You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (872)

PLAYS: (2668)

On his Fox News show last night, Glenn Beck launched his latest campaign to unseat a member of the Obama White House: Valerie Jarrett, one of the president's closest advisers and a close friend of Michelle Obama as well.

Beck in fact devoted over 20 minutes of his opening segment to attacking Jarrett. He not only puts Jarrett at the center of the controversies Beck has managed to stir up and force resignations, but he says Jarrett is the reason the Obamas are flying to Denmark to lobby for Chicago as the host city for the 2016 Olympics.

It's straight out of black-helicoptersville, of course. But this has never stopped Beck in the past. Indeed, it's been the key to his success so far.

Somehow, I don't think Jarrett is going to be as easy to throw under the bus as Van Jones was. Now we may get to see, finally, how this White House responds to these kinds of attacks -- other than rank capitulation.

In the meantime, has anyone noticed yet that all of Beck's targets to date have been black?

I'm sure it's just a coincidence.

Just like it was coincidence that Beck couldn't explain to Katie Couric the meaning of "white culture":

UPDATE: White House blogger Jesse Lee has posted a factual response pointing out how reality-deprived Beck's attacks are.

Market analysts - at least of the cable TV variety - seem to tiptoe around the obvious: if you don't cull the herd of insolvent banks and let the market bottom out, you won't be able to start the climb back up.

NEW YORK, Feb. 20 -- With the Dow Jones industrial average plunging past its lowest point since the financial crisis began, panicked investors are asking: How much uglier can it get?

Many market analysts and technicians armed with reams of historical data say that even though the Dow has given back all its gains -- and more -- from the five-year bull market that ended in 2007, it is unlikely the market has hit bottom.

Mark Arbeter, chief technical strategist at Standard & Poor's Equity Research, said the current market environment is showing few of the signs that have characterized previous lows -- high price volatility, high volumes of trading and even higher levels of fear.

"Bear market bottoms tend to be violent affairs," he said. "You sell hard, you rally hard, you go down hard and then you're off to the races. And that's not what were seeing right now. Until this week, the market was really drifting sideways."

And for all the jitteriness out there, Arbeter added, the options market, where investors trade contracts that bet on the future direction of the stock market, is not showing the fear that signals that true capitulation has arrived. Many market participants think capitulation -- when investors take their losses and get out of the market altogether -- must precede a major market recovery.

"We have not reached high enough levels of fear in the options market to suggest that this test of the lows is going to be successful," Arbeter said.

According to Glenn, and anyone who follows American politics, this is the Democrats' grand strategy: Give Bush everyone he wants so that the Republicans can't attack them as weak and spineless. How's that working out so far?

Salon:

Historians writing about the Bush era were given a great gift yesterday -- an iconic headline that explains so much of what has happened in this country over the last seven years:

Their rationale for doing that is that it prevents the Republicans from depicting them as "weak," because nothing exudes strength like bowing. Here's more evidence of the brilliance of the Democratic strategy to show how "strong" and "tough" they are by bowing to Bush and all of his demands, from this morning's New York Times article by Eric Lichtblau:

WASHINGTON — The Senate gave final approval on Wednesday to a major expansion of the government's surveillance powers, handing President Bush one more victory in a series of hard-fought clashes with Democrats over national security issues...

There comes a point when you have to wonder whether or not the Democrats actually support some of these disastrous bills they help usher through Congress. President Bush is the most unpopular President since the advent of polling, yet time after time they cave and give in to every one of his demands, despite overwhelming opposition to the policies he seeks. Save for the few in Congress who actually vote against these monstrosities, it's hard to deny that the majority of them actually think things like telecom immunity are a bad idea. After all, as we learned last week, it pays off.