home

Tuesday Open Thread

It's time for the Tuesday Open Thread. Some things of interest:

  • Alternet also has a new blog, The Echo Chamber, that will cover how political ideas and issues are communicated and gain traction in the media universe. It aims to spread the word of the progressive community far and wide.

< Federal Judge Orders Release of Names of Gitmo Detainees | Lawyer Seeks Dismissal of Criminal Charges Over NSA Surveillance >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 03:39:19 AM EST
    There are lots of goodies popping up today. What I have posted on my blog so far: Scalia skipped Roberts' swearing-in for a judicial junket NY Times reports on the botched rebuilding of Iraq The conservative magazine Insight reports that the White House is preparing for impeachment hearings A new poll shows most Americans think the NSA program was wrong and think there should be a special prosecutor New documents show that despite Bush and Chertoff's lies, they were told in advance that Katrina would devastate the New Orleans levees.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 04:46:37 AM EST
    There's triangulation and then there is gutless pandering, gutless waffling, and gutless refusal to lead for fear of screwing up your presidential run. I am with Molly Ivins all the way. I will not support Hillary Clinton for president

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#3)
    by kdog on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 06:45:50 AM EST
    I don't doubt for a second Hillary would lose to most any GOP candidate. The only GOP'er she has a snowball's chance in hell of beating is Cheney. She just carries too much baggage that the mudslingers can use against her.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#4)
    by jimcee on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 06:46:52 AM EST
    JPF, Sure you will because there won't be another alterative unless you go third party or stay home. The last two alternatives will guarantee another Republican president. Either way it should be an interesting election.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#5)
    by Edger on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 07:08:10 AM EST
    Edward Copeland: A new poll shows most Americans think the NSA program was wrong and think there should be a special prosecutor Ed, I read that quickly and thought you said "... Americans [that can] think [think] the NSA program was wrong and think there should be a special prosecutor. But I think that's what you meant. ;-)

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 07:56:56 AM EST
    Hillary is a DLC Democrat. The Democratic Loser Council are "GOP Lite". They lost the last 2 presidential elections. To hell with Hillary.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#7)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 09:22:51 AM EST
    Create in '08. ImagiNATION. That is all that will save the Democratic Party. Two steps forward, then two steps more. Maybe it'll be a normal Joe/Joanne, self-educated, an artist, who wins a hundre million in the lottery and runs for president...and wins. Ha ha ha, but this IS still America, after all. If the "liberal" party can't think and imagine and NOMINATE out of the box, or even ponder it seriously, then I doubt they'll offer anything but more of the same business suits and speeches.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#8)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 09:25:41 AM EST
    outSIDE of the box is what i meant there. "out of" could be read as the opposite.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 09:31:47 AM EST
    This just in: Senate Judiciary Committee OKs Alito on party-line vote: 10-8

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 09:53:03 AM EST
    How about the guy in Florida who freaked out, bit another passenger, and jumped out of a taxiing 737 yesterday? He wound up getting hit with a taser, and is now up on a raft of charges. I guess it was lucky for him there were no federal sky marshals aboard.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#11)
    by Edger on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 10:03:49 AM EST
    Dubya (without the prompter): Hey, what's the noise on the street? What's that banging on the door? There are millions of people out there? Is that what you're seeing? What's the matter with them? How did they get loose? I thought we had them all trained. Hey the roof is caving in. Help, I am choking. The walls are cracking. What do we do now? Someone broke their invisible chains. How is that possible? I thought we'd convinced them they were all happy. We'd told them to watch television and have fun. Why didn't they just do as they were told? And they have their own Eiffel Tower at Disney World. What else do they want? They don't even have to go to Paris. We give them everything they might possibly want here at home. And they come beating our doors down. All right, this is the time. Give them all anthrax. What do we need the people for anyway? They're just heavy ballast. Or, wait, throw them some white phosphor grenades. It works faster. What the hell went wrong? I thought we had it all figured out. The Boys in Washington playing marbles with nukes - The day after Armageddon


