home

Sunday Open Thread

Newt Gingrich today said he's more inclined to run than not to run for President, and may decide around February or March. Among Republicans, Gingrich named Mitt Romney as the Republican front-runner and Mike Huckabee as the most popular.

It looks like there will be a deal to extend the tax cuts.

Tonight: VH1 Divas: Support the Troops. Hosted by Kathy Griffin and filmed earlier this week, the show has gotten rave reviews. Performances by:

Katy Perry, Nicki Minaj, Sugarland, Keri Hilson, Paramore, Ann and Nancy Wilson of Heart, Grace Potter & The Nocturnals, as well as appearances by literally everyone from our First Lady Michelle Obama to "Snooki" and "The Situation" from "Jersey Shore," including comedian Jeffrey Ross, MC Lyte and Brandy.

If anyone is still watching Boardwalk Empire, tonight is the season finale. This is an open thread, all topics welcome

< Roman Polanski Wins European Best Picture Award | VH-1 Divas: Well Done >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Newt Gingrich,,,, (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by masslib on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 12:50:03 PM EST
    more inclined to utterly humiliate himself then not.  Quelle surprise.

    he is one of the few Republicans (none / 0) (#32)
    by desmoinesdem on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 07:53:04 PM EST
    I am confident Obama would beat.

    Parent
    Extend tax cuts for the rich (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by MO Blue on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 01:01:03 PM EST
    was IMO always going to happen. Everything else was just kabuki.

    The second act will have the poor and the middle class paying for these cuts by losing benefits needed to survive.

    One of the sad things is that even though (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by ruffian on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 01:29:34 PM EST
    the people support letting the tax cuts expire in the polls, the politicians still won't do it. They would pay little price for it in public opinion - this is one time it is perfectly obvious who they are working for.

    Parent
    And the fact that there are not Dems (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by ruffian on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 01:31:44 PM EST
    willing to filibuster to stop this tells me all I need to know about the current Democratic party. It has taken a while to bring me around to this position, but I really do see no difference in the parties anymore.

    Parent
    What do you want them to filibuster? (none / 0) (#16)
    by CoralGables on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 01:53:05 PM EST
    There is no bill saying "give the wealthy a tax break".

    The only option the Dems have is to filibuster a bill that if they are successful would lead to taxes increasing on everyone. Only 14% of the population supports that. (I'm in the 14%)

    Parent

    They can filibuster this (5.00 / 0) (#26)
    by ruffian on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 05:28:02 PM EST
    Then extend tax cuts for the middle class only, like the Republicans just filibustered. dont be the ones to give up on the game of chicken.

    Parent
    What happened to decoupling? (none / 0) (#19)
    by Politalkix on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 02:17:26 PM EST
    What happened to the promise to revoke the Bush tax cuts for the uber rich that the Democrats have promised for the last 10 years and the President promised in 2008.
    If the tax cuts for the uber rich are not revoked, it will have consequences for the Democratic party in the very near future. The Republicans will then use deficit arguments to demand austerity programs that will hit the middle class and poor.
    This is the perfect time for Democrats to draw a line in the sand and show conviction for what they are supposed to stand for. If they choose to fight, they can turn the politics in their favor very easily.

    Parent
    What Dems have said they stand for and what (5.00 / 0) (#22)
    by MO Blue on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 02:56:21 PM EST
    they really stand for are not one and the same thing. It is not just the Republicans who are demanding austerity programs that will hit the middle class and poor. It is Obama and many of his fiercest supporters in Congress. Durbin and Clyburn have both come out in favor of raising the retirement age on SS. Durbin, and Conrad stated that they would have voted yes on the draconian recommendations of the Cat Food Commission which was just chock full of austerity measures hitting the middle class and poor as well as additional tax cuts for wealthy individuals and corporations. On December 3, 2010, 14 Democratic Senators sent a letter demanding prompt action to bring the country's deficit into balance and stabilize our debt over the long term.

    ...the joint letter concludes. "Regardless of whether the Commission's report receives the support of at least 14 of its 18 members, we urge legislative action to address these problems." link

    Senators signing the Warner letter include Evan Bayh (D-IN), Mark Begich (D-AK), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Tom Carper (D-DE), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Kay Hagan (D-NC), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Joe Lieberman (I-CT), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Jon Tester (D-MT) and Mark Udall (D-CO).

