home

Saturday Night Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Sat Apr 11, 2015 at 09:13:45 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

I've been offline for a few days. I'll be back soon. In the meantime, here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Hillary Clinton To Announce White House Bid on Sunday | Hillary Makes It Official >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Saturday Night Open Thread | 153 comments (153 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Corker Bill (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by MKS on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 02:12:41 AM EST
    I called various Senators on Friday....to voice opposition to the Corker Bill.

    I got a frosty reception from Schumer's office--but I did say that it looked like Schumer was going to be the next Lieberman.

    I told Boxer's and DiFi's office that they were doing great and please do all they can to defeat the Corker Bill.

    And, a nice surprise, I called Gillibrand's office and got halfway into my windup (thinking she was with Schumer on this), when the aide told me she opposes the Corker bill although that had not been made public before.  Good news. She did seem too smart to go the Lieberman route.  

    Funny, I called Corker's office about a week ago (none / 0) (#3)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 08:27:03 AM EST
    and gave him heck for not signing the letter.

    It is surprising to see Congress actually do something constructive.


    Parent

    Obstructive, just in a direction (none / 0) (#4)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 08:33:17 AM EST
    you prefer, so that Iran has no incentive to quit working on
    WMD.

    I'm sure there are radical mullahs in Iran who would agree with both yourself and Sen. Corker right now.  Congratulations.


    Parent

    How (none / 0) (#20)
    by Uncle Chip on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 10:14:23 AM EST

    does giving Iran the money and parts it needs to build WMDs disincentavize them from developing those WMDs???

    Am I missing something here???

    Parent

    Probably (none / 0) (#23)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 11:00:08 AM EST
    especially when you don't mention the intrusive inspections that would be part of the final agreement.

    Parent
    Iran has announced that (none / 0) (#26)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 12:41:25 PM EST
    their military bases are off limits to inspection.

    So there goes your excuse of "intrusive."

    Parent

    Jim (none / 0) (#30)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 01:02:29 PM EST
    we all know you want a massive ground war, a holy war, to beat all holy wars so why do you even care?

    Parent
    That you buy propaganda designed (none / 0) (#34)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 01:14:48 PM EST
    for Iranian domestic consumption doesn't surprise me, nor the fact that the issue is a little more complicated than that:

    Khamenei "needs upfront relief to sell the deal in Iran," said Cliff Kupchan, chairman of the Eurasia Group, a risk assessment consulting firm. The U.S. might be able to meet that need by allowing Iran to quickly begin selling a limited amount of oil or reconnecting some of its banks to the international financial system, he said.

    The Iranian leader is holding out an incentive to the administration, saying, "I realize the stakes here: Give me upfront sanctions relief, and the sky's the limit," Kupchan added. Khamenei's remarks "should be viewed more as political jockeying than as setting hard, `killer' red lines."(Ed)



    Parent
    And Hitler would be (3.00 / 2) (#48)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 03:03:21 PM EST
    happy with Czechoslovakia and Chamberlain wanted peace in our time.

    You know, if the sanctions are so important then there is no reason to remove them until we get exactly what we want.

    Of course what Obama wants and what the country needs is two different things.


    Parent

    George (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 03:33:20 PM EST
    W. Bush and Dick Cheney said the same thing and it was a lie. I can see now the GOP despite their desire to forget about the disastrous Bush/Cheny administration wants to sound just like them.

    Hillary will be sending you a thank you note.

    Parent

    Ga, and exactly what does (none / 0) (#69)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 04:41:42 PM EST
    Bush and Cheney have to do with these "giveaways?"

    Last time I checked Obama is Prez...

    That you want to change the subject is proof positive you know how bad the deal is.

    ;-)

    Parent

    You mean "What neocons want (none / 0) (#61)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 03:51:13 PM EST
    and what this country needs are two different things."

    Parent
    Nope, I mean what I wrote. (none / 0) (#70)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 04:43:16 PM EST
    Obama is dedicated to reducing the US's defense to the same level as it had fallen to under Carter.

    Carter birthed the radical islamists. Obama has birthed triplets.

    Parent

    The Afghan insurgents (none / 0) (#73)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 05:22:07 PM EST
    were first supported by Carter and Zbignew Brzezinski:

    Q: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs ["From the Shadows"], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?

    Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.



    Parent
    And this proves what?? (none / 0) (#78)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 06:40:27 PM EST
    Carter's actions with Iran and the Shah speak for themselves.

    Parent
    No one in the U.S in the late-seventies (5.00 / 4) (#157)
    by jondee on Wed Apr 15, 2015 at 01:46:03 PM EST
    would've supported a second, longer, bloodier Vietnam in Iran to prop up the regime of a ruthless dictator like the Shah of Iran.

    Your fantasies about what Carter could have or  should have done are just that: groundless fantasies. The revisionist make-believe of the impotent..

    Just like your fantasies about what you and Robert Heinlein would have done if either had ever served in an actual war..  

    Parent

    Yes, he stayed allied with a monster (none / 0) (#82)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 07:08:36 PM EST
    far too long, and admitted him in this country for medical treatment on the advice of Henry Kissinger, Nixon's SOS.

    Glad to clear that up for you.

    Parent

    You seem to think that no Demo (2.00 / 1) (#95)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 11:41:21 PM EST
    can do things on his own.

    Carter had to rely on Kissinger... Obama has to rely on Bush...

    Can any of your Demo Demi-gods do anything on their own??

    I mean, why should anyone vote for them???

