home

Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 10:14:53 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The site outage is over. All sites at our hosting company were inaccessible this morning due to problems with the networks connecting into their site, in other words, it wasn't at their end.

But, I'm out of time to blog for a few hours....so how about taking over for me?

Thanks much.

< Neil Young's "Living With War": Listen Now | Friday Fitzgerald News and Commentary >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Open Thread | 63 comments (63 topical)
    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#1)
    by Patrick on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 10:30:06 AM EST
    Welcome back...

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#2)
    by Patrick on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 10:31:52 AM EST
    All I want to know is WTF?

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#3)
    by jondee on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 10:38:13 AM EST
    The power of numbers (that vote) and the importance of dirt cheap labor to the economy.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#4)
    by Patrick on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 10:39:03 AM EST
    Or this for all you pro-legalization folks...

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#5)
    by glanton on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 10:41:09 AM EST
    I just wanted to encourage everyone to watch Real Time tonight. Maher has really been on a roll lately; last week's closing monologue was so funny, so mwell said, and so true all at the same time, that it took me a while to accept the fact that in Uhmerrikah, it had been allowed on the air at all.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#6)
    by Edger on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 10:42:19 AM EST
    Patrick: All I want to know is WTF?
    Several senators equated the protest with the civil rights movement of the 1960s and other major events in American history.
    Good for them! They are thinking.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#7)
    by Patrick on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 10:44:35 AM EST
    Glanton, I don't take issue with that, why is skipping school being officially sanctioned by a state legislative body?

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#8)
    by Patrick on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 10:45:04 AM EST
    Sorry, that was for Edgar

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#9)
    by profmarcus on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 10:45:58 AM EST
    i'm sitting here in sofia, bulgaria, where the "informal" nato foreign ministers meeting just concluded... condi was here along with her fellow bigs and there was security crawling all over the place, helicopters buzzing around, and li'l ol' me had to go through x-ray screening just to get back in to my hotel... so, what was the deal...? i can't find any news on it... i would have to guess they were talking about iran... anybody else have a clue...? Visit my blog: And, yes, I DO take it personally

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#10)
    by squeaky on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 10:50:20 AM EST
    Patrick-hardly pro legalization. Sounds like it will increase the profits of the dealers because user are only allowed to possess very small amounts.
    Police will not penalize people for possessing up to 5 grams of marijuana, 5 grams of opium, 25 milligrams of heroin or 500 milligrams of cocaine, under a bill passed by senators late on Thursday and earlier approved by the lower house. People caught with larger quantities of drugs will be treated as narcotics dealers and face increased jail terms under the plan.
    So anyone caught with between a fifth and a sixth of an ounce of MJ will have a possession charged increased to a dealing charge. What is the penalty 20 to life?

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#11)
    by Edger on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 10:51:53 AM EST
    why is skipping school being officially sanctioned by a state legislative body? Perhaps they feel that they may learn something important enough to be of more value than what they may lose by missing ONE day in school.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#12)
    by Patrick on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 10:53:35 AM EST
    Pro, The President was in my neck of the woods last week. All night long there was at least one fighter jet overhead by the sounds of it. My wife got p!ssed and called the hotel he was staying at...2 minutes later, the jet was much higher and a lot quieter. I would not have expected that, but I suppose it could have been a coincidence.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#13)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 10:56:32 AM EST
    Patrick, I guess Villaraigosa doesn't agree with Romero...
    LOS ANGELES, April 27, 2006 - State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell urged parents today to send their children to school Monday, despite calls for students to join a boycott over immigration legislation. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Also on abc7.com: Eyewitness News team Bios | Breaking News Alerts | Tip Line | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- O'Connell's statement comes one day after Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent Roy Romer and Cardinal Roger Mahony sent parents a letter asking that students stay in school and only participate in late-afternoon demonstrations.


