Today's Blogs

A Prius Goes 100 MPH?

Bloggers snicker about Al Gore III’s arrest for speeding and drug possession, cheer the release of a BBC journalist in Gaza, and wonder in which of John Edwards’ “two Americas” he got a $1,250 haircut.

A Prius goes 100 mph? Al Gore III, the 24-year-old son of the former vice president, was arrested Wednesday while doing 100 mph in his Toyota Prius. Gore was carrying marijuana and a number of drugs (including Vicodin, Valium, and Xanax) for which he had no prescription. Bloggers marveled at the unexpected swiftness of the hybrid Prius.  

Nixguy at The Stump, AOL News’ election blog, writes: “What’s been giving this story real legs … is that Al Gore III was caught in a Prius going 100 mph. First, it appears that the Gore family believes in what Senior Gore is selling. A Toyota Prius is probably not the most ideal mode of locomotion for a twenty-something young man. But on the other hand, it was going 100 mph? Who knew hybrids could go that fast? A subtle piece of advertising for hybrid technology amongst a personal tragedy.” NotronWest at Sweet! echoes the surprise: “I guess I need to re-evaluate the purchase of my Volkswagen Passat. ’Prius: environmentally friendly and almost fast enough to get away from the police.’ Clyde at Recycled Sip speculates on the Prius’ new speed-demon reputation: “I suspect that the Prius will soon become the chase vehicle of choice in California. I look forward to seeing Prius car chases on Fox News in the very near future.”

Ed Morrissey at Captain’s Quarters cautions his fellow conservatives: “[I]t’s at the same level as the attacks on Jenna and Barbara Bush. We may dislike Al Gore’s policies and sanctimony, but that shouldn’t apply to his son. His misfortunes tell us nothing about his father’s policy or sanctimony, and as an adult, Al III answers for himself. Attacking Gore through his son amounts to a cheap shot.”

Rodger Thomas at Are We Lumberjacks? writes that it’s too bad Al Gore’s son will be missing the Live Earth concert: “What has to be the worst aspect of the whole blow-up: being in treatment during Dad’s Big Woodstock.”

Read more about Gore’s arrest.

Hamas plays politics: BBC reporter Alan Johnston was released Wednesday in the Gaza Strip after 114 days as a hostage. Hamas was influential in Johnston’s release and claimed their involvement as proof of their political legitimacy. Bloggers celebrated Johnston’s release and cast skeptical looks on Hamas’ motives.  

On the National Journal’s The Gate, Jane Roh sees Hamas’ action as a tiny positive step: “Hamas’ role in [the release] won’t change the U.S. and EU boycott of its government, but could open a path toward better standing in the world community. … One thing going for Hamas so far is that its strong-arm tactics not only helped convince the Islamist Army of Islam to release Johnston, they also seem to be successfully dampening violence in Gaza.”

Amrita at IndieQuill advises caution rather than an open embrace of Hamas: “Lest you think Hamas, like King Ashoka on the battlefield of his victory, has decided to trade in the gun for some prayer beads and a turtledove, you should know that they haven’t banned militias like the Army of Islam as they’re needed for ‘resistance’ against Israel—but they have decreed that there will be no more kidnapping of journalists.” 

Larkin at the lefty Wizbang Blue finds Hamas’ benevolence embarrassing to the United States:“Hamas delivered him, while the Israeli and US-backed organized crime syndicate called ‘Fatah’ could not. … It appears they’re delivering. Much to the consternation of the Bush administration and embittered neocons who’ve done everything they could do to destroy the democratically elected government of the Palestinian people.”Abdurahman, who blogs from Qatar on No Longer At Ease, also gives Hamas due credit:“It took Hamas to take full control of Gaza for Alan to be released, Fatah is much weaker and was unable to pressure the kidnappers.”

Read more about Hamas and the release of Alan Johnston.

Yet another bad hair day:The Washington Post found the stylist behind John Edwards’ infamous $400 haircuts, learning that Joseph Torrenueva once charged Edwards $1,250 for a haircut (to compensate for two days lost work). Bloggers blast Edwards for his hypocrisy but also find the Post’s article “silly.”

Right-leaning poli-sci professor Steven Taylor at PoliBlog knows which of the “two Americas” Edwards lives in: “Since there are potential Edwards voters out there for whom $400 might pay the rent, it is symbolically problematic for the man to be paying such (and more) for what most people shell out $12 to have done.”Libertarian Doug Mataconis agrees on Below the Beltway: “I don’t care how much John Edwards pays to get his haircut. If he wants to spend $ 400 to get it done and can afford it, then that’s his right. What I object to is John Edwards’ phony populism.”

Plenty of bloggers accuse the Post of frivolity, but Ann Althouse figures out why the story didn’t die. “But why is the friendly hairdresser coming forward with the story of a haircut that cost 3 times as much as the one that already drove people nuts,” she asks. “The hairdresser has feelings. He has pride. When Edwards was asked about that $400 haircut he posited that ‘the haircuts were some kind of aberration given by “that guy” his staff had arranged.’ “

Read more about Edwards’ ongoing hair troubles.