home

Tuesday Afternoon Open Thread

Your turn.

This is an Open Thread.

< Math Lesson For The JournOList: 60 More Than 50 | MA Passes Interim Senator Law >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    NY CoA (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by andgarden on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:21:36 PM EST
    green lights Paterson's Lt. Gov. appointment. 4:3 decision.

    This also gives him the option of taking a cushy appointment.

    Also a win for Kathleen Sullivan, btw (none / 0) (#3)
    by andgarden on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:23:01 PM EST
    Will there ever be an Afghan army? (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Dadler on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:22:13 PM EST
    What sort of Army does Ann Jones (none / 0) (#18)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:58:09 PM EST
    have in mind, because the writeup seems to be about how Afghanistan will never have the Army she desires.  Her end statement leaks a total lack of investigation since I just recently had BBQ with a soldier who works solely on education, crops, job creation, etc....for Afghanistan.  I don't like starting in Afghanistan from the position Bush placed us, but this whole show is being run completely differently now.  I mean completely differently.....and I don't expect Afghan civilians to look like a bunch of American jarhead bubbas in order to have faith in their abilities to protect the infrastructure of their country.  Pakistan does it and they have to contend with the same extremist a-holes.

    Parent
    I sympathize (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Dadler on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:39:17 PM EST
    I just don't agree.  The army she is talking about seems nothing more to me than one that functions.  I'm glad the guy you talked to thinks everything is being done differently.  I'm glad something is, and I don't deny some things have changed.  One thing hasn't, however: we are an army of foreign occupation, and always will be, and will always be faced with millions of people who don't want us there, no matter how magnanimous we think we are being (which is never as great as we believe).

    Parent
    There is one thing that a lot of people (none / 0) (#95)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 08:26:42 AM EST
    are forgetting.  The United States is not in Afghanistan alone.  Afghanistan is not Iraq, and NATO and the NATO countries also understand that allowing Afghanistan to simply be a breeding ground and a financing ground for the Taliban and Al Qaeda will no longer fly.  Since crazy people aren't running our government anymore NATO is stepping in on a much larger scale now. This whole situation, confronting Osama style terrorism, it isn't just about the U.S.  I think you have a better understanding of this than many other libs, but some libs act like Afghanistan is only our deal and we are the only military in there.  That isn't true and more military of democratic type nations are joining us there now since the madmen are out of the picture.

    Parent
    Some nurses are... (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:32:40 PM EST
    unhappy about the mandatory swine flu vaccination, and I don't blame them...public health is important, but so are workers rights and individual rights.  I believe the right to refuse an injection is fundamental and inalienable.

    I don't agree (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by andgarden on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:38:47 PM EST
    They have a critical role in coming into contact and treating sick people, and have a responsibility to make reasonable efforts to avoid being infected themselves. Presumably, they knew this was part of the job when they signed up.

    Parent
    Public health workers (5.00 / 4) (#17)
    by Fabian on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:56:07 PM EST
    are expected to not be dangers to the people they care for.  Patients often include those who are at high risk for complications from influenza and cold viruses, to say nothing of other pathogens.  When I worked at the hospital, they tested us for titers for varicella and others.  

    The new information that H1N1 should be considered contagious as long as coughing is present.  Imagine what would happen if the choice was to get the vaccine or be sent home if you were caught coughing at work.  That would pretty much be a choice between getting the vaccine and finding a new job unless you had phenomenal health.  

    Parent

    Actually, I'm wondering if they knew (none / 0) (#56)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 05:01:28 PM EST
    this would be part of the job when they decided what they would be.

    I got a flu shot for the first time in my life in 2007. I got the flu for the first time in 30+ years in 2008.

    There is some belief that those of us who had the swine flu back in the 70's are immune. There is also the belief that from getting the flu we are building our own immunities.

    They want to make it mandatory, they need to make it free.

    Parent

    I've not gotten flu shots (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 11:06:07 PM EST
    in the past for just that reason.  I've generally been robustly healthy, have had the flu a couple times in my 60 years and survived it with no complications.  My immune system seems to be very good at its job, and I credit that at least partly to not trying to protect it all the time from challenges.

    However, the older I get, the less resilient my body inevitably is, so I may well get both shots this year.

    Parent

    They also have an inalienable right (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by me only on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:45:48 PM EST
    to refuse drug testing.  That they lose their job for refusal of the test or vaccine is called a choice.

    Parent
    Point taken... (none / 0) (#42)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 04:01:36 PM EST
    but do we want our nurses to be given no other choice but to get the shot or quit?

    Can't they just be forced to wear masks and gloves at all times on the job if they object to the shot?  That seems a reasonable compromise, no?  I mean its a flu strain we're talking about here, not the black plague.

     

    Parent

    Some patients have little to no immunity (5.00 / 4) (#51)
    by MO Blue on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 04:37:35 PM EST
    to disease. Exposure to even mild disease could at best case put them into the hospital and worse case cause their death.

    Parent
    As someone in a high-risk group (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by Cream City on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 05:05:22 PM EST
    but not high enough for first priority for the H1N1 flu shot -- I'd sure like any health care worker who doesn't get the flu shot but is in contact with hundreds who do have the flu . . . well, I'd sure like that health care worker to let me know.  Maybe wearing a sign that communicates "I could be communicable."

    Fer pity's sake, when I was a student teacher, I had to get lots of shots to be allowed into the classroom -- for my own protection from the germ swarms called students.  Now I'm not teaching at that level so don't have to get the shots, but I do so every year because they're such carriers.  And right now, I'm surrounded by them dropping like flies from one flu or another . . . but when I went for even the regular flu shot yesterday, supplies ran out before hundreds like me.

    So maybe I oughta be grateful for health care workers get first priority for flu shots but won't get the shots, so next time there might be some left for me.  Yeh, that's it. . . .

    Parent

    It appears... (none / 0) (#61)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 05:17:23 PM EST
    the objection isn't to forced vaccination itself so much, just this particular unproven vaccine being forced upon them.  Nobody should be forced to be a pin pricked test subject, especially in response to a "pandemic" that has only been predicted, not actually having arrived as of yet.

    These are healthcare professionals too, nobody understands the risk to patients and themselves in a hospital setting more than they do...yet some are balking.  Gotta make you wonder...

    Parent

    Not what the nurses' group says (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by Cream City on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 07:27:02 PM EST
    at the link:

    "We as an organization have not questioned the safety of the vaccine," said Nancy Webber, spokeswoman for the association. "We see this as an issue of workers' rights."

    The reporter found some individual members who think otherwise.  Not a surprise among 37,000 members.  I don't agree with some of what the AFT says for my profession, either.  So what?  

    The organization of nurses says it's safe.  You don't.  There issue is workers' rights.  That's not your issue.

    Now, on the workers' rights issue -- I don't think that they have a legal argument, as they are licensed by the government which gets to tell them to do this . . . just as it gets to tell them to take more classes, etc.

    Parent

    Government licensing... (none / 0) (#82)
    by kdog on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 08:11:51 AM EST
    requirements give the state carte blanche to stick nurses with any concoction they wish?  

    That's a far cry from a continuing education requirement...that's some scary powers...we're talking about breakin' sovereign skin here and injecting an unproven vaccine.  

    Parent

    No, licensing allows (none / 0) (#88)
    by Cream City on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 11:39:22 AM EST
    only requirements related to the work involved -- like keeping clients healthy if you're in health "care."

    Parent
    Which is what in this instance? (none / 0) (#90)
    by kdog on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 11:52:32 AM EST
    An injection of an unproven vaccine containing potentially harmful preservatives, or that can potentially cause an allergic reaction, into their soveriegn bloodstream.

    I'm glad I'm not a nurse, you gotta sign your god damn body away to do that work I guess.  It's like being in the military...your body ain't yours no more.  At least it ain't a crime for nurses to quit over it...yet.

    Parent

    The pandemic is already here (5.00 / 3) (#78)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 11:08:58 PM EST
    H1N1 has already long since reached pandemic proportions, it's just that it's been relatively mild in its effects.  The fear is that it will mutate into something more deadly.  In that case, the vaccine that's been developed will only be partially effective, but that partial effectiveness will be absolutely critical in saving hundreds of thousands of lives.

    Parent
    Exactly... (none / 0) (#83)
    by kdog on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 08:18:28 AM EST
    mild effects...who the hell is saying hundreds and thousands of deaths?

    As of 9/21 according to the CDC there have been 44.5k cases and 694 deaths...I really don't get the panic and the rush rush to vaccinate.

    Parent

    Good grief (none / 0) (#94)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 12:52:18 AM EST
    Kdog, think a little, will you?  If the dam thing mutates, it will be too late to make a vaccine.

    Look up what happened with the frighteningly similar 1916-18 flu.  The first go-round was fairly mild, then it roared back the next year and killed millions of people.

    Odds are high that's not going to happen with this one, but a flu shot is a pretty minor thing to do to be sure it doesn't when the potential is definitely there.

    Parent

    Odd you mention Black Plague (5.00 / 2) (#87)
    by me only on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 11:34:54 AM EST
    From an article today

    Influenza kills a few hundred thousand people in an average year, but in 1918 it killed more people (50 million to 100 million) than any pandemic in history (including the bubonic plague).

    Considering that the plague is usually transferred by vermin from host to host and the flu is transmitted by air and touch maybe you could come up with a better argument.

    If this strain is as bad as the 1918 variety, then yes they should be forced to take the shot.  I cannot (and you cannot) answer how dangerous this particular virus is.

    Parent

    Interesting.... (none / 0) (#89)
    by kdog on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 11:42:00 AM EST
    did not know more died of flu in 1918 than the black plague...though I don't know how accurate the black plague estimates are.

    Of course I could be dead wrong on swine flu and it is the greatest threat to mankind since 1918...but then again, the shot could end up being the bigger threat long term...who the hell knows.  Nobody really...thats why I think it better to let people make up their own free minds and come what may.

    Or at the very least, waive the immunity the vaccine makers are being afforded, just in case it ends up doing more harm than good.

    Parent

    So if someone doesn't believe in (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by me only on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 12:04:21 PM EST
    AGW should they be allowed to opt out of the cap and trade (or carbon tax)?  I mean after all we won't know about the effects of those for decades or more, but the immediate negative impact is obvious...

    The vaccine makers are being given immunity so that we can have vaccines.  Making vaccines is very, very low profit since the government mandates a lot of the pricing.

    Parent

    Opinions vary (none / 0) (#93)
    by Fabian on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 12:10:22 PM EST
    on exactly what the black plague was but estimates are that it wiped out a huge percent of the population in the affected areas.  Up to 60% in some affected areas, 25% of the global population.  That was with a fairly sparsely distributed population and no means of rapid transportation.  The current pandemic climate is mass transit and many large, dense population centers - made to order for rapid spread.

    One theory is that it wasn't bacterial, but viral, a hemorrhagic fever because the spread was so rapid and the fatalities so high.

    Parent

    can you explain to me (none / 0) (#5)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:33:31 PM EST
    why anyone would not want a flu vaccine?


    Parent
    I don't get one (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:55:45 PM EST
    because I never get the flu. Probably one bout of the flu would be enough to make me get them every year after.

    But then again I don't refuse to get one. If my job required it, I would not protest.

    Parent

    yeah (none / 0) (#20)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:58:58 PM EST
    I get not getting one.  I dont get refusing to get one.

    Parent
    Many reasons (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by jen on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:17:51 PM EST
    people don't want to get the rushed through, untested swine flu vaccine. I'm one of them. Here's a website, Pandemic Flu Guide, that explains why some of us are so concerned.

    Dangers of Vaccines

    Parent

    thats a very official looking site (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:41:16 PM EST
    but from the "about us" tab:

    Between us, Steve (Brinser) and I have 8 children, and a great group of grandchildren. We live in a regular house, eat normal food, garden, watch movies, cook and bake for fun, walk for exercise, and we have faith in God.

    I am not a doctor.

    just sayin.  my doctor said to get the shot.  and she is young and I have found her to be very informed.

    Parent

    "goverment cover-up on thimerosal" (5.00 / 3) (#49)
    by Fabian on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 04:34:21 PM EST
    I wish they would have named the site "Why we hate vaccines!".  It would have been more honest.

    Yeah, it's one of those sites.  I clicked on the link for autism and vaccines and there it was.

    (BTW - there is a very rare seizure disorder that often has its first onset during a fever following a vaccination.  However, this is a seizure disorder with a strong (>50%) genetic link and it is NOT autism.  Our school is sponsoring a fund raiser for two students who have this severe seizure disorder.  It's to pay for the expensive anti-seizure meds that we need.  All hail the health insurance scam!)

    Parent

    The autism-vaccine people (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by andgarden on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 04:36:39 PM EST
    make me shake with anger. Seriously, I don't think I could be in the same room with an advocate.

    Parent
    I think there's still a possibility (none / 0) (#54)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 04:55:17 PM EST
    they may find some sort of link down the road. Perhaps it's the vac overload that triggers it in some children, or a specific vac triggers it in others. Over vaccinating has been know to cause problems. I think we are too one size fits all and jump on them too quick in other cases (the girl's cancer one comes to mind)

    Parent
    Who makes it (none / 0) (#46)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 04:15:21 PM EST
    and how much are they making from it?

    After growing up in the country drinking pond water, getting bit by snapping turtles and later in life working for a while in a slaughter house -- not to mention changing a few messy diapers, I dont get the flu either.

    Also, that last fifty-dollar--a-pill antibiotic that almost killed me that I was prescribed by one of our infallable medical high preists didnt exactly boost my confidence in the received wisdom "for our own good" coming down from on high.

    Parent

    I can be a knee-jerk... (none / 0) (#66)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 05:54:00 PM EST
    all-star, I object to the flu shot knee-jerkingly, unlike the nurses who have legit concerns in my book...immunity from lawsuit enough is a debate-winner for the nurses.  If the shot f*cks 'em up what recourse do they have?

    But the knee-jerk objections to the objections may be the most dangerous knee-jerk...the willingness to bow down to the collective and have zero tolerance for the oddball will vaccinate us all from a free existence if we're not careful.

    Parent

    Nurses recourse: worker's comp. (none / 0) (#70)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 06:50:53 PM EST
    Sure... (none / 0) (#91)
    by kdog on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 11:54:53 AM EST
    until the government immunity promised the vaccine maker allows the workers comp insurance co to deny the workers comp claim of the obvious "faker".

    Thats no protection at all.

    Parent

    If you're interested (none / 0) (#60)
    by jen on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 05:13:53 PM EST
    in finding out why so many are resistant to getting the shot, you can google or bing around and find many other sites that offer similar information on the dangers.

    Parent
    not trying to be (none / 0) (#6)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:34:41 PM EST
    confrontational I just dont get it.


    Parent
    I personally (none / 0) (#10)
    by CST on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:42:55 PM EST
    would prefer not to have one.  I don't like needles and I'm willing to take my chances that my body is strong enough to fight this off - plus, I have never had the flu, I don't hang out with little kids, and I'm no longer on a college campus.

    Parent
    not to mention (none / 0) (#11)
    by CST on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:45:36 PM EST
    they just came out with this thing, in kind of a hurry.  I'm willing to let you all be the guinea pigs for me.  Along with the at risk population.

    Parent
    There is the answer... (none / 0) (#21)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:59:17 PM EST
    the vaccine is new and untested for long-term potential side effects, contains eggs which some are allergic too...lots of concerns, especially for healthy folks who have little to worry about from the swine flu.

    Parent
    I also (none / 0) (#24)
    by CST on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:05:21 PM EST
    have a history of being highly allergic to things doctors give me.  Let's just say it makes me hesitant to sign up for something I don't feel I need.

    Parent
    During the last swine flu epidemic.... (none / 0) (#31)
    by trillian on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:34:53 PM EST
    ....more people died from the vaccine than the actual flu.

    Parent
    I don't really get it (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Steve M on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 04:11:25 PM EST
    how is a lack of people dying from the flu an argument against the vaccination program?

    Parent
    I had never had a flu shot, (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 04:29:36 PM EST
    nor the flu, until last year, and I didn't even know I had the flu.

    Woke up one morning after dinner and a little wine at a friend's house and felt like total dog sh!t - pounding headache, sandpaper eyes, upset stomach, run-down, etc., etc.

    Frustrated at being so hungover after only a little wine (couple glasses) I went for a run, ate a few ibuprofen and went to work.

    Instead of getting better, I felt even worse by the end of the day.

    By the next AM I was much better, and the next day it was all a distant memory.

    Then both my kids got sick and my wife. My wife was flat on her back, groaning, for three days.

    That's when I realized I didn't have a hangover that day, I had a slight flu, and when I realized I never want to spend three days flat on my back groaning, ever.

    So I'm thinking I might give this here new-fangled flu medicine stuff a try this year...

    Parent

    right (none / 0) (#37)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:42:09 PM EST
    1976

    Parent
    Not so. (none / 0) (#58)
    by Cream City on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 05:06:38 PM EST
    When was that exactly? (none / 0) (#62)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 05:23:20 PM EST
    I don't recall a swine flu vaccine ever being released before.

    Parent
    Ten or fifteen years ago maybe, twenty? (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 10:59:18 PM EST
    Can't remember.  But it was quite a hoo-hah, with all kinds of hysteria about a swine flu that was expected to be terribly serious, but it wasn't.  And I believe the commenter is right that the vaccine they hurriedly came up with was badly done and more people died from it than from what turns out to be a fizzle of a flu.

    But they've come a very long way in the science of this stuff since then, so the chances of a repeat are pretty close to zero, seems to me.

    Parent

    Low risk? (none / 0) (#14)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:48:09 PM EST
    My chances of getting the flu are very low. When I do get a flu like illness, I generally kick it in half the time or less than most people. My plan is to wait and see what goes down. I may get one before I hop on a plane in Dec-Jan, but I'll re-evaluate down the road.

    Parent
    fair enough (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:51:16 PM EST
    its amazing to me how many people still think you can get the flu from the shot though.

    I will get the shot.  I get one every year and I never have the flu.


    Parent

    I rarely get anything (none / 0) (#19)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:58:22 PM EST
    even when working in studios where folks insist on coming in ill. If I had a tendency to catch everything, I might think differently. The only reason I would consider one before flying is because I'll be seeing my elder, in not great health Dad. My Mom gets flu shots for that reason, she had previously not done them either.

    I did see an article today about China's flu shot and had a quick flash of us importing tainted batches from them, lol!~ Not saying theirs is tainted, sounds like it's fine, I just was flashing on our tendency towards shoddy imports from China . . .

    Parent

    I never get a flu (none / 0) (#33)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:36:09 PM EST
    shot and I never get the flu.

    The flu shot doesn't completely protect you from the flu.

    And a rare side effect, Guillian Barre syndrome can occur.

    All good reasons why some might opt out of the flu shot.

    Parent

    Perhaps (none / 0) (#25)
    by eric on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:06:49 PM EST
    they remember 1976.

    Parent
    ah (none / 0) (#26)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:08:15 PM EST
    so THAT is what its all about.  why not.  it was only 33 years ago.

    Parent
    Here's an interesting tidbit (imo) (none / 0) (#59)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 05:11:19 PM EST
    Legal immunity set for swine flu vaccine makers
    Lessons of 1976 outbreak prompt early action to warn off lawsuits

    ATLANTA - The last time the government embarked on a major vaccine campaign against a new swine flu, thousands filed claims contending they suffered side effects from the shots. This time, the government has already taken steps to head that off.

    Vaccine makers and federal officials will be immune from lawsuits that result from any new swine flu vaccine, under a document signed by Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, government health officials said Friday.


    Link

    Parent
    MA appointment bill (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by andgarden on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:42:14 PM EST
    passes senate.

    Final passage expected tomorrow.

    I get my wood from the InnerNetz (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by Ellie on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:47:29 PM EST
    No wonder the Perpetual Martyrs of Wingnuttia hate scientists as much as they hate safe sex.

    Clearly, some people are having wayyyy too much fun with sex, which, when done properly -- if at all -- should be as brief, dismal and punitive as possible.

    I like the Green options this product offers, ie, the myriad of other practical uses for those "containers" ... notably, the ability to come into the game off the bench should the opening line-up fails to deliver.

    think hair was big (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:00:40 PM EST
    This is great! (5.00 / 4) (#23)
    by jen on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:03:44 PM EST
    President of the health insurers trade assoc. (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by scribe on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:25:34 PM EST
    It figures (none / 0) (#41)
    by Zorba on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 04:01:32 PM EST
    that they don't like taxes on high-value plans, co-ops, national benefits standards, etc, but they love mandates- they just think the requirement should be much stronger.  Why am I not surprised?

    Parent
    Trivia (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by lentinel on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:36:26 PM EST
    I know there are more important things to think about but...

    Why does Pat Sajak have to guide every woman by her hand from the wheel to the spot ten feet away for the bonus round --- while the guys are left to navigate by themselves?

    Because. (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by scribe on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:43:30 PM EST
    He's got (none / 0) (#43)
    by Zorba on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 04:02:36 PM EST
    a(female)hand fetish?

    Parent
    LOL This probably started when the show did - (none / 0) (#53)
    by Angel on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 04:44:50 PM EST
    however many years ago that was, more than 20 probably, and it's just part of what he does.  It's a carryover from a different time I guess, even though why they did it way back then is another mystery.  

    Parent
    Similar question re rental car (none / 0) (#65)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 05:45:00 PM EST
    shuttle driver, who was female.  She took over the luggage of females boarding the shuttle but men of any age were on their own.

    Parent
    Remember... (none / 0) (#67)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 06:02:03 PM EST
    Richard Dawson on Family Fued back in the day...he was practically making out with anything in a skirt.

    Sajak's a gentleman, Dawson was a dirty old man!

    Parent

    I guess (none / 0) (#69)
    by lentinel on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 06:28:01 PM EST
    you could say that Sajak is a gentleman.. but it always makes me cringe. Women have to take his hand whether they want to or not.

    The Dawson thing was a real nightmare.

    How did it go on so long?

    Parent

    Because you and others (none / 0) (#72)
    by oldpro on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 07:13:42 PM EST
    watched it so long.

    And still are?

    Hooboy...

    Parent

    Respectfully, (none / 0) (#81)
    by lentinel on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 04:05:00 AM EST
    I will say that I watched it, or parts of it, from time to time - over a period of time. It was not a habit. When I would see Dawson grasping or (ick) kissing all the women on the lips, I would begin the process of switching channels. But I know the show lasted for years. But I can't be blamed as one of those whose viewing habits kept him on the air for all those years.

    I did like Ray Combs - and did enjoy the show at that point. I like seeing real people on TV - and Ray Combs was a people person.

    The only time we get to see real people on television are the game shows, IMO.

    Parent

    this is funny (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 04:04:19 PM EST
    at least to me.  work for a game company, right.
    we are working on a new game and the scuttlebutt around the studio is that our character looks "to gay"
    I wish I could post a pic of him so you could see for yourself but that would be some kind of violation of my privacy contract. suffice to say he is a bada$$.  this is a first person shooter and the character is built like Arnold, covered with tattoos and a face sort of like Bruce Willis (bald)with scars wears a ripped sleevless t-shirt and piercings.

    too gay.

    all I can say is stereotypes are not what they used to be.
     

    Asked my 17 yr old (none / 0) (#48)
    by waldenpond on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 04:33:24 PM EST
    He says...  sigh!!!! the tattoos, clothing etc should be optional!!!!! everyone is going to role playing, everyone knows that!!!!!  duh!!!!!

    Parent
    ha (none / 0) (#63)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 05:23:42 PM EST
    our other franchise has the most customizable characters available.  not this one.  so far.


    Parent
    Have you walked down Bourbon St (none / 0) (#52)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 04:37:52 PM EST
    in N.O. after the tourists are all passed out in bed after, say, midnight on a weekend?

    Not a lot of cuddly Nathan Lane types prowling the streets...

    Parent

    true (none / 0) (#7)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 02:35:21 PM EST
    grit

    Woman survives 5 days in the mountains after Central City Pkwy. Crash

    the moonie times frets (none / 0) (#27)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:11:04 PM EST
    Health reformers targeting 'enemies'

    for a moment consider how disingenuous, dishonest and intentionally misleading this is:

    The plan for a series of grass-roots demonstrations Tuesday to promote President Obama's health care agenda calls for tightly scripted events and an "escalation" of efforts against "enemies" of reform.

    ...

    David Palombi, senior vice president of corporate communications for WellPoint, said the "enemies project" is counterproductive to the debate and will do nothing to expand access, reduce costs or improve the quality of health care in the United States.

    "It is extraordinarily disappointing that it comes at a time when [House Speaker Nancy Pelosi] and others are calling for a civil discussion."

    Mrs. Pelosi, California Democrat, became emotional at a news conference Thursday when she expressed fear that the harsh rhetoric of the debate would lead to violence.



    Anyone know what "Public Option" means? (none / 0) (#29)
    by Exeter on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:19:20 PM EST
    Most on the left think, as the name implies, that they will have a "public option" to sign up for health insurance via the government. This is not true under the current proposals. 90% of people will still have NO OPTION -- and be stuck with their current $hitty insurance.

    Wow! (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:35:30 PM EST
    Thanks for the news flash.

    Sheesh, you capitulation apologists are amazing.

    For some reason, I doubt you are a single payer purist.

    Parent

    Apparently (none / 0) (#39)
    by eric on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:44:44 PM EST
    clove cigarettes are no more.  The end of an era.  I will miss passing the grungier sort of hipsters on the sidewalk and smelling the sweet aroma.  Parliament has just increased its market share in this demographic to near 100%.  Heh.

    Link (none / 0) (#40)
    by eric on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 03:46:14 PM EST
    about clove and flavored cigarettes is HERE.

    Parent
    The gateway tobacco bites the dust (none / 0) (#55)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 04:59:31 PM EST
    There's some good tastin' cigars out there . . .

    Parent
    That's a shame... (none / 0) (#68)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 06:08:42 PM EST
    I guess that includes Nat Shermans, can't seem to find out if beedies are done.

    Lady Liberty just shed another little tear.

    Parent

    I thought of you when I heard an (none / 0) (#71)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 06:53:45 PM EST
    NPR interview yesterday of a Manhattan smoke shop proprietor.  He is hoping samples of tiny cigars will keep him in business.

    Parent
    Double shame... (none / 0) (#85)
    by kdog on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 08:23:16 AM EST
    this is really gonna hurt the tobacco specialty shop.

    There is always the black market I guess.

    Parent

    Of course I could be wrong... (none / 0) (#64)
    by lentinel on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 05:37:24 PM EST
    but something about this (from the AP) has an all too familiar stench about it:

    "NEW YORK - The U.S. government expanded a terrorism warning from transit systems to stadiums, hotels and entertainment complexes as investigators searched for more suspects Tuesday in a possible al-Qaida plot to set off hydrogen-peroxide bombs hidden in backpacks.

    Police bolstered their presence at high-profile locations. Extra officers with bulletproof vests, rifles and dogs were assigned to spots such as Grand Central Terminal in New York. Plainclothes officers handed out fliers at a nearby hotel with a warning in large block letters: "If you suspect terrorism, call the NYPD."

    Bush admin (none / 0) (#79)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 11:12:16 PM EST
    This is what the Bush admin did to us, cried wolf on this stuff so many times, we don't believe any of it anymore.  I was a HUGE skeptic of the Bush-era "plots," but this one sounds like it might possibly be the real deal to me.

    Parent
    Timing (none / 0) (#84)
    by CST on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 08:22:29 AM EST
    That is what makes all this believable.  It's the first year of Obama's term.  Both trade center attacks happened in the first year of a new presidency.  There is a consistency to trying to hit a new guy early.  To be honest, I am somewhat surprised nothing has happened yet.  Let's hope nothing does.  But I absolutely believe something is planned.

    Parent
    So (none / 0) (#73)
    by jbindc on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 07:19:25 PM EST
    David Paterson and Obama have a little icy political relationship. Interesting....

    "Clearly I'm running for re-election," Governor David Paterson said one day after his awkward meeting with President Obama, who telegraphed his desire to see Paterson exit before next year's gubernatorial race.

    Paterson tried to latch onto the legal victory handed to him by the state Court of Appeals today, which affirmed his authority to appoint a lieutenant governor. He said that during the court battle, "All I read is about how I'm going to lose" which "is very much like the discussion we were just having" about his political prospects.

    Speaking to reporters at Columbia University, on West 168th Street, Paterson said the message is "you don't give up. You don't give up because people tell you what they think is going to happen. You don't give up because people tell you who's running and who's not before they ever announce to do it. You don't give up because you're unpopular when you feel you've made the right decisions and when people get a chance to look at what you're up against and reflect on it."

    He added, "And if you keep the attitude that you don't give up, you may get to prove people, when the final tabulation is in, that you were doing the right thing. And that's what happened with the court decision today."

    Paterson chalked up Obama's intervention to Washington politics.

    "I understand the president's concern and I understand concern of staff members at the White House. If you look at it from their perspective, they haven't exactly been able to govern in the first year of their administration in the way that other administrations have, where you would have, theoretically, a period in which the new administration is allowed to pass the needed pieces of legislation."

    But Paterson said Obama "was gracious to me. He asked me how I was feeling" and "he expressed a little chagrin about the process in this situation."



    Link? (none / 0) (#80)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 11:14:17 PM EST
    Do you mind?  Or if that's just way, way too hard for you to deal with, could you at least drop a hint about where the article was?

    Thanks ever so.

    Parent

    You can cut 'n paste any sentance you like (2.00 / 1) (#86)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 11:06:40 AM EST
    Trex (none / 0) (#75)
    by WillieB on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 07:37:59 PM EST
    I was cleaning up my bookmarks toolbar tonite when I clicked on Trex's site. He hadn't posted since May 1. What happened? Quit blogging? moved site? just curious.