    They are not going to fight because they are in agreement with the Republicans on tax cuts paid for by the poor and the middle class.
     

    Parent

    Well, we have to pay for the (5.00 / 0) (#23)
    by observed on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 03:50:50 PM EST
    Afghanistan war and the dreadful HCR and the tax cuts somehow!

    Parent
    Tester has been a big disappointment (none / 0) (#24)
    by shoephone on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 04:18:36 PM EST
    I'm sorry I gave my hard-earned money to help him get elected.

    Parent
    I think they could turn it too (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by ruffian on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 05:37:49 PM EST
    if they were wiling to brave even a couple of weeks of discomfort in January. Let all the 'Bush' tax cuts expire, and come back in January and fight for the Obama tax cuts for those making under 1 million, retroactive toJan 1. If the Republicans want to filibuster that, or not even bring it to a vote in the House, let them make that argument.

    The white house does not seem to want a tax cut named after them. How politically inept can you get?

    Parent

    WH has to learn Politics 101 (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Politalkix on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 06:54:44 PM EST
    In January they can tell voters that Bush tax cuts had expired because of sunset provisions (which Republicans voted not to extend). Then the WH can refer to the bad economy and make a case for the "Obama tax cuts for middle class Americans and small businesses", for those making under 1 million, retroactive to Jan 1.
    As you said, let the Republicans explain why they would filibuster that or not even bring it to a vote in the house!

    Parent
    To: Politalkix (none / 0) (#35)
    by christinep on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 09:33:13 PM EST
    The NYT Nate Silver piece today on this issue was a logistical eye-opener for me. All about odds, risks, outcomes. It ticked me off a bit; but, it is persuasive.

    Parent
    I'm part of that 14% (none / 0) (#41)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 08:39:22 AM EST
    as well. I say let all tax cuts expire rather than extend them for the wealthy. If Republicans really give a crap about deficit reduction that should be their mantra.

    Parent
    Nate Silver's NYT column today (none / 0) (#34)
    by christinep on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 09:29:46 PM EST
    was quite instructive...a decent analysis and risk assessment about the tax cuts and possible outcomes.

    Parent
    And the price tag on that tax cut deal (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Anne on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 01:29:07 PM EST
    will paint in neon, glow-in-the-dark orange the bull's-eye that Simpson-Bowles, Obama, and far too many hysterical Democrats have been drawing on Social Security, so that arrows sure to be fired on it find their mark.

    Swell.

    For the wealthy, it seems appropriate to quote a fairly well-known passage from Richard III, the first line of which is usually uttered by people who think it is meant as a lament, when instead, it is a celebration that a time of unhappiness is past:

    Now is the winter of our discontent
    Made glorious summer by this sun of York;
    And all the clouds that lour'd upon our house
    In the deep bosom of the ocean buried.
    Now are our brows bound with victorious wreaths;
    Our bruised arms hung up for monuments;
    Our stern alarums changed to merry meetings,
    Our dreadful marches to delightful measures.

    For the rest of us, however, not so much.

    "Our stern alarums changed to (none / 0) (#21)
    by The Addams Family on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 02:48:55 PM EST
    sternly worded letters"

    Parent
    also apropo, Anne... (none / 0) (#33)
    by kmblue on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 08:22:58 PM EST
    "Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow
    Creeps in its petty pace from day to day..."

    Parent
    Did you read that Geithner is (none / 0) (#42)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 08:39:49 AM EST
    negotiating this out?  I just read that.  It seems too wierd to me too that Geithner is in there trying to rough up House Dems.  Is Obama down to having to use Geithner as an arm twister now?  Am I starting to smell career Democrats abandoning the Obama ship?  And Geithner has been a failure at everything careerwise he has ever done......and now he is Obama's righthand man?  To me, this is bizarre.

    Parent
    As far as I'm concerned, when (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by Anne on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 09:29:27 AM EST
    smooth-talking Timmy gets involved with something, you can be sure it's going to be in service to the haves at the expense of the have-nots; I'm sure Obama thinks Timmy can sell ice to Eskimos, so it ought to be easy-peasy for him to sell the Congress on making sure the Wall Street/Big Bank/Mega-Corporations can raid the Widows and Orphans Fund, and can also see to it that we all make sizeable donations to the Benevolent and Protective Order of Savvy Businessmen while they're at it.

