This morning, BoomTown will be onstage at California First Lady Maria Shriver’s well-known Women’s Conference in Long Beach, to moderate a panel titled “Changing the World Through the Web” for a crowd of 1,800 people.

The panelists for my session at what has become one of the top forums for women’s issues include Hollywood actor/producer, Katalyst co-founder and Twitter demigod Ashton Kutcher (pictured above, of course); Facebook’s Randi Zuckerberg, who leads the social networking site’s elections, breaking news and social change initiatives; Premal Shah, president of online microloan site Kiva.org; and Joe Rospars, founder and creative director of Blue State Digital and new media director for Barack Obama’s presidential campaign.

In other words, as a group, they are all either prettier, smarter or better for the planet than anything I have ginned up so far.

But, to be safe, send some question suggestions quick that you think I should ask in the interview–via Twitter @karaswisher.

In any case, I shall press on and try to conduct myself with some kind of tech dignity, as I query the group on how the Web–especially social media–can empower people to change the world and be more than just one big pool of mundanities, meaningless status updates, silly apps and online gossip.

Speaking of which, it was a minor shock to run smack into reality show whatever-she-is Kate Gosselin at a speaker party last night, who is here to flack a book about–of course–her kids, titled “Eight Little Faces.”

No, I did not make that title up and I suppose it takes all kinds.

But it was especially surreal, since other speakers include–how shall I put this delicately?–much more serious and substantial women, such as primatology legend Dr. Jane Goodall, women’s rights activist Eve Ensler, Obama Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett, a spate of women news legends such as Katie Couric, and even–my personal favorite, for her cheery butter-loving nature–celebrity chef Paula Deen.

For those interested in seeing some of the all-day event online, there’s a live Webcast from the Web site, which you can access here (the Twitter hashtag is #wc09

I will, natch, post a video report later.

Almost-First Daughter Meghan McCain (pictured here) gave the Republican Party the analog equivalent of an unhappy emoticon yesterday in a column in The Daily Beast, predicting the political party will lose power quicker than a faulty iPhone if it does not get more Web-savvy pronto.

BoomTown always liked GOP Presidential candidate Sen. John McCain’s sassy spawn, who had a pretty good blog–deliciously called McCain Blogette.com: Musings on Politics From a Pop CultureGirl–during the campaign and was always coming out with some little nugget that I am sure made her PR handlers cringe.

Well, there she goes again!

In a post titled, “Why Republicans Don’t Get the Internet,” Meghan McCain noted flatly:

The Republican party isn’t exactly Internet savvy. That’s no secret…This has been a source of personal frustration for me for a very long time. Unless the GOP evolves as the party that can successfully utilize the Web, we’ll continue to lose influence.”

Thankfully, it gets worse!

Writes Meghan:

I know this aggravates the old school political operatives to no end, but it’s true. The Obama administration understands that my generation spends most of its day on a laptop or a BlackBerry, and that using the web is easy way to communicate their ideas to their constituents. Making a website, Facebook group, or YouTube video entertaining and enticing is where grassroots campaigning begins. President Obama currently has around five-and-a-half million supporters on Facebook; my father has around five-hundred thousand.”

Sorry, Dad!

But apparently not all that much, because she ended her piece with a zinger about the GOP’s new Web effort, the Rebuild the Party site, essentially declaring the party a wizened Luddite with no hopes of ever beating the BlackBerry-loving Obama.

…The website is about as provocative as a blue suit, white shirt, and red tie. At the time that I write this, the video on the homepage features various individuals, most of them I would guess between the ages of fifty and sixty, explaining why they consider themselves Republicans. Had I still been an independent, there is nothing about this website or video that would sway me as a twenty-four year old woman to join the GOP…Until the Republican party joins the twenty-first century and learns how to use the Internet, its members will keep getting older and the youth of America will just keep logging on to the other side.”

Meghan McCain is definitely right about the unusually sleepy video–which only pops when they focus on dead Republican former Presidents Ronald Reagan and Teddy Roosevelt:

Finally, someone who might actually understand the Internet will be taking charge of the thus-far lackadaisical government body that plays the largest role in spurring its growth.

The Washington Post is reporting that Julius Genachowski (pictured here) will be tapped to take on the always controversial job of chairman of the Federal Communications Commission.

Sources with knowledge of the situation also confirmed the appointment, which will be announced in the next few days, to BoomTown.

Genachowski has previously worked for the FCC as its chief counsel under former FCC Chairman Reed Hundt. But he is better known to Silicon Valley as a longtime Internet exec at Barry Diller’s IAC/InterActiveCorp (IACI).

He is now a founder of a Washington, D.C.-based venture firm called LaunchBox Digital, which has invested in a plethora of unusually trendy Web 2.0 companies.

One of its investments, the social news aggregation service Socialmedian, was recently acquired by the German-based business networking site Xing for $7.5 million.

And Genachowski is also a co-founder and managing director of Rock Creek Ventures, another venture firm, and a special adviser at General Atlantic.

Perhaps most notably, he went to law school with President-Elect Barack Obama.

Thus, Genachowski worked the tech sector tirelessly for Obama’s election, along with organizing the campaign’s successful social-networking and online fund-raising campaign.

He was also clearly on the short list to be America’s first chief technology officer, which might be too light on policy-making and too heavy on pontificating for Genachowski’s tastes.

As top telecom and, really, Internet regulator, Genachowski will have a lot more power and even more on his plate, including the rocky shift from analog to digital television, now set to take place next month, as well as dealing with net neutrality and a range of other key Web issues.

But top of the agenda will likely be how to make real Obama’s promise to drastically improve broadband access across this nation and lowering prices.

The slow speeds and high costs are an appalling legacy of Washington regulators and politicians, who have lived too long and too deep in the pockets of big telecom companies.

That has made the U.S. exactly what Softbank founder Masa Son once called in an interview I did with him at a D: All Things Digital conference: the “Third World of broadband.”

Hey, Julius, you’ll fix that, right?

The video has a star-studded cast, all singing Marc Shaiman’s “Prop 8–The Musical,” including Jack Black (as, um, Jesus), Neil Patrick Harris, John C. Reilly, Margaret Cho, Allison Janney and others.

It’s set as a musical being presented by the Sacramento Community College Players.

Prop 8, a ballot initiative passed in the November election in California, eliminated the right of gay and lesbian people to marry by overriding a state Supreme court decision and changing the state Constitution.

It is currently undergoing legal challenge.

In any case, this video is very funny, especially the part about shrimp cocktail:

Please see this disclosure related to me and gay marriage.

The large round by Oak, which was led by Palo Alto, Calif.-based venture capitalist Fred Harman, will give the popular online news and blog site a valuation of just “south of $100 million,” a source said.

The new funding, the Huffington Post’s third, will be used for expansion of its offerings and the hiring of editorial and business talent.

“There is an inevitable shift from offline to online with people increasingly getting their news media online, and this election proved how powerful the Huffington Post could be,” said Harman (pictured here), in an interview with BoomTown. “And I think the post-election perception of the Huffington Post has changed in the eyes of advertisers to being a key mainstream news site.”

Indeed, the Huffington Post–which is now billing itself as ‘”The Internet Newspaper”–has been hitting on all cylinders during the current election season.

And it hopes to continue building that momentum into the Obama administration, which will give the liberal-leaning site a lot of advantages in coverage.

The Huffington Post has also become a powerful news aggregator, much as the more conservative Drudge Report has, sending traffic all over the Web from its site by linking with a variety of online sites. It also has a strong offering of high-profile bloggers.

But the site’s leaders are also hoping its traffic strength will allow it to be as strong in arenas outside of its flagship political arena, including in business, local, “green” and investigative news.

It will also use the money to make acquisitions, the company said in a press release about the funding, which it put out this morning.

It’s certainly a long way from May of 2005, when its high-profile co-founder, Arianna Huffington, was roundly mocked for launching the site. Today, she has seen her power grow as the site’s traffic and influence have.

The site’s namesake operates out of her California-based office in Los Angeles, while the company has its HQ in New York.

The Huffington Post’s traffic in September 2008, for example, quadrupled from a year before to 4.5 million unique visitors, according to comScore (SCOR). That performance made it the No. 1 “stand-alone political blog and news site,” besting Drudge.

“The cycle of print media is accelerating downward and there are not as many companies with a balance sheet and focus to do it right online,” said Harman, who will join the Huffington Post’s board. “The news market is really up for grabs in a lot of ways…and it is a good time for those who are viewed as authoritative.”

But, like a lot of advertising-reliant businesses, the Huffington Post is also facing a tough market and must show it can compete under more dire economic circumstances and build a sustained and profitable business.

This slug of money should give it a lot of room to do so, said Harman, who has invested in several digital media companies, such as Demand Media and Federated Media. He was also one of the lead investors in aQuantive, the digital advertising business that was bought by Microsoft for $6 billion in 2007.

“Who knows how deep this economic situation is going to be,” said Harman, who noted that he and others kept investing in aQuantive through the last Web downturn. “But strong companies that keep investing through a bad cycle can emerge as winners.”

Previous investments in the Huffington Post have totaled about $12 million. That funding has come from Softbank Capital and Greycroft Partners, as well as seed money from co-founder Kenneth Lerer and former AOL exec Bob Pittman.

Funding reports about the Huffington Post appeared about a week ago in the Times of London, with the post claiming a $15 million investment and expansion into investigative and local news.

But the most detailed posts were done by paidContent, which was the first to name Oak as the new investor and said the round was $20 million.

I blame post-election exhaustion for rendering me comatose after Tuesday, which is how this video I did at the Web 2.0 Summit in San Francisco last week got stuck in my to-do-later pile.

(I did manage to get the MySpace Music party video up though, but that was because it was more fun!)

Well, it has since been fished out, including interviews with conference organizers John Battelle and Tim O’Reilly, as well as Demand Media’s Richard Rosenblatt (who is apparently scared of me, which is just the way I like it) and Microsoft’s man-in-Silicon-Valley Dan’l Lewin.

The overall message of the Web 2.0 Summit: Batten down the hatches, except tech always rises to the surface like some kind of econalypse-fighting styrofoam.

Well, we will see about that particular miracle, but here is the video:

When reports came out last week that Google and Yahoo were downsizing their controversial search advertising deal, I told a Yahoo exec I happened to be having dinner with that that it was the surest sign that the search giant was about to dump the long-suffering Internet portal.

The exec, who made the case that the deal was always tactical, and not strategic, laughed. For all its problems, Yahoo (YHOO) has always been a straight-up player and such sneaky machinations are not its strong suit.

Google, not so much.

After all, Google (GOOG) had already tried using The Wall Street Journal the week before to try out an our-way-or-the-highway tactic to play chicken with the Justice Department, to no avail.

As I wrote:

And, while it might be testing the Justice Department in hopes of salvaging the deal, I suspect Google–as much as its founders want to help out Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang and block Microsoft at the same time–is just now figuring out that walking might actually be the best move.”

Then in a sudden switcheroo just days later, Google was doing the docile-dog play, using the Journal again to signal that it was willing to compromise drastically to do a deal and trying more to look cooperative with the Justice Department.

Now, Google is not some Internet Sybil–way out of the deal one week and in another. Instead, it was creating what one might call “plausible deniability,” a Washington, D.C. term that essentially means covering your own petard.

Despite Google’s last-minute theatrics of cooperation, I am sure the decision had long been made at its California Googleplex lair that it would bow out.

After all, many top execs at the company were dead set against it from the start, mostly due to the undue scrutiny it would bring to Google. Those execs now had plenty of ammo to mercilessly strafe the deal from behind.

Early on, that was also a big worry of Google’s own operatives in D.C., who expressed concern–largely ignored at HQ, where execs really do see themselves as not even slightly evil–about its growing image as a scary behemoth.

Well, that picture is now most definitely solidified in the minds of regulators, helped along by the dangerous pontificating by CEO Eric Schmidt a little while back, who haughtily declared that Google would move forward with or without government approval.

“Time is money in our business,” said Schmidt, in a quote that I am sure he would like to take back now.

It was just the arrogant kind of attitude that Microsoft (MSFT) lobbyists, who have been hitting this deal hard like an old bass drum, needed in order to paint an ugly picture of Google in D.C.

And–more troublesome for Google–it gave advertisers and publishers, many of whom have long harbored fear of the company’s growing power, the courage to speak out, which they did in droves, along with many public interest groups.

But, as has been clear for a while, the Justice Department–after making its own big and noisy deal in its veiled public leaks of outside litigators and such–had to move forward with a lawsuit, and before the election was over.

And, indeed, as I have long maintained, stopping the deal was the right move all along, because a partnership between the No. 1 and No. 2 players just never should be allowed, however slight in its configuration.

As I wrote in April:

So, any further hook-up between the two seems sure to become the Justice Department Lawyer Employment Act of 2008, the likes of which we have not seen since Microsoft got its turn at being deservedly whacked for being a monopolist back in the last century.

Let’s face it, outside of those who cannot seem to shake the annoying Kumbaya mentality over at Google, a Yahoo-Google partnership is simply fantastical, like some out-of-control Dr. Seuss ditty.

They could not, would not with a goat. They would not, could not on a boat. They will not share an algorithm, they will not, will not, Jerry-I-Am.”

Because, although Google has almost none of the obvious menacing aggression that characterized Microsoft when it thoroughly dominated tech, the government was never going to allow such a clearly dominant company in search to strike such a deal, given the obvious antitrust implications.

As I also said then: “It is bad for advertisers, it is bad for consumers, it is bad for innovation, no matter how well-intentioned Google is.”

Thus, the die was cast for the inevitable dumping of Yahoo, in a hasta-la-vista-baby letter this morning terminating the partnership, which Yahoo should have seen coming many miles away.

Sources close to the company, which has been justifiably irked about how Google has handled itself with the Justice Department, said execs at Yahoo might have expected the move, but were deeply disappointed too.

(Here is Yahoo President Sue Decker’s memo on the collapse of the partnership.)

At least the very least, Yahoo did use the deal to escape the clutches of Microsoft in the midst of an ugly takeover battle, which investors now wish it had not, given its stock price is now half of what it was then.

And, indeed, it was perfectly tactical in that regard, using the software giant’s archrival, Google, to poke Microsoft relentlessly.

But Google would only prod so much, until it adversely impacted its own main goal of quiet but inevitable domination over search and, in fact, all online advertising.

When it did just that, dragging Google into a thorny briar patch, the company inevitably resorted to one of its internal mantras, “Feed the winners, starve the losers.”

Time will tell just how much a loser Yahoo will be from this latest bump in its current pothole-filled journey.

As to the candy-colored Google image? Well, it’s definitely not as sweet as it used to be.

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

BoomTown has finally gotten used to the silly gee-gaws television networks use on election night, like touchscreen maps and drawing all over the screen and jump-up numbers.

But one used by CNN last night–a hologram of various people beamed into the studio to look like they were with Wolf Blitzer and Anderson Cooper–was downright freaky.

Using lots of high-definition cameras, fancy computers and, I guess, magic, CNN reporter Jessica Yellin (see video below) was the first one to get the “Star Trek” treatment, beaming in from Chicago to New York.

Later, hip-hop musician Will.i.am was beamed in and preferred a “Star Wars” analogy. But the encounter was still kind of awkward, although you honestly could not look away either, as you can see from the video below (also coming in from Chicago).

Jessica Yellin:

Will.i.am:

Both President- Elect Barack Obama and the man he beat in an historic election, Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain, gave the kinds of speeches at the end of last night that make one proud to be part of a country where stark differences still can mean grace can prevail when it's all over.

But don't take my word for it--the Internet makes it possible to consider them again and again.

Thus, here is a video of McCain's concession speech (try hard to ignore the inane booing at the start by some very sore losers in the crowd at the Biltmore Hotel in Arizona, which McCain quickly tamped down), as well as Obama's appropriately calm victory speech in Chicago below it.

They serve as perfect bookends to each other and is an amazing example of how to fight hard without killing each other, which is--in this fractious world--still a modern miracle.

Or as Obama quoted our greatest president (in my estimation, at least), Abraham Lincoln: "We are not enemies, but friends, though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection."

Here that is, in living color:

McCain:

Obama:

In advance of tomorrow’s elections, here’s a pair of videos of the two presidential candidates, Republican Sen. John McCain and Democratic Sen. Barack Obama, talking about tech.

While Obama has many more supporters in the tech and Internet sectors in terms of numbers, including Google (GOOG) CEO Eric Schmidt, McCain’s include Cisco (CSCO) CEO John Chambers, former eBay (EBAY) CEO Meg Whitman and former Hewlett-Packard (HP) head Carly Fiorina.

And while tech is not exactly issue No. 1 with either of them, here is McCain talking about it in the entire interview he did at the fifth D: All Things Digital conference in 2007 (he also discusses Iraq and other topics in the interview) and a new, much shorter three-minute video just posted by Obama on tech policy:

As BoomTown has noted, one of the best things to come out of this election has been the very funny and very topical humor that has been on "Saturday Night Live" in this political cycle.

Headlined by Tina Fey's perfect impression of Republican VP candidate and Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, the offerings from the comedy television show has been biting without stooping to the rank meanness from so many other places by both sides.

Last night, Republican Presidential candidate John McCain--who has been on SNL before (his "John McCain Sings Barbra Streisand" skit was really a gem from that appearance)--was in two skits on the show and did a great job in both.

The first was a really clever opening sketch in which he and Fey as Palin appeared on the QVC cable shopping network, sheepishly explaining that they could not afford to buy time on the major networks as Democratic candidate Sen. Barack Obama did last week.

Money quote from McCain: "I'm a true maverick, a Republican without money."

Along with a set of "John McCain Pork Knives" and "McCain Fine Gold" (with Cindy McCain as the comely demoer), Fey (as Palin) goes rogue and starts selling "Palin in 2012" T-shirts.

In a second appearance on "Weekend Update," McCain did another nice turn, running through a series of new strategies to win, such as "The Sad Grandpa" and the "The Reverse Maverick."

Here are the videos:

Opening QVC Sketch

Weekend Update

The election is not the only event with only days to go–a move in face-off Yahoo and Google are in with the Justice Department over their controversial search advertising partnership will have an outcome, sources close to all sides said, before the next President is chosen.

Thus, I predict news either tomorrow or Monday.

Why? Well, campaign news will surely drown out any attention any development might get, of course.

But, actually, for more obvious reasons: Whoever is elected, the Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust, Thomas Barnett, will be leaving that post sometime after the Nov. 4 election.

Thus, Barnett and his team are likely–after all this noise–to want to take action of some sort before he becomes, in essence, a lame duck.

Of course, it is ironic that, as the clock counts down the last minutes, a regulator not regarded as a very effective trustbuster and who has taken a mostly hands-off attitude toward meddling with businesses, could launch a lawsuit against the most powerful Internet company in the world.

Or not.

Yahoo (YHOO), Google (GOOG) and the Justice Department are still talking, sources said, trying to come to some accommodation.

So, as we wait for the verdict, here’s a short handicap of options:

1. Google and/or Yahoo walk:

It seems far more likely that Google would do this than Yahoo, given its corporate culture is impatient with moving forward illogically (think Spock and you have the right picture of Google’s mindset).

I would imagine Google execs do not want to accept any caps or changes to the deal at all, and might conclude such restrictions make it not as worthwhile.

Yahoo, of course, cannot walk as easily, depending on the deal for revenue and because it must avoid having to then turn to Microsoft (MSFT) to strike a search ad deal from a very prone position.

Thus, Yahoo has to be pulling out all the stops to make something work.

Then again, if a Justice Department lawsuit is the alternative, walking would be the best option.

Prediction: Even odds.

2. Google and Yahoo accept changes:

Whether it be caps or monitoring or forcing Yahoo to strike a similar deal with Microsoft, this option seems like a bad one for the pair, as it hobbles the deal before it even has a chance to be tested.

Plus, the joy of government regulators breathing down your neck 24/7 is, well, priceless, especially after Google CEO Eric Schmidt told regulators he would move forward with or without them.

While Google has now perhaps permanently put the government on notice that is must be more scrutinized than ever going forward with that unfortunate statement, I would be surprised if Google accepted any substantial changes to the deal.

Prediction: If small adjustments, likely. If more, it would be hard to imagine.

3. The Justice Department files a lawsuit:

Ouch. Bad all around.

First, the Justice Department will have a hard time proving this partnership–which has not launched–is damaging. While it is good to have all those nervous advertisers to point to, it will be an uphill slog of a case.

Second, another lawsuit or fight for slap-happy Google? Oh, dear. It just settled the book scanning lawsuit and is still embroiled in a bigger lawsuit with Viacom (VIA) over YouTube copyright infringement. Enough.

Third, a Justice Department lawsuit for Yahoo should be the proverbial straw that breaks Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang’s rule of the company and would get Yahoo stock to the penny-stock level.

Prediction: I witnessed the Microsoft antitrust trial, while working at the Washington Post and I am here to say to all parties involved: Do not go there.

4. Justice waves the deal on through as is:

Wake up, Eric and Jerry, you’ve been dreaming! Also, in this event, the head of Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer would explode.

Prediction: Well, it could happen. Also Ralph Nader could get elected.

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

Here’s an interesting video from The Vote Hour, which is trying to get CEOs to let employees take off an hour from work to vote in the upcoming elections.

But while the group is independent and bipartisan, it is also an effort that started at Google (GOOG).

From the About Us section of the Vote Hour site:

The Vote Hour sprung (as many things do at Google) from some very interesting research. After reading a report from the U.S. Census Bureau, a Googler noticed that in the 2004 Presidential election, the NUMBER ONE reason that registered voters didn’t make it out to the polls to vote was because they were ‘too busy’ or had conflicting work schedules.

So this person asked himself, ‘What if bosses around the country encouraged their employees to take an hour off to go vote? Would employees feel relaxed enough, even in this down economy, to leave work behind and go vote?’

It seemed logical that if nothing else, getting ‘permission’ from your boss to take an hour off would take one more excuse off the table. So this Googler sent an email to Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google Inc., who volunteered to record a message of support and encouraged some fellow CEOs to join him … and The Vote Hour was born.”

Schmidt, who recently went on the trail for Democratic Presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, is the first CEO featured in the video, along with a panoply of well-known execs, including a lot from tech (including eBay, Cisco, Symantec and Intel).

Also roped in, apparently for comic relief, is real estate mogul Donald Trump.

He is, as usual, quite funny in ordering his employees to take off “only one hour.”

Here’s the video:

(And here is a post about the effort on Google’s blog, posted by Andy Berndt, Managing Director of Google Creative Lab, and Katie Jacobs Stanton of its Elections team.)

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

Wrote The Deal’s Cecile Kohrs: “A proposed joint venture between rival Internet companies Google Inc. and Yahoo! Inc. appears headed for the trash bin, just ahead of an expected U.S. Department of Justice challenge to the agreement, lawyers close to the deal said.”

Well, maybe it will die at some point. But, in the words of Juba in the last line of the greatest movie ever (“Gladiator,” of course!): Not yet.

Said Google spokesman Adam Kovacevich: “We are continuing to have cooperative discussions with the Department of Justice about this arrangement and agreed to a brief delay in implementing the agreement while those discussions continue. We are confident that the arrangement is beneficial to competition, but we are not going to discuss the details of the process.”

It was a sentiment underscored by Google CEO Eric Schmidt, who was doing an economic summit with Democratic Presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama today in Florida and told reporters there when asked about the deal: “We agreed to extend our discussions … with the DOJ.”

Yahoo’s CEO Jerry Yang also said the same during Yahoo’s third-quarter earnings call this afternoon.

In fact, that Google (GOOG) and Yahoo (YHOO) lawyers, along with the Justice Department, are still talking is the strongest indication that there might be some middle ground to be found in the fight over the future of the search advertising business.

After all, Google is not shy about going to court. Among many others, it took on media giant Viacom over YouTube’s copyright issues with all the relish of a lipstick-wearing pit bull.

In fact, I am convinced that the search giant’s corporate mantra is from Travis Bickle in “Taxi Driver”: You talkin’ to me? You talkin’ to me? You talkin’ to me? Then who the hell else are you talking … you talking to me? Well, I’m the only one here.

And Yahoo? Well, Yahoo can never stop talking, as evidenced recently by its never-ending discussions to merge with the Time Warner (TWX) online unit, AOL.

This is an overall corporate characteristic–Yahoo often has the tone of a 1970s encounter group.

Plus, the deal to put some Google search ads on its site is an important fountain of revenue Yahoo desperately needs. For its part, Google wants the deal, mostly to keep Microsoft (MSFT) at bay.

As for the Justice Department, it has one big problem if it does go hot and files a lawsuit against the Yahoogle twins: A little thing I like to call “proof.”

Now I am no legal eagle, but I am told by experts that it is a little hard to prove damage that has not occurred yet if it is seeking an injunction to stop implementation of the partnership.

It’s like the big question in that dumb but watchable Tom Cruise movie, “Minority Report”: Can you arrest someone for a murder they might commit?

Google, with its dominant market share that grows daily, may very well be the scariest company on the planet.

(I think it might indeed be and have written in opposition many times to this partnership of the No. 1 and No. 2 players in the search space, but who am I to say?)

But making a case that it will turn Yahoo into a satellite, raise ad prices and turn into Godzilla, all before it actually happens, is tough.

More to the point, with all the pressure from public interest groups and advertisers who oppose the deal without some checks and balances, along with Microsoft’s relentless lobbying, some accommodation obviously must be made.

Thus, that is going to take more days of jabbering, probably into next week (although it all does have to be settled before the election, when the regulators pressing the case might be out of a job).

After those blabby avenues are exhausted, of course, we might very well see the digital gladiators go at it. Or abandon the field.

But not yet.

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

One of the more interesting developments of this election cycle has been the boom in viral online videos being used–from a plethora of political spoofs of the candidates to educational videos to people simply venting.

And those pushing citizens, especially young people, to register to vote have been using the boom in online video too.

Last week, BoomTown featured one effort by a passel of celebrities to snarkily get people to vote by telling them not to (but not really).

This week, actress Jessica Alba turns into a Home Shopping Network maniac by hawking “The Muzzler,” for those who don’t vote.

It’s a lot over the top–including featuring a pink muzzle on indestructible “Heroes” cheerleader Hayden Panettiere.

But it does get the point through like a sledge hammer that it is important to vote in the Nov. 4 election.

Alba has already posed for several shocking pictures for the group doing the video–Declare Yourself, a national nonpartisan group dedicated to getting young people to vote–including wearing a muzzle and being bound by electric tape.

So, whoever you plan to vote for, here is a list of deadlines to register to vote in the 50 states, with many being today and the rest of this week.

And, here’s the Muzzler video: