly, Mr. President, do you have any freakin' idea what's even going on in Afghanistan? Your quoted statement above smacks squarely of a moron holding himself out as the President of a great country. Reminds me very much of George W. Bush, in all honesty. Change We Can Believe In? Nah -- Just More of the Same!!! That's VERY pathetic stuff right there. And by the way, you will ONLY get commentary on such stupid remarks from an Independent like me. The right doesn't touch Afghanistan, because they started the conflict, and they generally like the idea of sending more troops there. And the left won't touch the issue, because they won't question their hero Obama no matter how out of his league he evinces on a daily basis.

2. I heard tonight a statement from Bill Clinton accusing the republican party of being taken over by its right-wing extreme at some in the more-recent past. I tried HARD to find a link to the exact quote, but came up empty -- but I know what I heard. And frankly, Clinton's exactly right on the pure substance of what he said -- the repubs are controlled by the far right and do not represent much of any of us in this country. But here's the outrage: Bill Clinton, or any other dem, accusing the repubs of permitting their extreme to take over the party! Oh my God! The ultra-far left completely controls the dems, and this slimey buffoon Clinton is out there casting stones at the repubs for having let the same thing occur with respect to their party! Folks, as I often say in this space, these are TWO political parties that control our political system and who are controlled by their extremes. They do not represent much of any of us. Eschew them. Criticize them. Keep a close eye on them at all times. Because neither one of them is to be trusted any farther than you could toss KU's Head Football Coach Mark Mangino in a shot put contest! Really though.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2009/09/obama_afghanistan_doubts_mean.html

Hilarious Blame Game.

First David Paterson, the embattled democratic Governor of New York, tried to blame all of Obama's woes on racism a few weeks back. Now Paterson is blaming all of his own woes on Obama (story link below). Is there anything or anybody that this guy won't blame for something? He oughta just stick with the 'ol standby -- Blame Bush -- whenever he needs someone to blame because at least then he would appear to be a bit more consistent.

But looking at Paterson's side of things, conversely, can we really "blame" him for lashing out at Obama? Obama has more or less thrown this guy under the bus with all this backdoor-channel pressure for Paterson not to seek re-election in 2010. This strikes me as pretty sensitive stuff that Obama is wading into, since Paterson is one of only a few African-American governors in the country (and in American history, to be quite frank), and here you have Obama wanting Paterson to ride off into the sunset so that a white dude (Andrew Cuomo) can be the democratic nominee for New York governor. Sounds like a big hornet's nest that I wouldn't want to be anywhere near if I was Obama.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0909/Paterson_blames_weak_Obama_record_for_friction.html

"I have no interest in increasing the size of government."

That's a quote I heard tonight from Obama on one of his myriad Sunday morning television appearances (this particular one was CBS -- first link below). Here's the thing with me, and it's real simple: If you want to debate the merits of what you seek to achieve, that's great. Let's do it. But do not misrepresent to me the precise thing it is that I know you want to achieve. This smacks of the whole "moderate" act that hoodwinked so many Independents and moderate dems and repubs into voting for this guy last year. Obama: You want MUCH bigger government. So embrace it and tell me why! You WANT a single payer system, so admit that is the goal of your health care plan, and then let's debate the merits of it! But STOP telling the American people that the warm fuzzy feeling they are experiencing on their backs these days from Obama & The Dems is just a warm September rain! You have no interest in increasing the size of government? Good grief...

And kudos to George Stephanopoulos for being about the one interviewer yesterday to actually ask a few tough questions of Obama. His question on whether a component of Obama's health care reform plan was actually a tax garnered quite the hilarious retort from Obama, which I found to be very condescending to Stephanopoulos, very arrogrant, and very elitist (video at second link below). I didn't previously refer to Obama as "His Majesty" for nothing, folks, although I did cease using that moniker as it just continued to strike me as a bit too Rush Slimebaugh-esque. But it wasn't used lightly, I can tell you that.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/20/ftn/main5324077.shtml

http://www.trentonian.com/articles/2009/09/21/opinion/doc4ab7b7e5684d1384571573.txt

He's Back...

Curb Your Enthusiasm's new season starts tonight on HBO (links to promo and story below). Tune in for the funniest television comedy (in my humble opinion) in the history of television (yes, even better than Seinfeld and All in the Family). The highlight of this upcoming season: The entire main cast from Seinfeld will be reuniting as a part of an ongoing storyline this season.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wng1ZJVSXaQ

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/ent/stories/DN-curb_0920gd.State.Edition1.4bd2aea.html