Media Matters does the heavy lifting and announces the worst offenders of misinformation by the media. Top categories: Those who unfairly blasted Hillary, Obama, the undocumented and Muslims.

Top Offenders: You know who they are, no surprises here. But the examples demonstrating the extent of their naked hatred may surprise you.

In a separate MM article, Jamison Foser lambasts Chris Matthews and Tucker Carlson over their feigned indignation about Bob Kerrey's use of Barack Obama's middle name. Turns out, both of them used his middle name well before Kerrey.

The first mention of the name as a political matter that we can find in the Nexis database comes from MSNBC's Chris Matthews. On the November 7 [2006] edition of Hardball -- three full weeks before Rogers' comment -- Matthews said: "You know, it's interesting that Barack Obama's middle name is Hussein. That will be interesting down the road, won't it?" Media Matters noted Matthews' comments the next day.

....A few weeks after Matthews' reference to Obama's middle name -- and a day before Rogers first used it -- Tucker Carlson used his MSNBC television program to call guest Bill Press "a true member of the Barack Hussein Obama fan club."

Foser continues on to who first brought up the topic of Obama's cocaine use:

More...

I just received notification that TalkLeft has received press credentials to cover the Iowa Caucuses. Credentials are required for admission to the Polk County Convention Complex, which will be open 24/7 from December 30 to January 4.

On January 3, caucus night, the convention center will be the location of the “big board.” This is where real-time numbers from both parties will be reported.

An assigned workspace at the convention center, including an electrical outlet and internet connection, is $200.00. Since media with assigned workspace will have priority to be in the "big board" room on caucus night, I just faxed in my $200.

So, my New Year's Eve will be spent in Des Moines. I'll be in Iowa, along with Jane of Firedogake and other bloggers, from Dec. 31 to Jan. 4. I hope you'll log on to read us.

This is the month that many bloggers balance the ledger sheet and reassess their time commitment to blogging. There's no question blogging is a financial drain -- time that could be spent making real money at our day jobs. Whether blogging is an act of love or a means of keeping one's sanity in these uncertain times, we could all use a little boost.

So, as you're putting a little something in the pocket of your newspaper carrier, housekeeper, doorman, shoe shiner, hairstylist, secretary, personal trainer, whomever.....please consider a thank you gesture to the bloggers whose sites you read regularly throughout the year. A little holiday giving goes a long way.

If you're short on cash, you can contribute by voting for TalkLeft in the ABA Journal Awards. We're in the "politics for sport" category. It's free, does not require logging in or identification and takes 5 seconds or less. Voting ends January 2, 2008.

USA Today has released a new poll of New Hampshire voters. It's a toss-up between Hillary and Obama, but there is a 5% margin of error rate. Even so, there are a few differentiating clues.

• Who are you leaning towards? Note, this was asked of Democrats and those leaning towards a Democrat but without a preference.

Hillary 32%, Obama 32%, Edwards 18%

• How certain are you to vote for that person?(Note, this was asked of Democrat voters not those leaning without a preference)

Hillary 20%, Obama 18%, Edwards 10%

The terrific Mark Schmitt writes a great piece on what is clearly the central issue of the Democratic campaign - the competing theories of change the three top tier candidates are offering. I am on record as disagreeing with Obama's theory of change. Schmitt here mounts an articulate defense of the Obama theory:

let's take a slightly different angle on the charge that Obama is "naïve" about power and partisanship. Suppose you were as non-naïve about it as I am -- but your job wasn't writing about politics, it was running for president? What should you do? In that case, your responsibility is not merely to describe the situation exactly, but to find a way to subvert it. In other words, perhaps we are being too literal in believing that "hope" and bipartisanship are things that Obama naively believes are present and possible, when in fact they are a tactic, a method of subverting and breaking the unified conservative power structure. Claiming the mantle of bipartisanship and national unity, and defining the problem to be solved (e.g. universal health care) puts one in a position of strength, and Republicans would defect from that position at their own risk. The public, and younger voters in particular, seem to want an end to partisanship and conflictual politics, and an administration that came in with that premise (an option not available to Senator Clinton), would have a tremendous advantage, at least for a moment.

As I have written ad nauseum, I believe it fails as a tactic. But Schmitt's argument is well worth reading. On the flip a bit more from Schmitt.

The very important Iowa caucuses are 13 days away which will mark the mad dash to nominate the candidates. Chris Cilizza has a nice rundown.

If you believe in polls, RCP and pollster.com do a good job of summarizing the polling. In Iowa, the polls show Obama in a virtual tie with Clinton with Edwards further back. However, polling Iowa is especially tricky because of the caucusing format and the 15% thresholds per precinct (an incredibly undemocratic provision by the way.) Because of all this, it is safe to say that no one really knows who is going to win Iowa among the top 3. I think Obama wins narrowly with Clinton 2nd and a fading Edwards 3rd. It becomes a new ballgame after that with a real race between Clinton and Obama. New Hampshire will be wild.

Among the GOP, Huckabee has moved into a solid lead in Iowa and since there are no 15% thresholds for the GOP in Iowa, this seems to be a likely result. But Huckabee has money problems and a lot of resistance from the Establishment GOP. Like Cilizza, I still see Romney as the favorite for the GOP nomination. More.

CBS' Harry Smith interviews Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in Iowa, trying to get them to reveal something of their personalities with questions like what's on your iPod, what's the first thing you do when you wake up, last thing before going to sleep, what's the last movie you saw, etc.

Here's the video. See for yourselves, they sure are different.

CBS notes in a companion article that Obama has a hard time showing emotion and empathy, even in a pre-arranged setting, suggesting he struggles "to feel the pain." It doesn't come naturally to him. Example: His campaign invited six voters in New Hampshire with hard luck stories to meet the candidate. Here's what happened. [More....]

The New York Times yesterday featured an article about Barack Obama's voting record as an Illinois Senator -- and his penchant for voting "present" instead of yes or no on controversial bills.

Why does someone vote "present" instead of yes or no?

Because it takes affirmative votes to pass legislation in the Illinois Senate, a "present" vote is tantamount to a "no" vote. A "present" vote is generally used to provide political cover for legislators who don't want to be on the record against a bill that they oppose.

When I asked the Obama campaign about those votes, they explained that in some cases, the Senator was uncomfortable with only certain parts of the bill, while in other cases, the bills were attempts by Republicans simply to score points.

I think he voted present to dodge the political bullet a "no" vote would have caused with some constituents or organizations. If he believed a bill was bad, like the bill banning partial birth abortion, why not take a stand and vote it down?

For example, in 1997, Obama voted "present" on two bills (HB 382 and SB 230) that would have prohibited a procedure often referred to as partial birth abortion....

....In his book, the "Audacity of Hope," on page 132, Obama explained his problems with the "born alive" bills, specifically arguing that they would overturn Roe v. Wade. But he failed to mention that he only felt strongly enough to vote "present" on the bills instead of "no."

This leads to the question, will he have the courage of his convictions as President? Unlike in Illinois, his options if elected to the Oval Office will be "yes" or "no." Can we count on Obama to take a stand?

More...

When we last checked in with Vincent Margera, better known as MTV's "Don Vito," he was on a suicide watch at the Jefferson County, Colorado jail following his conviction for groping two teenage girls at an autograph signing event.

When the verdict was announced, Margera, 51, fell on the floor, saying: “Just kill me now. I can’t spend my (expletive) life in prison. I didn’t do anything.”

Magera was facing from 2 to 6 years to life on the charges. Judge MJ Menendez today sentenced him to 10 years probation, during which he can't appear on television or act as his Don Vito character.

More....

Three current and former Duke lacrosse players who were not among those indicted in the failed criminal case, have filed a civil lawsuit against 45 defendants, including Duke University, DA Mike Nifong, the Durham police department and several individual officers, the Duke medical center and the SANE nurses, the DNA lab and its owner in a 400 page complaint filed in federal court.

The introductory paragraph of the complaint states:

This action arises out of a combination of actors and entities that, from time to time, we refer to herein as the Consortium. The Consortium included a world renowned University, its faculty, its police department, its medical center, and a SANE nurse; a city, its city manager, its police department, and a rogue officer; a private DNA lab, its lab director, and its owner; and a prosecutor who was disbarred, and subsequently convicted of contempt and incarcerated for certain of his acts in furtherance of the Consortium’s conspiracy.

The complaint alleges a conspiracy to railroad the team members:

Plaintiffs’ claims arise out of the Consortium’s conspiracy to railroad 47 Duke University students as either principals or accomplices based upon the transparently false claim of rape, sexual offense, and kidnapping made by a clinically unreliable accuser on March 14, 2006. The conspiracy was facilitated by overt acts and by the refusal to intervene on the part of those in the Consortium who knew of the wrongs conspired to be done to Plaintiffs, had the power and authority to intervene, and refused to do so.

The complaint is available in three parts, here, here and here (pdf.)

More...

I always thought that the Obama (and Edwards) moralizing on lobbyists was utter nonsense. Now we see just how nonsensical it was for Obama:

Three political aides on Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) payroll were registered lobbyists for dozens of corporations, including Wal-Mart, British Petroleum and Lockheed Martin, while they received payments from his campaign, according to public documents. The presence of political operatives with long client lists on Obama’s campaign contrasts with his long-held stand of campaigning against the influence of special interests. Obama has even refused to accept contributions from lobbyists or political action committees (PACs).

Of course Obama accepted money from lobbyists, but not from current lobbyists (just past and future lobbyists) and the clients of current lobbyists. It was all hypocritical nonsense. And this makes it absolutely clear it was nonsense.

This is a bad development for Obama.

Two former South Carolina prison executioners have sued the state's top prison officials in federal court alleging they were forced to conduct executions even though they were not trained to do so. They also claim that had they refused, they would have lost their jobs or been demoted.

Neither man was trained or prepared for using the electric chair, the suits allege, "with its shocking smell and scene of agony." And neither man was offered counseling, the suits allege.

"Although these executions were barbaric, gruesome and repulsive to the plaintiff, he continued to perform them under the implied threat by the defendant Ward that such service was necessary if he was to continue to act as team leader and to receive the salary supplement and other benefits of his major’s position," Baxley’s suit alleges.

You can read their complaints here and here (pdf.)