We watched the McLaughlin Group this evening. I didn't think it was that good. But there were some moments worth remembering. Pat Buchanan made Mort Zuckerman uncomfortable, (as well he should be made repeatedly) by talking about the properties that they owned. Mort Zuckerman is very rich, but he likes to pretend he isn't, or maybe he just isn't comfortable with the fact that the public knows that he is very wealthy. Zuckerman didn't like Buchanan talking about him owning properties, although he did basically acknowledge it.

I have to say, that I grew up with the notion that McLaughlin himself was pretty conservative, and that his show took a conservative slant. I always had thought that and I think that it wasn't inaccurate in those years. But in the last several years, he seemed to be developing a more open mind. Lately, however, he's going back to his core. He's really almost giddy, although he tries to hide it, at the prospects of the republicans knocking Obama out of power. Tonight he agreed with Zuckerman, who was the one out of four panelists who said that the republicans would take the senate. The rest said no. And I think a fair analysis of some of these positions that McLaughlin himself has taken on his shows, which are well documented, and I do praise him for that, show that he hasn't always been right. And when he's wrong, he's often wrong by being too far right.

Again, Buchanan agreed with Clift that the republicans are slipping. It seems so obvious to me that the republicans peaked too soon. When I hear these commentators talk about how excited the republicans are about voting, and the democrats aren't, it makes me think, "that was weeks ago, but it's old news now." That's equivalent to peaking too soon. A lot of these mainstream pundits don't want to report that. They have been reporting for so long that the republicans are going to swamp the democrats, that it better happen or their credibility is on the line.

And then there was an interesting discussion on "Comment on Kentucky" about, as they called it "the ad." That's the Conway "aquabuddah" ad. As I've already written, the Paul campaign is responsible for some really crummy ads against Conway. No doubt, politics is dirty. I think Paul is outraged because Conway is more dirty than he is, and he thought that the big money could buy the race for him and he could stay unscathed. But Conway is too tough for that to happen, and Paul resents it. He resents it because he believes he is priviledged. I mean, that's the sense I get from the whole thing. But he can't say that, so he creates this faux outrage, which he hopes gives him an excuse for skipping the last debate.

But if you listened to any of the debates between Paul and Conway, it becomes obvious right away that Conway is the policy wonk. The guy has an incredible amount of knowledge in his brain about what is going on with government and what to do. Paul doesn't have a clue and can't respond at all to a lot of what Conway says. That's why he doesn't want to appear on KET, because that is literally the one statewide forum there is, and he is going to look really bad if he goes against Conway, because Conway won't back down on "the ad" and Paul doesn't have all the details to respond.

It's going to be really interesting to see what happens in the Kentucky senate race. I don't know if it is a bellweather or not, but it is minority leader McConnel's home state, and if he can't hold a republican seat there, he's in more trouble that most people realize.

And speaking of McConnell, it's so ironic that he going around criticizing the stimulus, when he was first in line with his hand out getting it, even in counties that strongly rejected Obama in the election. He's very much a hypocrite in that regard. So I hope the electorate gives him a little bit of a black eye. Politically, he deserves it.