home

Monday Morning Open Thread

Open thread. Posted from my phone. Never done that before.

< The Limits of GOP Ideology | Monday Night TV and Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    The kind of responsible history (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by brodie on Mon May 24, 2010 at 12:33:33 PM EST
    debunking that probably needs to be done more often

    ...American University professor W. Joseph Campbell, whose new book Getting It Wrong: Ten of the Greatest Misreported Stories in American Journalism flattens established myths that you were brought up to believe were true: that Orson Welles sparked a national panic with his 1938 War of the Worlds broadcast; that the New York Times suppressed news of the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba at the request of the White House; that Edward R. Murrow destroyed Sen. Joseph McCarthy; that publishing magnate William Randolph Hearst told an illustrator, "You furnish the pictures, I'll furnish the war," before the Spanish-American war started;

    and more [including ...] it has long been an article of faith that President Lyndon B. Johnson said, "If I've lost Cronkite, I've lost middle America," or something like that, after watching the February 1968 CBS News special about the Vietnam War in which well-respected broadcaster and host Walter Cronkite described the conflict as "mired in stalemate."

    That alleged line from Lyndon always struck me as a little too good to be true, and tracking it back, it appears to have shaky origins with Halberstam.  Edward Murrow was better than most probably but almost always turned into a fearless hero on the McCarthy case, which he was not, and he had his pre-Barbara Walters moments with that embarrassing show Person to Person, plus his close ties to the US military over the years.  

     

    Is "Gore said he invented the Internet" (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:06:37 PM EST
    in there?  The stream of lies about Gore that became conventional wisdom could fill several books, but that's the one that started it all off.

    Parent
    All the Vietnam vets (none / 0) (#39)
    by jondee on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:18:56 PM EST
    who were "spat on" by war protesters after returning home..

    Parent
    I thought Gore (none / 0) (#41)
    by brodie on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:24:52 PM EST
    that's the one that started it all off.

    actually said, "I'm the one who started it all" ...   ; )

    Parent

    Glad to see on his list (none / 0) (#30)
    by Cream City on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:02:45 PM EST
    the debunking of the "bra burners" myth, too (although on his blog, even he did not get the full story -- as an ad man restaged the event with paid models).

    I personally, in a newsroom, when working again as a copy editor (to pay the rent in summers) lost a battle to get that nonsensical myth out of a story.  After all, what does a trained historian know when a journalist says it is so?

    So many myths abound in the ambiance of arrogance in newsrooms.  And yes, there is so little time to put out a paper -- but there always is time for a correction, and the resistance to those is something to see, too.

    Parent

    I'll take your word for it (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by brodie on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:38:29 PM EST
    about the newsrooms, never having worked in one myself (though I did once visit the LAT, and I've seen All the President's Men numerous times ...).  Except, the press are working on deadlines, and aren't supposed to be offering more than just "the first draft of history."

    What bugs me is how often what originates in the frenetic context of rushed daily journalism but which isn't adequately vetted for sourcing and accuracy ends up being repeated as gospel not only by so-called serious journalist-historian types but by regular historians, in book after book, and one media appearance after the other.   Meanwhile, the very careful historians or biographers who demand accuracy, or are careful to note where their stories originate and give fair warning to the reader, tend to be in the minority.  

    Parent

    And Cronkite was wrong (none / 0) (#60)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:14:02 PM EST
    More getting history wrong, (none / 0) (#71)
    by brodie on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:33:43 PM EST
    this offering from senate hopeful JD Hayworth

    Former Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ), who is challenging Sen. John McCain in the Republican primary, said that the United States did not formally declare war on Germany in World War II -- at least, that's how it went in his history.

    ... Hayworth defended the modern-day authorizations for the use of military force. "But I would also point out, that if we want to be sticklers, the war that Dwight Eisenhower led in Europe against the Third Reich was never declared by the United States Congress," said Hayworth. "Recall, the Congress passed a war resolution against Japan. Germany declared war on us two days later. We never formally declared war on Hitler's Germany, and yet we fought the war."

    His office later offered a correction, however.  And not quite as bad as the Dick Blumenthal getting his own personal history wrong "misstatement", which is still an ongoing personal quagmire.  Texas pols, perhaps, are allowed to get away with lying about their military service, but not Northern liberals.

    Parent

    but wasn't DB actually in the Marines during the (none / 0) (#133)
    by DFLer on Mon May 24, 2010 at 07:11:16 PM EST
    Vietnam era? Many a vet of that era call themselves Vietnam vets, even though they were not posted to Nam itself or did combat duty. His mistake, was saying "when I was in Vietnam..." when he wasn't there, right?

    help me out here

    Parent

    Yes (none / 0) (#138)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon May 24, 2010 at 07:30:16 PM EST
    THe Times was apparently able to dig up only one clear instance of his saying "When I was in Vietnam" after searching 20 years of news accounts on Lexis-Nexis.

    Go have a look at Bob Somerby's Daily Howler for the last several days.  He's been on a tear about the crappy reporting on this.

