OK, this is... funny, in a Carl-Rove-is-insane kind of way.

From NPR:

MR. SIEGEL: We're in the home stretch, though. And many might consider you on the optimistic end of >realism about --

MR. ROVE: Not that you would be exhibiting a bias or anything like that. You're just making a comment.

MR. SIEGEL: I'm looking at all the same polls that you're looking at every day.

MR. ROVE: No you're not. No you're not!

MR. SIEGEL: No, I'm not --

MR. ROVE: I'm looking at 68 polls a week. You may be looking at four or five public polls a week that talk >about attitudes nationally, but that do not impact the outcome --

MR. SIEGEL: -- name races between -- certainly Senate race

MR. ROVE: Well, like the polls today showing that Corker's ahead in Tennessee; or the race -- polls >showing that Allen is pulling away in the Virginia Senate race.

MR. SIEGEL: Leading Webb in Virginia. Yes.

MR. ROVE: Yeah, exactly.

MR. SIEGEL: Have you seen the DeWine race and the Santorum race and -- I don't want to --

MR. ROVE: Yeah. Look, I'm looking at all these Robert and adding them up. And I add up to a Republican Senate and a Republican House. You may end up with a different math, but you're entitled to your math. I'm entitled to "the" math.

MR. SIEGEL: I don't know if you're entitled to a different math, but you're certainly entitled to --

MR. ROVE: I said you were entitled to yours.

So apparantly math has a liberal bias.

Numbers - it's all a liberal conspiracy!

...I'm not really sure why that's a less objectionable generalization than any of the ones in the article.

Clearly, because it's mine! Really, because I was one of those people, and it was shocking to me how many of my peers thought that the rest of DC was only scary and at the same time easily ignored. Obviously, it's not true of everyone, but I actually believe I have a lower threshold to meet here than someone writing something for publication.

We could all start generalizing about how people who live in LA are all a buncha phonies.

No, no, just people in the entertainment industry.

I heard that the other morning. I tried really hard to forget it because every time I remember it, my eyes start rolling and it was bad enough chasing them around the bathroom floor the first time I heard it.

Would've been funny, if it weren't, well, real.

(that was to the NPR thing)

I just love how the current administration keeps trying to rewrite reality like it's a dictionary in Alphaville.

Top Chef:

I'm SO glad my Top Chef is back! And they're bringing the fun again. (I didn't catch the season opener until last night, I was working evenings the previous week)

At the end, when the judges called in the winning team, and the losers started speculating about what it meant, I was very amused when Marcel actually said "I will be very surprised if this doesn't go the way I expect." All I could think was "Maybe if you spent a little less time thinking about how cool you are, you wouldn't spend so much time being surprised. Surprised is not a good way to spend a competition. Take a lesson from this." The look on his face when they heard the winners cheering in the next room was priceless.

Oh, you know what else? There are many generalizations I don't find objectionable. There are many things that are generally true about many groups of people. It's in defining the group that I think many people go wrong.

There are many generalizations I don't find objectionable. There are many things that are generally true about many groups of people. It's in defining the group that I think many people go wrong.

Actually, I'm right there with you, Jesse. I think the other place people go wrong with generalizations is in thinking the generalization always applies in every individual case.

So apparantly math has a liberal bias.

Reality has a liberal bias.

So apparantly math has a liberal bias.

and a homosexual agenda too!