    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 11:32:09 AM EST
    Over 400,000 civilians have already died in Darfur. But, almost 2 years after the United States officially recognized it as a "genocide," almost nothing has been done to stop the killing. A relatively small United Nations peace keeping force (which wouldn't even require new US troops) could protect civilians, stop the violence, and help a real peace process begin. But it won't happen if world leaders, including ours, don't stand up and demand it. So this week, thousands of concerned Americans will gather in Washington to tell Congress and President Bush to support a real international peacekeeping force - and to do it now. To help show the national media how many voters support this call, MoveOn is organizing this virtual march. They'll present all our signatures and comments at the big rally, and they're aiming to get 250,000 "virtual marchers" by the end of the week.
    --MoveOn.org Please join me and sign up today: Virtual March to End Genocide in Darfur. Thanks!

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#15)
    by Patrick on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 11:37:46 AM EST
    Perhaps they feel that they may learn something important enough to be of more value than what they may lose by missing ONE day in school.
    Yeah! OK, whatever! That's almost funny. I know I'm old, but I remember school days and I could pretend to as socially concientious as the next person for a day off.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#16)
    by Patrick on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 11:38:59 AM EST
    Susan, If it wasn't moveon, I might consider it.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#17)
    by Dadler on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 11:42:49 AM EST
    After yesterday's Exxon profit news, today is Chevron's turn to announce huge profits. Nothing like taking advantage of the working class and working poor for some profiteering. Patrick, I'm a proud member of MoveOn. What have they done to harm people that warrants such mistrust on your part?

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#18)
    by squeaky on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 11:43:50 AM EST
    Six congress members were arrested ealier today protesting at the Sudaneese Embassy. They are:Tom Lantos D-CA James McGovern D-MA John Olver D-MA Sheila Jackson Lee D-TX Jim Moran D-VA think progress

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 11:52:59 AM EST
    Squeaky, you beat me to it. I just copied the same two parragraphs and you more or less wrote my text. It changes nothing for the moment but I wonder if this is an opener for more progressive legislation later on. Given the major problems that exist in Mexico, I can't help but think that those that came up with the figures know what they are talking about and consequently more realistic levels will be implimented later on. Having said that, it's a start, albeit overdue.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#20)
    by Patrick on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 12:01:12 PM EST
    What have they done to harm people that warrants such mistrust on your part?
    They have a different agenda than mine. And yes, I have looked into it.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#21)
    by Dadler on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 12:33:41 PM EST
    What specifically about their agenda is opposed to yours? Genuinely curious, my friend. Lakers 98 Suns 81 Peace.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 12:35:35 PM EST
    Squeaky. In our recent chat about how our cultures differ, this December article from the Guardian might shed light on our different aproaches to social issues.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#23)
    by Dadler on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 12:36:20 PM EST
    And I have to link this spoof news story again, it's simply too amusing.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 12:41:29 PM EST
    Daddler, would that be the only clip you were looking at? Honest now!

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#25)
    by joejoejoe on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 01:05:22 PM EST
    CNN:
    4/28/06 2:50 p.m. - ALEXANDRIA, Va. -- The judge in the sentencing trial of al Qaeda conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui reminded jurors Friday to avoid looking up words in the dictionary after learning a juror looked up the definition of "aggravating" on an Internet dictionary. . . . Brinkema had denied the jury's request for a dictionary Tuesday, and jurors never asked for any definitions.
    Why can't a jury have a dictionary during deliberations? It seems like a neutral tool for people making a decision.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#26)
    by Dadler on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 01:06:34 PM EST
    I must admit, with all due humility, that indeed I did peruse the sorority sister orgy-poker & contortionist clip. However, no matter thy doubt, I did so with the humblest research purposes initiating my visit. For my honorary doctorate in oxdung from (remember these t-shirts?) Kamanawana Lei U. Not you personally, but, well, you know.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 01:11:54 PM EST
    But undoubtably the redeeming social value of your research will stand you in great stead as you face life's future adventures.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#28)
    by BigTex on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 01:57:51 PM EST
    Kudos for the congresspeople for protesting at the embasy. It's about damn time they got off their collective butts and did something about this problem. But what took them so long, and rather than engage in publicity stunts, why don't they do somethig that has value, such as introduce legislation calling for intervention in Sudan. It's one thing for a great photo op, another to act on their supposed concerns.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#29)
    by chew2 on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 03:38:17 PM EST
    Rush Limbaugh Arrested for Prescription Drug Violation I'd like to see the TL defense analysis on this.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#30)
    by squeaky on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 10:10:09 PM EST
    Laura Rozen posts a really interesting Photograph from 1963. Porter Goss in Mexico City with members of Operation 40 Her take on Goss and his pals from those days, Negroponte, North, Wilkes, Wade, Foggo is even more interesting
    small informal fraternities of right-wing CIA-linked operatives..... that were supposed to evade oversight and basically not exist.
    Laura Rozen

