I suppose this is another thing that’s “messy.”
Perhaps when Maliki had the ear of the United States Congress he should have made a point about having a say regarding U.S. military actions in “his” country. But I guess it was easier to go with the approved speech instead.

The Connecticut primary, that is. I realize that this campaign takes place close to the big media markets and that there are only a few competitive races during the primaries. So you expect to hear about it. But good grief, some blogs have been playing it up as if the fate of the U.S. Senate hangs in the balance. Like him or not, the Senate clearly has far bigger issues than Joe Liberman.
That being said, I see how some of these bloggers have been frustrated by the media coverage. Here is David Gergen last night on CNN:

But my larger concern here is that the disappearance of the Senators, with Senators like Bill Bradley and Alan Simpson and Jack Danforth, and, you know, so many others, as they’ve left the Senate, it’s been much, much harder to put together bipartisan compromises.
And if the message out of Connecticut is, you work with the other side too closely and we’re going to burn you. Just like Lincoln Chaffey, if you work too closely with the Democrats, we’re going to burn you. That means that people are going to be afraid to be in the center. And it really, I think, provides a recipe for a very divided, very polarized and very dysfunctional politics.

Sure, a point can be made about the death of moderates in Congress. But this isn’t the case to make that argument. If Liberman loses, it won’t be because he crossed party lines to compromise on a spending bill or because he joined the “Gang of 14.” It will be because he embraced the biggest screw up of the Bush presidency (the Iraq War) and continues to deny the disaster on the ground there.
This isn’t about bipartisanship; it’s about whether or not Liberman is in touch with reality.

Nations that have elections don’t have civil wars.

A news site has 20 fuel-saving tips. It includes the standard ones, but also a few you don’t hear as frequently:
–Finding your vehicles “sweet spot.” I realize that vehicles have different efficient speed “sweet spots,” but I didn’t realize it might be as fast as 85 m.p. h. I have no idea what it is for my car, because I typically mix in significant city driving on a typical tank. Maybe I should be driving faster.
–Parking in the shade to avoid gasoline evaporation.
–Wait to get gas until the tank is almost empty–less weight to haul around.
–Buy gas on Wednesdays: statistically the cheapest day of the week.
I was amused by the “Don’t stop” tip. It’s a good one, one that I often do. But I was kind of surprised by the way they present it; it’s as if they are encouraging people to roll through stop signs.
UPDATE: The aforementioned rolling stop slide make Keith Olbermann’s Worse Person of the World!

Is this part of the re-election agenda?

Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen wants the state to do a better job at preparing students for careers at Wal-Mart. But he’s not talking about stocking shelves or checking out customers at the retail giant.
Instead, Bredesen wants to tailor community college programs to offer courses on retail management.
. . .
While no formal arrangement has been struck, Bredesen and Wal-Mart officials agreed to work on developing a curriculum.
Bredesen told The Associated Press he would consider an arrangement where community colleges teach Wal-Mart-specific skills, if the company would agree to guarantee jobs for graduates with good grades.

It’s great to provide students with skills employers want. But I’m curious not only how many jobs this would impact, but also how much middle management Wal-Mart jobs actually pay? Does this make sense from an public cost/benefit standpoint?