He goes on to say that Obama runs a “secular, socialist machine.”

The obvious question is: who held the title of “Most radical President” before him? So, whatever you think of Obama aside; who, in your opinion, is the most radical President ever?

I have my answer, but I’m going to wait awhile to see what other people think before I post it.

On Friday, every news organization was whipped up over Sarah Palin’s speech for John McCain in his primary battle against J.D. Hayworth. The liberals could use it as an excuse to replay Palin’s worst mistakes from the 2008 campaign. The conservatives could use it to talk about their most charismatic and exciting leader. Everywhere, it was big news.

Except I couldn’t find anything about it on Drudge Report. If any of you saw anything about it there, please say so in the comments, but I couldn’t see anything about it all afternoon.

Oddly, Drudge has had several ads for J.D. Hayworth at the top of his page for quite some time now.

I was bored yesterday, so I clicked the “Next Blog” button at the top of the main page to see where I’d go. I kept clicking through random blogs for a bit, and I was surprised to see how many had a post that read something like “I’m sick of blogging. I quit.” or “I’m too busy. I quit. This blog is finished.”

I can understand not wanting to blog, or being too busy, but why go and say you’re not going to do it anymore? Just do what I did: I blogged a little last March, lost interest, didn’t blog, forgot about the whole thing, got bored one day in December, remembered blog’s existence, and came back.

I assume Blogger will delete your blog eventually if you don’t use it, but apparently it takes them a long time. Seriously; why say “I quit”?

The more I think about this charisma issue, the more it’s confusing me. Like I said in my last post, it seems to allow a charismatic person the ability to get elected easily, but it does not grant that person powers of persuasion as such. This doesn’t really make sense to me; and perhaps it isn’t even accurate. But, in the past, I’ve noticed that politicians cannot use charisma to help another, non-charismatic politician.

I realized today that this may well extend to issues as well, meaning that a charismatic person can’t actually change peoples’ minds. But if he can’t do that, well, why does charisma seem so powerful? Why does it enable someone who has it to attract legions of loyal followers?

Thoughts?