    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 10:12:58 AM EST
    Good luck with the WaPo blog idea. For over a year I've been operating the blog at the link that has daily open threads where anyone can leave comments about articles appearing at the WaPo, NYT, Insty, TL, Sully, Kaus, TPM, DU, DK, and others. It receives very little traffic, despite the benefits of posting there.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#13)
    by Edger on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 10:24:00 AM EST
    The Bush administration is bracing for impeachment hearings in Congress. "A coalition in Congress is being formed to support impeachment," an administration source said. Sources said a prelude to the impeachment process could begin with hearings by the Senate Judiciary Committee in February.
    --Insight

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#14)
    by Justina on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 12:45:46 PM EST
    More misinformation from Vanderhei's article in the Washington Post today:
    No evidence has emerged thus far suggesting Bush had a close relationship with Abramoff or that he or any of his top White House aides did anything to improperly assist his clients, according to people familiar with the investigation. Several lower-level administration officials, however, have been caught up in the scandal, including the top procurement official.
    I guess Bush's firing of the Guam attorney general investigating Abramoff's lobbying for the Guam Superior Court doesn't count as "evidence of a close relationship" between the Bush administration and Abramoff. Good gracious, don't Washington Post reporters even read newspapers?

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#15)
    by soccerdad on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 12:54:25 PM EST
    The new Bush proposals that will seriously undercut health insurance as we know it and shift much more of the financial burden and risk to the people. link Link link

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#16)
    by jondee on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 12:57:20 PM EST
    Art degraded, Imagination denied, War ruled the nations. Blake

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 01:16:38 PM EST
    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#18)
    by Edger on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 01:25:09 PM EST
    Macro... Good for the Chavla's!

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#19)
    by pigwiggle on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 01:26:22 PM EST
    If you partisans can take a break from slinging mud long enough to choke this down ... From some folks at Emory;
    "Democrats and Republicans alike are adept at making decisions without letting the facts get in the way, a new study shows. And they get quite a rush from ignoring information that's contrary to their point of view. Researchers asked staunch party members from both sides to evaluate information that threatened their preferred candidate prior to the 2004 Presidential election. The subjects' brains were monitored while they pondered ..."
    Bottom line; those parts of the brain thought to control reason shut down. I'm waiting for the manuscript to be published but until then I'll assume it's all true, and more. You know, tell a man something he already knows and he'll think you're a genius.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#20)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 01:50:26 PM EST
    The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear a challenge to a California law that requires wines carrying the name "Napa" to have at least 75% of their grapes from Napa County....
    So the US Supremes affirmed the Cal Supremes in support of State law over Fed law:
    In August 2004, the California Supreme Court overturned a lower-court decision and ruled against Bronco by finding that the federal rules didn't trump the state wine label law.
    Isn't that what the whole Roe v. Wade legality issue ultimately boils down to - Federalism?

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#21)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 02:20:12 PM EST
    edger - When you get done writing fantasy fiction, or at least quoting it, here is what Bush said.
    First of all, when you make decisions, you've got to stand on principle. If you're going to make decisions, you've got to know what you believe. I guess the best way to summarize me is I came from Texas and I'm going back to Texas with the exact same values I had when I arrived in Washington, D.C. (Applause.)
    and...
    But since we're not able to track vast battalions or armadas, we've got to have intelligence, good intelligence, to help us locate the dark corners of the world where these people hide. A lot of the decisions I make, and decisions future Presidents make, will be based upon the capacity of our intelligence services to find the enemy and to understand the intentions of the enemy and to share information with our allies. This is a different kind of struggle and requires the best intelligence possible. That's why we're reevaluating, constantly reevaluating, how best to use our intelligence services to be able to protect the American people
    And you guys say he can't communicate.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#22)
    by Edger on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 02:40:01 PM EST
    President Bush begins each day at the crack of nine o'clock kneeling on the floor of the Oval Office in his Batman flannel feety-pajamas, holding hands with a group of Christian men. They kneel there for an hour (two hours on the Lord's Day or if there are enough doughnuts) just talking to our nation's Commander-of-the-Commander-in-Chief, the Lord Jesus. This is the Presidential Prayer team. Rev. Pat Robertson, Dr. Jerry Falwell, Rev. Bob Jones Jr., Pastor Deacon Fred, Brother Harry Hardwick, President George W. Bush, and the Lord Jesus Christ (who invisibly attends, legs crossed and dangling over the side of the Resolute desk), They comprise the elite force of spiritual warriors that most Americans consider more important and able to inflict more damage than the entire United States Military. Department of Faith - Preznidential Prayer Squad


    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#23)
    by Patrick on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 03:30:07 PM EST
    OK lawyer types, I guess this is a 6th Amendment type question. An in-custody inmate who is assigned counsel makes "shop" talk with a cop who's working the jail. Inmate initially says he doesn't want to talk about it. cop says OK, but before he can leave, inmate starts telling his tale. Cop says he wasn't looking for confession, just wanted to know what had happened on the day in question when the guy ran from him and got away. Cop never documents comments in police report and states he had no intention using conversation in legal proceedings. Problem or no?

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 03:59:28 PM EST
    From WaPo today:
    Gen. Michael V. Hayden, the former NSA chief who is now deputy director of national intelligence, told reporters in Washington that the warrantless eavesdropping on calls and e-mails between the United States and overseas was "targeted and focused" and did not constitute a "driftnet" over U.S. cities.
    Kevin Drum notes that:
    Hayden is saying that the NSA program isn't some kind of large-scale data mining operation that the authors of the FISA act never could have foreseen. Rather, it's "targeted and focused"... precisely the kind of monitoring that the FISA court already approves routinely and in large volumes. Another few hundred requests wouldn't faze them in the least.
    J.D. Henderson at intel-dump reviews the justice department document defending the NSA warrantless wiretaps:
    What is appalling is the length the administration goes to in order to make these exceedingly weak arguments. The entire document is basically a long justification for the president's power to collect foreign intelligence. The problem with that argument is that it is not disputed, not by anybody. Yes, the president DOES have the authority to spy on our enemies. His powers over foreign policy and foreign intelligence collection are great. The problem is with DOMESTIC intelligence collection. The problem is not with wiretapping Al Queda, it is wiretapping IN THE UNITED STATES, ON US CITIZENS, WITHOUT A WARRANT. This is not about foreign intelligence, it is about our government's actions with respect to US citizens. It is about US.
    Reading the GWB excerpts that Jim's provided, vis a vis the above commentary, I get the sense that while the President does communicate well a certain kind of material to his particular audience, what we see here is guy who could have been a very good communicator if only he'd had the courage. We'll never know, for example, how well he communicates to an audience that doesn't already agree with what he has to say.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#25)
    by Edger on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 04:17:51 PM EST
    Punisher: while the President does communicate well a certain kind of material to his particular audience Al of us here are able to communicate as well or better than bush, when delivering a practiced presentation written and prepared by presidential speechwriters. That bush can do it to says nothing about his ability to communicate, though it may say something about his administrations ability.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#26)
    by roger on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 04:37:33 PM EST
    Patrick, As long as the officer did not make any comments LIKELY TO ELICIT A RESPONSE, he's okay. The law says that you cant trick them into a confession. If they are just stupid however.........

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 04:58:38 PM EST
    Edger, Bush has been misunderestimated more than once by his opponents, and we're all paying for it now.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#28)
    by Edger on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 05:04:30 PM EST
    Punisher, yes... good point. His endless repetition also helps him.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#29)
    by Sailor on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 07:35:28 PM EST
    ppj, bush DID rent out the Lincoln Bedroom, much more than clinton did. LWW,
    So this is the "new and improved" TL?
    I can only speak for myself, and I'm continually trying to be a better commenter and person. I don't always achieve it;-) BTW, charlie was banned, partly due to my complaints about his civility. et al, I have asked many commenters, R & L, to adhere to TL's guidlines and to stay on topic. I am as guilty as some in violating those precepts, (e.g this post;-) I rise to the bait and I decend to the LCD, but over time I feel I have established a mutual respect with some people who hold diametric views. ras and Patrick come immediately to mind. And oddly enough I think we we have things in common that we would not have realized if we hadn't elevated our discourse. But hey, maybe it's just me.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#30)
    by squeaky on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 08:28:59 PM EST
    thanks for calling out charly...he was relentless in his incivility. Much better without him.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#31)
    by jimcee on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 09:11:26 PM EST
    Sailor, Thank you for mentioning 'CDS10' suspension as he was not advancing anyone's argument. I have been hanging out in these parts for two years now and I have always enjoyed the give and take of Jerilynn's site and TL posters have been pretty civil most of the time. We all have gone over the top on occasion but the longer I stay here the more civil the place becomes because most return posters are honestly arguing thier points and not just flaming thier opposites. That can't be said for most partisan sites. Most Leftist or Rightist sites tend to shout down anyone who doesn't tow the party line and as a libertarian that is just depressing. Of the few libertarian sites that do exist most do not allow forums because they tend to be hijacked by those from the Left and the Right and generally turn into a blogswarm kind of thing. Jerilynn and her TL crew run a really good shop here and they allow a forum for all that wish to respond civilly and honestly. To Talk Left et al; thank you for your efforts. CDS10, RIP.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#32)
    by MikeDitto on Tue Jan 24, 2006 at 10:40:57 PM EST
    Speaking of toeing the party line and the relative suckiness that can engender, I have a post at Progress Now called Partisanship over Principle regarding newly-elected Virginia governor Tim Kaine's signing the most draconian anti-gay law in the US since Amendment 2 in Colorado, versus Maryland's Republican governor Bob Erlich taking a baby-step towards equality and the DNC's absolutely disgusting partisan response. Do check it out, and ask yourself if rewarding bigots is really the direction you want the Democratic Party to be taking.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#33)
    by Johnny on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 12:02:24 AM EST
    Good luck with the WaPo blog idea. For over a year I've been operating the blog at the link that has daily open threads where anyone can leave comments about articles appearing at the WaPo, NYT, Insty, TL, Sully, Kaus, TPM, DU, DK, and others. It receives very little traffic, despite the benefits of posting there.
    Think about that.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#35)
    by Sailor on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:46:15 AM EST
    I didn't want charlie banned, but I can understand why he was. I appreciated his points, but constant name calling is tiresome.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#36)
    by soccerdad on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 06:57:45 AM EST
    but constant name calling is tiresome.
    I continue to feel contrary to TL, that to tolerate complete dishonesty while banning someone for name calling doesn't make sense. It panders to the GOP who baltently lies, and when opposed by someone then cries that they are being mean. As long as dishonesty is tolerated there is no hope. You are in essence, condoning the practice.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#37)
    by Edger on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:21:06 AM EST
    I never had much use for name calling either, myself. I can say what needs to be said without it, mostly. Maybe Charlie couldn't. Or maybe he just felt what he felt, and felt it passionately. He could be abrasive, yes. Truth hurts, I guess. Too bad. Get over it. I'll continue to say what I have to say without name calling, but just below the surface it lies there in spirit. If we become concerned with not offending the sensibilities of the most offensive, incivil and cowardly people in the world, the people who are shredding the constitution, destroying the US, and quite possibly the world... then we've lost all of that to them.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#38)
    by Edger on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:24:27 AM EST
    I used to sleep at the foot of old glory And awake in the dawn's early light But much to my surprise When I opened my eyes I was a victim of the great compromise --John Prine

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#39)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:44:36 AM EST
    et al - And how many think that the many personal/vulgar/etc. Washington Post attacks advanced their cause?

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#40)
    by soccerdad on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:02:25 AM EST
    PPJ how do you think hat the many personal/vulgar/etc. GOP attacks advanced their cause? Getting a tad sensitive aren't you. Goose, gander etc. As is typical when faced with damning evidence whine that they are being mean.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#41)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:04:31 AM EST
    and how many think that the many personal/vulgar/etc. Washington Post attacks advanced their cause? There goes PPJ, blindly accepting the MSM characterization of the facts. You're taking the WP at face value when it has been demonstrated that many of the comments that were restored by the WP after their initial deletion contained none of the traits that you attribute to them. Oh, and to answer your pseudo-question: About as much as yours that denigrate the intelligence, experience, knowledge of history, etc. of those who disagree with any of your vaporous rantings here.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#42)
    by squeaky on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:13:28 AM EST
    edgar-are we talking about the same charlie. I never saw the nickname Charliedontsurf10 next to his posts. I saw nothing productive in his posts. They were badly rendered repeats of Coulter and her ilk. Frankly I did not see anything to debate even though I did get into the ring with him/her more times that I would have liked to admit. Pushing lefties buttons without any real content seems a waste of time and emotional drain. At the end nothing is gained. Yes, TL is a special site in that there are, er...different opinions voiced. I think we still have enough of that without an extreme wingnut parrot, whose only intention is to taunt. I have benefited from having to articulate ideas and positions because of the er...challange posed by having to argue points to those who have a different poisition. The only articulations honed by charlie's posts were ones filled with asteriks; no higher brain function were stimulated by his posts. If we are talking about the same guy, I do not get your point.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#43)
    by Edger on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:56:06 AM EST
    Squeaky, You're right. I confused the two. Charliedontsurf10 was recently banned. He is, like me, strongly anti bushco in many ways, and very passionate in expressing himself. Yiddish, from NY, his favorite put downs for the wingers were "Schmendrick" or "Schmenie" (for "clueless"), or "Schmuck". I've tried searching for some of his posts, and I can find google references to them, but when I go to the threads to find an example they to give you, all seem to have been deleted from TL. My confusion. But my sentiments stand...

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#44)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 09:20:12 AM EST
    edger, Mother Avenger taught me through her own example that a sign of character is when one admits when one has been in error. My favorite line is the one attributted to the NYC mayor Fiorello La Guardia from the 1930s:
    When I make a mistake, it's a beaut!
    Presidential mistakes.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#45)
    by Edger on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 09:34:12 AM EST
    DA, thanks. My parents also taught me to admit mistakes promptly. They also said "don't cry over spilled milk". ;-) Squeaky, None of what I said in this thread was in any way criticism of you. I thought you meant "charlie" when you said "charly", and I was confused. Some days I'm as dumb as I look!. ;-)

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#46)
    by squeaky on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 09:57:48 AM EST
    edgar-Your post was clear, I did not take it as criticism from you. My post was in response to Sailor's comment
    BTW, charlie was banned, partly due to my complaints about his civility.
    I took charlie to mean charley. Was charley banned? I am not sure who sailor was referring to now.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#47)
    by glanton on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 10:18:30 AM EST
    PPJ writes:
    And how many think that the many personal/vulgar/etc. Washington Post attacks advanced their cause?
    SD replies:
    PPJ how do you think hat the many personal/vulgar/etc. GOP attacks advanced their cause?
    This disagreement can easily be put into context with one representative example of GOP tactics: the South Carolina primary, 2000. If McCain were an honest man, he would be able to testify to the effectiveness of the personal and the vulgar with the American public--hey, they can't help it, the vulgar is just what they like. As long, that is, as nobody's having "inappropriate conversations." You could also ask Kerry about the GOP's Swift Boating of him. Or Dukakis about the questions directed at him during debate with Bush the Elder, or Dukakis again with respect to Wille Horton as his running mate. The Dems suck at the corporate teat, it's true, but at the end of the day, Jim, if you wanna talk vulgarity and ad hominem, they are light years away from the GOP and its politics of one one half fear one half bigotry.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#48)
    by Edger on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 10:27:15 AM EST
    Squeaky, Sailor I think was referring to Charliedontsurf10 (Charlie). That's who I was talking about, and who I thought you meant. I know now who you mean when you say Charly (or Charley). Haven't seen him post here for awhile, don't know if he was banned or not. But I agree with you that his posts were "were badly rendered repeats of Coulter and her ilk".

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#49)
    by Sailor on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 10:47:51 AM EST
    Sorry for the confusion, I was referring to Charliedontsurf10 Charley (?) was just a troll and banned for obvious reasons. Charliedontsurf10, usually had pretty good points and I hated to see him go, but he did constantly violate the name calling policy. A further point; I feel that when we discuss things here we are guests in Jeralyn's domain, and out of respect for TL, and, by extension, respect for those TL allows in, we can do without the playground postering. Of course I'm mad about a lot of things going on in the country, and those bitter castigating words are always just beneath the surface when I respond to a particularly unenlightened comment, but it ain't my house and I don't make the rules. Besides, it just devolves into a miasma of personal attacks and runs off people who have something to contribute.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#50)
    by Edger on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 11:25:58 AM EST
    I feel that when we discuss things here we are guests in Jeralyn's domain, and out of respect for TL, and, by extension, respect for those TL allows in, we can do without the playground postering.
    Agree, yes. Well said, Sailor. As I stated earlier: "I can say what needs to be said without it" (name calling)

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#51)
    by squeaky on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 12:29:13 PM EST
    Well put sailor. This post belongs here and is a paste from the JA pics thread: It is good practice to be able to refute absolute nonsense without getting all bent out of shape. When a poster seems unable to learn from civil rebuffs the only thing left to gain is for the rebutter (non-wingnut in this case), to learn how to stay calm and clear in the face of relentless lies and inane jibberish. I am not up to that task these days so my choice is to not take the bait. Although, I have benefited from trying to straighten these guys out in the past, it is a tough job to keep calm and stay civil. I admire those with the character to stay engaged and maintain lively and civil debate in the face of wingnut nonsense.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#52)
    by jimcee on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 05:53:20 PM EST
    CDS10 as Thomas Paine reborn. You have got to be kidding. Right? Right? You are kidding.....right?

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#53)
    by Edger on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:38:30 PM EST
    DA, Great link to Daniel Schorr's audio commentary about when presidents make mistakes. I think only someone who had been a contemporary and colleague of Edward R. Murrow could be so skillfully and smoothly deprecating of bush, yet do it with such class and... journalistic, historical and poetic authority? Bill Moyers might be able to approach such heights of skill, but Schorr is a master. Thanks.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#54)
    by Edger on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 07:45:13 PM EST
    Jimcee, The Wayback Machine at archive dot org is a wonderful piece of software engineering wizardry. When they get their archives of the internet up to date through December 2005, remind me, and I'll dig through it and let Charlie respond to you himself. Fair? ;-)

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#55)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:03:18 PM EST
    edger - Yes, I love Schorr. I remember driving north on I35 on 9/14/01 from Dallas - it was impossible to get a flight. He was already laying the foundation for the Left's desire to blame America. glanton - The issue is not dirty politics. We could both cite all sorts of little tricks, including Wisconsin that just convicted 4 Democrat Party workers of slashing the tires on something like 25 vhicles that were to be used to transport voters to the polls. Do you think that may have had an effect on the very, very, very tight WI presidential race? The question was specific. Did the personal/vulgar attacks on the WP lady advance the cause of those that did so?? SD - I think vulgar/personal attacks hurt the writer. Does that answer your question? Dark Avenger writes:
    There goes PPJ, blindly accepting the MSM characterization of the facts.
    Again you provide an example of Goodwin's Law. You have no knowledge of whether or not I saw some of them, or all of them, and you have no knowledge whether I have accepted the MSM version "blindly," partially or not at all.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#56)
    by glanton on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:15:23 PM EST
    Jim: We are in fact talking about the same thing. I am saying yes, I suspect that the vitriolic response against the "WP lady" does advance the cause of those who spoke out. She is perfectly representative of how ridiculous it is that so many of you guys keep calling the WaPost a "liberal" paper. For goodness sakes, O'Reilly regularly calls the NY Times "Far Left." Intelligent rebuttal of the "liberal media" tag doesn't work with an American public thorouhgly addicted to the soundbite. As both Bushes and Jesse Helms and Ronald Reagan before them have proven time and time again, mudslinging is what gets votes in America. Accepting this will help you realize how badly Bush the elder screwed up in 1992. Had he run ads stating that Clinton's running mate was Charles Manson, he would have won in a walk.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#57)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:20:03 PM EST
    glanton writes:
    I am saying yes, I suspect that the vitriolic response against the "WP lady" does advance the cause of those who spoke out.
    You then write:
    Accepting this will help you realize how badly Bush the elder screwed up in 1992. Had he run ads stating that Clinton's running mate was Charles Manson, he would have won in a walk.
    Uh, could you make your mind up??

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#58)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 08:24:29 PM EST
    ooops wrong button... Glanton... So he lost because he didn't? Hmmmm.. My head is spinning. Too much ice tea. Call me old fashioned, but when you start the vulgar/personal stuff I immediately tune you out and post a note that says: "Not logical... Ignore." But hey, that's just me!

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#59)
    by glanton on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 09:19:33 PM EST
    So he lost because he didn't? Hmmmm..
    Yes, that's why he lost. Something got into him, I remember the campaign well and the way he never really could get himself rolling; perhaps he suffered from shreds of decency, perhaps he was just tired of it all. But in any case when you compare his 1992 campaign with the way he and his stooges took dirtiness to a new level in 1988 (Willie Horton, the planted question at the debate, the whole flag burning ruckus, and on and on and on)--well, when you compare them, it's pretty easy to see that when forced to stand on argument alone, he had nothing of substance to offer.
    head is spinning. Too much ice tea.
    One of the things I miss most about North Carolina is the everywhereness of SWEET TEA. Now I live in Texas. They don't believe in it as much out here. But I have gotten pretty good at boiling my own, and have also learned to appreciate the pleasure of unsweet tea. Better than nothing.
    Call me old fashioned, but when you start the vulgar/personal stuff I immediately tune you out and post a note that says: "Not logical... Ignore."
    Well, that's wonderful of you, but this picture you paint of yourself... I sincerely hope you don't think it describes the typical voter. Nobody 'researches' candidates or issues, and few seem terribly interested in logic; it's all soundbite, baby. Guess it's that liberal media's fault, huh?

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#60)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 25, 2006 at 09:36:44 PM EST
    Again you provide an example of Goodwin's Law. You have no knowledge of whether or not I saw some of them, or all of them, and you have no knowledge whether I have accepted the MSM version "blindly," partially or not at all. Sorry, PPJ, I've seen them, so I know what you'd have seen if in fact you had done any research on the subject, and your post was repeating the MSM version, so I put two and two together and came up with four. Is that so bad? Your attempt to smear me with the Godwin's Law brush is hilarious, to say the least. Sleep tight, and don't let the bedbugs bite.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#61)
    by Edger on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 07:13:50 PM EST
    Minneapolis/St. Paul City Pages Obituaries October 5, 2018--George W. Bush, the 43rd president of the United States, died today at Methodist Hospital in Houston, Texas. He was 72. The cause of death was announced as heart failure.