    Parent

    According to this (none / 0) (#139)
    by brodie on Mon May 24, 2010 at 07:50:59 PM EST
    NYT article, they've found at least two instance where Blumenthal put himself in VN

    In 2008, for instance, Mr. Blumenthal told a gathering of veterans in Norwalk, "We have learned something important since the days that I served in Vietnam." An article in The Stamford Advocate quoted his remarks at a Veterans Day parade in 2008, where he said, "I wore the uniform in Vietnam, and many came back to all kinds of disrespect."

    I've seen worse stretching by a pol of his military service record (Junior and Lyndon come to mind), assuming nothing else comes out and it was only twice that he misled ... or misspoke.  Now that he's fully apologized, and not just said he "regretted" his "misstatements", it's possible he can begin to put it behind him and survive.

    Parent

    OK, twice in 20 years (none / 0) (#148)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue May 25, 2010 at 07:46:53 AM EST
    Meh.

    Parent
    this could be good (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:21:00 PM EST

    After keeping us waiting for a century, Mark Twain will finally reveal all

    The great American writer left instructions not to publish his autobiography until 100 years after his death, which is now

    Exactly a century after rumours of his death turned out to be entirely accurate, one of Mark Twain's
    dying wishes is at last coming true: an extensive, outspoken and revelatory autobiography which he devoted the last decade of his life to writing is finally going to be published.



    He came into this world (none / 0) (#45)
    by brodie on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:44:55 PM EST
    with Halley's Comet and went out with it, if memory serves.  Interesting and fitting timeline frame for a life.  And at least he didn't burn all his papers, or fail to write that memoir like other major public figures.

    Parent
    Pew shows us (none / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Mon May 24, 2010 at 11:18:35 AM EST
    how different the landline universe now is from cell phone only households. In particular, look at the age composition chart under "discussion."

    I think this is the end of the robopollsters, who aren't allowed to call cell phones.

    and thank (none / 0) (#2)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 11:21:16 AM EST
    GOD for that

    Parent
    Although I did get a robo text message (none / 0) (#4)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 11:35:10 AM EST
    the other day.  

    Questioning my cell phone only choice though when battery wouldn't hold a charge even w/phone powered off.  Kid at ATT sd. it's not the battery.  It's Facebook.  ATT replaced the phone though.

    Parent

    havent (none / 0) (#8)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 11:37:43 AM EST
    had a land line in years.  and likely will never have another

    Parent
    Although I didn't ask ATT, I'm (none / 0) (#23)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 12:26:34 PM EST
    wondering if the gizmo I got at Rite Aid may have harmed the battery in cell phone.  Two AA batteries power gizmo to recharge cell phone.  What do you think?

    Parent
    How do you put up with the annoying echo of most (none / 0) (#134)
    by DFLer on Mon May 24, 2010 at 07:12:51 PM EST
    cell phones? Give me the sound of a land line any day.

    Parent
    I think it's too bad (none / 0) (#9)
    by andgarden on Mon May 24, 2010 at 11:42:13 AM EST
    Public opinion polls are useful.

    What should happen is a "calling party pays" ability for volume callers.

    FTR, I don't have a landline either, and neither does almost anyone I know my age or younger.

    Parent

    Got a good deal recently (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by brodie on Mon May 24, 2010 at 11:55:49 AM EST
    with our phone co to keep the landline and with the cell and internet service with them it works out slightly cheaper than if I'd gone landless.  Found out though I've gotta watch my bills more carefully, particularly with this phone carrier, as they tend to "err" on the side of overcharging.

    Meanwhile doesn't having a landline offer better backup protection during power outages?

    Parent

    Yep... (none / 0) (#15)
    by kdog on Mon May 24, 2010 at 11:59:50 AM EST
    and if I recall correctly, during the 9/11 tragedy cell-phones were down and people were lining up at the pay-phones.  There is no match for a landline for reliability.

    Parent
    The mis-named (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by jbindc on Mon May 24, 2010 at 12:01:11 PM EST
    "East Coast Blackout" of 2004 is also a good example.  Only landlines worked in our area - those with cell phones only had no way to communicate.

    Parent
    Yeah, that jibes with my (none / 0) (#28)
    by brodie on Mon May 24, 2010 at 12:37:09 PM EST
    understanding of power outages.  Maybe I've been in a few too many myself, a/o was too emotionally scarred from living through that first spooky one in NYC in 1965, but I tend to want to plan ahead for these types of things, so long as it's priced right.  The parent in me I suppose.

    Parent
    If all the pay-phones... (none / 0) (#29)
    by kdog on Mon May 24, 2010 at 12:43:15 PM EST
    outside Manhattan weren't ripped out, I still would be landline only...It's a love/hate relationship with the celly...mostly hate:)

    Parent
    If drugs were legal, would there (none / 0) (#57)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:05:03 PM EST
    be working payphones in NYC?

    Parent
    A non-factor.... (none / 0) (#83)
    by kdog on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:45:45 PM EST
    once the pager became obsolete in the trade, so did the need for a payphone.

    Who do you think were some of the first to get on board with cellys?

    Don't know why Manhattan still has so many...tourists?

    Parent

    The impetus for my getting a cell phone (none / 0) (#86)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:47:42 PM EST
    was the inability to give the auto club a call back no. from the cell phone outside the bail bond office!

    Parent
    Make that "pay phone." (none / 0) (#111)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:26:23 PM EST
    That's because of illegal drugs... (none / 0) (#119)
    by kdog on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:51:25 PM EST
    or rather, prohibitionists.  I remember when all the pay-phones suddenly did not allow callbacks...luckily cell phones came right on the heels of that brand of tyranny-lite:)

    Parent
    I keep a landline too (5.00 / 3) (#78)
    by ruffian on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:43:06 PM EST
    for storm/hurricane season. I would feel insecure without it. Want to be able to grab the phone at night and call 911 if I hear a noise without wondering where I left the cell phone. (Have I ever done that? No.)

    Doesn't cost me that much in a local Bell South/ATT bundle with my cell phone. I have a cheap long distance plan with Working Assets, a nice liberal group.

    I never answer calls on the landline unless I know the caller - that is where the telemarketers call.

    Parent

    On 9/11 (none / 0) (#143)
    by BackFromOhio on Mon May 24, 2010 at 09:28:48 PM EST
    cell towers located at World Trade Center were knocked out.  Also, the phone lines were jammed, with everyone trying to reach their friends and family to see that they were okay.  I wonder if cell phone cos. now have back-ups for the downtown towers elsewhere close by.

    Parent
    Landline $32 a month plus (5.00 / 2) (#51)
    by BarnBabe on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:50:47 PM EST
    I get 500 mins of LD, Call waiting, and Voice mail. I keep a annual $90 800 min cell phone for those emergencies. We lose our electric about 4 times a year min. That kills any broadband phone. I use all the 500 mins too. When my family were in the hurricanes, they were very glad they had the land lines which they did not lose.

    I might add that not all cell phones are the same. We have people calling us and you get every other word. I usually ask them if they are calling from a cell phone. They ask, Yes, why? They are totally unaware of how poor the reception is in some areas if you are at the receiver end. BTW, I like the bigger phone in my hand. Must be us old folks who learned to talk on a Princess telephone.  

    Parent

    bet Im older n' you (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:55:01 PM EST
    I just love no telemarketers.

    Parent
    no (none / 0) (#11)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 11:48:34 AM EST
    no no no no NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

    keep yer call off my body.

    Parent

    The politics on this are complicated (none / 0) (#12)
    by andgarden on Mon May 24, 2010 at 11:53:29 AM EST
    The question is whether legislators will want to preserve the access to cheap but good public opinion research. It's possible that internet polling will get good enough to stand in.

    Parent
    I believe that there is no rule saying you (none / 0) (#14)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 24, 2010 at 11:57:58 AM EST
    can't robocall a cell phone.

    The issue is there are no cellphone phone books.

    Parent

    There is a rule saying that you can't (none / 0) (#18)
    by andgarden on Mon May 24, 2010 at 12:03:53 PM EST
    That's the entire point of my original comment.

    Parent
    Thanks I learn something everyday (none / 0) (#59)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:10:06 PM EST
    Are you referring to the do not call (none / 0) (#144)
    by BackFromOhio on Mon May 24, 2010 at 09:30:36 PM EST
    option you can register for with your State? -- This option was very well publicized.  

    Parent
    Nope, FCC rules (none / 0) (#146)
    by andgarden on Mon May 24, 2010 at 11:26:09 PM EST
    I believe only (none / 0) (#27)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Mon May 24, 2010 at 12:33:46 PM EST
    politicians, banks and charities can robocall your cell phone.  Everyone else faces a stiff fine.

    Parent
    Still need a line (none / 0) (#135)
    by mmc9431 on Mon May 24, 2010 at 07:19:17 PM EST
    I have DirectTv and they suspended my service because I didn't have it connected to a phone line.

    Parent
    get dish (none / 0) (#150)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 25, 2010 at 09:04:27 AM EST
    better service better picture better HD and no phone required.

    Parent
    Unless you've got alotta trees... (none / 0) (#155)
    by kdog on Tue May 25, 2010 at 10:36:40 AM EST
    then it's no picture at all...hated to drop Dish, great customer service, but I love the trees too much.

    Parent
    that can be (none / 0) (#156)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 25, 2010 at 11:06:50 AM EST
    a problem.  but Dish has the same problem and the original problem was needing a phone.  

    although it is not required you still need a phone to order PayPer view movies but why on earth would you do that with NetFlix?


    Parent

    sorry (none / 0) (#157)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 25, 2010 at 11:07:21 AM EST
    DirecTv does that.

    Parent
    hmmmm (none / 0) (#3)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 11:22:39 AM EST
    Breenwald's got it. Earlier today (none / 0) (#5)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 11:36:00 AM EST
    he posted about U.S. in continuous war w/o end.

    Parent
    A change of subject may be helpful (none / 0) (#25)
    by KeysDan on Mon May 24, 2010 at 12:33:18 PM EST
    right now, what with that pesky oil issue and even peskier reporters asking those pesky and unwelcome questions.

    Parent
    Dan, I've replied to you on the (none / 0) (#142)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Mon May 24, 2010 at 09:04:17 PM EST
    2012... (none / 0) (#6)
    by kdog on Mon May 24, 2010 at 11:36:18 AM EST
    looking like a safer bet everyday...get your fun in people.  Does the US and China sit out a new Korean War?  Scary.

    Parent
    this Sestak Secretary of the Navy (none / 0) (#7)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 11:36:43 AM EST
    thing is starting to get interesting.  turns out if someone did that its a crime!

    Sestak's charge is a serious one that could potentially involve criminal conduct on the part of someone in the administration. And Sestak, while not offering any new details, is standing by his story. "Something happened last July before I got in the race," he said on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" program March 9. When he was asked about it on the radio program, Sestak continued, "I answered it honestly; I just said yes, but I didn't go beyond that. And actually, Joe, I don't think I should. That's politics." Just to clarify, Sestak said, of the radio interview, "They said to me, have you been offered a job not to get in the race, or to get in the race? And I said yes."

    Not only is the charge serious; Sestak himself, with his long career in the Navy before winning a seat in Congress, is a serious source. On March 8, at a health care event in Pennsylvania, President Obama referred to Sestak as "somebody who rendered outstanding service to our nation before he was in Congress."

    And yet, after an initial denial, the White House spokesman hasn't been able to muster any comment on the allegation. Gibbs has not repeated the denial, hasn't issued a new one, and has now dropped any pretense of checking on the story. How long will the Sestak Stonewall continue?



    How long will the Sestak Stonewall continue? (none / 0) (#121)
    by prittfumes on Mon May 24, 2010 at 04:18:43 PM EST
    Probably right through the first Tuesday in November 2012. By then, do you really believe anyone will be in a mood to discuss Sestak's allegation about a WH job offer?

    Parent
    The WH (none / 0) (#122)
    by jbindc on Mon May 24, 2010 at 04:35:09 PM EST
    Doesn't have their act together on this either.  Yesterday Bob Scheiffer asked Robert Gibbs about this:

    SCHIEFFER: One final question. Joe Sestak, who beat Arlen Specter -- and the White House, of course, was backing Arlen Specter in the Pennsylvania primary up there -- all these reports that the White House offered him some sort of job, some sort of post in the administration if he wouldn't run. Would you tell us what -- what post he was offered?

    GIBBS: Well, Bob, I'm not a lawyer. But lawyers in the White House and others have looked into conversations that were had with Congressman Sestak. And nothing inappropriate happened.

    I think Republicans are continuing to dredge this up because, if you look just a couple of days after this primary, the polling shows that Republicans are already behind in a very important Senate race.

    SCHIEFFER: Improper or not, did you offer him a job in the administration?

    GIBBS: I'm not going to get further into what the conversations were. People that have looked into them assure me that they weren't inappropriate in any way.

    SCHIEFFER: Robert Gibbs, thank you very much for being with us.



    Parent
    I've said it before (none / 0) (#136)
    by Raskolnikov on Mon May 24, 2010 at 07:22:12 PM EST
    but Gibbs is such a snake, really really dislike him.  The press secretary's job may be to not answer questions while giving the appearance of answering but he just gives me the willies.  

    Parent
    Now, I'm not so sure this Sestak thing won't (none / 0) (#145)
    by prittfumes on Mon May 24, 2010 at 10:27:18 PM EST
    develop some legs.

    My reply #121 was written before I read this.

    Parent

    legs it will have (none / 0) (#151)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 25, 2010 at 09:05:08 AM EST
    I think

    Parent
    Wait... (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue May 25, 2010 at 09:15:36 AM EST
    ...is it Talk Like Yoda Day?  

    Parent
    talk like Yoda day (none / 0) (#153)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 25, 2010 at 09:29:22 AM EST
    it is.

    Parent
    You betcha! (none / 0) (#154)
    by prittfumes on Tue May 25, 2010 at 09:57:15 AM EST
    Can't tell the difference... (none / 0) (#10)
    by kdog on Mon May 24, 2010 at 11:43:46 AM EST
    between autistic and drunk you say?  You're hired...here's your badge, gun, chains, and taser...now get to work, we've got the face of humanity to step on.

    flew this weekend (none / 0) (#17)
    by CST on Mon May 24, 2010 at 12:02:44 PM EST
    to philly.  One thing I have noticed - every time I fly anywhere - Logan airport has way less security than any other airport I've been through.

    I know I should be happy that I don't get patted down and they forget to tell me to remove my shoes, and they are sitting there joking around with us.  But I forgot to take off my watch, belt, and earrings, I set off the alarm, and I was the first one who noticed...

    Really?  Logan?  Not at all worried about security lapses???

    Not an airport, but article in LA Times (none / 0) (#19)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 12:15:16 PM EST
    this morning about a stabbing on upper floor of state office bldg.  Chef's knife.  There is security, including airport-type conveyor belt and walk through metal detector at entrance to the downtown bldg.  

    Parent
    Posted from my iPad (none / 0) (#20)
    by Jeralyn on Mon May 24, 2010 at 12:23:46 PM EST
    Never done this before

    You two are technological whiz kids! (none / 0) (#22)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 12:24:53 PM EST
    Cool! (none / 0) (#24)
    by squeaky on Mon May 24, 2010 at 12:32:54 PM EST
    Now try to press that 'home' button (none / 0) (#35)
    by ruffian on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:16:33 PM EST
    without sending yourself an email ;-)

    Parent
    Supreme Court opinions and (none / 0) (#21)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 12:24:20 PM EST
    decisions re whether to grant cert.:  

    scotusblog

    NFL case re anti-trust.

    Interesting case re ex post facto in which Breyer writes the majority opinion, Stevens is the lone dissenter, and Sotomayor does not participate.

    Reid may have an (none / 0) (#32)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:07:59 PM EST
    opponent who makes Rand Paul look like a raging moderate:

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has knocked down his leading Republican challenger, paving the way for a potential fall fight with a tea party favorite who may be easier to beat.

    On her website -- full of spelling mistakes and grammatical errors -- Angle declares: "Like a soldier going to war, I am fighting for my country, the Constitution and a free society."

    She wants to privatize Social Security; cut federal spending by hundreds of billions of dollars; build nuclear power plants inside Yucca Mountain; abolish the federal income tax and institute a "simpler, fairer, flatter tax system"; "defund Obamacare"; pull the United States out of the United Nations; ban nearly all abortions; get rid of the Energy and Education departments as well as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; and remove all campaign finance restrictions, requiring instead immediate reporting of donations.




    Shhhhhh.....not till after the Rep primary! (none / 0) (#34)
    by ruffian on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:14:50 PM EST
    Don't give them a chance to come to their senses.

    Parent
    to late for that (none / 0) (#37)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:17:31 PM EST
    Im thinkin

    Parent
    Cutting fed spending... (none / 0) (#42)
    by kdog on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:26:54 PM EST
    doesn't sound half-bad...good to see somebody else wants the DEA disbanded and totally defunded.

    What?  She doesn't?  How is that possible?...:)

    Parent

    Do they want a candidate that (none / 0) (#61)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:15:24 PM EST
    spells good or votes rgiht?

    lol

    Parent

    "rgiht" (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:23:39 PM EST
    being somewhat relative in this case

    Parent
    I see that your lack (none / 0) (#149)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 25, 2010 at 08:45:13 AM EST
    of a sense of humor is in your rgiht pocket.

    Parent
    Even scarier! (none / 0) (#137)
    by mmc9431 on Mon May 24, 2010 at 07:29:05 PM EST
    Will the Democrats continue their march to the right in an effort to appear they're still in the middle?

    Parent
    I'm surprised there hasn't been any.,... (none / 0) (#33)
    by magster on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:14:29 PM EST
    Kentucky polling since Paul's supposed meltdown.  Unfortunately, I suspect that he'll be as popular as ever.

    probably (none / 0) (#36)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:17:02 PM EST
    although I would not be surprised if he was not quite.

    anyway, its come to this:

    Rand Paul: Another High Tech Lynching

    ah yes, those dastardly librul media types who have the nerve to record what you say and play it back to you.
    when will the madness end?


    Wonder what Rand Paul will say about (5.00 / 0) (#131)
    by christinep on Mon May 24, 2010 at 06:28:19 PM EST
    the Dept. of Agriculture and TVA?? Those are far from theoretical questions in Kentucky. Pushing him on Social Security and Medicare will prove to be interesting too, I'm sure. (While it may be that the dog-whistling he is doing about Civil Rights and other "business" issues will, unfortunately, not have the kind of negative effect in portions of his state electorate that one might at first suspect...the Agricultural and TVA questions go to the wallet and heart of Kentucky operations.  (You betcha!)

    Parent
    oops (none / 0) (#38)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:18:35 PM EST
    supposed to be a reply to magsters comment

    Parent
    Diary on Kos says white supremists doing (none / 0) (#48)
    by magster on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:48:24 PM EST
    a money bombs in the recent past to support Rand Paul.  That might help keep the story alive another couple of days if that tidbit of info gets any media attention.

    Parent
    real cute: (none / 0) (#140)
    by jondee on Mon May 24, 2010 at 07:52:17 PM EST
    one of the six black conservatives in the country says it's "a high tech lynching", so that's supposed to automatically legitimize the idiotically lurid characterization.

    Although it might possibly be a prelude Paul's next talking point: a call for a return to OLD FASHIONED Kentucky lynchings..

    Parent

    More re ATT. Finally received (none / 0) (#44)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:44:30 PM EST
    "Rebate," but in the form of a VISA debit card which instructions say merchant should treat as a credit card.  Oh, an restaurants will add 20& tip against the card, but delete if you don't tip 20%

    Whatever happened to rebate in the form of a negotiable check?

    I got one of those... (none / 0) (#47)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:48:12 PM EST
    ...from Sears upon buying my new fridge.  Suffice to say that it wasn't very easy to use at Nordstrom's yesterday.  

    The clerk ended up having to buy a Nordie's gift card with it to use against my charge.  Plastic for plastic--and not very user friendly.

    Parent

    Is the point to share all my ATT info w/ (none / 0) (#50)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:50:34 PM EST
    VISA?  

    Parent
    Norton does it too in their rebates (none / 0) (#52)
    by BarnBabe on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:54:01 PM EST
    For a few years now the rebate has come in a VISA card. Works at grocery stores pretty well, but some retail stores question it. Works at Staples and Best Buy too as they sell the product.

    Parent
    Like they don't already. n/t (none / 0) (#54)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:55:15 PM EST
    ATT rebate call center guy says (none / 0) (#79)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:43:44 PM EST
    reason for VISA debit card is checks were stolen.  No reaction to my inquiry re sharing ATT info w/VISA.  

    Parent
    Verizon too (none / 0) (#56)
    by jbindc on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:01:16 PM EST
    Doesn't TL feel obligated to let me know (none / 0) (#46)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:45:37 PM EST
    how Brett Michaels fared on Celebrity whatever last night?  Now that I figured out who Brett Michaels is?  

    He won. n/t (none / 0) (#49)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:48:36 PM EST
    SATC 2 (none / 0) (#55)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 01:58:23 PM EST

    These wan domestic squabbles are merely prelude to the movie's major plot development. Samantha is approached by an Arab sheik to devise a PR campaign for his business enterprises, and he offers to fly her and her three gal pals on an all-expenses-paid luxury vacation to Abu Dhabi. (These scenes were filmed in Morocco.) Even in an escapist fantasy, the spectacle of women sinking into this billionaire's paradise at a time of widespread economic hardship initially seems creepy and off-putting. Soon, however, their Arab sojourn takes unexpected turns. First of all, Carrie encounters her old flame, Aidan (John Corbett), at the spice market, but even more importantly, she and her friends run up against the puritanical and misogynistic culture of the Middle East. The rather scathing portrayal of Muslim society no doubt will stir controversy, especially in a frothy summer entertainment, but there's something bracing about the film's saucy political incorrectness. Or is it politically correct? "SATC 2" is at once proudly feminist and blatantly anti-Muslim, which means that it might confound liberal viewers.


    Must reserve judgment until Ms. Palin (none / 0) (#58)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:07:27 PM EST
    gives her opinion.

    Parent
    seem downright PC (none / 0) (#64)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:22:01 PM EST
    compared to this which sounds awsum:

    Sam Rockwell to Star in Sweet Baby Jesus?

    Sam Rockwell is considering a role in an indie comedy called Sweet Baby Jesus, in which he would join the unlikely trio of Bette Midler, Kim Cattrall and pop star Pixie Lott in a story that is a literal comic retelling of the Christian Nativity.

    Deadline reports Rockwell's interest, saying that he'd play Joe, "a guy who finds himself accompanying his pregnant teenage girlfriend to Bethlehem, Maryland. His girlfriend's name is Mary and soon the town is agog that it's about to witness the Second Coming." See, Joe and Mary are hippies, and the story takes place at Christmas sometime during the '70s.

    Cattrall would be Darlene, mother of Mary, while Midler would be an innkeeper, Elanor. When Variety reported this earlier today, producer Philippe Rebboah was quoted saying that other surprises and great actors were going to be announced; looks like Rockwell is one of those.



    Parent
    awesome (none / 0) (#66)
    by CST on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:27:04 PM EST
    A latter day "Jesus of Montreal." (none / 0) (#67)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:30:17 PM EST
    That sounds completely nuts (none / 0) (#100)
    by lilburro on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:57:27 PM EST
    I feel as though it was already made, and I've been laughing at it around Christmastime for the past 10 years already.  Although it's interesting to see Pixie Lott's name pop up, I like one of her songs ("Mama Do").

    Parent
    An article in Politico by Ben Smith (none / 0) (#62)
    by KeysDan on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:17:52 PM EST
    starts with the "Robert Gates/Hillary Clinton axis" and ends by allowing the thought to arise of a Clinton move to Defense upon the retirement of Gates.  Since nothing is as it seems, I wonder what this is really about?

    its (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:20:57 PM EST
    interesting.  

    Parent
    Hillary Clinton assumes (none / 0) (#69)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:30:49 PM EST
    responsibility for Obama's wars?

    Parent
    Die Hard Cultist... (none / 0) (#70)
    by squeaky on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:33:04 PM EST
    Just as I can't help myself pointing it out, you can't stop the love from flowing.....

    Parent
    Not at all. It's that first ever (none / 0) (#89)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:48:54 PM EST
    9and last ever) campaign donation.

    Parent
    why not? (none / 0) (#74)
    by CST on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:39:36 PM EST
    How would it be any different from Gates?

    At least Hillary had a vote at one time.

    Parent

    have we ever (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:40:40 PM EST
    had a female secretary of war mongering?

    Parent
    it's (none / 0) (#81)
    by CST on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:44:27 PM EST
    interesting :)

    Parent
    I could see them both (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:52:23 PM EST
    doing it just for that reason

    Parent
    No (none / 0) (#82)
    by jbindc on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:45:06 PM EST
    Because Gates was a hold-over (none / 0) (#76)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:41:01 PM EST
    from GWB?

    Parent
    sure but I guess what I meant was (none / 0) (#80)
    by CST on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:43:52 PM EST
    Obama is not gonna be Secretary of Defense himself obviously.  So why shouldn't it be Hillary?  It's gotta be someone.

    Parent
    If this rumor is accurate, I really (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:45:46 PM EST
    hope she refuses this offer.  

    Parent
    why? (none / 0) (#87)
    by CST on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:48:24 PM EST
    I think she supports the war efforts.  She was never anti-war, as senator or as candidate for office.  And she seems to be generally on board with this admin's foreign policy.

    I think it would be very interesting.

    Parent

    It fits (none / 0) (#106)
    by jbindc on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:17:30 PM EST
    Obama was never anti war either, except in the minds of those who keeping pushing that theme.

    But I can't see why she'd want that headache except to say she was the first female Sec Def  

    Parent

    yea (none / 0) (#107)
    by CST on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:20:31 PM EST
    same reason she took Sec of State maybe?  Because if the president asks you for help, you say yes.  And of course, the ability to make a difference.

    I mean, being president is probably a headache too.  She wanted that job.

    Parent

    Because Secretary of State (none / 0) (#108)
    by Cream City on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:20:42 PM EST
    is the highest-ranking position in the presidential cabinet.  Why in the world -- which she apparently enjoys traveling -- would she give up the highest post?  Rank matters, in the cabinet, in Washington, and around the world.

    Parent
    true (none / 0) (#110)
    by CST on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:25:24 PM EST
    although it seems a lot of Sec. of States only serve one term for exactly that reason.

    I dunno, I didn't really see it as a "step down", since I guess I assumed she would only do one term as S.O.S. but that may not be the case.

    On a personal note, I do think it would be pretty interesting to see her as Secretary of Defense if she decided not to stay as Secretary of State.

    I think it would fit.

    Parent

    So everyone but the WH can (none / 0) (#112)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:29:45 PM EST
    bring up the fired on/not fired on thingee again?

    Parent
    She Already Said (none / 0) (#118)
    by squeaky on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:47:20 PM EST
    That she will only do the job for one term. In any case, I think appointing a woman as Secretary of Defense would be a brilliant idea, and Hillary certainly fits the bill.

    Parent
    Because it is better (none / 0) (#132)
    by christinep on Mon May 24, 2010 at 06:37:33 PM EST
    to be Secretary of State. Next to the President--historically & really--it is better to be Secretary of State. Anything else at this point smacks of fantasmagoria...just like arguing about which Democrat had more responsibility (or lust for) war is useless, circular, divisive. The answer about responsibility is clear: Bush.

    Parent
    SoS usually is the top of (none / 0) (#141)
    by brodie on Mon May 24, 2010 at 08:03:51 PM EST
    the food chain, except for the times when it isn't.  SoS under JFK for instance.  Rusk was considered not up to the task in some ways, and so Kennedy in effect became his own SoS.  SecDef McNamara became far more of a powerful admin player and advisor to Kennedy than the marginalized SoS Rusk.

    Then SoS under Nixon.  Bill Rogers had much less influence than the nat'l security advisor, Kissinger.  Ditto, nearly, with Carter, whose n.s.a. Brezenski was at least an equal with the SoS.

    Could be that Obama has laid out major changes for the DoD in a second term -- budget cutbacks -- or has indicated that somehow the Pentagon will be an even more important place to be than currently and that Hillary and her experience and ability would be a better fit there at that time.  Might be tempting, especially since she's indicated she wanted to remain SoS for only one term, and a stateside job with greatly reduced flying around the world would certainly be less stressful.    

    Parent

    Nonsense (none / 0) (#88)
    by squeaky on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:48:38 PM EST
    Rumsfeld, was a jerk, but no one blamed Rumsfeld for Bush and Cheney's war.

    Seems to me your problem is your deep denial of who Hillary Clinton is. Just like the obots, who can't believe that Obama is no progressive ( look at what he inherited, can't change things so quickly, etc)

    Parent

    I sure blame Rumsfeld (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by CST on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:50:51 PM EST
    for a whole lot that went wrong in said war.  That being said, Gates is no Rumsfeld.

    Parent
    Well Yeah (none / 0) (#98)
    by squeaky on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:56:44 PM EST
    But, regarding oculus' comment that Obama would appoint Hillary so she can be blamed for Obama's wars, Rumsfield, the horror that he was, did not remove any blame Bush and Cheney have on their heads for perpetuating their wars.

     

    Parent

    Sticking w/my initial comment. (none / 0) (#93)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:51:32 PM EST
    Even if you are correct, why should Hillary Clinton be the point person for GWB's wars which Pres. Obama has made his own?  I guess if she is wholeheartedly on board with Obama's war policies, she may want the job.  I'm not on board, wholeheartedly, or even tepidly.

    Parent
    well (none / 0) (#95)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:53:25 PM EST
    post election Obama seemed to adopt most of her policies so I could see it, actually.


    Parent
    Ha. Thinking of mandates? (none / 0) (#96)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:54:31 PM EST
    during the election (none / 0) (#97)
    by CST on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:55:55 PM EST
    she seemed 100% on board with basically everything this admin is doing regarding the war efforts.

    Parent
    I don't suppose she will need my (none / 0) (#99)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:57:04 PM EST
    career counseling advice then.

    Parent
    not at all (none / 0) (#101)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:58:45 PM EST
    thinking of Iran and Iraq

    Parent
    Ah (none / 0) (#102)
    by squeaky on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:00:24 PM EST
    The downside of identity politics.... The real person (Hillary et al.) inevitably starts to leak through the cracks..

    Parent
    And who knew how many politicians (none / 0) (#103)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:03:21 PM EST
    would subsequently invade my e mail account?

    Parent
    What? (none / 0) (#104)
    by squeaky on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:06:35 PM EST
    Hilary sold your info? Well she was saddled with a huge campaign debt, still looming...  so take comfort that whatever she got for your info, lessened her financial misery..

    Parent
    INot sure she sold it. May have sold (none / 0) (#115)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:32:18 PM EST
    me out in exchange for Obama's campaign paying off some of her campaign debt.  Who knows what happened at DiFi's house in Georgetown.

    Parent
    Shared blame there (none / 0) (#109)
    by ruffian on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:24:50 PM EST
    I think Rumsfeld was as involved from the beginning as Cheney and Bush. He was an architect of the policy, not just a DoD head implementing the policy.

    Parent
    Isn't Rumsfield the fellow who assured (none / 0) (#113)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:31:17 PM EST
    us the Iraqi people would welcome U.S. with open arms?

    Parent
    along with (none / 0) (#114)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:32:06 PM EST
    Dick and Bush.

    hmmm that sounded bad.

    Parent

    Geez (none / 0) (#117)
    by squeaky on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:44:00 PM EST
    No one is taking any blame away from Rummy. Again, I was only pointing out that oculus comment was absurd.

    Parent
    I suspect we can all read. (none / 0) (#123)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 04:49:59 PM EST
    As It Is Written (none / 0) (#124)
    by squeaky on Mon May 24, 2010 at 04:55:38 PM EST
    YMMV

    Parent
    Trial balloon to see who's heads explode? (none / 0) (#68)
    by ruffian on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:30:43 PM EST
    My top candidates for brain spatter are righties who liked Clinton just fine as long as she was against Obama, but are going to remember they hate her if she takes charge of their beloved DoD.

    Parent
    Wingnut Head's Explode No Matter What (5.00 / 2) (#72)
    by squeaky on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:33:59 PM EST
    It is their job...

    Parent
    They were fine with Gates (none / 0) (#85)
    by ruffian on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:46:23 PM EST
    For that reason I predict Obama won't rock the boat. He'll give them another Republican.

    Parent
    20 worst drinks in america (none / 0) (#73)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:38:50 PM EST
    Tropicana Tropical Fruit Fury Twister (1 bottle, 20 fl oz)

    Sugar Equivalent: Two 7-ounce canisters Reddi-wip

    Sunkist (1 bottle, 20 fl oz)

    Sugar Equivalent: 6 Breyers Oreo Ice Cream Sandwiches

    link

    Saw an on line ad recently--maybe (none / 0) (#77)
    by oculus on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:42:07 PM EST
    at Salon.com--Coca Cola stating you care about your kids and so do we.

    Parent
    I go into a sugar coma just reading that (none / 0) (#91)
    by ruffian on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:50:54 PM EST
    They both sound delicous! (none / 0) (#105)
    by kdog on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:16:09 PM EST
    But I've been on the grape soda kick lately as an alternative to my beloved Coca-Cola...and of course Mountain Dew.  

    If NY State gets their soda tax passed I will be convinced it is a personal vendetta...the man is down on everything I enjoy.  

    Parent

    Immigration Bill Fallout (none / 0) (#92)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 02:51:17 PM EST
    There's no doubt that the new Arizona immigration law is popular nationally, but that still doesn't mean the issue's going to work to the GOP's advantage this fall.

    Public Policy Polling

    new favorite website (none / 0) (#116)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:33:35 PM EST
    Amgen Tour of California bike race (none / 0) (#120)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon May 24, 2010 at 03:55:36 PM EST
    was literally in my backyard yesterday: video.

    canned food (none / 0) (#125)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 05:06:02 PM EST
    a new report released last week by the National Workgroup for Safe Markets, a coalition of more than 17 public and environmental health groups, shows that bisphenol-A  is present in most food preserved in cans (not just in the lining of the cans themselves, where it is used to protect food from corrosion and bacteria). BPA, as the chemical is also called, has been linked to a range of ills including cancer, infertility, and obesity.

    Mike Schade, a co-author of the study, told AOL News that "real-life meals involving one or more cans of food can cause an individual to ingest levels of BPA that have been shown to cause health effects in laboratory animal studies."



    My Chef Boyardee... (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by kdog on Mon May 24, 2010 at 05:27:05 PM EST
    cache is poisonous?  Oh well, fits with the lifestyle:)

    Pretty soon the "what doesn't cause cancer" list will be shorter...I can't keep up,

    Parent

    Your best bet (none / 0) (#126)
    by jbindc on Mon May 24, 2010 at 05:11:03 PM EST
    Is to stay on the perimeter of the grocery store - as much as you can, of course.  It's where all the fresh stuff is sold - butcher /seafood, bakery, produce, and dairy.

    Parent
    pretty much the only thing (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 05:12:04 PM EST
    I ever eat out of a can is tuna.


    Parent
    But (none / 0) (#129)
    by jbindc on Mon May 24, 2010 at 05:37:18 PM EST
    Now you can get it in a pouch - less waste and just as fresh!

    Parent
    and from now on (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 24, 2010 at 05:38:56 PM EST
    I will do just that.

    Parent
    But watch the Mercury. (none / 0) (#147)
    by oculus on Tue May 25, 2010 at 01:14:28 AM EST