    Dawn dishwashing liquid might be able to remove crude oil from birds and sea-creatures, but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't make a dent in the sleaze oil that coats Timmy and his pals from head to toe.

    As for what this means for Obama, I think it's just another indication that he aspires to everything people like Geithner stand for; just one more disheartening and demoralizing realization that should mark outright rebellion from Democrats, but won't because too many of them are still hoping this is some Alice-in-Wonderland, Mad-Hatter's Tea Party game that is going to turn out well for us.  Which it won't.  

    And the "Democratic" members of Congress?  At this point, there just are no words to adequately convey the utter contempt in which most of them should be held - and even if there were, what good would it do?

    The whole thing is making me very cranky.


    Parent

    And the tragic irony (5.00 / 0) (#63)
    by NYShooter on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 10:36:55 AM EST
    Of this whole mess is that the "tax cut for the rich"  issue is such an easy sell. I don't care what the opposition throws up there, if a large majority of the American people truly demand something they're going to get it. And this issue resonates with everybody, from the tea-baggers to the ultra Liberals.

    For the Tea baggers, it's the deficit, Stupid, and for the Liberals, its the Fairness thing, Stupid.

    Get Ross Perot (or a look-a-like) out there, with his billboards, and plaster this across everybody's TV screen:
    From this morning Paul Krugman's article:

    "We're talking about almost $4 trillion in lost revenue just over the next decade; over the next 75 years, the revenue loss would be more than three times the entire projected Social Security shortfall."

    My Lord! What could be easier.

    Parent

    Apparently, it's easier to keep (none / 0) (#77)
    by Anne on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 11:33:20 AM EST
    framing this as tax rates that apply to people making over or under some magic threshold than it is to discuss this as applying to income over or under some number.

    That simple frame would make it clear that everyone gets the benefit of lower rates up to that income level - so even if the rates are not extended over that level, even the wealthy will be getting a break.

    Which also makes it easier to add an element of greed to the equation.

    It would be so simple, and yet, there might not even be more than one or two in the media who have made a point to discuss the issue correctly.

    So, while I don't think it would be all that hard to make people understand the facts, apparently this is more than we can expect from the people who represent us in the Congress and the people who read the news to us - and perhaps some of them - the ones making well into 7 figures whose accountants have all told them what their tax bill will be if the rates aren't extended - don't really want the public to find out just how greedy they are.

    But this is the way it works now - this is how we were sold a war, how we were sold health whatever "reform," how we are being sold the mortgage/foreclosure fraud mess, how we are being sold the steady erosion of our privacy rights, and how we are being sold the "problems" with Social Security and the - insert scream here - deficit.

    I'm sick of it, can you tell?

    Parent

    I spent an... (5.00 / 3) (#37)
    by desertswine on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 12:38:38 AM EST
    incredebly beautiful day at the Bosque del Apache NWR. The huge flocks of sandhill cranes and snow geese were jaw droppingly awesome as they flew over our heads to come in to roost for the night. Even spotted a golden eagle. Too much.

    Dexter (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 08:35:21 AM EST
    great episode leading up to the finale but the best thing about last nights was when they were looking on Quinns computer for surveillance video and all they found was this video.

    not sure when they shoot these things but that means they had to find that thing weeks before I found it and posted it here a few days ago.

    I love this show.

     

    I thought of you when I saw that! (none / 0) (#46)
    by ruffian on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 09:33:12 AM EST
    Very funny. Great minds think alike - you are in a mind meld with the Dexter writers - so, how is it going to end?

    Loved how the whole Quinn angle was plotted out, right down to Dexter hearing the one side of the phone call and realizing Quinn is no longer willingly involved with the rogue cop.

    I think Deb is going to find Lumen and identify her as the vigilante, and realize Dexter is somehow involved. That will be the setup for next season. Of course it does not take much to see that coming, so I'm sure there is something else.

    Parent

    could be right about (none / 0) (#50)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 09:42:24 AM EST
    Deb.  although I think the teaser was edited that way to make  us think that.  I bet she was not talking to Dexter when she said
    "drop it" even tho it was made to look that way.  
    but it could be.

    I think Lumen is going to stay.  I cant believe they will kill her off.  although what Deb said about never coming back from something like that was troubling.

    there are so many loose ends flapping around its easy to lose count.

    Parent

    Yeah, I don't believe that teaser editing (none / 0) (#53)
    by ruffian on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 09:47:54 AM EST
    I don't think those pictures are even from the same scene.

    I think Lumen is going to get killed off one way or another. I don't think she is meant to be Dexter's partner in general vigilante-ism. Just her own tormenters. The way he keeps trying to tell her to leave the easy way tells me she is going to leave the hard way.

    Parent

    I go back and forth (none / 0) (#61)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 10:29:14 AM EST
    for a while I was sure she would be killed off.
    I think I have changed my mind.  I dont think she will be.

    I say that because when Rita was killed off they telegraphed it all season.  I commented about it months before she died.  nothing like that with Lumen so far.  exactly the opposite.
    but Rita was a great setup for Lumen because now we know that they, unlike most series, WILL kill off main characters from time to time so no one is safe and we could never be comfortable with someone being immune.

    but I love being surprised.  and she could take the fall for Dexter.  and probably be happy to.

    Parent

    I totally missed the telegraphing (none / 0) (#69)
    by ruffian on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 11:09:49 AM EST
    of Rita getting killed, so my predictions are not very reliable!

    Parent
    My predictions on Dexter (none / 0) (#79)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 11:39:38 AM EST
    aren't either, but that is part of the fun for me...seeing how wrong I was when great writers are involved in entertaining me :)

    Parent
    That was the debate in this house last night (none / 0) (#55)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 09:57:51 AM EST
    too.  Husband said it was edited to look that way, Joshua lept off the couch and shook his finger while saying, "That was Dexter's hair (there is the shot of the back of a head in the Deb shot).  It was hilarious watching that debate about the back of the head.  Joshua declares that he has been exposed to Dexter's hair for years now and that was Dexter's hair.

    Parent
    I sort of hope (none / 0) (#59)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 10:25:02 AM EST
    he is right
    that would be very interesting.

    Parent
    ok (none / 0) (#64)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 10:41:41 AM EST
    I just rewatched trailer.  I saw no heads in the shot with Deb.  you can watch it here
    but I still think he may be right and Deb has the drop on Dexter.

    Parent
    just based (none / 0) (#65)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 10:50:22 AM EST
    on her expression

    Parent
    Yes , I think it is time for Deb to catch Dexter (none / 0) (#71)
    by ruffian on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 11:13:04 AM EST
    doing something. I think she will catch him helping Lumen though,and she will think that is OK, as she alluded to last night, leading to a crisis of conscience for her.

    But- where does the nanny fit in? I'm so confused.....

    Parent

    That's weird (none / 0) (#78)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 11:35:40 AM EST
    I don't see it either.  I will rewind Dexter from last night on the DVR and see if it is different.

    Parent
    first order of business (none / 0) (#52)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 09:45:38 AM EST
    next season.  

    martial arts lessons for Lumen.

    Parent

    ha! yeah, the cowering is really not a good (none / 0) (#54)
    by ruffian on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 09:48:48 AM EST
    strategy.

    Parent
    But sadly fits how women often (none / 0) (#56)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 09:59:20 AM EST
    act around someone threatening them who has in the past raped them, beaten them, or tortured them :(

    Parent
    Yes, I thought it was very realistic (none / 0) (#67)
    by ruffian on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 11:04:26 AM EST
    and I like that they did not unrealistically make her into a superwoman.

    Parent
    Looking forward to V (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by brodie on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 11:52:01 AM EST
    season 2, and further amusement trying to find all the O = ET subtextual references.

    You know, alien, benign even pleasant appearance, promised much by way of positive change, said they came in peace.

    Also hoping the producers can find a regular spot for Mr David Vincent, since he was one of the early, dogged investigators into ET visitation, and probably has a clearer idea of their actual m.o. by now, 40+ years later.  

    I'm watching Boardwalk (none / 0) (#1)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 12:16:29 PM EST
    Tonight is going to be a great night, but Sunday is around here between Boardwalk, Dexter, and the Walking Dead.  Everyone in the house has their programs in the DVR and we jockey for our air time.  Sunday night right now is a big popcorn fest around here.

    I've been reading around about the upcoming (none / 0) (#2)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 12:30:46 PM EST
    layoffs in Alabama municipal law enforcement, looks like it is going to be harder for that Magistrate to work on gunning specifically for me in a get even vendetta.......bummer.  Honestly though, if they have so many police officers working here that they have time and capacity to have three cars shake down seven teenagers in a parking lot for nothing....violate their civil rights and come up with nothing.....we have too many police officers employed.  Some of these people should be retrained and employed in the building of skate parks and then perhaps skate boarders could have a hope of graduating above the level and label of offspring of the devil.

    Parent
    Auxiliaries and unpaid volunteers, (none / 0) (#43)
    by jeffinalabama on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 09:02:28 AM EST
    MT... now some of them have had police officer standards and training (POST), but others might be scheduled to go, or be attending weekend courses, yet still have some authority...

    But if they can't afford fuel, lol!

    Parent

    In Enterprise you take an 8 week (none / 0) (#47)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 09:34:29 AM EST
    course or some such thing and Ta Da, you are now law enforcement.  Scariest fricken thing I've ever seen.  In Wyoming you needed at least a two year degree preferably in law enforcement and you had to pass a really tough psych eval too.  I know people personally who got the education and then some but could not pass the psych eval.  In Colorado Springs, if you had any sort of incident of family violence whatsoever....no law enforcement job for you.

    I think that is also why I have in the past had a skewed sense of trust in law enforcement.  I grew up with and experienced my teenage years with some very very sound sane law enforcement officers, I came to trust them mucho and they really were worthy of that trust.  But they all had a lot of interaction with the community too  before, during, and after their work.  Many of the police officers here scare me, they won't even talk to other people....many of them are antisocial personalities who mostly want you to be afraid of them and if you aren't they will give you a reason to be.  A busy police officer almost accidentally ran over Josh and I the other day in Target, he steadied Josh with his hands, apologized, laughed good naturedly, had such a social personality....God I miss that being the norm for me in my life.  I didn't even care that he was in a hurry and almost took us out bodily :)

    Parent

    Glad I stuck with Boardwalk, (none / 0) (#5)
    by KeysDan on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 01:10:14 PM EST
    for as many have pointed out, it seemed to get off to a slow start. However, it has gained speed along with recognition that we are not supposed to like any of the characters.  Just as you may start to do so, the storyline sets you straight.   Moreover, I initially thought Steve Buscemi was miscast but now I like him as Nucky Thompson (glad that Vince Vaughan/Buscemi barroom brawl that put Steve in the hospital back in 2001 was not as serious as it might have been.)   Have been a fan of Michael Pitt since 'Dreamers'--an under-recognized talent.  

    Parent
    I've had kind of the opposite experience (none / 0) (#7)
    by ruffian on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 01:26:51 PM EST
    I've liked it less as time has gone by. But I do agree that Steve Buscemi is good in the role. I think my issues are mostly with the dialogue, which I find stilted.

    But I keep watching, so they must be doing something right.

    Parent

    Do you think it is possible that (none / 0) (#13)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 01:34:34 PM EST
    Margaret stole Annabelle's money she had hidden under the floor boards?

    Parent
    I was thinking the same thing (none / 0) (#30)
    by ruffian on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 05:46:39 PM EST
    She must have something up her sleeve

    Parent
    Well I guess not (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by ruffian on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 09:26:47 AM EST
    Back to Plan A

    Parent
    very curious (none / 0) (#48)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 09:35:45 AM EST
    what happens to Quinn.  he as seen them tossing bodies over the side of their boat.


    Parent
    but he can't prove it was a body (none / 0) (#49)
    by ruffian on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 09:41:56 AM EST
    All he has is some odd looking behavior.

    Parent
    true (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 09:43:16 AM EST
    but I wonder what is going to happen with the detectives blood on his shoe.

    if anything

    Parent

    He's going to the big house (none / 0) (#58)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 10:04:51 AM EST
    and when he gets out for some strange reason he will be Dexter's new adversary.

    Parent
    I think that was mostly metaphorical blood (none / 0) (#72)
    by ruffian on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 11:16:06 AM EST
    on his shoe. I think Dexter and Quinn are going to be on the same side.

    Parent
    I agree (none / 0) (#73)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 11:18:29 AM EST
    just cant figure out how.  this is the blurb on the site:

    In the season finale, Dexter's situation grows desperate when he discovers that Lumen's been set up. Despite knowing he's being baited into a trap, Dexter risks everything to make sure he doesn't fall into the same mistake again. In the Barrel Girls case, Debra lets her personal feelings lead her instincts once she concludes that vigilantes are more than just a theory. Quinn finds himself in a troublesome situation, which only Dexter can help him out of.


    Parent
    I think the season cliffhanger (none / 0) (#75)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 11:19:20 AM EST
    could be Deb.  what she thinks and does about all this.


    Parent
    Garbage bags (none / 0) (#57)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 10:03:23 AM EST
    Dexter is creative, he'll come up with something.  But you know what Josh says?  That ex cop is dead and his blood is on Quinn's shoe!  If Deb discovers that she has bedded another killer though.....ruh roh, she may need an antidepressant.

    Parent
    I think that Michael Pitt (none / 0) (#10)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 01:30:55 PM EST
    has been an under appreciated talent in the past too.  I think he's really pulling off his Boardwalk character well.  Perhaps this will open new doors in his future.

    Parent
    Agree! I think he has a good career ahead (none / 0) (#12)
    by ruffian on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 01:33:30 PM EST
    That really super creepy (none / 0) (#14)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 01:36:08 PM EST
    emotional molestation type relationship he has going on with his mom Gretchen Mol is enthralling in a fubar way too.

    Parent
    Yes, almost brother and sister-- (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by KeysDan on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 01:55:17 PM EST
    sort of like the very peculiar siblings out of Dreamers (a really good film), Isabelle and Theo. Gretchen and Jimmy are only 14 years apart in age.

    Parent
    Going to see a live performance of (none / 0) (#6)
    by oculus on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 01:24:11 PM EST
    Arthur Miller's "The Crucible."  

    Cool (none / 0) (#15)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 01:36:29 PM EST
    I'd love to go to it

    Parent
    Anyone read this yet? (none / 0) (#18)
    by oculus on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 02:12:14 PM EST
    Steve Martin

    I am almost finished w/"Saul Bellow's Letters" and am ready for something less weighty!

    Well, Shopgirl was awful to me (none / 0) (#27)
    by Dadler on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 05:29:47 PM EST
    I have to admit I find Steve Martin's non-comedic writing horrible in general.

    You want to read a great novel: try THE LIFE AND TIMES OF MICHAEL K, by Nobel winner J.M. Coetzee, which will leave you speechless it is so disturbingly beautiful. Coetzee, however, is entirely humorless, so be forewarned.

    Parent

    I am glad I read "Shopgirl." (none / 0) (#36)
    by oculus on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 09:49:52 PM EST
    Sad though.

    Parent
    Henry J. Aaron, a senior fellow at (none / 0) (#20)
    by KeysDan on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 02:31:51 PM EST
    Brookings presents, in his op-ed (cf. Sunday NYT December 5, 2010), deficit reduction plans that focus on first things first.   The upshot is that the Catfood Commission as well as the Bipartisan Policy Center, both put everything on table at once-- such as tax rates, defense spending, social security, Medicare and Medicaid without timing based on urgency or giving attention to the political reality of biting off too much to chew.

    The priority, Aaron states,  is to stop debt from growing faster than gross domestic product, and to do so within the next decade.  He notes that social security plays out over the next quarter-century and that if President Obama believes a commission could help, he should appoint a focused  one, with the realization that its work could not do much to help reduce the deficit.

    Moreover, to slash Medicare and Medicaid spending before reforms to the health care bear fruit would mean reneging on the nation's commitment to the elderly, disabled and the poor. To reduce Medicaid benefits now just as the Affordable Care Act will be adding about 16 million new beneficiaries, would "risk chaos." Mr. Aaron suggests, instead, that among efforts to be undertaken are to curb tax expenditures, end at least some of the Bush tax cuts, and institute cuts in defense spending.  Moreover, he proposes a three-stage  program over time.

     Of course,  what Aaron misses is that a sensible ordering of priorities does not fit the scheme--never let a crisis go as an opportunity to get what you always wanted accomplished.

    Look, there is no shortage (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by NYShooter on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 02:40:22 AM EST
    Of reasonable solutions to our many problems. We are a big, advanced, rich & powerful country and the problems we face, from an empirical point of view, are certainly not insurmountable. And, furthermore, they can be solved with a minimum amount of pain and sacrifice.

    HOWEVER,  

    We are not living in normal times. Our government, industry, educational system, and media are so totally corrupted that discussions regarding how to fix things are just meaningless.

    I worked as the senior negotiator for a large corporation for many years. When sitting down with an adversary for the first time I, and my counterpart, must first answer two questions affirmatively or we may as well pack up and go home. They are: 1. Do we really want to "make a deal"? and, 2. Will we be acting in good faith?

    As any reasonably informed person today knows, the leaders of the institutions mentioned above, while, of course, claiming to want to find solutions, and claiming to be acting in good faith, the tragic facts belie those claims.

    Powerful people will not give up their power willingly and we are not living a fairy tale; there is no reason to expect a happy ending to the debacle we find ourselves in. Its not surprising that when our citizens fail in their first duty of citizenship, to be informed, that the powerful swoop in to fill the vacuum and relegate the masses to the inevitable serfdom as a result.


    Parent

    It's Catholics vs Convicts again (none / 0) (#25)
    by CoralGables on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 05:15:57 PM EST
    Notre Dame with 11 all time National Titles vs The University of Miami with 5 National Titles, in the GrandDuddy of them all as they meet in ...El Paso?

    Oh how times have changed.

    The Sun Bowl? (none / 0) (#28)
    by caseyOR on Sun Dec 05, 2010 at 05:37:35 PM EST
    Notre Dame vs.Miami in the Sun Bowl? That's what happens when Oregon State doesn't qualify for a bowl game; some other team has to play in El Paso.

    Parent
    Of course, with ND football's (none / 0) (#82)
    by brodie on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 12:03:22 PM EST
    several controversies this year, and with the (now fired) Miami U coach apparently really cleaning up what used to be an anything goes program, it's harder to tell these days which program represents the Convicts.

    The NCAA needs to include some "morals" clause in their evaluations of schools' athletic programs which could take into account what happened in two instances at ND this year.  Either one by itself should have meant at least one-year probation and no bowls.

    But then, the NCAA has never been known for having its priorities straight, and ND is probably easily in the category of Too Big To Fail.

    Parent

    I'm through with the Democratic Party (none / 0) (#39)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 08:34:01 AM EST
    and Obama. Not extending tax cuts for the rich was my line in the sand. It was time for Obama and the Democratic party to dig in and fight for something. I certainly won't start voting Republican, but if they cave and extend the tax cuts for everyone (I'd rather see them expire for all.), I will no longer support a party of spineless cowards. I'll vote Green, Libertarian, Independent, something, but no more support for Democrats if this comes to pass.

    Professor Krugman (NYT, Dec 6) (none / 0) (#60)
    by KeysDan on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 10:25:36 AM EST
    is on your team it seems.  He calls it blackmail, and he says Obama and Democrats should "just say no" (that is a good Republican idea, in this case).   And, he continues, Mr. Obama should draw a line in the sand, right here, right now.  If Republicans hold out, and taxes go up, he should tell the nation the truth, and denounce the blackmail attempt for what it is.

    Parent
    Yeah (none / 0) (#62)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 10:32:52 AM EST
    but Obama is just sorry at politics. You can't community organize Washington.

    Parent
    If you feel like reading (none / 0) (#66)
    by CST on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 11:02:20 AM EST
    something that will both "inform" and "insult" you this morning - here is Ross Douhat on "the changing culture war".

    Condescending piece of cr@p about the "depressing" decline of the 2 person family

    This paragraph says it all:

    "But as religious conservatives have climbed the educational ladder, American churches seem to be having trouble reaching the people left behind. This is bad news for both Christianity and the country. The reinforcing bonds of strong families and strong religious communities have been crucial to working-class prosperity in America. Yet today, no religious body seems equipped to play the kind of stabilizing role in the lives of the "moderately educated middle" (let alone among high school dropouts) that the early-20th-century Catholic Church played among the ethnic working class."

    Whatever will people do without the "stabalizing" role of the Church telling them how to behave?  Personally, I think the rise of Socialism in the "early-20th-century" was a lot more "crucial to working-class prosperity in America" than the Church ever was.

    As for the shift in church going folk to the wealthy - I wonder how much of that has to do with the increasing focus on money making mega churches and the weird smashing together of Republican party economics with the religious movement.

    I think (none / 0) (#80)
    by jbindc on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 11:40:36 AM EST
    it was more than

    Whatever will people do without the "stabalizing" role of the Church telling them how to behave?

    I'm not going to argue that the Church, like any organization that has rules, doesn't have some ridiculous ones in my opinion.  But the Church (and the little "c" church) in small towns and in neighborhoods of cities was often the center of the community, which as we all know, strong communities build strong people.  Businesses grew up and were patronized by church-members and church-goers. Churches provided (and still provide) for the needy (talk about socialists!).  Churches provided a place for people to gather to discuss and work on community issues

    And yes, if you are a person who follows the rules because you don't want to get in trouble, either with your faith, and / or with the law, and you think it's the right thing to do, you are probably going to be a good neighbor and good participant in your community, which leads to stronger families and economic growth.

    I think it's too easy to denigrate the role of religious organizations, especially if you are not comfortable with, or opposed to, religion itself.  

    I would also argue, that having two world wars with a Great Depression in between had more to do with the economic growth and innovation that took place in the early 20th century, rather than "socialistic" views held by some portion of the American population.

    And let's face it - two parent homes where there is love and respect really still are the best environments for children.  Why the "depressing" decline comment?

    Parent

    no (none / 0) (#88)
    by CST on Tue Dec 07, 2010 at 09:50:46 AM EST
    I am very comfortable with private worship of religion.  I am not comfortable with an overwhelming community influence.  I find that the exclusive influence of one kind of religion in a community breeds a certain kind of ignorance and promotes a closeminded view of the world - no matter what religion it is.

    I have not known non religious people to have problems following laws.

    World Wars might have helped the economy on a macro scale, but there were plenty of booming economies that occurred before that time period that left the vast majority of the middle and lower classes behind (actually there was no middle class before then).  Socialism changed that.

    The two parent home is great.  But that doesn't make the alternative depressing.  People are free to make choices about how they live their life, and if it doesn't fit into a cookie cutter jar, that's more than ok, certainly not depressing, just different.

    Parent

    I can't (none / 0) (#83)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 12:33:20 PM EST
    decide if he is conceding the so called "culture war" or if he's trying to create another one.

    I also can't understand why they care whether people get married or not.

    Some of this played out in the Dem primaries in '08 though with even though Hillary was socially liberal she captured working class voters. Perhaps working class voters really are just sick of the culture war and I've been making the case for years that fusing the government and religion has done nothing but hurt religion.

    Parent

    Prop 8 live webcast (none / 0) (#68)
    by nycstray on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 11:08:16 AM EST
    today at 10 AM PT. This should be the link in case anyone wants to follow along.

    Gotta love Wall Street (none / 0) (#70)
    by CST on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 11:10:55 AM EST
    Always looking out for their own interests.  Not to fear wealthy - you'll get your tax cuts anyway.

    But just in case they don't - here is plan B

    pay everyone early

    I had to stop reading (none / 0) (#74)
    by nycstray on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 11:19:04 AM EST
    The top five Wall Street firms have put aside nearly $90 billion for total pay this year, and they are expected to raise that amount using their end of year earnings. That would make this year one of the best ever for bank pay.


    Parent
    I like this line (none / 0) (#84)
    by republicratitarian on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 12:42:09 PM EST
    "Then, these two executives said, they would consider paying early as a competitive measure, so that their workers were not upset. "

    Don't want to upset them.

    Parent

    recorded and watched most (none / 0) (#76)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 11:20:28 AM EST
    of the Walking Dead season yesterday with the marathon.  I liked it.  more than I expected to. but it didnt thrill me as much as some of my friends I think.


    Here are the Padres Nov. 2010 (none / 0) (#85)
    by oculus on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 12:44:53 PM EST
    transactions:  "elected free agency"

    Assuming Heath Bell returns as closer, who else might I recognize come April?

    who will you recognize? (none / 0) (#86)
    by Dadler on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 01:10:50 PM EST
    about forty thousand empty seats a game will quickly look very familiar.  i guess they could keep heath bell, but why? now that you've unloaded a likely hall of famer for not a single major league ready player, why would you keep a closer when you're going to have no games to close?  

    they've got three young starting pitchers.  and that is it.

    Parent

    Good point. Probability of "possible (none / 0) (#87)
    by oculus on Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 01:13:04 PM EST
    save situation" is pretty slim.  

    Parent