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 10:47:50 PM EST
    Welcome to the Launch of Congresspedia ("The Citizens Encyclopedia on Congress"), an announcement by Conor Kenny, Editor of The Center for Media and Democracy, publishers of PR Watch (Wed., Apr. 26, 2006). As he explains in Conor Kenny's Blog, it's based on the wiki model (Wikipedia). This is timed well before the November mid-term elections and should be a very useful resource for everyday American citizens.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#32)
    by soccerdad on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 03:44:17 AM EST
    This is not your father's Democratic party

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#33)
    by soccerdad on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 05:10:36 AM EST
    I never said she was no better, but you insist on mischaracterizing my main points. You have learned your analysis techniques from PPJ i guess. But thats ok you have to get ready to start justifying why the Dems will vote to let Bush nuke Iran.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#34)
    by soccerdad on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 05:56:09 AM EST
    Charlie you are truly an idiot. I've been very specific in saying that there was no fundamental difference between Dems and Repub wrt to corporate power and the war. Since you have been unable to counter that you try and dismiss me with a generalization I never made. Who do you think the Dems are going to owe if they gain back control Clearly Charlie you are not for the Dems in prinicples you are just against Bush.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#35)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 06:39:28 AM EST
    et al - Can any of you explain why we should be concerned over "legal" immigrant's rights? Far as I can tell no one has said a word about "legal" immigrants. I mean the California Senate surely isn't saying that it is okay to enter the country illegaly is it? Surely people sworn to uphold the California and US constitution wouldn't encourage people to break the law, would they?

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#36)
    by jondee on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 06:50:44 AM EST
    You mean the way Bush did when he was governor of Texas? But then, you've never supported the president. Never.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#37)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 08:02:39 AM EST
    et al - And while we are at it, can any of you explain why we should be in Darfu and not in Iraq? Why Darfu and not Iran? If you want to argue the humanitarian bit, go ahead, but include in it your points the fact that if we leave Iraq the death toll will be huge as the two religious groups' radicals extract revenge on each other. And surely you haven't forgotten that Saddam had killed hundreds of thousands, not to forget the Rape Rooms, people fed feet first into industrial plastic/paper shredders. Why one and not the other? Is it because Iraq and Iraq were threats, but the Sudan is not? Is the use of US power only to be agreed to if it does not help the US? Would Mrs. Sheehan have accepted the death of her son if he had been killed in Darfu? Would he have been any less dead? And before you decide that the military problem can be fixed before breakfast one fine June morning, take a look at a map, and note the lack of supply points. Think about the logistics involved, even if you have to Google "military logistics" to get a vague understanding of the meaning of the term. And then perhaps you can explain why we should be willing to spend our wealth and young men's lives in a military fight that has absolutely nothing to do with the safety and well being of our citizens. I mean the only argument that makes any sense at all in regards to Iraq is that it supposedly offered no threat to the US. If you argue that we need to go to Darfu because it is the humane thing to stop the genocide and killing, fine. If you argue that we can establish a democracy, fine. If you argue we need to stop the spread of Islamicfascism, fine. Bush needs all the help and support he can get right now. But many of you argued against all of these things. I clearly remember the argument that if we invaded Iraq because of Saddam's killings, why not the rest of the world? And why not? Why shouldn't we become the policemen the Left seems to want us to be? Genocide anyplace? Call in the Marines. Send in the Naval Air strike force. Guided missiles from our cruisers. Pax American. Governors in every country to help the unwashed. Worship your Gods as you please. We will build your roads and teach you engineering, all we ask is that you render unto Ceaser what is Ceaser's. And that would not be grain from Egypt or cedars from Lebanon, but oil from Iran and uranium from Nigeria. Love and peace world wide, we can "let the sunshine in." The "Age of Aquarius" will have arrived. But the Left will not stand idly by while this happens, will you? After all, isn't this what you think is the NeoCon plan writ large? No, the Left wants us to police the world and fix the world, but with no reward beyond making the Left feel warm and fuzzy. That is the payment the Left wants. The problem is that since the Left will not serve and the vast majority of the rich will avoid, the military dead will come from the middle and lower classes. So like the woman that got into a discussion over the price for her sexual favors, it has become apparent that the only difference between the Neocons and the Left is the price the world must pay. The world, especially our brethren in Europe, should remember that in this life, you get what you pay for.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#38)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 08:17:06 AM EST
    Jondee - No. I have no idea of what Bush did to "legal" immigrants when he was governor of Texas, and given your normal inability to actually write a descriptive summary and provide a link for further information, I doubt I will. You had much rather infer and slur. It is the lazy person's debating method. chalie - Then you agree that the protests scheduled for Monday have nothing to do with "legal" immigrants, and are only about the so-called rights of "illegal aliens." Thanks, I needed that.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#39)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 08:42:48 AM EST
    And then perhaps you can explain why we should be willing to spend our wealth and young men's lives in a military fight that has absolutely nothing to do with the safety and well being of our citizens. Well you finally get the Iraq picture! ...if we leave Iraq the death toll will be huge as the two religious groups' radicals extract revenge on each other. Do you even WATCH the news? How will that differ from the current situation? people fed feet first into industrial plastic/paper shredders. That's very old and just as false.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#40)
    by glanton on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 09:17:12 AM EST
    From soc's link: "Having the clear frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination show up at a Fox News party created a lot of excitement, and makes a statement about how we're regarded in top Democratic circles," said host Chris Wallace , who invited her to the celebration.
    Sound the trumpets! For once, Chris Wallace is right.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#41)
    by Edger on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 09:21:58 AM EST
    Posted by JimakaPPJ April 29, 2006 09:02 AM Che and Charlie - You guys both replied to "Posted by JimakaPPJ April 29, 2006 09:02 AM". I don't believe that he wrote that. Do you? The writing is just too lucid for him. The phraseology and word choices are not him. I suppose it's possible he lifed the ideas from something someone else wrote, but he can't write as clearly as this post - compare it to anything else he's ever written. Someone else wrote this one I think...

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#42)
    by Edger on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 09:29:32 AM EST
    Charlie, can I borrow your spell checker? ;-)

