The archivists at the Library of Congress know well the ruddy face and tenacious mind of researcher Michael Hill.
If there's a lesson to be drawn from President Obama's lackluster performance in this year's first presidential debate, it's this: A whole lot can go wrong.
Mitt Romney's debate performance continued to wear well Thursday as President Obama's backers searched for answers to what went wrong with their candidate, who voters and pundits alike said lacked the magic that captivated the country in 2008.
Here we go again. Voters, pundits and political junkies will be glued to Wednesday night's presidential debate to see more than just a back-and-forth on national defense, the economy and other issues.
When explaining why President Obama has stuck by Joseph R. Biden for 3½ years of gaffes, overly exuberant flourishes and fumbles, political observers like to say the vice president is everything Mr. Obama is not: a garrulous, unscripted, yet seasoned political operator who loves to glad-hand and connect one on one.
The president is back on the campaign trail. What's striking is where he's going: Pennsylvania, Ohio, Iowa — places he won in 2008. Why? Simple. All the latest polls show he's losing … well, everyone.
The much-anticipated operation was a brilliant success, but the patient died. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. is a clever surgeon, and he left a bloody mess to prove it. He's in the Mediterranean now, on the island of Malta, lecturing to European lawyers about how to "grow" in office, basking in the applause of fans of the welfare state.
Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida and other ambitious Republicans eyeing a possible invitation to be Mitt Romney's running mate might want to keep 1920 in mind. That was the last time the losing vice presidential nominee was a politician skillful and lucky enough to eventually become president.
It's seven months before their convention in Tampa, a lifetime in today's five-minute-news-cycle politics. But the split decisions in the first three primaries and the personal attacks in the televised debates beg the question: Are Republicans divided into so many parts they are about to engage in 1964-style "politicide"?