The best Twitter retort to Trump's "stable genius" tweet is probably connecting "stable" to horses.

I'm seeing lots of stuff like this:

One is a #StableGenius...

The other is a jackass...

RT for Mr Ed. #ImpeachTrump pic.twitter.com/YBXL3GHSKH

— Thomas Reich (@gollum1419_g) January 7, 2018

But some of us oldies notice the oldness problem:

My students seem not to have heard of #StableGenius Mr. Ed. You see, it was a TV show 1961-66. Mr. Ed made more sense than most back then. He still does. Learn and sing the theme: https://t.co/AFWWFHioNm

— Larry Sabato (@LarrySabato) January 6, 2018

No, no, no, Larry, singing old TV theme songs is not a way to get the youngsters to see that Baby Boomer 1960s culture is cool right now. The anti-Trump idea is to make Trump seem senile, so leaning into your oldness is not the best move.

And watch out. There are a lot of people who hear "stable" and think of Jesus:

Have any evangelical leaders come out to explain that Jesus was also a #StableGenius ?

— A Staten Island Guy (@DanFiorella) January 7, 2018

"Soros-backed group pores over emails as it targets Walker."

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports:

Organizers say they have committed about two dozen of their Washington, D.C.-based staff to poring over the 27,000 pages of emails.....

So about 1125 emails per staff member.  Guessing at the length of most emails, I say they can get their poring done in 2 days, max.

Larry Sabato, a prominent political analyst at the University of Virginia who had placed Walker atop his early list of Republican presidential hopefuls, said he didn't think the emails and documents hurt Walker.
"I would put a big red asterisk to anything I say," Sabato said, noting the huge number of documents could be hiding something damaging. "It could be Bridgegate. But I don't think it's like Bridgegate. I just don't think it is nearly as serious."

Yeah, also Bridgegate wasn't preceded by years of secret investigation by prosecutors. What do you think would be in there that we haven't heard about yet? Maybe some embarrassing little junky things that people jot down when they're emailing and imagining that they're more or less talking to the other person. We're going to have to get used to reading material like that and being reasonable about understanding this, but maybe everybody needs to see their side burned first.

For example — see previous post — what's in all that Department of Agriculture email that the Obama DOJ doesn't want to release in that Shirley Sherrod defamation case against Andrew Breitbart? What bad things did those insiders say in the course of decided to cut Sherrod loose? I doubt very much that it's something like: Now that Breitbart has established that Ms. Sherrod practices racial discrimination, we cannot keep her in her current position of power. It might be something more like: Sherrod is toxic. We can't let that get on us.