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#43)
    by glanton on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 10:30:11 AM EST
    That's his characterization of the event
    No, that's called an observation, Charlie. Like it or not, when top Democrats show up at an organization's party, that shows they hold said organization in some sort of esteem. After all, Hillary wouldn't go to a Klan meeting even if she were invited, now would she? You are the one who spun this, my friend. Upthread you likened her appearance to "entering a lion's den," as though she were going in there to take them on or something. And in this you delude yourself. Do you really think she did anything other than swap a few playful jabs, have some drinks with some crporate bigs, etc.? And by the way, one of the biggest no-no's of argument is to project. I quoted soemthing from soccerdad's excellent link. I didn;t say anything about them being exactly the same. I just said Wallace was right, indeed, now I augment my point and say he alluded to the self-evident. When you show up at my birthday party I'll take that to mean we're friends. And again, Charlie, you and others concinue to misrepresent me, Tampa, soc, and others when you insist we are looking for perfection. Or at least me: let others speak for themselves. As for me, I'll quote the song again: "Give me a reason to love you and I'll turn right back around." But telling me what you are NOT won't do. I already know what you are NOT: that's why I would even consider voting for you, in the first place. Democrats, you have my ear because you are at least slightly different than Rethugs. But now that you have my ear, you must tell me something worth hearing. Speak up against Uhmerrikahn bigotry, for example. Teach. Tell Uhmerrikahns that their fear of boys kissing is irrational and, what's more, being exploited by the Rethugs. Tell the people that debating flag burning is a waste of time, a distraction, a red herring. Have balls, don't pander. If you pander I'll see through it and stay home. Witnessing won't do it, by the way; neither will telling me how much you love doing your wife.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#44)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 10:32:40 AM EST
    Che - No, the following sentence says: I mean the only argument that makes any sense at all in regards to Iraq is that it supposedly offered no threat to the US. You write:
    Do you even WATCH the news? How will that differ from the current situation?
    Let's be conservative (gasp!)and say if we pull out now, the number will be a factor of 20 times higher. And are you telling me those mass graves didn't exist? What happened to all those people Saddam killed using posion gas made from chemicals the Left claimed we sold him? chalie writes:
    We should be in Darfur as part of a UN Force instead of trying to undermine it with that got milk nitwit because that's what the UN is for.
    Sorry if the comment was too naunced for you. As usual, when you have no ideas you start to worry over spelling. Are you sure you are not Dark Avenger's brother? And if you think the UN will provide any significant help you meet SD's description. Edger - It was my evil twin "Social Liberal." et al - I note no one disagreed with my premise that the only difference between the Left and the NeoCon's plans is the price and who pays it.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#45)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 11:09:29 AM EST
    Edger writes:
    Charlie, can I borrow your spell checker? ;-)
    Yeah, use his. Mine has a problem. Everytime it hits the word "dummy" it tries to change it to charlie.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#46)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 11:44:32 AM EST
    We may not have had 9/11 if Gore had been President for Christ sake!
    OK Charlie- please elaborate.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#47)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 11:46:37 AM EST
    Meanwhile it's Al Franken Day in Brattleboro, VT.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#48)
    by jondee on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 12:37:54 PM EST
    ppj - When I lived in Texas, it seemed like a good third of the labor force was made up of illegals. The words "this situation has become problematic." or, "we need to address this." or, anything even remotely similar, never found utterance while your pristine, unimpeachable, red, white, and blue boy-king was gov. And speaking of links, if you have any evidence to the contrary, I'd like to see it. Take your time. After all, you dont want your only legacy to be that you that you've consistently backed two-faced frauds.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#49)
    by soccerdad on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 12:48:09 PM EST
    So, do you wanna win, or do you wanna just fight the good fight and reminisce about the good old days?
    Win what? More lost jobs, more coporate give aways.
    Me, I wanna get somethin' done
    What is it you want to get done besides beat Bush? So many words, such little content from you Charlie. You dont say anything, you just try and label us. So charlie I take it you are pro war pro corporation, and anti worker.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#50)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 12:55:27 PM EST
    JRT - charlie can't elaborate. All he can do is make claims. Somehow he thinks that whatever he says becomes gospel. Sort of a "I write therefore it is." Jondee - So. What's your point? People quit doing various things at various times for various reasons. That they did something doesn't mean that it was right, or that they should do it or they shouldn't quit doing it. And what does that have to do with the fact that demonstrations by "illegal" aliens shouldn't happen, and if "legal" immigrants are being abused there are laws against it. Not to mention that children shouldn't be politciized by the school system, which even more so than college, is paid for by ALL the taxpayers. You problem is you want an open border, and to hell with what is happening to labor costs of our poorest citizens and to hell with security. Tell me I'm wrong. charlie - And you still aren't capable of addressing the comments, no matter where they came from. Give us some chatter about sports. That'll show us how clever you are. Yeah. I recommend a high Fish Oil diet.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#51)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 12:57:30 PM EST
    Jondee - BTW - You made the claim, you provide the proof. It isn't my job.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#52)
    by jondee on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 01:49:34 PM EST
    ppj - The careers of that gang that you've been bending over backwards (and forwards) for is as close to a living testament to utter disdain for the sufferings of the poor as its possible to find in the first world. So spare us the election year crocodile tears about "the poor" before you make me bust a gut. Face it, in a few months this wedge-issue pulled out of the RNC and your collective as*es, will have gone the way of Terri, flag burning and your newly discovered, deep, abiding, concern for the poor in America.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#53)
    by soccerdad on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 02:09:10 PM EST
    Charlie once again says absolutely nothing. What do you stand for besides beating Bush? Anything? Or you just a DLC shill? Does anyone know what Charlie stands for? He has about 20 posts/day yet there's no substance. I have to agree with PPJ - you never address the substance of a post. You are under the delusion that you're clever.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#54)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 02:19:30 PM EST
    Jondee - Even if the depressing effective of illegal aliens on the wages of poor, unskilled US citizens is a wedge issue, it also happens to be the truth. BTW - I note you didn't deny my point that you are believer in open borders...

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#55)
    by jondee on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 02:26:56 PM EST
    "I have to agree with ppj." Did I just feel a tremor?

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#56)
    by glanton on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 02:36:34 PM EST
    Even if the depressing effective of illegal aliens on the wages of poor, unskilled US citizens is a wedge issue, it also happens to be the truth.
    Writes Jim. But he's not a Republican. :-) On to more important things. Soccerdad, you write:
    Does anyone know what Charlie stands for? He has about 20 posts/day yet there's no substance.
    That's going considerably too far, as I suspect you know. Charlie has stood for social justice, women's rights, gay rights, and a globally-sensible foreign policy throughout his time on TalkLeft. What has happened here is that because he has faith in the Democratic Party, and you and I do not, discourse suddenly devolves into the typical GOP-esque ad hominem, red herring game which Jim and justpaul, for example, are so adept at playing. Charlie, soc is right that when it comes to this particular debate, you fail to address points. You just keep telling us how bad the GOP is and therefore everything soc, Tampa, and I have been pointing out about the Dems is just irrelevant. This pisses people off, Charlie. You blame us for Bush, you blame Nader for Florida, etc. But at what point are you going to turn that critical eye upon the people who ask you to support them? An example: Gore's deep-throating of his wife at the 2000 Dem convention revealed him to be the panderer that he is. In that moment, many said well hell, the Dems are just playing the "family values" game, they're allowing the GOP to frame everything. Instead of the environment we got to see this middle aged man pretend that he couldn't control himself around his wife of 20+ years. Gore and every other high level Dem plays inside the sandbox that the GOP draws. Hillary going to the Fox party, that's what that was about; Hillary proposing a flag-burning amendment, that's what that's about. Until someone stands up, does something worthy of our respect, we should not pretend to respect them. That makes us as dishonest as the politicians whose reign we apparently deserve, here in Uhmerrikah. Stay alert.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#57)
    by soccerdad on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 03:12:18 PM EST
    Glanton, Well put

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#58)
    by Edger on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 04:12:31 PM EST
    glanton - You know, I agree with you and Soccerdad on most every point I've seen you guys make here. In fact, I can't offhand here think of anything either of you have said that I disagree with, though there are probably some things. That's human nature I guess. We all want the same thing I think - to see America return to it's historical stature and position as the leader and light of a free world that stands above all else for what I think is the fundamental thing that is very close to being lost under the regime that bush and the neocons have saddled the world, not just the country, with. The simple dignity of and respect for, men and women everywhere. I think... no, I know, that Charlie wants the same thing. And like you and Soccerdad, and me, and Squeaky, and Jondee, and Susan, and Bigunit, and Jeralyn, and Che, and Scar, and Sarc, and Profmarcus, and Patrick, and Oscar, and and everyone else that I've missed naming here - Charlie, like all of us, is overwhelmingly outraged and disgusted to the core of his being by what has happened to his country. We all want the same thing. Arguing about methods of achieving it is what most of us do here everyday. I agree with Charlie that getting rid of the cancer that has zero regard for social justice, women's rights, gay rights, and a globally-sensible foreign policy, simple dignity of and respect for, men and women everywhere, and all the other things that Charlie, and all of us, stand for, is the first thing that needs to be done, so that we can move forward... I think you guys do, too.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#59)
    by Edger on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 04:21:38 PM EST
    Even the wingers that post here want the same thing. Most of them anyway. A few of them are sociopaths, or outright psychotics that lack the empathy circuitry in their brains. They, and we, know who they are. Those ones don't count, and deserve no consideration, respect, or response, and are not worth debating, IMO. And I have no qualms about offending the most offensive, sick, twisted and seriously damaged.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#60)
    by glanton on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 04:25:40 PM EST
    Edger, Yes, it is true that most of the posters here agree on those fundamental things you name. But the disagreement that keeps coming up between Charlie and myself represents something very, very important. To ask me to just shrug it off, as it were, and vote Democratic because Bush is "cancerous" just isn't going to cut it. You say "We all want the same thing." By "all," I'm assuming you mean the people on TL to whom you refer. But: Do you see those wants reflected in any important way by the Democratic leadership? Those issues we have named on this thread, as important to us, which high-profile Democrats are fighting for them? Do those issues even matter to the Dems in the end? Or could it be that they are so embedded with the corporate lobby, and so worried about courting "values voters" as the GOP defines them, that they have simply taken us for granted a long, long time ago, with no intention of delivering? The painful answers to these questions leads me to believe that the greatest possible thing that could happen to this country, in the long run, would be the utter obliteration of the Democratic Party as it stands now. Let the Rethugs have the entire corporate base outright, let them have every single solitary voter who believes that the earth is 6000 years old. From ashes may rise the Phoenix.

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#61)
    by soccerdad on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 04:28:44 PM EST
    globally-sensible foreign policy
    Thats certainly not Hillary Clinton. The 2 major issues that face us as a country right now IMO are continued wars in the Middle East and corporate control of the government. Clinton is no better than Bush on these issues. You have to look at people and their core beliefs. H. Clinton doesn't give a rats a@@ about the average working person. The Democratic party has abandoned its base, the middle class, workers, and minorities. Getting thrown a scrap doesn't satisy me. I worry about my kids future and I see not much to make me happy. Its simply not enough to be "not Bush" . With people like Clinton and Biden you are not moving forward. Clinton will continue to back never ending war in the ME because thats what the Corps and Israel want. If thats what you want fine, but its not what I want. Rearranging some chairs on a sinking ship isn't enough for me to offset her support of the war and corps..

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#62)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 05:57:26 PM EST
    charlie -- The following happened on July 5, over a month before the now infamous PDB of 8/6. It is plain to anyone with at least average intelligence that Bush had all those issues covered through his NSA.
    "At the special meeting on July 5 were the FBI, Secret Service, FAA, Customs, Coast Guard, and Immigration. We told them that we thought a spectacular al Qaeda terrorist attack was coming in the near future." That had been had been George Tenet's language. "We asked that they take special measures to increase security and surveillance. Thus, the White House did ensure that domestic law enforcement including the FAA knew that the CSG believed that a major al Qaeda attack was coming, and it could be in the U.S., and did ask that special measures be taken."
    Now, when did the President get this started?
    CLARKE: In the first week in February, decided on principle, in the spring to add to the existing Clinton strategy, and to increase CIA resources, for example for covert action, five-fold, to go after al Qaeda. And then changed the strategy from one of rollback with al Qaeda over the course of five years, which it had been, to a new strategy that called for the rapid elimination of al Qaeda."
    Now let me see. First week of Feburary, which would be the second week in office, he started adding to the plan to get rid of al-Qaeda. By July 5 his NSA is calling meetings, based on CIA information, to warn the FAA, FBI, etc., of an expected terrorist attack... Now, do you think maybe he knew what was in the 8/6 PDB? Think maybe he had reviewed all this stuff and dispatched his staff to take care of it?

    Re: Open Thread (none / 0) (#63)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 06:01:15 PM EST
    This thread has degenerated into commenters insulting each other. It's now closed.

    Open Thread | 63 comments (63 topical)