Please forgive the stroll down nostalgia lane, but remember the good old days, when you could count on liberals to cheer for a nuclear freeze and for the Sandinistas and boo Ed Meese and nuclear energy?

The first three foundations have been overtaken by events.  But what about the fourth pillar — hatred of nuclear power?  Like the Berlin Wall, it’s crumbling to the ground.

Here’s Barack Obama in Salon today:

I think that with nuclear power, we have got to see if there are ways for us to store the radioactive material in a safe, environmentally sound way, and if we can do that and deal with the some of the safety and security issues, [nuclear power] is something that we should look at.

Liberals looking at nuclear power?  Is nothing sacred anymore?  What’s next, cutting capital gains taxes?  Bringing balance to public television?  I am depressed.

Where does CNN’s Dana Bash get inspiration for metaphors?

Apparently from some temporarily trendy sitcom from the mid to late ’90s.

Check out Sunday’s “Late Edition”:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

EDWARDS: The American people deserve to know that their presidency is not for sale, the Lincoln Bedroom is not for rent, and lobbyist money can no longer influence policy in the House or the Senate. The problem with nostalgia is, what we tend to do, is you only remember what you like — right? — and you forget the parts that you didn’t like.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: All right. Now, that was widely seen as a slap at Hillary Clinton, the reference to the Lincoln Bedroom, for example, not for sale. He’s now insisting it wasn’t a slap at Hillary Clinton, but anybody listening to it on Thursday, you couldn’t help but draw that conclusion.

BASH: Oh, there’s no question. Do you remember the “Seinfeld” episode, “Bizarro World”?  That’s pretty much what this was.

It was pretty much like a Seinfeld episode?  Talk about bizarro.  Let’s recall Bash’s March 2007 reporting on Chuck Hagel:

An advisory went out with big fonts saying that the senator was going to talk about his future plans here and there was informed speculation that he would, in fact, dip his toe, at least, into the presidential waters.

In the end, a local Nebraska reporter, Wolf, came up to our photographer and said it was a “Seinfeld” press conference about nothing.

We’d be much more impressed if Dana could work in a reference to “Bob Patterson.”

Happened to catch this at our favorite guilty-pleasure-blog-reading site, Jessica Cutler Online:

What to wear to your bankruptcy hearing.

The black crepe dress by Libertine for Target is really perfect.

Here’s a political trivia question I’ve never before contemplated:  What’s the most expensive congressional trip in the past seven years?

According to the September issue of Washingtonian magazine, it’s former Virginia Rep. Tom Bliley’s 2000 London trip, sponsored by Brown & Williamson Tobacco, which cost an average $6,000 a day.

But possibly more interesting and fascinating is the trip that ranks number two.  It’s Rep. Bob Wexler’s (D-FL) fact-finding trip to Kazakhstan, costing $29,951.  No details in the mag about who sponsored it or when it was.  But the concept itself is quite peculiar.

$30K to go to Kazakhstan? Is Almaty that pricey?  And if Borat has taught us anything, it’s that the Kazakhs don’t care much for Jews.  Maybe Wexler went over there to ensure that no more Jews would be thrown down the well.

The Washington Post story on Hillary Clinton’s rivals attacking her on terrorism (”Clinton’s Democratic Rivals Denounce Terrorism Remark”) has us asking: Which rivals?

The answer: Primarily liberal bloggers.

It’s another concrete example of the major mainstream media taking its cues — and reporting — from the blogosphere.

Here’s the critical — and lengthly — section:

Clinton took an immediate hit online. Left-leaning bloggers accused her of conceding a key Republican talking point without a fight and blithely accepting a Karl Rove-like framing of the terrorism debate. A Democratic candidate, bloggers argued, should be able to confidently make the case that another terrorist attack might suggest mistakes in the approach to fighting terrorism embraced by President Bush and the GOP, instead of accepting the assumption that any threat to national security causes voters to flock to Republicans. Since Republicans are claiming an edge because there have not been attacks since Sept. 11, 2001, it seems illogical, bloggers argued, to say that the GOP would gain if there were another attack.

Tough to imagine how these political stories get written anymore without blogs.

In a poll-driven environment even the smallest changes get noticed.

That’s why folks who want to make the case that Americans these days hate Congress more than they hate President Bush have a bit more ammunition now.

From American Research Group polling, compare …

July’s President Bush disapproval: 71%  (approval is 25%)
with August President Bush disapproval:  65%  (approval is 28%).

It may be small, it may be one poll, it may be a quirk, it may be any number of cautionary caveats — but one thing it’s not is Congressional disapproval.  That’s the lowest.

First, our last trivia answer.

And the winning question supplied by rcgeist: What is the Army’s new Class A dress uniform?

More background here.

Now, the next Extreme Trivia answer:

What’s the question?

Want some potent marijuana chatter?  Then tune in C-SPAN’s “Washington Journal.”
Yesterday we relayed Fishbowl’s coverage of a marijuana/Doritos conversation with Steve Scully.

The exchange made us uncontrollably giggly, then we get hungry and ate a bottle of mustard.
Today on C-SPAN, however, we experienced the harsh realities of the darker side of marijuana use — when The Man throws you in jail.

The “Washington Journal” call-in segment on whether George Wallace shooter Arthur Bremer should be released from prison brought this exchange:

San Diego caller: No, i do not believe that they should let Arthur Bremer be released.  Because, you know, he wanted to kill some people just for notoriety.  If they release him, if he tries to kill somebody else, then his notoriety is even going to go higher.
Brian Lamb: So, why do you think they’re even thinking about it?
Caller: I think they’re thinking about it because he’s done an awful long time in prison.  Time is really tough.  I had to do some time in prison myself before.
Lamb: How long?
Caller: Three years.
Lamb: When?
Caller: From 1967 to 1970.
Host: And how long was your sentence?
Caller: My sentence, I had two sentences of five to life that ran concurrently.  And so, what that did was, it forced my minimum eligible parole date to three years on one five to life.  I could have got out in 18 months.  But, because I had two of them running together, that raised my minimal eligible oop parole date to three years.
Lamb: What was the crime?
Caller: The crime was sales of marijuana.  But, at the time, they were trying to take me and flip me and make me a snitch.  I wouldn’t flip.  And so, what they did, is they just pressed the charge on me extra hard.
Lamb: They gave you five to life for selling marijuana?
Caller: Two five-to-lifes.

Now, if only C-SPAN could still book this guy…

On tonight’s NBC Nightly News report about Iraq, Brian Williams cited LBJ’s famous quote about losing Walter Cronkite.

Last year Cronkite gave this context to Esquire magazine:

When President Johnson heard my report that said we should get out of Vietnam, he snapped off the TV and said, “If I’ve lost Cronkite, I’ve lost Middle America.” A couple of days after that, Johnson said he was not going to run for reelection. Later on, somebody made the joke that Johnson had gotten it wrong. What he should have said was, “If I’ve lost Cronkite, I’ve lost all of America.” To be honest, I was rather amazed that my reporting from Vietnam had such an effect on history.

Curious to see the left go the lazy route and cite “Apocalypse Now” in discussing President Bush’s Iraq-Vietnam speech at the VFW.

• Air America: “Apocalypse Now: Bush Says Iraq IS Vietnam”
• Democratic Underground:  “Apocalypse … Now? Press Explores Bush’s Iraq/Vietnam Link”

Normally we’d be giddy about any “Apocalypse Now” reference.  But Bush was talking about post-war Vietnam, and the movie is very much a wartime portrayal.  If you’re looking for a movie reference about the perils of letting your guard down and falling victim to evildoers during time of conflict, perhaps “Red Dawn” might be more appropriate.

Of course, there’s always the universally applicable lesson “Apocalypse Now” teaches us: Never get out of the boat.