home

Wednesday Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Colorado News
Posted on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 12:18:04 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

It's still extremely busy around here. I've been trying to follow events in Libya, as well as some domestic stuff, but I'm just too busy right now to write.

Here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Prosecutor Requests DSK Charges Be Dismissed | What Causes Extremism? >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Wednesday Open Thread | 164 comments (164 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Am I Being Plagiarized... (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 02:08:05 PM EST
    ...by a spammer ?

    Probably (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by Zorba on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 03:37:04 PM EST
    Although, an incompetent one who did not bother to post a link.
    Let's hear it for incompetent spammers!  ;-)

    Parent
    Coming Soon: The Reign of Stuck on Stupid III (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 02:27:40 PM EST
    Jeb Bush's maiden voyage into foreign policy was painful to watch, a hodgepodge of exaggerated bogeymen, vague ideals, inaccurate assertions, and bad history. Oh. Where have we seen this combination of tropes before? Let me think...

    - Juan Cole.  (Who else?)

    I stumbled upon (none / 0) (#69)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 02:49:44 PM EST
    his recent statement about his brother and his father. He's not them but he thinks they are great men. So he doesn't want to be like men that he thinks are great was the hilarious gist of the whole statement.

    He even admits that there are no WMD's so that is not going to play well in the GOP primary. I had thought that maybe he would try to separate himself from the clowns but he already sounds just like the rest of them.

    Parent

    Yes, Jeb is his own man. (none / 0) (#70)
    by KeysDan on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 03:23:40 PM EST
    But, who owns this man?  His advisers do have a familiar ring--Condi Rice, Paul Wolfowitz, James Baker.

    Parent
    All I have (none / 0) (#73)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 04:01:46 PM EST
    to say is it's hilarious to see him twist himself into a pretzel trying to explain how wonderful his father and his brother are but at the same time trying to separate himself from them. He can't do it without looking like an idiot. I don't see how this guy makes it much past the Super Tuesday unless everybody else implodes.

    Parent
    Isn't that the same (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by jbindc on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 04:40:37 PM EST
    For every candidate who runs from the party who's currently in power?

    And who do you think actually makes it past Super Tuesday?  Ted Cruz?  Marco Rubio?  I would be surpassed if those two made it TO Super Tuesday.

    Parent

    Well, first (none / 0) (#76)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 04:45:48 PM EST
    of all Marco Rubio is probably not going to run and who is his constituency? He doesn't seem to have one outside of Cubans in Florida and they can be picked up by Ted Cruz.

    Right now I would put money on Mike Huckabee. He pushes all the right buttons but there's plenty of people in the GOP who will spend good money to take him down.

    Jeb Bush has turned himself into a clown so fast it's amazing. He's probably been out of politics too long to realize how idiotic he sounds.

    Parent

    They all sound (none / 0) (#77)
    by Zorba on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 05:09:45 PM EST
    Idiotic, so Jeb is in good company.

    Parent
    LOL (5.00 / 2) (#78)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 06:03:36 PM EST
    True but Jeb was supposed to be selling himself as the electable non-crazy one and that seems to be swirling the drain at break neck speed.

    Parent
    Some stunning pictures (5.00 / 2) (#80)
    by Zorba on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 07:32:44 PM EST
    Of Niagara Falls, partially frozen.
    Somehow, cold as it is here, those images make me feel as though it could be a lot worse.

    Cool pictures (none / 0) (#89)
    by Slado on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 05:19:12 AM EST
    Got me to wondering if it has ever frozen over completely?

    It appears according to Snopes that it hasn't.

    Seems there is always a trickle of flow.

    Parent

    Bill O'Reilly taken to task ... (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by Yman on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 11:45:59 AM EST
    ... by veteran war correspondents for exaggerating his "war" reporting.

    Karma in action.

    O'Reiley hits back (none / 0) (#110)
    by Slado on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 06:06:28 AM EST
    Huffington Post

    Watch the whole thing to see CBS memos regarding what happened.

    I think the original claim by David Corn is pretty week.   This is boiling down to a battle over the meaning of "is".  

    Hardly comparable to Brian Williams and since O'Reiley has his own opinion show to hit back all this does is help his ratings.  He gets to claim the far left is attacking him and his viewers will eat it up.

    Each side of the Fox or Faux news debate go to your respective corners and we can all move along.

    Parent

    Of course he did - so what? (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by Yman on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 07:28:22 AM EST
    The fact that he has a platform is irrelevant to whether he lied or exagerrated and it has nothing to do with the meaning of "is".  It has everything to do with O'Reilly repeatedly describing himself as having been a combat reporter in a "war/combat zone".  He wasn't.  He was 1,200 miles away, reporting on protests after the war.

    Wonder why you want to minimize it so much?

    Parent

    Regardless of his exaggerated claims ... (none / 0) (#120)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 02:22:00 PM EST
    ... to have been under fire in Iraq, at least Brian Williams WAS in an actual war zone -- unlike Bill O'Reilly, who was nowhere near the Falkland Islands during the 1982 war between Britain and Argentina. Rather, the latter was in Buenos Aires. That's like someone claiming to have witnessed the 1992 riots in Los Angeles personally, even though he was in Vancouver at the time.

    This, of course, isn't the first time O'Reilly's been caught falsely embellishing his own credentials as a journalist. In 2003, Al Franken called him out publicly on his claim that he had won two Peabody Awards while with the news show "First Edition." When they shared a stage with former Congresswoman Pat Schroeder and Molly Ivins at a book fair broadcast live on C-SPAN, O'Reilly pointedly denied to Franken that he had ever made that claim.

    Franken then proceeded to quote O'Reilly verbatim from "O'Reilly Factor" transcripts, proving conclusively to everyone watching that O'Reilly had indeed lied about winning Peabody Awards, which led to the man's You-Tube viral meltdown.

    Further, O'Reilly was also compelled to settle a sexual discrimination suit brought against him by a former female employee at Fox News, after repeatedly denying the allegations and publicly denouncing the woman on the air, when court-authorized transcripts of a highly compromising phone conversation between him and that employee were leaked to the media.

    It's long been readily apparent that Bill O'Reilly is a pathological bully and liar. But, given that Fox News did absolutely nothing to punish the man regarding his false Peabody Award claims and sexual harassment denials, it's highly doubtful that they'll do anything to him about his self-credentialing as a war correspondent during the Falkland Islands campaign.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Dr. Oliver Sacks, (5.00 / 3) (#118)
    by Zorba on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 11:30:43 AM EST
    the famous neurologist, and author of "Awakenings" and "The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat," has terminal cancer.
    He has written a very moving piece in the New York Times, which is well worth a read.
    Godspeed, Dr. Sacks.

    Muslims protecting synagogue (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by Yman on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 07:10:16 AM EST
    For those who keep insisting they never see moderate Muslims standing up against the extremists, wanted to make sure you didn't miss this:

    Norway's Muslims Form Protective Human Ring Around Oslo's Synagogue

    They'll just ignore this sort of stuff, you know. (none / 0) (#153)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 02:39:10 PM EST
    The more selective and malleable is one's set of facts, the more stubborn and interminable one's maintenance of one's own self-delusions can be.

    That way, in the year 2015, one can freely conflate 1982 Buenos Aires with late 1940 London, in order to convince oneself that Bill O'Reilly is somehow the living reincarnation of Edward R. Murrow.

    On a related note, while we were out to dinner last night, I overheard someone at another table who was insisting to his dining companions that Joe McCarthy was right.

    Such are the mysterious ways of the parallel universe.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Paging M.T.... (none / 0) (#1)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 12:51:51 PM EST
    I need your expertise...my niece had her (knock on wood) second to last back surgery this morning.  All went well.  

    Doc says she needs to gain 10 lbs. by summer for the last one...any suggestion besides lots and lots of McDonalds?  She's a picky eater, plus our stringbean family genetics working against anh weight gain.  I don't think I could gain 10 lbs in 6 months if you paid me.  This is a seemingly impossible task!  

    Protein Shakes... (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 01:20:03 PM EST
    ...will put on weight, along with carbs she can do it without trans fats.  I am pretty sure you can find some sort of protein supplement made specifically for adding weight as many athletes need to gain weight to compete at certain levels.  They would have a much healthier blend of ingredients than fast food.

    I would think the doctor would have some recommendations.  It's odd that she should gain weight after back surgery as weight is usually an issue that leads to back issues.

    Parent

    Tried those... (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 01:46:10 PM EST
    she hates them...we've even tried slipping them in milk shakes and my niece notices right away, and she ain't havin' it.

    Keep in mind, she's only 10.  And stubborn as she is smart.  Her parents have tried tough discipline, bribery, you name it to get her to eat more...nothing seems to work.  

    Parent

    Have you tried it in a berry smoothie? (none / 0) (#15)
    by nycstray on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 02:49:55 PM EST
    Also, try using less than recommended and slowly increasing the amount of protein powder. If she likes vanilla, a dash of that may help also.

    Ice cream helps with weight gain. Increasing exercise (especially in cold weather) will increase appetite = increase in meal size. Low impact, low calorie burning like walking just to get the hunger going. Snacks of dried fruit and nuts. Oh and cheese :)

    I weigh the same as I did in HS and have to be careful not to lose weight. It's a b!tch to gain if you are in the genetic family that says you should be skinny.

    Parent

    My sister... (none / 0) (#16)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 02:55:07 PM EST
    string bean from another mother!  I too weigh exactly what I weighed when I graduated HS.

    I wonder if I can inject protein powder into gummy bears...she never met a gummy bear she didn't like.  Or maybe weekly brown gravy chugging contests at Sunday dinners.

    Parent

    Off topic a Bit... (none / 0) (#17)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 03:21:56 PM EST
    ...one time at the liquor store I bought a half gallon of Fridays Mudslide.  It is so fricken good, and I am not one to put on weight either, but I gained like five pounds, whatever is in it, it's like fricken rocket fuel to my body.  Reminded me of Seinfeld and the non fat yogurt.

    Plus it's surprisingly strong, I think to hide the fact that it's all fat, I think, as alcoholic beverages don't have to list the ingredients.

    Parent

    Protein is good if you're working out (none / 0) (#21)
    by fishcamp on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 03:51:21 PM EST
    and trying to build muscle, but I'm not sure it puts pounds on.  Peter's idea is probably the best, except I'v run into doctors that think nutritionists don't do much except take your money.  I would guess it's going to be a high fat, sugar, carbo type diet for a while.  You know, all the stuff that's bad for you.  I never change weight either, no matter what I eat.  Guess you'll have to make sure she brushes her teeth more often, until this episode is over.  Good dog for watching over her.

    Parent
    The real trick is gaining weight (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by Peter G on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 01:20:54 PM EST
    in a way that is not unhealthy.  Clearly, that's what the doc wants.  The doctor should make the appropriate dietary suggestions, or make a referral to a nutritionist.

    Parent
    Healthy food... (none / 0) (#9)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 01:58:29 PM EST
    would be better of course, but again, she's 10.  We'll take any weight gain we can get, she just needs to gain weight for the next surgery.  M.T. has said Mickey D's helped with her son Josh.

    I'm visiting tonight, I'll see what the doctor suggested if anything.

    I don't think her skinniness has anything to do with her scoliosis or the CDH...it's just how my family is.  Her sisters have no health problems and they're just as skinny.  

    Parent

    I'm no expert (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by Reconstructionist on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 03:28:58 PM EST
      but 10 pounds for a naturally slim 10 year old is a lot of weight. An average 10 year old girl  weighs about 70 pounds so that is  nearly 15%. Unless the girl is underweight due to malnourishment that kind of weight gain prior to puberty in such a short period of time would seem beyond reason.

      Hell, I'm in my mid-50s and I don't think I could gain 24 pounds in six months now  unless I was tied to a chair and force fed. When I was a late  adolescent and playing sports I would consume  4000+ calories a day (which a 10 year old girl probably  could not do, even unhealthily)and struggled to stay at 150 pounds.

     

    Parent

    This 10 year old... (none / 0) (#56)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 11:55:05 AM EST
    weighs 51 lbs...we're talking a 20% increase!!!

    It does seem impossible, I'm told the surgeon mentioned a feeding tube as a last resort.  We need a weight gain miracle up in here.

    Parent

    Is this his ideal? Will he settle for a little (none / 0) (#81)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 08:01:45 PM EST
    Less on game day? Probably not since he has brought up a feeding tube.  My heart goes out to her and your family.

    The kids that grow up dealing with these things are so precious.  They have amazing hearts and souls.

    Once the healing of the fusion occurs, a normalcy that has been missing because of the constant surgeries for the growth comes about.  It has been 7 months for us.  So as the schedule we lived goes there should have been a surgery a month ago that never came about.  Or the preparation for it with school and teachers, someone to babysit the house, worry, sleeplessness, etc, it all never happened.  It has been such a relief.

    When Josh had to be in halo traction for months I told him this was his Everest.  He climbed a different Everest.  I mapped out the real climb, and equated it with what he had to endure at different times.  Just an idea if she is goal or project oriented.  Sounds like she's had enough.  Just a bit farther though and freedom.

    Parent

    MT, I rarely agree with anything you write, (none / 0) (#84)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 12:03:29 AM EST
    but that is beautiful and special. You are doing an amazing job with Josh and he is clearly blessed to have you in his life.

    Parent
    A lot of the big constant stress has been retired (none / 0) (#93)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 09:02:55 AM EST
    Often we talk about how we are lucky to have Josh.  We have all grown so much having Josh in our lives.  Even our grandchildren, they are naturally more inclusive of people with visible disabilities.  

    He has at some point another really big foot surgery. It will require wedges of bone being removed from his shins.  It's going to be a real bummer.  A lot of pain. He can have that taken care of farther down the road though.  It's so nice for him to just be able to live for awhile.

    Parent

    Try (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by lentinel on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 01:34:14 PM EST
    whole wheat pasta - or organic pasta.

    I can't imagine 6 months of all the good pasta specialities one can eat wouldn't result in a significant weight gain.

    Organic sausage could make things even more appetizing.

    And not unhealthy - imo.

    I wish your niece success and health.

    Parent

    Pasta... (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 02:04:59 PM EST
    is a staple...she loves her 'ronis', we can try doubling up on the pasta intake.  But the pickiness rules out whole wheat.  

    Parent
    Forgot about franks and beans! (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by vml68 on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 10:06:40 PM EST
    High in calories and beans are good for you. The franks not so much.
    Chili can be high in calories depending on the recipe but is also reasonably nutritious.

    Creamy chicken enchiladas or cheesy quesadillas.

    MT suggested french fries. Extra buttery mashed potatoes or loaded (sour cream, grated cheese, bacon) baked potatoes are also options.

    I think most kids like these foods, so hopefully your niece does too.


    Parent

    How about chocolate? (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by MO Blue on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 01:47:40 PM EST
    Chocolate Avocado Smoothie

    If she doesn't like chocolate, there are other avocado smoothies and desserts at that link.

    What about cheese? Cheese added to a lot of dishes adds calories as well as flavor. Cheese added to potatoes, pasta, vegetables and even apple pie.

    Push come to shove, go the Ensure diet supplement drink at every meal.

    Parent

    If she likes pasta, then generous (none / 0) (#32)
    by vml68 on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 09:30:53 PM EST
    helpings of Lasagna should do the trick. High in calories. Takes care of carbs, proteins, dairy and you can even sneak in a few veggies.

    I know Uncle K does not like avocadoes but how about his niece? Puree it with a fruit smoothie or into a chocolate shake and she won't even taste it. Or you can use coconut oil. Both are healthy fats.

    Since she is fond of trail mix. Try granola with greek yogurt and honey. Pretty high in calories and also healthy.

    If she likes hummus, increase the amount of tahini in the recipe.

    Tropical fruits (bananas, mangoes, etc) are higher in calories than other fruits.

    Parent

    I am shaking my fist at you skinny minnies... (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by vml68 on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 03:22:15 PM EST
    I don't think I could gain 10 lbs in 6 months if you paid me.

    I have to exercise like a crazy person and watch what I eat, to not gain weight. While I don't mind exercising, I love food, so it is a constant battle.
    I could pack on 10 lbs in a couple of weeks and you wouldn't even have to pay me to do it!
    Life is so damn unfair!!

    If someone could come up with a way to do body fat donation I would be an unending source :-)

    Parent

    People with Freeman Sheldon Syndrome tend (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 05:01:00 PM EST
    To be very thin too.  I have had a time of it with Josh sometimes.  He is finally over 60 lbs now though.  His final surgery provided some new stamina and extra appetite too. He's very short in stature, 60 to 70 lbs is about right..  He's a big carnivore, I think that has helped him put on muscle.  I do believe that he gained 10 lbs in 6 months though after his rods came out.  He could use his diaphragm and chest walls so much better.

    He eats a lot of steak.  He detests sweets, too much sugar can make him feel ill.  My husband is the same way. But homemade french fries go over fine for Josh so I have been making him french fries at home with a T-fal Actifry.  I paint the potatoes with duck fat to cook, nothing is leftover.  Duck fat french fries are hella addictive.  I had forgotten about them until AtoZ brought them up.  Also peanut butter, such an awesome food as long as someone doesn't have an allergy!  A lot of things you can do with it. And thank the universe for pizza :)

    I have nothing magic though...sorry.  Many of the new babies born with FSS are being quickly diagnosed now and they start out feeding them through stomach tubes. But now we discover that the kids don't develop a taste for food then, and eventually we are all back at square one at some point working to gain and keep weight on the kids.

    You guys will be in our thoughts and meditations.  You are a skinny bunch :)

    Parent

    Just returned... (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 07:32:08 PM EST
    from my visit...a lil groggy from the happy juice and wear and tear, but she came to the dinner table and we got 3.5 big ol' cheese raviolis in her, a garlic knot, and an uncle's famous mint chocolate chip milkshake.  She's a wonder.

    Buy Breyers and milk stock y'all.  

    Parent

    I wonder if you could sneak a little (none / 0) (#42)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 07:50:45 AM EST
    Peanut butter in a shake?  Maybe...but if you ruin the taste once sometimes that does a dish in with the kiddos.  She is very loved, sometimes that's the best flavor :)

    Parent
    Best wishes for your niece's recovery... (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by gbrbsb on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 04:46:29 AM EST
    If it helps, when as a young adult I was put on a medically controlled high calorific diet to gain weight after illness (NOT an eating disorder) left me under 40kgs when I should have weighed at very least 50, apart from the obvious carbs (pasta, rice, potato, cereals, etc.), it included lots of nuts and seeds, squashes and roots (turnips and swedes), pulses (especially lentils with which I make a lovely sausage hotpot with Savoy cabbage, squash, mustard and cream that kids like), peanut butter, avocados, mushrooms and toadstalls (in Spanish 'setas'), bananas, tuna (canned or fresh) and other oily fish, dried fruit and good amounts of olive oil for cooking.

    A healthy high calorie pasta sauce kids I've tried it with love is to wok fry cherry tomatoes (sear them first) in a generous amount of olive oil until soft and a good quantity of thick juicy sauce has formed from the oil and juice but before the toms completely break up. Add salt and pepper to taste (I like a lot of pepper) and just before the end add a tsp of sugar to sweeten (or for adults a capful of balsamic vinegar gives a sweet but tangy punch to it!) Fold the sauce into cooked pasta along with canned or fresh tuna (or chicken, pork, bacon, etc.) and if desired adding red or green pesto to taste.

    As with roasted peppers (another versatile for sweetening kids dishes) the fried cherry toms in their juice keep well in the fridge and are great as a cold or heated dip or spread for fresh bread, or as an accompaniment to Welsh rarebit, fried eggs, omelette, quiche, etc.

    The fried cherry toms in their juice also go to make another typical Spanish dish kids love called 'arroz a la Cubana' (Cuban rice). Zilch to do with Cuba, it consists of a fried egg, a fried banana, and a serving of rice. I press cooked rice into a round bottomed single serving plastic pudding basin / desert tub and after a short burst in the micro upturn onto the plate to make a decorative mound which I top with a good helping of the tomato sauce...  an unusual mix for conservative Brits but most I've introduced it to here have found very yummy!

    Parent

    Well, assuming she's old enough to have (none / 0) (#7)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 01:55:35 PM EST
    finished growing, she can gain 10 lbs by increasing either her muscle mass or her fat mass, or a combination of both.

    Assuming the extra weight will be temporary, any high-calorie foods will do the trick, and eating them for only a few months or so I would think should not have any long term ill-effects.

    If she is able to work out the biggest muscles have the most weight-gaining potential, so squats, etc., to increase the mass of quads, hamstrings, glutes, etc.

    Parent

    Still growin'... (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 02:15:36 PM EST
    till the last surgery, then If I'm not mistaken only her legs will grow after that when they fuse her spine or whatever they call it.

    She loves trail mix. I see that's high calorie, nuts and dried fruits.   We can push more of that too.

    Thanks all!

    Parent

    Best of luck, it's especially tough to see kids (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 02:24:33 PM EST
    go through stuff like this.

    Parent
    Yeah man... (5.00 / 3) (#14)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 02:31:38 PM EST
    but on the flip, to watch them overcome stuff like this and thrive is something to behold.  If not for a funny-lookin' gait you'd never know the ringer she's been through.  

    And the way she bounces back from these adjustment surgeries is amazing...within 24 hours she's jumping on the couch and climbing the furniture again.  It's unbelievable.

    Parent

    Kdog (none / 0) (#86)
    by Slado on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 01:08:41 AM EST
    I know you like to keep things sImple and when I've had to gain or  keep on weight I try to drink "calorie bomb" milkshakes.   My dad the doc has always told me its not a game of fats, proteins, carbs or whatever but a game of calories.   She has a daily number that equals no weight gain, you need to push her over it.

    The calorie bomb is favorite Ice cream, mixed with a bit of  protein powder,  Ensure or Boost plus whole milk and you can mix up a 2,000 calorie snack pretty quick and they are yummy too.    Change it up, too much protein and it gets grainy etc...

    I would check on the a Ensure/boosts with the doc since she's a kid but I chug those after operations to put weight back on.    They make them in juice boxers as well which could be a sneaky wat to get her to drink them.

    Good luck.

    Parent

    Whole fat milk works for me (none / 0) (#23)
    by McBain on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 04:18:54 PM EST
    Lots of nutrition in that

    Parent
    There's no other kind! (none / 0) (#30)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 07:39:46 PM EST
    Anything less than whole milk is blasphemy. The kid drinks chocolate milk like it's going out of style.

    I could have no other beverage with dinner growing up, the only exceptions being pizza and chinese where soda was permitted.

    Parent

    Most people think low fat or non fat milk (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by McBain on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 08:33:36 PM EST
    is healthier than whole.  It has to do with the great anti-fat PR campaign that still lingers.

    Parent
    kdog (none / 0) (#91)
    by CoralGables on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 08:30:11 AM EST
    in keeping with the season...Bud Harrelson used to swear by butterscotch ice cream to pack on some weight prior to the opening of Spring Training.

    Parent
    I'll have to tell Nana... (none / 0) (#92)
    by kdog on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 08:55:17 AM EST
    I think I've mentioned that my moms is Buddy Harrelson's #1 fan.  It's never just "Bud" or "Buddy", it's always "My Bud" or "My Buddy".

    I wonder what kinda shape Buddy's in, we could use him back at short.  I can't believe we've made it to Spring Training without a viable Major League Shortstop...again!  

    My axis of evil consists of a Dolan, a Johnson, and a Wilpon;)

    Parent

    Funny Observation & Discovery (none / 0) (#8)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 01:58:02 PM EST
    ...Monday I could not find one news story regarding deflategate.  I checked again today, and found this:
    A locker room attendant for the New England Patriots tried to introduce an unapproved special teams football into last month's AFC Championship Game, the same game at the center of the "Deflategate" allegations, four sources familiar with the investigation told "Outside the Lines."
    ...
    Three sources said that McNally has worked Patriots games for a decade, and has been in charge of the officials' locker room at Gillette Stadium since at least 2008. In the first half of the AFC Championship Game, the sources said, McNally tried to give the unapproved football to an alternate official who was in charge of the special-teams footballs. Those footballs are known as "kicking balls" or "K balls."
    ...
    The alternate official, Greg Yette, became suspicious when he noticed that the football McNally handed him did not have the proper markings on it, three sources said. One of those sources added that Yette found it surprising that the officials' locker room attendant was on the field, trying to hand him a ball, because officials' locker room attendants don't typically have ballhandling responsibilities during NFL games. Once McNally tried to introduce the unapproved football into the game, the source said, Yette notified the NFL's vice president of game operations, Mike Kensil, who was at the game in the press box.
    ...
    A source told "Outside the Lines" that Kensil decided to personally go down to the officials' locker room at halftime of the Patriots-Colts game to check the game balls, in part because of the suspicions McNally's actions raised. Kensil did not respond to requests for comment.
    LINK

    I guess we can toss the 'lone wolf acting alone' theory out the window.  Not that it really matters, they did win, but it's also obvious that this was a coordinated effort to cheat.  

    Who say cheaters never prosper ?

    I don't know. (none / 0) (#26)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 05:55:20 PM EST
    ScottW314: "Who says cheaters never prosper?"

    Likely, it's said by people who aren't used to winning.

    Parent

    And By Good Parents & Coaches (none / 0) (#46)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 09:49:40 AM EST


    Parent
    Still no proof. (none / 0) (#43)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 09:17:36 AM EST
    An alternate possibility: he may have been switching balls so he could sell the game balls.  He may even be one of the three unnamed individuals in this story.  Or maybe he simply grabbed a ball and carried it gameside because he needed a plausible excuse for being on the sidelines.  It must have sucked to watch his team on TV.  Why did he attempt to hand it to an official?  Because he had no idea what the actual protocol was.  What's a locker room attendent do?  He mops floors and hands out towels.  This isn't the guy you put in charge of cheating.

    Parent
    And Still... (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 09:48:46 AM EST
    ...the rules of the NFL do not require proof.

    You can keep acting like this a courtroom and not a the rules w/i a privately held business, all day long, but it will not make it true, no many how times you repeat it.

    Parent

    You wanna play internet prosecutor? (none / 0) (#64)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 02:16:01 PM EST
    Then you can't be surprised when someone else decides to play internet defense lawyer.

    You can keep acting like this a courtroom and not a the rules w/i a privately held business, all day long, but it will not make it true, no many how times you repeat it.

    Yeah, money is the only truth that matters.

    Parent

    Dude... (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 03:32:02 PM EST
    ...you are trying to use Monopoly money while playing Clue.

    The governing body doesn't need a lick of proof so please STFU with the courtroom drama/non-sense.

    Parent

    STFU ? (none / 0) (#107)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 08:48:04 PM EST
    You're a real class act, Scott.

    Parent
    But...... (none / 0) (#75)
    by Zorba on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 04:41:37 PM EST
    What does it all mean, Mr. Natural?
    Don't mean sheeit.

    Parent
    As a Titan fan I have no (none / 0) (#44)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 09:36:35 AM EST
    team in pro football...but hope springs eternal.

    However, I have read/heard that 11 of the Pats balls were under inflated while none of Indianapolis's balls were.

    Then we have this.

    The 2014 Patriots were just the 3rd team in the last 25 years to never have lost a fumble at home!  The biggest difference between the Patriots and the other 2 teams who did it was that New England ran between 150 and 200 MORE plays this year than those teams did in the years they had zero home fumbles, making the Patriots stand alone in this unique statistic.

    Link

    I say it is proof that someone did something.

    Parent

    the 11 of 12 footballs is shady (none / 0) (#47)
    by CST on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 09:55:57 AM EST
    Although there are conflicting reports about just how underinflated they were.

    Lack of fumbles - this is a team that won the superbowl and has a coach who is notoriously strict about sitting you for fumbles, they're consistently beating the stats in many categories.  Also - it says they never "lost" a fumble at home, not that they never fumbled the ball.  Being able to recover a ball first would have nothing to do with it.  In fact, when someone brought that up later in the article the writer all of a sudden moved the goalposts from comparing the Patriots to every team in the NFL to comparing them to only teams that play outdoors.  And statistics that show that they are consistently better at a certain aspect of the game proves absolutely nothing - they've been one of the best teams in NFL history during that period across the board, why wouldn't they also be the best at one particular aspect of the game?

    Parent

    Here's the thing: how do you get (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Anne on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 10:34:14 AM EST
    past the problem of none of the Colt's footballs being underinflated?

    If, out of a total of 24 balls (12 for NE and 12 for Indy), some of both teams' footballs were non-compliant, you could maybe make the case that whatever the reason, it probably wasn't intentional.

    The fact that only the Patriots' footballs were deflated is cause for concern.  Reports coming out now seem to suggest things were more than a little loosey-goosey in the Pats' locker room - what was the protocol being followed by the Colts?  

    As for the fumbling stats, how do you explain that when Patriots signed with other teams, they were not able to maintain their ability to not fumble the ball?  Were they no longer afraid of the consequences of fumbling - either on the field, or with respect to being benched (Belichick is not the only coach who sits players for screwing up on the field)?  

    At this point, I have every confidence that the NFL will carry on in its pattern of failing to conduct meaningful investigations and/or institute appropriate actions.  

    Parent

    There are theories (none / 0) (#50)
    by CST on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 10:47:06 AM EST
    that could be true but they don't seem particularly credible.  

    The one people like the most (around here obviously) regarding the underinflated balls is that maybe the Colts inflated theirs beyond the league minimum and then they all lost pressure due to atmospheric conditions but the Colts balls were still above it.  I think that seems unlikely but it's possible.

    A lot of player's individual stats go down once they leave the patriots, not just fumbles.  If you have better tackling/protection from the rest of your team you would think you'd be less likely to fumble the ball/more likely to recover it.  Another thing they're known for is being really good at getting personnel at the right time and cutting them loose at the right time.  They have been on a tear as one of the best teams in many different statistical categories, and those things are usually not replicated by the players once they leave.  I don't think it's completely unthinkable that one of the things they would be better at is ball handling/recovery.  If they were the worst team in the league with the best fumbling stats it would be a lot more suspect.  I imagine having (according to many people) the best QB in the game also makes it a little easier on the running game.

    Parent

    They're so good it took them (none / 0) (#51)
    by Anne on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 10:50:41 AM EST
    what, ten years, to win another Super Bowl?

    :-)

    Parent

    The Giants are clearly cheaters (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by CST on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 10:54:24 AM EST
    They put a magnet in the football and in their helmets for ease of back-of-the-head catches.

    Parent
    LOL! (5.00 / 2) (#53)
    by Anne on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 11:22:28 AM EST
    And I refer to Terrell Suggs' interception of a ball between his knees as the "chicken salad catch."

    Did you ever see Five Easy Pieces?  Great movie, and one of my favorite scenes takes place in a diner, where Jack Nicholson's character wants plain toast, but has been told that he can't substitute toast for what comes with his order - it's against the rules.

    This is the dialogue:

    Bobby: I'd like a plain omelet no potatoes tomatoes instead, a cuppa coffee and wheat toast

    Waitress: No substitutions

    Bob:    What do you mean? You don't have any tomatoes?

    Waitress:    Only what's on the menu. You can have a #2, plain omelet, comes with cottage fries and rolls.

    Bobby:    I know what it comes with but it's not what I want.

    Waitress:    I'll come back when you make up your mind.

    Bobby: Wait a minute, I have made up my mind. I'd like an plain omelet, no potatoes on the plate, a cuppa coffee and a side order of wheat toast.

    Waitress: I'm sorry, we don't have any side orders of toast. It's a muffin or a coffee roll.

    Bobby: What do you mean you don't make side orders of toast. You make sandwiches don't you?

    Waitress:    Would you like to talk to the manager?

    Bobby:    You've got bread and a toaster of some kind?

    Waitress:    I don't make the rules.

    Bobby:    Okay, I'll make it as easy for you as I can. I'd like an omelet plain and a chicken salad sandwich on wheat toast, no mayonnaise, no butter, no lettuce. And a cup of coffee.

    Waitress : A #2, chicken sal sand. Hold the butter, the lettuce, the mayonnaise, and a cup of coffee. Anything else?

    Bobby: Yeah, now all you have to do is hold the chicken, bring me the toast, give me a check for the chicken salad sandwich, and you haven't broken any rules.

    Waitress: You want me to hold the chicken, huh?

    Bobby: I want you to hold it between your knees.

    Here's a link to the video.

    Parent

    What's the Theory... (none / 0) (#54)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 11:28:17 AM EST
    ...on some guy trying to introduce non-sanctioned kicking balls ?

    I do agree that you can't use number of fumbles or anything that happened on the field as an indicator.  I forget who was benched last year (2013) for a fumble, then later let go because of fumbles.  Belichick don't play with fumblers.

    That isn't the point anyways, doesn't matter if it helped them, hurt them, or didn't do anything.  They cheated, all but one, which means, using your theory, the Pats over inflated one ball, then by complete coincidence, a madman decided to try and change k-balls.  I mean seriously.  That might hold up in an OJ trial, but it's not going to hold up in the NFL.

    As far as I can tell, the only reason the balls were checked (not because of the interception) but because someone tried to put in a non game balls and the NFL decided to check pressure of all balls.

    The pats proved they were/are the best team.  That they can win the biggest game w/o cheating, but that doesn't give them a pass from cheating, which in all fairness, they didn't need to do.  But now they are going to be held to the flame, every loss is going to be due to them not being able to control ball pressure, every drop, every fumble, every INT is going to have that cloud following them.  Sad but their own damn fault.

    Parent

    that's new information (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by CST on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 11:48:52 AM EST
    Give it a week or two and I'm sure some Boston sportswriter will come up with a perfectly reasonable answer :)

    Either way one of the balls was more inflated than the others.  However that happened.

    My personal favorite excuse for all of it is that the Jets, Ravens and Colts conspired to sabatoge the patriots.

    Parent

    I Like That One... (none / 0) (#58)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 12:06:02 PM EST
    ...the set-up; who doesn't like a good conspiracy.

    But it has to include the dolphins and bills.  It would be hilarious if they discovered the equipment manager was a closeted fan of another team, or better yet, set-him-up to be one.

    Parent

    turns out (none / 0) (#68)
    by CST on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 02:31:51 PM EST
    it took less than a week or two.

    "According to Schefter, the NFL had a league employee at the AFC Championship game whose job was to keep track of the footballs, and then collect them after the game so the NFL could sell the balls off to charity.

    But that employee has since been fired for allegedly selling footballs over a period of time -- and not just for his actions in the AFC title game -- for his own financial gain. Another league employee handling the footballs on the sideline noticed that a football was missing, according to the report, and the now-fired employee found another football to replace the missing ball. That league employee likely handed McNally a football that wasn't preapproved for use.

    This exchange on the sideline was captured on video tape that has been turned over to the NFL, according to Schefter, and will be documented thoroughly in the report being prepared by independent investigator Ted Wells. The employee was later fired reportedly for exhibiting a pattern of behavior of stashing and selling the footballs for personal gain."

    Parent

    Let Me Guess... (none / 0) (#72)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 03:35:32 PM EST
    ...Belichick and Brady were the ones buying the balls.

    We need a statistician to figure the odds of some lone loser trying to replace a ball at the same game 10 of 11 footballs were under inflated.

    I would personally like to know the odds of that coincidence.  

    Parent

    So the couch is super strict about things (none / 0) (#62)
    by nycstray on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 01:56:47 PM EST
    but the locker room is loosey-goosey?

    Parent
    Ahem, coach not couch :P (none / 0) (#63)
    by nycstray on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 01:57:51 PM EST


    Parent
    Some people still wrapped up in this (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by CoralGables on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 02:21:04 PM EST
    could benefit from some couch time.

    Parent
    I wasn't trying to suggest that (none / 0) (#66)
    by Anne on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 02:21:38 PM EST
    loosey-goosey is the norm, but that on the day of that particular game, it sounds less than by-the-book.

    The unapproved kicking ball that sources told "Outside the Lines" a Gillette Stadium officials' locker room attendant tried to introduce into the AFC Championship Game was handed to the man by an NFL employee, a source told ESPN's Adam Schefter on Wednesday.

    The source said one of the "K balls," which are used for only special-teams play, went missing, and an NFL employee in charge of collecting balls for charity gave another ball to Jim McNally, who works the officials' locker room at New England Patriots games.

    McNally then gave it to Greg Yette, an alternate official who was in charge of putting the K balls into play. When Yette saw that ball did not have the pregame marking that referee Walt Anderson had put on the ball, he became suspicious and alerted NFL officials in the press box, a source told "Outside The Lines."

    The man in charge of collecting balls for charity in previous games has been fired by the league for selling the footballs meant for charity for a profit over a period of time, a source told Schefter.

    The source said that a different NFL official also handed a ball to an equipment manager to be passed along to Yette later in the game.

    Seems like a lot of people handling balls, and does anyone know where the missing ball went that started all of this?

    Parent

    Charlie Pierce's blog over at Esquire... (none / 0) (#22)
    by unitron on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 03:56:10 PM EST
    ...anybody else notice how badly they've messed it up recently?

    And it's getting worse.

    And drawing trolls.

    I've noticed that they've changed the ... (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 05:52:58 PM EST
    ... format and look. Can't say that I like or dislike it, but I'm sure that I'll get used to it. Haven't paid too much attention to the trolls, which is a euphemism for "people in desperate need of getting a life."

    Parent
    The last bullet (none / 0) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 07:05:52 PM EST
    You will ever need

    "Effectively destroying vital (none / 0) (#29)
    by oculus on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 07:34:20 PM EST
    organs."

    Parent
    Rand Paul (none / 0) (#33)
    by Politalkix on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 09:48:45 PM EST
    is tied with HRC in two swing states-Colorado and Virginia. I do not think Rand Paul will get the nomination from his party but WOW!
    link

    Wow! (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by Yman on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 06:16:43 AM EST
    How about the other 48 states?

    Parent
    Or not so much (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by CoralGables on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 07:23:34 AM EST
    The Colorado Q poll vs Paul has Clinton +2 (only recent one). Both you and CNN fudge the results using the margin or error. There is no such thing as a virtual tie except when someone is trying to make the person behind look better than they are.

    The Virginia Q poll has them tied but the RCP avg vs Paul in Virginia is Clinton +9.3

    Nationwide RCP avg vs Paul has Clinton at +10.5

    Not really close at all at this stage.

    Parent

    CG (none / 0) (#109)
    by Politalkix on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 10:55:13 PM EST
    Cannot fathom the reason for your testiness, I thought you were more reasonable....

    I have never thought of Rand Paul as a serious candidate, so I was just surprised that he was that close to HRC (even with all caveats that you mentioned) given the fact that the Republican voter preference for nomination is split among numerous candidates at this time while the Democratic voter preference has more or less coalesced around HRC without anyone else announcing a challenge. I just posted a CNN headline that I saw, did not spend much time delving through a bunch of polls as you seem to have done.

    There is also no reason for me to portray Rand Paul's chances as better than it actually is. I am not planning to vote for him or another Republican and as I already said, I am not expecting him to get the nomination.

    I have already mentioned what I would like to hear from the Democratic Party candidate. If I get the impression that HRC will even be willing to listen to a voice like mine, I will vote for her, if not I will just not vote for anyone or vote third party. It is as simple as that.

    Parent

    Absloutely as simple as that (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by Yman on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 07:30:38 AM EST
    Can't wait to hear your decision once you finally make up your (open) mind.

    Heh.

    Actually, that's completely untrue.

    I couldn't care less.

    Parent

    Colorado has an outspoken (none / 0) (#116)
    by christinep on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 09:44:05 AM EST
    and sizable "libertarian" segment (particularly on the west slope.)  Rand Paul is said to attract individuals with "libertarian" leanings.  Ergo....

    A few points: Quinnipiac has had a history of polling problems in Colorado and--assuming some early first-blush flirtation with Paul by Independent/Unaffiliated types here, the Republican-leaning Unaffiliateds tend to come around to the Republican establishment in the long run.  I have long considered Rand Paul a real contender in states such as Colorado (and even Iowa, courtesy of his dad) in view of the western motif of proud individualism.

     Apart from pre-debate, pre-trial-in-the-spotlight theoretical match-ups these days, I would also offer that--contrary to your assertion otherwise--you have reason to hype this blip: That reason is the very obvious Anybody But Clinton position demonstrated by your comments thus far.  I still don't understand where you are coming from on the matter (other than the clear personal dislike you have evidenced against the former Secretary of State.)  <And, right now with the beautiful new snow outside, it is kind of fun to push back on your comments on this subject. Thanks.:)>

    Parent

    Christinep (2.00 / 3) (#124)
    by Politalkix on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 04:31:38 PM EST
    "I would also offer that--contrary to your assertion otherwise--you have reason to hype this blip: That reason is the very obvious Anybody But Clinton position demonstrated by your comments thus far.  I still don't understand where you are coming from on the matter (other than the clear personal dislike you have evidenced against the former Secretary of State.)  <And, right now with the beautiful new snow outside, it is kind of fun to push back on your comments on this subject. Thanks.:)>"

    If you think that you can manipulate me to achieve what you want by accusations of "personal dislike" and  CDS, you are very mistaken. I engaged with you and Zorba imagining both of you you to be more sincere than I now understand you to be, I am almost regretting that decision. I will be more wary of your passive-aggressiveness in the future. Anyways, enjoy the beautiful snow outside..

    Parent

    No, no, honey ... not passive (none / 0) (#132)
    by christinep on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 07:42:28 PM EST
    Based upon my reading of your comments on the subject, I am saying what I believe to be true ... not passive aggressive; rather, consider the challenge to be assertive & very direct. (Thank you very much.)

    Again, no manipulation intended. Rather, I have been and intend to be quite direct about what--in fact--is a transparent pretense on your part to find anyone, just anyone, to satisfy your vaguely-stated foreign policy standard.  Since the President and former Secretary of State Clinton are intertwined in foreign policy--by any objective measure--it is difficult to understand your issue by any objective standard.

    Passive, politalkix ... for passive aggressive, I'd suggest that you take a gander at your mirror.  

    Parent

    Alrighty (2.00 / 2) (#133)
    by Politalkix on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 08:12:08 PM EST
    then. I have no reason now onwards to treat your posts any differently than Yman's posts. Thanks for burning that bridge in your paranoia or haughtiness or both.

    Parent
    Thank you, politalkix (none / 0) (#147)
    by christinep on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 09:18:40 AM EST


    Parent
    You know, PK is the same (5.00 / 2) (#159)
    by sj on Mon Feb 23, 2015 at 02:50:18 PM EST
    as she always has been. It's just that you thought you and he had simpatico. In reality, you just approved of her offensiveness based on recipient.

    He has never cared one way or the other what you (or anyone else) thought. Although in that, I suppose we are all, to one extent or another, the same.

    Parent

    I think that I've known that for a long time (none / 0) (#164)
    by christinep on Mon Feb 23, 2015 at 10:05:51 PM EST


    Parent
    Please allow me to add (none / 0) (#165)
    by christinep on Tue Feb 24, 2015 at 01:02:30 PM EST
    Politalkix' offensiveness & insulting comments are simply that ... that person seems to be getting carried away (a variation on the Doubling-Down Theme) with a foreign policy "argument" premised in the unsupportable claim that the President and the former Secretary of State have significantly differing views.

     So, imo, that commenter is thrashing and name-calling.  Others have done the same at different times rather than admit error, ambiguity, legitimate differences of opinion.

    It makes me laugh, tho, rather than bristle ... because while I definitely agree with politalkix' depiction of the worthwhile actions taken by the President & his administration, let me only say that politalkix seems to have gotten caught up in some kind of predictable anti-Hillary response pattern.  As for me: I continue to find significant and respect the public service and action improvements of both President Obama and Hillary Clinton.  (Read: politalkix and others of like mind can go ahead and flail about all they want :))  
     

    Parent

    Like a dog (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by sj on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 12:11:13 PM EST
    with a bone, you keep worrying your CDS. WOW!

    Parent
    Any day now, (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Zorba on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 12:42:38 PM EST
    CDS is going to be included in the DSM.   ;-)

    Parent
    Coincidence (maybe not) (2.00 / 1) (#108)
    by Politalkix on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 10:31:17 PM EST
    I do not think that it is a coincidence that the people with the most malignant cases of ODS always accuse other people of CDS. Zorba, sj, jbindc-you are accusing people left and right of CDS but could not bring yourself to vote for Obama in any election that he contested. There is also a rich trail of anti-BHO comments that you have left in TL archives but heaven forbid that anyone should accuse you of ODS.

    I think Karl Rove perfected the technique of attacking others where his own candidate was weak. eg: Swiftboat a decorated Vietnam Vet, John Kerry to cover for GWB and Cheney not serving in Vietnam. All of you are trying the same trick at a lower level. Pathetic! Get rid of the log in your own eye first....

    Parent

    I think what many of us have is a (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by Anne on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 09:06:59 AM EST
    case of NOTVF or ATTOC: "no one to vote for " or "Are these the only choices?"

    I have been puzzled by the comments by people who won't or can't support Clinton this time around giving you a hard time for wrestling with your own feelings about it. It bugs me that I can see you being thoughtful about it and all you're getting in response is a lot of cr@p.  I don't get it.

    Pretty sure you know where I am on the so-called choices it looks like we're going to have; I recognize some of my thoughts in what you're saying - all I can say now is that time will tell for all of us.  What we see, what we hear, will all play a role in our ultimate decision; I don't get why you're getting a hard time for it now.

    What am I missing?


    Parent

    Because he's not "being thoughtful" (5.00 / 3) (#122)
    by Yman on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 04:03:29 PM EST
    I have been puzzled by the comments by people who won't or can't support Clinton this time around giving you a hard time for wrestling with your own feelings about it. It bugs me that I can see you being thoughtful about it and all you're getting in response is a lot of cr@p.  I don't get it.

    ... or "wrestling with anything".  I can tell you right now what his ultimate "decision" will be based on his years of comments and fixation on both Clintons.  It's not a mystery.  He's going to "wrestle with" this decision about as much as Jim will.

    Parent

    So, what's he going to do? (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by Anne on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 04:41:31 PM EST
    [and while you're at it, can you tell me what the lottery numbers are going to be?  Thanks.]

    But so what if he decides not to vote for Clinton?  There are a lot of us who have already made that decision, or expect that will be the decision we'll make.  

    Are you going to be bullying us, too?  Just so you know, I think that's a tactic that has less and less success with each election.  

    I've had my go-rounds with Politalkix over the years - I expect he's as taken aback by my comment here as anyone, but I don't think the comparison to jim is a fair one.

    Look, in the end, who anyone votes for is his or her business, as is how they arrive at whatever their decision is.  You don't have to like it, or agree with it, or "buy" it; you get your vote, I get mine, Politalkix gets his.  Lord knows I've had a lot of people tell me I was wasting my vote to vote Green, or effectively voting for the Republican, and that it would be my fault if the Democrat lost.  I don't know what makes people who lob those rhetorical hand grenades think that we take our votes lightly, or don't give them enough thought, but in the end, I don't care what they think.

    So what if you're right about what Politalkix will do?  The prize you get will be the same as the one I will get for being right about the things I "know."

    A big ol' handful of nothing.

    Parent

    So, ... nothing (4.00 / 3) (#128)
    by Yman on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 05:06:20 PM EST
    But so what if he decides not to vote for Clinton?  There are a lot of us who have already made that decision, or expect that will be the decision we'll make.

    I couldn't care less if he votes for her or not.  I'm just not going to pretend that he's "wrestling" with the decision or being "thoughtful" about it.  If you want to, ... knock yourself out.  But if you think choosing random, winning lottery numbers are the same as predicting whether politalkix or Jim will vote for HC, well ... that's funny.  You don't need to have mystic powers to figure out whether Rush Limbaugh will vote for her, either.

    Are you going to be bullying us, too?  Just so you know, I think that's a tactic that has less and less success with each election.

    Really?  That's an argument you want to try?

    Oy.


    Look, in the end, who anyone votes for is his or her business, as is how they arrive at whatever their decision is.  You don't have to like it, or agree with it, or "buy" it; you get your vote, I get mine, Politalkix gets his.  Lord knows I've had a lot of people tell me I was wasting my vote to vote Green, or effectively voting for the Republican, and that it would be my fault if the Democrat lost.  I don't know what makes people who lob those rhetorical hand grenades think that we take our votes lightly, or don't give them enough thought, but in the end, I don't care what they think.

    Is that supposed to be in response to my post?  Because it certainly doesn't have anything to do with what I posted ...

    Parent

    Oh, go shovel some snow, Yman. (none / 0) (#129)
    by Anne on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 05:17:31 PM EST
    Maybe that will help you unclench your jaws from around the bone you can't seem to let go of.

    Jesus.

    Parent

    That "bone" is imaginary (none / 0) (#130)
    by Yman on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 05:21:46 PM EST
    ... but not the nerve I hit, huh, Anne?

    Parent
    I don't know that you are missing anything (5.00 / 2) (#160)
    by sj on Mon Feb 23, 2015 at 02:54:48 PM EST
    But you are certainly seeing something that I am not. I see no thoughtful remarks. I see the same knee jerk-ism of the pro-Obama comments existing in the anti-Clinton comments. I don't see any wrestling at all.

    But I do like the NOTVF notation.


    Parent

    I guess it has to do with the fact that (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by Anne on Mon Feb 23, 2015 at 05:19:12 PM EST
    I have some of the same doubts/problems with Clinton, and I see Obama as irrelevant because he's not going to be on anyone's ballot in 2016.  People can be as pro-Obama as they like, but what does that have to do with 2016?

    Nothing.

    I guess what I see is someone who wants to vote for a Democrat, probably doesn't want that Democrat to be Clinton, and is pretty sure that's going to be the name with the (D) after it on the ballot.  As someone who is pretty sure I'm not going to vote for Clinton, I've still had similar conversations with myself about, well, if she would just do this, or say that, or show me something I want to see, maybe I could vote for her without feeling icky.

    And while I would never vote for any of the crazies likely to be on the GOP side of the contest, there has to be at least some consideration that one of them could be the next president.  Assuming more people lose their minds than keep them.

    I don't know.  I think we're all a little cranky, maybe we all know each other's triggers a little too well, maybe it's hard to leave old patterns behind and take things as they come.

    Your guess is as good as mine.

    Parent

    I have doubts about Clinton, too (5.00 / 2) (#163)
    by sj on Mon Feb 23, 2015 at 06:06:53 PM EST
    Serious ones. That doesn't mean that I will gleefully highlight every critical article that happens to pop up! With exclamation points!
    I guess what I see is someone who wants to vote for a Democrat, probably doesn't want that Democrat to be Clinton, and is pretty sure that's going to be the name with the (D) after it on the ballot.
    I see that in you, and in me* but not in PK. I just see someone who won't vote for Clinton.

    ----
    * speaking of me, HRC could win back some cautious support if she championed much of the same domestic policy she did the first time round. I already know she is a lost cause for me on FP. As is every President.

    And her remarks on the Snowden information. Oy.


    Parent

    Thanks, Anne (none / 0) (#121)
    by Politalkix on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 03:51:44 PM EST


    Parent
    As a matter of fact, (4.40 / 5) (#117)
    by Zorba on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 11:03:12 AM EST
    I did not support either Clinton or Obama in the 2008 Primary. Neither one was (or is) my idea of a liberal.
    I voted for Dennis Kucinich.
    I did vote for Obama in the 2008 General Election, because I could not stomach the thought of Senator "Bomb Iran" McCain becoming President; I thought he would be worse than Bush.  And I really could not stomach the idea of Palin being one heartbeat away from the Presidency.
    I would have voted for Clinton, if she had gotten the nomination, for the same reason.
    In 2012, I voted for Jill Stein of the Green Party.
    What I am getting sick of is your history of trying to paint Obama as more progressive than H. Clinton.  He's not a progressive, and neither is she.  
    The trashing of Hillary by the Obama worshipers is also getting way, way old.
    Let's face it, the Democratic Party has moved to the right.
    I didn't leave the Democratic Party.  The Democratic Party left me.

    Parent
    This does not pass the smell test (2.00 / 2) (#123)
    by Politalkix on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 04:05:49 PM EST
    "What I am getting sick of is your history of trying to paint Obama as more progressive than H. Clinton.  He's not a progressive, and neither is she. The trashing of Hillary by the Obama worshipers is also getting way, way old."

    (1) No, it was just a post of CNN poll about Rand Paul. It had nothing to do with BHO. That some of you got so aggravated by that post tells me a lot about you than you would like others to think about you.

    (2) There is an outright lie in your comment. I have never attempted to "paint Obama as more progressive than H. Clinton" on all issues. In fact I have specifically said that BHO's foreign policy attitude was more to my liking than HRC's. However, in the past I have also said that Edwards and HRC's healthcare plan were more to the left than BHO's healthcare plan.

    Parent

    Its always "just a post about . . ." (5.00 / 5) (#131)
    by nycstray on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 06:07:01 PM EST
    and when it comes to Clinton, you are pretty consistent . . .and it says a lot about you.

    Maybe you could spend an equal amount of time on the GOP?

    Parent

    Those states (none / 0) (#38)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 06:22:40 AM EST
    have always been close and I don't think that is going to change in 2016 and people are really tired of Obama which is something she is going to have to fight.

    Parent
    GITMO refugees in Uruguay (none / 0) (#35)
    by Politalkix on Wed Feb 18, 2015 at 11:27:53 PM EST
    link

    GITMO refugees in Uruguay. Things are not going so well.

    Norm Macdonald dishes inside secrets (none / 0) (#39)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 07:13:06 AM EST
    on 'SNL' 40th show, why Eddie Murphy declined to play Bill Cosby in skit...

    This is for Howdy. (none / 0) (#40)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 07:15:26 AM EST
    The other day I was flipping channels that show 19 and counting was on and darn if the mother wasn't wearing one of those jean skirts you have talked about. And the kids were all dressed like they were on Little House on the Prairie despite the best efforts of the TV camera crew to hide that fact.

    For no reason at all (none / 0) (#49)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 10:44:52 AM EST
    except I am currently dancing around my kitchen to while making lunch.

    Golden Eldorado

    Please put the knife down first. (none / 0) (#79)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 06:13:16 PM EST
    ;-D

    Parent
    Wage Protests are working... (none / 0) (#57)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 12:02:15 PM EST
    Walmart has announced they are raising their lowest wage to 10 bucks an hour by next February.  Took 'em long enough...should we tell them 10 bucks might have been good enough 10 years ago now or wait a bit? ;)

    The fast-food joints will hopefully not be far behind...keep the pressure on!

    Bill O'Reilly has a Brian Williams ... (none / 0) (#82)
    by Yman on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 10:17:07 PM EST
    ... problem of his own with his claims of combat reporting from the Faulklands War.

    Wonder if his lying low/no comment strategy will work?

    O'Reilly responded (none / 0) (#83)
    by Yman on Thu Feb 19, 2015 at 10:45:28 PM EST
    Attacked the authors of the piece and defends his claims of having been "in an active war zone" during the Faulklands War meant covering the protests in Buenos Aires (not the war zone in the islands) after the war ended.

    Parent
    All this article did (none / 0) (#87)
    by Slado on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 01:36:43 AM EST
    Was give him material for his show.  I can see the " Talking points Memo" writing itself.   He loves these kinds of fights and will probably dare Corn to come on his show.

    We'll see but one things for sure, he's not going anywhere unless he wants to.

    Parent

    Of course not (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by Yman on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 11:38:22 AM EST
    The Fox crowd is just fine with journalists lying when it's one of their own.

    Parent
    Good One Bill... (none / 0) (#94)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 09:20:24 AM EST
    "I was not on the Falkland Islands and I never said I was. I was in Buenos Aires... In Buenos Aires we were in a combat situation after the Argentines surrendered."

    I won't hold my breathe waiting on the right to freak out about distortions of the truth.

    Parent

    So after the combat was over... (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by unitron on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 11:46:26 AM EST
    ...they were in a combat situation?

    With whom, the street vendors?

    Or did I miss the part where Brit paratroopers dropped into Buenos Aires, followed by fierce house to house fighting?

    Parent

    The Point Was... (none / 0) (#98)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 01:26:39 PM EST
    ...that the demonstrators in Buenos Aires were fired upon by the police, therefore they were in ___.  

    It's blank because it went from war zones, to covering wars, to surviving a combat situation, then back to war zones, and I believe today it's at combat situations.

    Funny thing is there is no mention of it in his book written years ago and doesn't mention any of this.  He simple stated he watched the Junta surrender to the British.  For O'Reilly, his memory, apparently, gets better with time; more exciting as well.

    That being said who cares if Bill O, or Brian W, or Jany of them tells tall tales, so long as the news they are reading isn't being embellished, they can tell people whatever they want.  Like we all don't embellish the resume a tad, and that is really what they both did, but in person rather than on paper.

    I don't think anyone really cares, but the right flipped out over an personality they don't even watch.  Fine, but they should at least act like they care about one of their own lying.

    As I typed that I realized, O'Reilly and Obama have the same initials.  That is funny.

    Parent

    Per post above (none / 0) (#111)
    by Slado on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 06:14:28 AM EST
    He produced a memo and a letter last night on his show from CBS News at the time that in his view verify his recollection of events.

    Will be interesting to see what Corn responds with but as I said this whole thing only helps O'Reily because it just gives him material for his show and a way to claim the "far left" is attacking him.

    Parent

    "In his view verify ... (none / 0) (#114)
    by Yman on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 07:35:11 AM EST
    ... his recollection of events".

    Dear G0d that's funny.

    Could you point out the part where the memo discusses Bill's service in a war/combat zone?

    Parent

    To be fair to Bill O'Reilly, there was ... (none / 0) (#103)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 04:19:09 PM EST
    ... in fact a very violent public backlash against the military junta in Buenos Aires in June 1982, once the government was compelled to formally acknowledge that Argentine forces -- mostly raw and untrained conscripts who had retreated in chaos to Port Stanley in the face of relentless pressure from rapidly advancing British troops -- had surrendered. (The video linked above shows the surrender itself, as well as the subsequent political violence in Buenos Aires.)

    Up to that point, the junta's flacks had been insisting publicly that Argentina was winning the war, and the Argentine people had generally believed them. News of Port Stanley's fall left many citizens feeling betrayed and disgusted, and they quickly took to the streets in protest, calling for the junta's ouster. Gen. Leopoldo Galtieri would fall from power less than 48 hours later, thanks in no small part to his loss of credibility due to the Falklands fiasco.

    (There is a great film about the war from the Argentine perspective, "Illuminados Por el Fuego" (2005), which was written and directed by Tristán Bauer, who pulls no punches in his consideration of just how badly the Argentine military had bungled its invasion and occupation of the Falklands. It's readily apparent that the young, poor and malnourished Argentine conscripts who had been deployed there were no match for the highly-trained and well-disciplined professional British marines and airborne troops sent against them.)

    But that said, O'Reilly was obviously wrong to allude that he was a "war correspondent" during the Falklands Islands War, when all he was actually doing at the time was covering the related politics of the conflict from neighboring Argentina. Not one and the same, by any means.

    The only credentialed western correspondents who were allowed within Britain's self-declared "Falklands Exclusion Zone" -- that is, the military perimeter surrounding the islands from 200 miles out -- were British, all of whom had been authorized by Whitehall to accompany the huge Royal Navy task force as it sailed to the South Atlantic from Southhampton and Portsmouth in the immediate wake of the Argentine occupation.

    These were intrepid reporters such as the London Evening Standard's Max Hastings -- who not only became the very first journalist to enter Port Stanley, but actually did so ahead of arriving British forces --  and Simon Jenkins, who later teamed up with Hastings to write what still stands as one of the definitive accounts of the war, "Battle for the Falklands" (published in Feb. 1983 by W.W. Norton & Co., London UK).

    Bill O'Reilly pales on comparison to such men.

    Parent

    Were the US reporters reporting from England (none / 0) (#125)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 04:32:21 PM EST
    prior to 12/7/41 war correspondents??

    It is accurate to say that they were.

    So, like it or not, O'Relliy was a "war correspondent."

    And he was very specific in noting that he and his crew were there when the government fired on the crowd.

    And the documents he produced support him.

    He called Corn a liar several times. Corn can now accept the label or sue for slander.

    We live in interesting times.

    And if anyone wants to say that O'Reilly is arrogant and totally full of himself I'll be happy to add an "amen.:

    Parent

    We're talking about the Falkland Islands War, ... (5.00 / 2) (#138)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 01:00:07 AM EST
    JimakaPPJ: "Were the US reporters reporting from England prior to 12/7/41 war correspondents?? It is accurate to say that they were."

    ... and not the Battle of Britain and the London Blitz. Not a single British bomb fell on the Argentine mainland during the 1982 conflict, so comparing Bill O'Reilly's work in Buenos Aires to Edward R. Murrow's in World War II-era London is simply nonsensical.

    O'Reilly was no more a war correspondent, than was George W. Bush a combat pilot in the Texas Air National Guard. The only difference between the two is that at least we know where O'Reilly was at the time.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    And there was a time before (2.00 / 1) (#143)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 07:44:44 AM EST
    England was bombed when we had reporters there and a war had been declared.

    Were they war correspondents??

    And I compare no one's "work." I'm just pointing out facts.

    And a nice snark re Bush. At least he, unlike Clinton or Obama, served in the NG.

    Parent

    I think we are missing the point (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by FlJoe on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 08:01:14 AM EST
    You can be a war correspondent and not see combat.
    Billo claimed he was in a combat situation which is complete BS.

    Parent
    One of Bill's co-workers at the time ... (none / 0) (#139)
    by Yman on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 06:48:16 AM EST
    ... shred O'Reilly's story.

    Bill O'Reilly's CBS Colleague Says Buenos Aires Was Not A 'Combat Situation' After Falklands War

    His original FB post is an even better read.

    Parent

    And there was a time before (none / 0) (#142)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 07:44:43 AM EST
    England was bombed when we had reporters there and a war had been declared.

    Were they war correspondents??

    And I compare no one's "work." I'm just pointing out facts.

    And a nice snark re Bush. At least he, unlike Clinton or Obama, served in the NG.

    Parent

    I've already answered your question. (5.00 / 2) (#154)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 03:02:30 PM EST
    London in late 1940 WAS the front lines, courtesy of the Luftwaffe's Blitz, whereas Buenos Aires in May-June 1982 was about 1,200 miles from the fighting in the Falklands, or the rough equivalent of the distance between your home state of Tennessee and Boise, ID.

    Therefore, your hamhanded attempt to compare Bill O'Reilly to the legendary likes of Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite, who risked their lives to report from the front, is thoroughly nonsensical -- not to mention quite noxious and highly inappropriate.

    Please stop doubling down on stupid.

    Parent

    Were they in a place ... (none / 0) (#145)
    by Yman on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 08:27:37 AM EST
    ... where a war was being fought - unlike O'Reilly?  (Yes).  Were they in a combat zone - unlike O'Reilly?  (Yes).  Did O'Reilly lie about "soldiers" killing civilians in Bueonos Aires - 1,200 miles away from the combat zone after the war ended?

    Yes - yes, he did.

    O'Reilly:  

    The Argentine army pulled up in giant trucks, came out with guns and opened fire on the crowd. The video [we filed for CBS Evening News] shows that; it's on the Internet, you can see it. We shot it.... That was combat. Soldiers shooting at people who were trying to overthrow the government...

    Yes - that video is indeed on the internet, Bill - which is precisely how we know you're lying.

    Wow - reporters jostled and cars damaged while policemen stand nearby.  That's some scary "combat" in a "war zone".

    Parent

    Uhhhmmmm (none / 0) (#127)
    by Yman on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 04:57:50 PM EST
    Were the US reporters reporting from England prior to 12/7/41 war correspondents??

    Uhhmmm, yeah.  They were.  Anyone reporting on a war from anywhere is a "war correspondent".  But O'Reilly didn't just call himself a "war correspondent".  He claimed - on numerous occasions -  that he was:

    1.  in a "combat situation in Argentina" during the Falklands War

    2.  that he "respects himself for going into combat

    3.  that he's seen the "combat up close and personal" in the Falklands War.

    4.  that he has a "soft spot" for combat veterans because he covered the Falklands War "out in the middle of nowhere."

    5.  that he was in a "war zone in Argentina"

    He wasn't.  He lied ...  and he got caught.

    He called Corn a liar several times. Corn can now accept the label or sue for slander.

    This is seriously funny.  If someone doesn't sue for slander after they're called a liar, they have to "accept the label"?  Heh, heh ...  Do you know how many times O'Reilly has been called a liar (accurately) and hasn't sued?  (Hint - ask O'Reilly if you can see one of his Peabody Awards).  Heck - I just called him one.

    I guess if he doesn't sue, he just has to "accept the label".

    Heh.

    Parent

    Heh (none / 0) (#134)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 08:18:27 PM EST
    So now you don't think that being were troops are shooting isn't combat?

    lol

    And yes, Corn can sue or accept.

    Of course they both could square off at 10 feet with computer mouses.

    Parent

    According to traditional usage (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by jondee on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 10:50:00 PM EST
    and definition, what Fox's loud-mouthed ignoramus-residence was in or near in Argentina, wasn't "combat".

    But then, up until a few weeks ago, you didn't know "protest" could be both a noun and a verb, did you, Jim?

    Parent

    I forgot, Heh. (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by jondee on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 11:03:46 PM EST


    Parent
    So the O'Reilly can sue ... (none / 0) (#135)
    by Yman on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 08:37:19 PM EST
    ... or accept the label ... or you.  C'mon, Jim - money where your mouth is for a change.  Although I can understand why you of all people would sympathize with O'Reilly's exaggeration/lies to suggest he was in combat.

    BTW - What shooting?  What troops?  O"Reilly had cameras and in his own words, the best vantage point.  But there is no video or pictures of other reports (other than his current claims) of "troops shooting".  There are no media reports of such violence or any fatalities.  Media accounts from the time describe protesters who set fires, broke store windows, and jostled reporters - none describe soldiers shooting civilians.  Not even the CBS News report on the protest that O'Reilly contributed to mentioned soldiers shooting and killing civilians.  So O'Reilly doesn't even mention it in his own report at the time and suddenly remembers it 20-30 years later - with no corroboration at all - and you want us to believe this silly fairy tale?

    Heh.

    I'm not sure if you're funnier than O'Reilly or the other way around.

    Parent

    Why should (none / 0) (#141)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 07:38:24 AM EST
    I want you to believe anything?  Expecting a rational reaction from you or Jondee (see below) is an exercise in futility.

    Why didn't O'Reilly have his camera crew take pictures?? Maybe they were ducking?? And maybe the producer was directing the video??

    And why don't you link to a copy of the report rather than tell us what was not in it??

    But you won't.

    The facts are that Corn is attacking O'Reilly because Corn is a member of the Far Left press working for a magazine that couldn't even quote Justice Department statistics accurately.

    His motive is simple. "Maybe I can get some exposure by trying to get a payback for Williams."


    Parent

    Somehow I'm not yearning (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by jondee on Mon Feb 23, 2015 at 05:35:23 PM EST
    for lessons in rational thinking from someone who says the world was created in six days (not five, not seven) and who looks up to Bill O'Reilly for guidance and inspiration.

    Parent
    Because I was waiting for you ... (none / 0) (#146)
    by Yman on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 08:45:49 AM EST
    ... to try this silly argument.

    Here's a link to the CBS report, which O'Reilly claimed would vindicate him and prove him right.  Problem is ... it proves he was lying.

    O'Reilly's claim:

    The Argentine army pulled up in giant trucks, came out with guns and opened fire on the crowd. The video [we filed for CBS Evening News] shows that; it's on the Internet, you can see it. We shot it.... That was combat. Soldiers shooting at people who were trying to overthrow the government...

    No, Bill (and Jim).  Civilians protesting, jostling reporters and damaging cars in a capital 1,200 miles away while policemen are nearby is not "combat" or a "war zone".  Bill O'Reilly didn't mention the soldiers killing civilians until decades later because it never happened.  If it had, he - along with all the other reporters in the capital - would have described it in their reports.  No one did, including O'Reilly.  The video would show it as O'Reilly claimed it does - but it doesn't, because he's lying.

    Oops!

    Parent

    Further, had the Argentine Army ... (none / 0) (#156)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 03:38:27 PM EST
    ... violently suppressed the civilian protests in Buenos Aires on June 15, 1982, why would Gen. Galtieri have resigned his post as president only two days later? He was later arrested.)

    Truth is, most of Argentina's regular army was actually down south in Pantagonia, both to defend Argentine military bases from possible British attack and to await orders (which never came) to further reinforce the garrison in the Falklands. Another 11,300 of them ended up as British POWs when their commander, Brig. Gen. Mario Menendez, surrendered to British Maj. Gen. Jeremy Moore at Port Stanley.

    Thus, the Argentine army was really in no position to suppress the Buenos Aires crowds, because they were still deployed against the possibility of further British attacks. The British had in fact planned to assault the major Argentine air force base at Rio Grande in Tierra del Fuego, but then scrapped "Operation Mikado" as unnecessary when Menendez waved the white flag at Stanley.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Wow, those picture are beautiful (none / 0) (#85)
    by sj on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 01:00:46 AM EST
    And terrifying.

    Parent
    This was a response to (none / 0) (#99)
    by sj on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 02:30:48 PM EST
    Zorba here.

    Parent
    Vaccines (none / 0) (#88)
    by Slado on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 01:44:05 AM EST
    Interesting program after all the debate we had recently on the subject.

    Frontline

    MSNBC changes its lineup (none / 0) (#90)
    by jbindc on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 08:17:03 AM EST
    They are actually going to have news during the afternoon.

    And buh-bye Ronan Farrow and Chris Hayes.

    Interesting behind the scenes SNL stuff (none / 0) (#100)
    by McBain on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 03:23:51 PM EST
    http://tinyurl.com/pvrfju3

    I'm surprised Eddie Murphy even considered doing a Cosby bit.  

    Also, cool to read about the genesis (none / 0) (#101)
    by McBain on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 03:37:30 PM EST
    of the Celebrity Jeopardy sketch.  

    Parent
    Good times (none / 0) (#102)
    by Slado on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 03:50:17 PM EST
    Thumdersnow!

    Somebody loves their job.  

    glad someone is enjoying it (none / 0) (#104)
    by CST on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 04:21:42 PM EST
    Pretty sure this is how the rest of us feel.

    Parent
    and in case anyone was wondering (none / 0) (#105)
    by CST on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 04:37:36 PM EST
    just how bad is it really?

    Anytime you are beating Buffalo in an all-time 30-day snowfall record, you know it's bad.  And we aren't even 30 days out from the first bad blizzard yet - more snow is coming this weekend.

    Parent

    Try and stay safe, (none / 0) (#106)
    by Zorba on Fri Feb 20, 2015 at 05:51:27 PM EST
    CST.  You are in our thoughts.  
    Namaste.

    Parent
    Strategy for attempting to (none / 0) (#119)
    by oculus on Sat Feb 21, 2015 at 12:51:36 PM EST
    wrest Mosul from ISIS:

    NYT

    Population: 1,000,000.  # of ISIS: 1200 or less

    O'Reilly loses it ... (none / 0) (#148)
    by Yman on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 11:09:15 AM EST
    ... during a softball interview on his own network.

    Looks like the calm, reasonable Bill has gone on sabbatical.

    As if anyone with a double-digit IQ couldn't see through that act.

    Tsarenov Atty Judy Clark's client list (none / 0) (#149)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 12:07:46 PM EST
    No idea why this showed up on google news today.

    They are imagining the electorate (none / 0) (#150)
    by Politalkix on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 01:21:55 PM EST
    link

    as customers!

    Corporations are people, citizens are customers.

    "Is Hillary Rodham Clinton a McDonald's Big Mac or a Chipotle burrito bowl? A can of Bud or a bottle of Blue Moon? JCPenney or J. Crew?"

    I was wondering when they would be back (5.00 / 3) (#157)
    by nycstray on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 04:03:02 PM EST
    the exclamation points that is . . . .

    By the way, you're a tad late to the realization that citizens are customers . . . we've been referred to as "consumers" first and foremost for YEARS . . . .

    Parent

    The WORST (none / 0) (#151)
    by FlJoe on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 02:03:56 PM EST
    meme ever put forth in political punditry.
    In politics, authenticity can be a powerful trait
    as they themselves judge authenticity.

    Parent
    I wonder if her campaign will win (none / 0) (#152)
    by MO Blue on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 02:20:46 PM EST
    will marketing awards.

    Obama Wins! ... Ad Age's Marketer of the
    ORLANDO, Fla. (AdAge.com) -- Just weeks before he demonstrates whether his campaign's blend of grass-roots appeal and big media-budget know-how has converted the American electorate, Sen. Barack Obama has shown he's already won over the nation's brand builders. He's been named Advertising Age's year for 2008.Mr. Obama won the vote of hundreds of marketers, agency heads and marketing-services vendors gathered here at the Association of National Advertisers' annual conference.

    Mr. Obama won the vote of hundreds of marketers, agency heads and marketing-services vendors gathered here at the Association of National Advertisers' annual conference.

    Mr. Obama won the vote of hundreds of marketers, agency heads and marketing-services vendors gathered here at the Association of National Advertisers' annual conference. He edged out runners-up Apple and Zappos.com. The rest of the shortlist, selected by Ad Age's editorial staff, was rounded out by megabrand Nike, turnaround story Coors and Mr. Obama's rival, Sen. John McCain.

    The Obama for America 2012 team picked up another accolade Tuesday: a Webby award for the "breakout of the year."

    The Webbys, which recognize the best on the Web each year, gave its nod to the Obama campaign team for its use of "savvy political and tech genius" in using massive data banks to analyze and target voters across the country.

    The campaign's use of data included information on everything from magazine subscriptions to hunting licenses to evaluate how likely voters were to support their candidate and, as The Washington Post reported, the database itself has become a valuable asset for Democrats.



    Parent
    You'd think that never happened (5.00 / 2) (#158)
    by nycstray on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 04:10:00 PM EST
    judging by some folks' memories . . .

    Isn't it being said that some of the Obama Campaign folks have been hired by you know who . . . ?

    Parent

    This is surprising? (none / 0) (#155)
    by Yman on Sun Feb 22, 2015 at 03:36:17 PM EST
    A campaign is basically a sales pitch.

    And who is "they"?  There's no one quoted in the article saying what you're saying.

    Parent

    Wednesday Open Thread | 164 comments (164 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment