If Jessica Alba is wrong, then I don't want to be right. Fortunately, she's right.

Ha, let's face it, she meant indeed to say "Switzerland" but lucked out when she found out later that Sweden was neutral in WWII. What's amazing is how she initiated this whole thing by calling someone an "a-hole" but then she writes "individuals are taking it upon themselves to encourage negativity and stupidity" and "I appreciate the name calling". I heard that Obama's election was supposed to bring people together and end divisiveness. How is this supposed to work?

If Bill O'Reilly says something stupid, just ignore him, or rebut him with a better comment than "a-hole".

I do think Jessica Alba > Salma Hayek though (and now I've upset Prof. Drezner).

I am comfortable with the idea the Bill O'Reilly is stupider than Jessica Alba. Which begs the question of what he's good for anyway, because he is nowhere near as hot as
Jessica Alba.

(And, if O'Reilly claims he was mislead by his careful internet research using TMZ, then...well, he isn't as bright as Paris Hilton pretends to be either.)

Leaving aside any relative judgements among Bill O'Reailly, Jessica Alba and Salma Hayek...Jules Crittenden has a comment on Sweden's neutrality, and that it's a little complicated:

http://www.julescrittenden.com/2009/01/29/from-the-mouths-of-babes-2/

Oh, and Jules throws in his views on neutrality in general as a bonus.

Well, Alba (hot and dumb; and yes, she's hotter than Selma Hayek) and O'Reilly (ugly and dumb) aside, you can't expect us to believe Sweden was really neutral during WW2. That's like saying Western Europe was neutral during the Cold War, or Iran has been neutral in the Iraq War.

I mean, if providing logistical support for the German military, allowing transport of troops and military equipment for German invasions, and providing Germany with the crucial iron ore needed to build up its military makes you neutral, then you've twisted the word to make it practically meaningless. Sweden could have singlehandedly ended the war by stopping its export of iron ore to Germany. There's a reason why we had plans to bomb the Swedish rail system.

Sweden may have been officially neutral during WWII (although, as pointed out above, in reality it wasn't). However, Sweden is no longer neutral. It has participated with NATO in Kosovo and Afghanistan.

I guess Jessica Alba is smarter not only that Bill O'Reilly and Jules Crittenden, but also some of the commenters here.

Sweden was in fact officially neutral in WW2. Just like the U.S. was officially neutral until December 7, 1941. Just like Spain was officially neutral the whole war despite its regime's friendly relationship with the Nazis.

Furthermore, Sweden has a history of neutrality. The last war that Sweden fought ended in 1814. Military actions since then have been limited to peacekeeping operations. Swedish neutrality is why Sweden refuses to join NATO.

So why are celebrities schooling them? Has the quality of conservative leadership really fallen so far? What happens when the true A-listers, like, say, Salma Hayek, start focusing their fire on Mitch McConnell or Rush Limbaugh?

O'Reilly and Limbaugh are not leaders, they're entertainers.

McConnell is supposed to be a leader.

As we say in Miami Jessica cagged it - she didn't mean to say Sweden and she got lucky that it was neutral once. More importantly conservatism is in dire straits...and I say this as a conservative. First there is Ann Coulter getting "banned", this bizarre O'Reilly/Alba exchange and finally Rush's ill advised not so best wishes for Obama and by extension the country. WFB, Jr. and Barry Goldwater these people aren't.

it seems foreign policy pundits are worse than teenage boys when it comes to obsessions with attractive female celebrities and their doings. they do prattle about those obviously superficial doings all day.
or is it only you?

O'Riley and his ilk have long gotten away without being fact checked, other than maybe by Jon Stewart.