    Parent

    irrelevant, and (none / 0) (#105)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 07:14:04 AM EST
    that's not why I mentioned Kissinger.

    Do try to keep up, James.  At least he didn't trade hostages of arms to Iran like St. Ronnie did.

    Glad I could clear that up for you.

    Parent

    For your readers, I believe (none / 0) (#5)
    by lentinel on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 08:34:29 AM EST
    that these words would help define the word, "constructive" as you used it above:

    annihilative,
    annihilating,
    devastating,
    withering,
    blasting,
    ruinous,
    cataclysmal,
    cataclysmi
    corrosive,
    erosive,
    crushing,
    devastating,
    damaging,
    negative.

    Parent

    Pacifism is a shifty doctrine (none / 0) (#28)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 12:46:32 PM EST
    .... under which a man accept the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay-and claims a halo for his dishonesty."

    ― Robert Heinlein



    Parent
    Please explain (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by lentinel on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 01:18:18 PM EST
    the connection you seem to be making between "pacifism", and the proposed deal between Iran and the US.

    Parent
    I am here to serve. (1.00 / 2) (#52)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 03:19:35 PM EST
    Those supporting the talks, based on what we know, are pacifists by intent and action although not by declaration or admission.

    Although I will admit there is another group who who will support anything Obama who might fight if Iran torched off a bomb in NYC and bragged about it.

    Parent

    Your bait (5.00 / 2) (#53)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 03:26:35 PM EST
    is particularly vile today.  Kudos.

    Parent
    Notice that I said "might fight." (none / 0) (#77)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 06:34:44 PM EST


    Parent
    And others still ... (none / 0) (#87)
    by Yman on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 09:29:21 PM EST
    ... who have never fought - and never will - but pretend they fought in a Cold "War".

    Heh.

    Parent

    Thanks, I'll relay your disgusting comment (2.00 / 1) (#96)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 11:43:23 PM EST
    to Simmons' widow.

    You have truly reached a new low.

    But then again I understand. You were pulling for the other side!

    Parent

    Nothing to do with Simmons (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by Yman on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 06:13:42 AM EST
    Just the faux, armchair warriors.

    Parent
    Yman... (5.00 / 2) (#114)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 10:03:05 AM EST
    ...how many new lows have you reached this week with Jim ?

    I hit one a week, but I can honestly say that Jim will never hit a new low after the 'killing kids in war time is fine'.

    Jim, you are not here to serve, you are the provocateur, and the caricature of all things wrong with the republican.  If you think that is serving some purpose here, you are delusional, but we already knew that.

    When you are not here, threads rarely come close to 200. The number of thread you post and create with your non-sense is easily the largest bandwidth consumer at TL.

    And I suspect that is the very purpose you serve, to provoke the masses into discussing nothing of value except rebutting your ridiculous posts.  

    Parent

    "Never attribute ... (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by Yman on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 02:11:44 PM EST
    ... to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity."

    - Robert Heinlein

    Parent

    TANSTAAFL (none / 0) (#49)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 03:08:34 PM EST
    There aint no such thing as a free lunch.

    -- Robert Heinlein

    And the question is, who's buying? Us or Iran??

    If Obama swapped dimes with Iran he'd wind up with two cents and declare, from the Bergdahl Garden, how smart he is.

    Parent

    Re:Quote by Heinlein (none / 0) (#62)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 03:53:06 PM EST

    God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks, please. Cash and in small bills. [Robert Heinlein, Notebooks of Lazarus Long]



    Parent
    And you don't believe in God (none / 0) (#76)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 06:32:19 PM EST
    Which is a matter of faith.

    Yet you claim to believe in man made global warming... which is a matter of faith, not science.

    Parent

    Understanding Climate Change (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by Palli on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 06:43:46 PM EST
    is an act of faith not science? Get off now.

    Parent
    Get your facts straight (2.00 / 1) (#97)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 11:47:04 PM EST
    climate change has been going on since day 1. We're talking about man made global warming here... and all that has is something called "consensus."

    Which isn't science by anyone's definition, especially Popper's...

    But you will find consensus among Christians and Jews and Hindus...about their religions and faith.

    Think about it.

    Parent

    Thinking is something (none / 0) (#144)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Tue Apr 14, 2015 at 07:14:09 AM EST
    you need to take up after you quit watching Fox News.

    Glad I could explain that to you.

    Parent

    Jim's faith (none / 0) (#81)
    by FlJoe on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 06:55:11 PM EST
    requires him to believe science that does not support his world view must be a vast international left-wing conspiracy to steal his "freedom".

    Parent
    Hmmm (2.00 / 1) (#100)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 11:52:55 PM EST
    did you make that bit of BS up yourself or did you need help??

    My guess is you need help.

    Parent

    I (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by FlJoe on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 06:45:18 AM EST
    need no help, with you the jokes write themselves.

    Parent
    Hey, if you have a problem (none / 0) (#84)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 07:15:32 PM EST
    with a lack of respect for Theism, take it up with Heinlein.

    I have faith in the Scientific Method, and the fact that recent data suggests that this planet is still warming:

    Arctic sea ice extent for March 2015 averaged 14.39 million square kilometers (5.56 million square miles). This is the lowest March ice extent in the satellite record. It is 1.13 million square kilometers (436,000 square miles) below the 1981 to 2010 long-term average of 15.52 million square kilometers (6.00 million square miles). It is also 60,000 square kilometers (23,000 square miles) below the previous record low for the month observed in 2006.




    Parent
    The key phrase is (none / 0) (#98)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 11:48:55 PM EST
    "suggest the planet....."

    Let me know when you have some actual facts and cam show how MMGW meets the reqs of a Scientific Theory.

    Parent

    I did So. (none / 0) (#106)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 07:16:28 AM EST
    That you refuse to acknowledge them isn't my fault, James.

    Parent
    Strange (none / 0) (#88)
    by Yman on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 09:31:53 PM EST
    Since "matters of faith" are not supported by thousands actual scientists and thousands of peer-reviewed scientific studies.

    Parent
    Sure there is (none / 0) (#86)
    by Yman on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 09:22:40 PM EST
    There aint no such thing as a free lunch.

    Well, ...

    ... for the armchair warriors and the hypocrites complaining about social programs while living off them.

    Parent

    Read Popper (2.00 / 1) (#99)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 11:50:36 PM EST
    And quit making things up. We all know what you are.
    No need to prove it over and over again.

    Parent
    Not making up a thing (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by Yman on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 06:14:43 AM EST
    Facts.

    Reality.

    Hard to deal with, huh, Jim?

    Parent

    You can't even quote Popper (none / 0) (#135)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 06:53:35 PM EST
    correctly on your blog, so your indignation is very misplaced
    In the first place.

    Parent
    And Yet... (none / 0) (#122)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 02:37:49 PM EST
    ...Rumsfeld and Bush promised us a 'war that will pay for itself'.  Don't remember the free lunch speech from you.

    Parent
    Jim's got a cliché for almost any occasion. (none / 0) (#123)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 03:02:09 PM EST


    Parent
    Welcome to the "Pacifist Club" (none / 0) (#35)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 01:17:08 PM EST
    courtesy of Jim.

    Parent
    It's funny (none / 0) (#21)
    by FlJoe on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 10:14:27 AM EST
    that congress is so ambivalent when it comes to restricting the war making powers of presidents, yet is so eager to get in the way of his peace making power.

    Parent
    That, (none / 0) (#38)
    by lentinel on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 01:21:46 PM EST
    actually, is something I am thinking about.

    I am opposed to the meddling and obstruction by the Congress in the matter of the deal with Iran.

    However, I would be heartily in favor of much much more meddling and obstruction the next time a chief exec attempts to start yet another war or military "action" on his or her own.

    Inconsistent?
    Moi?

    Parent

    Here's something that may be of interest, (none / 0) (#6)
    by Anne on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 08:56:13 AM EST
    to you, and maybe to others who aren't familiar with what's brewing in the Congress over this Iran deal.

    Interview with Tim Kaine

    The intro/explanation:

    Virginia Senator Tim Kaine is among the most prominent Democratic supporters of the Corker-Menendez bill on Iran. He may be one of the most important players in determining whether it passes and what it ultimately looks like -- which in turn could help influence whether a final Iran deal is reached and goes forward.

    Critics fear Corker-Menendez could prematurely scuttle the whole negotiation process. The bill would suspend for 65 days President Obama's authority to temporarily lift sanctions, pending a Congressional vote to approve or disapprove the final deal, and would require the president to certify Iranian compliance on several fronts, including whether Iran has directly supported an act of terrorism against Americans or American interests. Critics say this latter provision risks killing a deal later by introducing an element unrelated to Iran's nuclear program.



    Parent
    Kind of (none / 0) (#7)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 09:26:07 AM EST
    ironic it would seem since IIRC Kaine was one of the first ones out of the gate for Obama back in 2007.

    Parent
    And was actively being cosidered for VP (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by MKS on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 02:56:15 PM EST
    He comes from purple Virginia, so that may be part of it.  But no such excuse for Schumer and deep blue New York.  

    Parent
    Was (none / 0) (#56)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 03:35:13 PM EST
    Schumer considered for VP?

    Or are you talking about the Corker bill that Schumer is supporting? If it's the Corker bill the fact that he's from NY actually makes sense from that standpoint of what he's doing.

    Parent

    Kaine was on Obama's shortlist for VP (none / 0) (#58)
    by MKS on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 03:39:28 PM EST
    True, being from New York would give Schumer a heightened interest in Israel, etc.  That is why I assumed that Gillibrand might be in favor of the Corker bill, but she isn't.

     

    Parent

    Neither is Dianne Feinstein. (none / 0) (#125)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 03:58:35 PM EST
    And if Sen. Feinstein -- who, like Chuck Schumer, is Jewish and represents a state with a fairly sizable Jewish population -- can refuse to shill for Bibi Netanyahu, so can the honorable gentleman from New York.

    For all his supposed credentials as a progressive Democrat par excellence, when it comes to issues regarding Israel and Wall Street, and regardless of the particular concern pending before Congress, Mr. Schumer's track record is generally that of an apologist and an enabler on both counts.

    I spoke recently with Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI), who's pretty hard-wired himself with the New York Jewish community, and is co-sponsoring Sen. Barbara Boxer's alternative bill, which would fast-track any reinstatement of economic sanctions should Iran be found in violation of any agreement reached with the West.

    He's of the opinion that most Jewish-Americans are increasingly unhappy with the present tone and direction of Netanyahu's leadership in Jerusalem, and further tend to support President Obama's diplomatic initiative toward resolving the Iranian nuclear issue.

    Not surprisingly, Sen. Schumer does not necessarily speak for American Jewry on this issue. Three of his colleagues who are Jewish -- (Feinstein, Schatz, and Minnesota's Al Franken -- are on record in opposition to the Corker bill.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    We can only hope (none / 0) (#27)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 12:42:39 PM EST
    Critics fear Corker-Menendez could prematurely scuttle the whole negotiation process


    Parent
    Corker bill (none / 0) (#15)
    by Uncle Chip on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 10:04:36 AM EST
    Is this Corker bill actually written down somewhere or is it going to be submitted to Congress in an audio format with both Corker and Menendez disputing what it says???

    Parent
    The Corker bill (none / 0) (#29)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 12:49:18 PM EST
    Link

    Parent
    To any (5.00 / 5) (#24)
    by Zorba on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 12:04:22 PM EST
    Orthodox Christians who may be reading this site, Happy Easter, and  Χριστός Ανέστη!
    The lamb is in the oven, the tyropita is made, and I await our guests.
    And I'm pretty tired.  The Orthodox Paschal Service (we call Easter, "Pascha") starts at 11:30 PM Saturday night and lasts until almost 3:00 AM Sunday morning.  It's a true test of endurance, but it's very moving.
    Back to work in the kitchen.  Have a great day, all!

    Zorba: Happy Easter (Alleluia!) (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by christinep on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 01:10:59 PM EST
    I've often wondered about the endurance it takes to participate in Orthodox all-night Easter service :) (The Catholic Holy Saturday rite is long, but ... let's say that your dedication and stamina are wonderfully admirable.)

    On the way home from Mass awhile ago, I actually thought about writing a note addressed to you even before reading your Easter Greetings here.  Today, I was blessed to hear one of the best sermons in recollection. A visiting priest spoke on this Diving Mercy Sunday about mercy (naturally)... yet, he stressed that mercy isn't about simply praying for & receiving it; rather, it is about reflecting God's universal love and acting in Mercy.  He spoke about the growth of community that ensued in the first days after the first Easter--the always Easter--and described the earlier Last Supper as being a foremost model of inclusion.  Inclusion of everyone.  The priest said: Look, Jesus--knowing what was to come from Judas (and even knowing of Peter's coming inability to acknowledge friendship with Jesus as he was led away to his Passion)--supped with all of them ... he did not say "Hey, everyone is welcome but you and you (etc.) because."  For reasons unknown, I never thought of that.

    What I did hear today was this heartfelt universal inclusive love.  Maybe the most important things get "lost in translation" and certainly in practice.  'So optimistic, Zorba, that the years of my home Church's politicizing rigidity seems to be dissolving with the tidal influence of Pope Francis. A time for the real back-to-basics of universal love and acts of mercy.

    Have a blessed, joyful Easter.  Enjoy the fullness of your repast, too.  

    Parent

    Happy "Pascha" (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by MO Blue on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 01:41:10 PM EST
    Hope that is right. Have a great day and enjoy your meal and your guests.

    Parent
    I never tire (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 12:20:13 PM EST
    of watching Joffrey die.   Like watching a beautiful sunset.   Looking forward to Tywin meeting the same fate later today.

    winter is coming

    it's funny though (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by CST on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 01:02:53 PM EST
    Because you really do love to hate certain characters.  Both the actors who played those characters were superb.  It's funny, because while it was extremely satisfying to see them die, at the same time, I don't miss Rob Stark one bit.  And while I'm sure the show will remain fantastic, I might miss Tywin.

    Parent
    I will miss Tywin. He had redeeming qualities (none / 0) (#41)
    by ruffian on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 01:51:24 PM EST
    Good leader, smart, dryly funny. I will miss his chats with Lady Tyrell.

    rob who?

    Parent

    So funny, I just watched it too and was (none / 0) (#40)
    by ruffian on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 01:47:29 PM EST
    thinking the same thing. It never gets old. He was so horrid.

    The night is dark and full of terrors!

    Parent

    Did you see the True Detective (none / 0) (#43)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 02:02:37 PM EST
    trailer?  Looks good.

    Parent
    Yes, it does. I like the SoCal location - I've had (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by ruffian on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 02:12:03 PM EST
    Enough of the south for a while.

    Have you seen Bloodline on Netflix yet? Wow, really well done. Watched a lot of it yesterday during a nice Florida thunderstorm, very moody. The actor that plays the black sheep son is fantastic. Ben Mendelson - had to look him up, he is a well known Aussie.

    Parent

    ruffian, many of the locations (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by fishcamp on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 05:37:50 PM EST
    in Bloodline were filmed here in Islamorada.  It's strange to recognize the docks and restaurants, but not the actors.  they were snorting blow at my closest bar.  wonder if it was real.  naa, none of the real is  real anymore.  

    Parent
    It seemed like it must have been filmed down there (none / 0) (#93)
    by ruffian on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 10:51:48 PM EST
    Looked very authentic to me anyway! Loved the boat ride through the mangroves. Definitely can't film that very many places.

    Parent
    SoCal is the birthplace of noir. (none / 0) (#126)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 04:06:58 PM EST
    "True Detective" is a natural fit for L.A.

    Parent
    Ew...I forgot about one of the more (none / 0) (#46)
    by ruffian on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 02:51:54 PM EST
    grisly deaths....Jon Snow putting a sword through that creep's head at Craster's Keep.

    Parent
    The Viper is (none / 0) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 03:12:13 PM EST
    coming up.

    Parent
    Sadly, yes...I keep hoping it will (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by ruffian on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 03:40:24 PM EST
    turn out differently. I just have HBO on all day as I do chores., then stop to watch some parts over again. Almost at my favorite - Tyrion's speech at trial.

    I'll catch up on the Hillary news later....I feel the need for fiction today.

    Parent

    Haha, I forgot about Jaime walking in to Tywin's (none / 0) (#60)
    by ruffian on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 03:47:20 PM EST
    trap - "Done!"

    Check out the 2 minute down to 10 second season recaps on slate.com. Really funny re Jaime.

    Parent

    Wise of Hillary to wait to launch (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 03:30:59 PM EST
    until MSNBC signed off for the day.  A few less barking spiders.  I unwisely watched some of the morning fare.

    Watched (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 03:55:27 PM EST
    the Hillary kickoff video. It seems she is going to start out where she left off in 2008 talking about everyday Americans in all walks of life.

    Loved the fact that she put a gay couple in the kickoff. That was bold and an in your face to the GOP. LOL.

    Good, hope it keeps that emphasis (none / 0) (#64)
    by ruffian on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 04:00:55 PM EST
    That is when she was most popular, and where the votes are...not to mention the right thing. There is just no need to try to claim any Republican territory, at least not this soon. No 'triangulation' please.

    Parent
    Between GoT episodes (none / 0) (#68)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 04:19:22 PM EST
    i switched over to CNN just for grins.  The banner that greeted me-

    IS THERE A "REAL" HILLARY CLINTON?

    Parent

    That is (none / 0) (#72)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 05:00:03 PM EST
    so over the top it made me laugh.

    Parent
    It was great! (none / 0) (#66)
    by magster on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 04:03:27 PM EST
    I'm not sure if I'm all in, but I will be if she wins the nomination. Very impressive she didn't even jump in to video until 1:30 in.

    Parent
    I think there was two (none / 0) (#67)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 04:12:38 PM EST
    actually.  But I only watched it once.

    Parent
    Yep two. I think. (none / 0) (#71)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 04:48:23 PM EST
    two guys holding hands.  In your face.  Two women on a sofa.  Not quite as in your face.

    Parent
    This made me laugh (5.00 / 2) (#80)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 06:49:37 PM EST
    Jeb Bush's PAC is called Right to Rise. ROTFLMAO. Who on earth thought up that name??? It sounds like he's advertising for viagara.

    LOL- does it mean they have the (none / 0) (#83)
    by ruffian on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 07:11:45 PM EST
    right to rise, the right is rising, it is right to rise....or do they even know? Pretty bad.

    Parent
    Sounds sort of (none / 0) (#85)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 07:34:36 PM EST
    undeadish if you ask me.  
    Or the doughy lumps will rise.  Pillsburyish.

    Parent
    Or Jesus Camp . . . (none / 0) (#91)
    by nycstray on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 10:38:54 PM EST


    Parent
    Should be dubbed (none / 0) (#116)
    by Palli on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 10:22:13 AM EST
    Right to Repeat.

    Parent
    I loved the kid who played Cersei (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 09:33:56 PM EST
    as a child.  You knew it was her instantly before she even opened her mouth.

    Yes, that was good (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by ruffian on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 10:16:35 PM EST
    Down to the hair style and the mini-version of her current wardrobe. Say one thing for her, she picked a style and stuck with it!

    I liked the episode...except for the demise of a character...I won't spoil by naming names.

    Parent

    Bad decision (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 10:39:59 PM EST
    i expect.  Stannis seems cursed.

    Parent
    yeah, I thought maybe the Red Woman was going to (none / 0) (#94)
    by ruffian on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 10:57:56 PM EST
    stop it somehow...but nooooooo

    Parent
    She made a comment about (none / 0) (#108)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 08:32:39 AM EST
    "the lord needing" the little scaly faced girl.  I'm wondering if the will try to burn her and find out she is Targayyenbestos.

    Don't I remember hearing she has Targaryen blood?

    Parent

    She does (none / 0) (#110)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 09:32:45 AM EST
    The Baraetheons have a fairly recent Targaryen ancestor.  I can't remember how close, I think Stannis is a quarter. If Cersei would have had Baraetheon children.......but she didn't

    Parent
    All of Stannis' other children were born (none / 0) (#111)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 09:35:51 AM EST
    Deformed like Daenerys' child was.

    Parent
    Ah! (none / 0) (#121)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 10:55:24 AM EST
    interesting.

    Parent
    LOL, that took me awhile (none / 0) (#117)
    by ruffian on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 10:34:27 AM EST
    Between the foreign names and the vagaries of spell check. Good one!

    Yes, that will be interesting...certainly looks like a possiblity.

    Parent

    I like Stannis for some reason (none / 0) (#101)
    by McBain on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 01:02:25 AM EST
    I'm rooting for him.  Not a big fan of Daenerys.

    Parent
    To much commie (none / 0) (#107)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 08:29:43 AM EST
    concern for the poor?

    Parent
    She's boring (none / 0) (#113)
    by McBain on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 10:02:08 AM EST
    With her dragons locked up there's nothing much interesting going on there. Plus, I preferred the first actor who played Daario Naharis.

    I've also lost interest in the Starks.  Tyrion is still a favorite.  

    Parent

    Even Arya? (none / 0) (#115)
    by CST on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 10:17:39 AM EST
    I haven't watched the new episode yet - but her character is generally awesome.  Sansa is starting to come into her own as well.

    I too preferred the first Daario.  But the dragons being locked up, IMO, allows her character to attempt ruling on her own.  Which I think will be important for when the inevitably get unlocked.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#119)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 10:52:33 AM EST
    two of them are locked up.  Won't do spoilers but that is addressed.  And more possibilities are addressed in the next week trailer about the one that is not locked up.

    Love the two girls.  Both are going to be very interesting this season.  Reading the first four episodes are sort of low key bringing everyone up on everyone else.

    Bran is not going to appear in this season I read.  He is in training.

    I REALLY prefer the new Darrio.  really.

    Parent

    For oculus because the Game of Thrones (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 09:50:54 AM EST
    Threads are starting up again.

    Seth Meyers brings Jon Snow to a dinner party

    Honestly he seems (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 10:53:53 AM EST
    misguided.  Hope he allowed to redeem himself.  And I live to see the red woman get what's coming to her.  I hope it involves a dragon..

    True Detective (none / 0) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 08:14:05 AM EST
    Season 2 trailer

    June

    Man oh man (none / 0) (#8)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 09:32:07 AM EST
    just channel surfing to catch the coverage of the "big news"

    It's gonna be a looooong 18 months.

    At least when the (none / 0) (#9)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 09:44:39 AM EST
    clown car gets up and running that will give them something else to talk about for a while.

    Parent
    I would consider Paul and Cruz (none / 0) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 09:50:57 AM EST
    to have it running.  Paul is making the rounds to warm receptions and reasonable questions.  
    Hillary otoh is the universal piñata.  If anyone doubts the left is Hillary's problem they need to pay more attention.  

    Parent
    Actually (none / 0) (#11)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 09:58:37 AM EST
    Fox News was all over Paul the other day. I guess the mainstream media doesn't take him seriously while the GOP wants to take him down.

    Anybody who paid attention back in 2008 knew this was coming. At some point they are going to get tired of it.

    Parent

    Actually (none / 0) (#12)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 10:00:24 AM EST
    I don't think anybody doubts that the left is Hillary's problem or at least I don't but Obama had a lot of problems with voters too. It's not like a lot of women didn't leave the party over Obama.

    Parent
    Example from this week (none / 0) (#13)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 10:02:49 AM EST
    imagine "call NOW" voice

    "AND Insights and analysis from MIKE HUCKABEE!!! The republican contender who knows Hillary besssssst!"

    Sexism (none / 0) (#14)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 10:04:02 AM EST
    Sexism and more sexism and they're apparently too stupid to even realize what they are doing.

    Parent
    What was sexist about that (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 10:07:49 AM EST


    Parent
    Talking (none / 0) (#17)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 10:10:22 AM EST
    about her voice.

    Parent
    What!? (none / 0) (#19)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 10:12:32 AM EST
    are you referring to my comment?  I was talking about the intro voice over.  I would have thought that was obvious.


    Parent
    No, (none / 0) (#22)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 10:15:50 AM EST
    sorry it wasn't clear. It made it sound like the shows were talking about her voice screeching CALL NOW.

    Parent
    Here's (none / 0) (#18)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 10:11:40 AM EST
    a good round up at digby link

    Parent
    Lordy (none / 0) (#32)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 01:08:29 PM EST
    Paul Begala tweeted this link:

    link

    It's Reagan's announcement for President where he even talks about people who want to reclaim the past as being out of touch. LOL.

    Reagan later came out (none / 0) (#37)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 01:19:53 PM EST
    In favor of nuclear disarmament, which makes him a cheese-eating surrender-monkey by today's standards.

    Parent
    And Reagan walked away from a bad deal (2.00 / 1) (#50)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 03:10:27 PM EST


    Parent
    Reagan (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 03:36:43 PM EST
    campaigned on peace. He's a cheese eating surrender monkey or a pacific. Take your pick.

    Parent
    The same guys who sold weapons to Iran? (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by Yman on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 04:03:11 PM EST
    Fat chance.

    Parent
    Uh, not quite, Jim. (5.00 / 5) (#75)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 06:18:10 PM EST
    JimakaPPJ: "Reagan walked away from a bad deal."

    It was Secretary Gorbachev who actually spurned President Reagan's overtures and walked out of the October 1986 Reykjavik summit, not vice versa.

    In the months prior to that summit, Gorbachev had initially proposed in several public speeches that the U.S. and Soviet Union seek to eliminate all ballistic missiles in their entirety. At Reykyavik, he went further by proposing that both countries agree to shed their entire respective stockpiles of nuclear weapons. The Soviet leader later admitted many years later that both of those offers were essentially little more at the time than a lot of posturing.

    However, Reagan then put the Soviets on the spot by assuming that Gorbachev had earlier been serious about eliminating all ballistic missiles, countering with a proposal that essentially agreed to do precisely that within a ten-year period, while reserving the Americans' right to continue their ongoing research on the Strategic Defense Initiative, aka SDI or "Star Wars."

    As an added inducement to cajole Gorbachev into an agreement, Reagan further offered to share that SDI research with the Soviets. Clearly taken aback by the president's extraordinary ad hoc gesture -- as were Reagan's own cabinet members, apparently -- and unprepared to sieze the moment, Gorbachev summarily rejected Reagan's proposal as disingenuous, noting pointedly to the president that the U.S. wouldn't even share oil-drilling technology with the Soviet Union.

    On that note, the talks collapsed, both sides returned home without any agreement, and the summit looked like a complete failure at the time. However, the substantive progress that had been made during lower-level talks at Reykyavik between those officials who had accompanied both leaders ultimately led to the INF treaty between the two countries the following year.

    Jim, if you're going to cite history as part of your argument, then please either do so correctly or not at all, because you're certainly no good at trying to rewrite it.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Good one Mordi... (none / 0) (#42)
    by fishcamp on Sun Apr 12, 2015 at 02:00:41 PM EST
    very visual.

    Parent
    Not supposed to use the "N" word (none / 0) (#124)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 03:46:00 PM EST
    but yes.  I assume you got the long unrated directors cut.  Unrated is watch at your own risk.

    But yeah. Yikes.

    Yep (none / 0) (#127)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 04:11:27 PM EST
    just checked on the discs which I still have.  (Thanks for reminding me to return them)

    NR.  that means not rated.

    Parent

    Right... (none / 0) (#130)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 05:00:37 PM EST
    ...I watched the 2+ hour of each NR version, but I never expected Netflix to have a movie with penetration and lots of it.


    Parent
    Antichrist (none / 0) (#131)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 05:09:00 PM EST
    does also.  Closeup.

    Parent
    If it makes you feel any better, reverse the (none / 0) (#136)
    by Mr Natural on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 08:04:24 PM EST
    metaphor.  "Envelopment" is not as sexist.

    Parent
    Oh (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 08:21:57 PM EST
    im all for both penetration and envelopment.  The closer up the better.

    Parent
    For those who are interested: (none / 0) (#128)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 04:41:00 PM EST
    [North Charleston Mayor Keith] Summey said Scott was hit with the officer's Taser weapon, and they know that, Summey said, because one of the Taser projectiles was still attached.

    Once a taser has been fired, it can still be used to shock by physically pressing it against skin and pulling the trigger.

    But even if Scott did get control of the taser after it was fired, once it was dropped on the ground and Scott ran away from both Slager and the taser, I don't see how he could be still considered "imminent danger" to Slager or anyone else.

    Short of (none / 0) (#129)
    by Reconstructionist on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 04:57:41 PM EST
     any black man who runs from the cops is ipso facto a threat of serious injury or death to others, I don't either.

       

    Parent

    What? (none / 0) (#139)
    by Yman on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 08:36:00 PM EST
    But even if Scott did get control of the taser after it was fired ...

    You keep suggesting Scott may have gotten the taser from Slager.  There is no evidence of this, including the fact that Scott was hit with the taser.

    Parent

    In the nearly 12-minute recording released (none / 0) (#140)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 10:36:19 PM EST
    In the nearly 12-minute recording released to The Huffington Post by the State Law Enforcement Division, the 33-year-old officer sounds out of breath as he radios dispatchers to request assistance after killing 50-year-old Walter Scott.

    "Shots fired, subject is down," Slager says. "He grabbed my Taser."

    The second audio, taken from dash cam video from inside a patrol car, captures a phone call between Slager and someone CNN believes is his wife.

    Video shows cop shoot unarmed man in the back
    Video shows cop shoot unarmed man in the back 03:04
    PLAY VIDEO
    He tells her: "Hey. Hey, everything's OK. OK? I just shot somebody."

    "He grabbed my Taser, yeah. Yeah," says Slager. "He was running from me. ... I'm fine."



    Parent
    Ohhhh .... (5.00 / 2) (#143)
    by Yman on Tue Apr 14, 2015 at 06:43:59 AM EST
    So you're relying solely on the self-serving words of the cop who just shot the unarmed, middle-aged man running away from him who claimed the man "grabbed his taser"?

    That's funny.

    Parent

    I'm not sure relying is the right word choice (none / 0) (#147)
    by CST on Tue Apr 14, 2015 at 09:02:41 AM EST
    I think it's more like - confirming that it's true or not - and in this case not true.  Since it will probably be relevant to the legal case going forward as that seems to be his primary defense.

    It's certainly something of note.

    Parent

    Not That Self Serving (none / 0) (#148)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Apr 14, 2015 at 09:05:14 AM EST
    "He was running from me."

    If the threshold is grave danger, a non-lethal weapon hardly qualifies, even if he did have it.

    That cop is screwed, unlike other shootings, he has basically been tossed under the bus by the people he would need to protect him.  He wasn't put on paid leave, but fired and arrested, and the department that investigates police shootings has said they were suspicious of his report before the video came out, and after they said he lied about what happened.

    Whether he can convince a jury a black man running away was the bogey man is TBD.

    Parent

    I didn't see, anywhere in (none / 0) (#149)
    by Anne on Tue Apr 14, 2015 at 09:22:02 AM EST
    sarc's comment, an indication the he offered the excerpt for anything other than informational purposes; he didn't say he believed him, or that anyone else has to believe him - all he did was relate more information about what the cop said during the time period in question.

    Maybe if you spent less time laughing, you'd have a better grasp on the finer points of comprehension, which would spare you from leaping to conclusions the comments don't elicit, and the rest of us from your constant editorializing on what you do and don't find amusing.

    This isn't a courtroom, and no one's on trial and in need of attack-dog-style cross-examination so that you can have a Perry Mason moment; do you ever have a conversation that isn't at Defcon 1?

    Parent

    From you .... that's funnIER (none / 0) (#155)
    by Yman on Tue Apr 14, 2015 at 01:02:00 PM EST
    BTW - Maybe if you were aware of our discussion from the other thread, you would know this is a claim that he's made repeatedly.  Previously, he did it was "probable" that Scott had grabbed the trader based on the video, when the video shows no such thing.  The most claim of evidence was based on the fact that Scott was shot with the taser.  Now, we're down to Slager's self-serving claim.  I have no idea why Sarc keeps pushing this claim, but the only evidence to support it is the officer's statement.  NOT the video and not the fact that Scott was shot with the taser.

    But if you're unhappy with my response, maybe you should tell someone who cares.

    Parent

    Slager said Scott grabbed his taser. (none / 0) (#153)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Apr 14, 2015 at 11:25:36 AM EST
    I said even if Scott did that doesn't justify Slager shooting him.

    We all know that you pride yourself on your dbaggery, but you lost this one before you typed your first word.

    Parent

    It's not about whether it ... (none / 0) (#156)
    by Yman on Tue Apr 14, 2015 at 06:38:14 PM EST
    ... justifies the use of force.  It clearly doesn't, given the utter lack of threat at the time of the shooting.  It's about you repeatedly claiming (directly and by suggestion) that Scott grabbed the taser.  First you made the claim based on the video, but it wasn't here.  Then you suggested that somehow being shot with the taser was evidence.  It's not.  Finally, you're down to the unsupported, self-serving claim of the guy who just shot the unarmed, fleeing man.

    Glad we've cleared up your dbaggery.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#132)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 05:20:41 PM EST
    Narco has made it almost all the way thru his thing without hydrating.

    Standard boilerplate.  My parents were poor.  It's a great country.  Hillary is old.  Blah blah.

    I don't see much of a threat here.

    Ha (none / 0) (#133)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 05:21:05 PM EST
    funny typeo

    Parent
    Interesting comment (none / 0) (#134)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 06:05:10 PM EST
    on facebook

    I'll never forget when Hillary was running for the Senate from NY. And what impressed me the most (and I'm a lifetime Upstater is this: NO ONE who wanted to be a senator from NY EVER spent the time upstate learning about the physical 90% of New York State (not Schumer, not D'amato, no one that I can remember). Upstate had always been seen as the caboose on the NY train - you HAD to get New York City and once you had that, well, whatever you got out of Upstate was gravy. After Hillary crushed Lazio WITH Upstate NY, Schumer started coming upstate. And it was not just pressing the flesh and eating spiedies and sausage sandwiches at the NYS Fair, either. Hillary Clinton is the fastest, hardest working learner out there. She actually took the time to find out what makes Upstate tick (it ain't just cows and the Adirondacks), what people felt were needs and dreams. This is what got Upstate Republicans to vote for her, seriously.

    and another:

    I was never so impressed with any one like I was with Hillary. She knew and had great command of the stats and people like the back of her hand. As a former resident of NYC I always wondered why Dems forgot upstate until I moved upstate and realized that they were depending on NYC to carry an election for the Dems. Hillary didn't take anything for granted.

    That explains exactly what she is doing now. And I would say that is a good thing.

    Blackwater guards sentenced to life, (none / 0) (#137)
    by Mr Natural on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 08:07:07 PM EST
    30 years in jail over 2007 wartime killing of Iraqi civilians.

    Four former Blackwater security guards have been sentenced to lengthy prison terms by a US federal judge over the 2007 massacre of 14 unarmed Iraqis.

    The sentences closed a chapter of the US war in Iraq that strained relations between the two countries.

    Nicholas Slatten was sentenced to life in prison for his murder conviction in the killings at a Baghdad traffic circle.

    Judge Royce Lamberth sentenced three other former Blackwater guards, convicted of manslaughter in the killings, to 30 years each.

    In final statements, all four defendants protested their innocence and asked for leniency.
    Makes mercenary work (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by Palli on Tue Apr 14, 2015 at 07:14:31 AM EST
    a little less attractive for those macho American gunslinger types, I hope.

    Gotta wonder if Erik Prince will visit them in prison...

    Parent

    You had to love the Uma Thurman scene, right? (none / 0) (#141)
    by McBain on Mon Apr 13, 2015 at 10:56:46 PM EST
    I thought that was the best part of the film.  The two brothers arguing over who goes where was a close second.

    I Agree... (none / 0) (#146)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Apr 14, 2015 at 08:57:11 AM EST
    ...it started slow and she went off the rails.

    Those guys were actually brothers ? I though they were friends, aka brothers.

    Parent

    I thought they were actual brothers (none / 0) (#154)
    by McBain on Tue Apr 14, 2015 at 11:36:04 AM EST
    I haven't seen the unrated version.  There's probably more to that scene than I know.

    Parent
    150 years ago today: (none / 0) (#142)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Apr 14, 2015 at 05:20:22 AM EST
    "Now he belongs to the ages."
    -- Edwin Stanton, U.S. Secretary of War (7:22 a.m., April 15, 1865)

    On the evening of April 14, 1865, President Abraham Lincoln was shot by actor John Wilkes Booth, while attending a performance of "Our American Cousin" with his wife Mary at Ford's Theatre in Washington, D.C. Mortally wounded, he was carried across the street to the townhouse of William Petersen, where he died the following morning.

    The Comedians (none / 0) (#158)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Apr 17, 2015 at 07:54:37 AM EST
    anyone watching this.  What the F?  What an odd show.  Interspersed with many "what the hell did I just watch" segments there is some truly funny stuff.  But honestly watching it is sort of painful.  Which I suppose is what they were going for with the tension between the two leads.
    But I thought some stuff like Josh spotting Billy on a weight bench literally balls out was very very funny.
    And the two sailors walking funny.  Why does this make me laugh?  I don't know but it does.
    Another odd thing.  The supposed transgendered director is not credited.  Not on the shows IMDB page or his own.  Wassup with that. I have no problem with the bit.  It is respectful and not I think exploitative.  It was actually funny.  
    But why no credit?

    Saturday Night Open Thread | 153 comments (153 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment