Wednesday Open Thread

For non-HOLC related issues.

This is an Open Thread.

< McCain Credits Hillary With HOLC Idea | Bush Administration's Data-Mining Programs Criticized >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Looks like the REAL original Maverick's... (5.00 / 0) (#14)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 12:25:09 PM EST
    ...are none too pleased about JSM3 using their name in vain.  From a comment over at Tbogg...

    '"I'm just enraged that McCain calls himself a maverick," said Terrellita Maverick, 82, a San Antonio native who proudly carries the name of a family that has been known for its progressive politics since the 1600s, when an early ancestor in Boston got into trouble with the law over his agitation for the rights of indentured servants.

    Terrellita Maverick, sister of Maury Jr., is a member emeritus of the board of the San Antonio chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas.

    Considering the family's long history of association with liberalism and progressive ideals, it should come as no surprise that Ms. Maverick insists that John McCain, who has voted so often with his party, "is in no way a maverick, in uppercase or lowercase."

    "It's just incredible - the nerve! - to suggest that he's not part of that Republican herd. Every time we hear it, all my children and I and all my family shrink a little and say, 'Oh, my God, he said it again.' "

    "He's a Republican," she said. "He's branded."'

    Weak segue: yesterday (none / 0) (#16)
    by oculus on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 02:07:17 PM EST
    on NPR the people who hold all sorts of copyrights re Rin Tin Tin talked about a lawsuit they filed against those behind a new movie.  The plaintiff sd. those dogs on screen aren't real Rin Tin Tin dogs and the plot wasn't so great either.

    A remake of RinTinTin? (5.00 / 0) (#19)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 02:57:40 PM EST
    Boy, talk about a golden oldie!  What's next--a remake of the Green Lantern?  The Rifleman?

    Is Hollywood really that bankrupt of ideas?  


    This week PBS began airing ... (none / 0) (#1)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 11:17:58 AM EST
    a new nightly program called WORLD FOCUS.  It's an attempt to fill the huge deficit in coverage of international news.

    It's a new show.  And it will have growing pains.  But it's the kind of show that people who care about the lack of such coverage should support.

    I found the first two nights fascinating.

    If the show isn't available in your area, you can watch it here.

    Nightly Business Report (none / 0) (#2)
    by Fabian on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 11:22:04 AM EST
    For some reason my seven year old son likes to watch it.  No one else is watching it, just him.  I asked him what it was about one day last week - "banks" was his answer.

    I'm just curious how much he's understanding. (It's on after the PBSKids is over.)


    Your kid is probably ... (none / 0) (#4)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 11:28:33 AM EST
    picking up more than you realize.

    But I don't know why you made this a response to my comment on the new show WORLD FOCUS.

    Regardless, kids are interested in all kinds of stuff.  Much of it seemingly beyond their years.


    Because PBS rocks. (none / 0) (#6)
    by Fabian on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 11:35:13 AM EST
    I need news, not ego and definitely not commercials.  (Although my son can also tell you who the sponsors are....)

    When I lived in the UK ... (none / 0) (#10)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 11:45:35 AM EST
    as a wee tot, I begged to go with my parents to see a production of Shakespeare's RICHARD II at the Old Vic.

    My parents thought I'd be bored, but I was so insistent that they took me.

    I only have vague recollections of the prison scene.  But supposedly I sat in rapt attention through the whole play.

    I don't tell this story to suggest I was some amazing kid.  But just that to show that kids can surprise you with their ability to focus on material that you think might bore them.


    Just because it makes my head hurt (none / 0) (#11)
    by Fabian on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 11:50:10 AM EST
    doesn't mean it makes his head hurt! ;-)

    Exactly! (none / 0) (#12)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 11:53:52 AM EST

    Thanks for the heads up :) (none / 0) (#15)
    by nycstray on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 12:43:34 PM EST
    Did they cover the global food safety issue  regarding Chinese exports?

    Because I'm a poll junkie. . . (none / 0) (#3)
    by andgarden on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 11:22:52 AM EST
    PPPis hinting that their Virginia poll released tomorrow will give Obama a double-digit lead, confirming Suffolk and SUSA.

    It seems to me that if McCain can't win Virginia, he is well and truly finished. It's no wonder he hasn't yet pulled out of Pennsylvania: that would be an admission of defeat. Though in reality, he seems well behind there too.

    I hate to admit when I'm wrong (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Exeter on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 11:34:23 AM EST
    But, Obama is in a position  now that I claimed during the primaries would NEVER, EVER happen. I hope it sticks.

    Indeed (none / 0) (#7)
    by andgarden on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 11:36:38 AM EST
    Democrats. The Economy. (none / 0) (#8)
    by Fabian on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 11:37:33 AM EST
    It's really not Obama so much as it is McCain, eight years of Bush and an economic crisis.  All Obama has to do is appear concerned and competent.

    Some of politics is sheer luck, coincidence, serendipity.  This is one of those times.


    I completely understand. . . (none / 0) (#13)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 12:18:42 PM EST
    I hate to admit when I'm wrong

    I'm the same way.  I hate to say "I told you so".  So I won't (unless BTD comes along).


    Just an observation (none / 0) (#9)
    by esmense on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 11:42:04 AM EST
    (that doesn't fit anywhere else) I thought last nights debate format worked for Obama, allowing him to put his ideas across with more force and believability, because it forced him to FOCUS ON SOMEONE when he was talking. When he speaks before an audience he often lacks that focus -- he paces like a lecturer and seems lost in his own head thinking about what he wants to say rather than who he wants and needs to say it to. The ideas and policies he supports require a persuasive human connection -- they lack power and are less believable if they are presented in a manner that is too abstract and diffident.

    It's such an easy fix -- stay put and really focus on who you must reach with your message. He doesn't have to get loud or angry to overcome a manner that sometimes seems too "cool." He just needs to focus on and speak passionately to the people who is message is aimed at.

    "Imbecilic tedium" (none / 0) (#17)
    by dutchfox on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 02:26:26 PM EST
    That's what Alexander Coburn called last night's non-debate.
    Of the two performances, Obama's was the more appalling since he is meant to be the candidate of change and new ideas. He has no detectable commitment to change and no new ideas. Neither does McCain. Yet the post-debate panelists mostly claimed the Town Hall Meeting an absorbing affair, rich in content.

    Oops I meant Cockburn (none / 0) (#20)
    by dutchfox on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 03:01:07 PM EST
    Sorry about that.

    And the reason I highlighted that paragraph by him in the above comment: Most of my friends know for whom I'm voting for, but I ran into some undecideds and Obama supporters at my local coffee shop today. They were talking about last night. They thought the debate was boring and expected a lot more from Obama, rather than the scripted soundbites. They wanted more details. The Dems among the bunch had real hopes for their party representatives after the '06 mid-terms....to bring the troops home and end the immoral war. But, seriously, folks, they are not pleased with Obama's horrific war talk and call to move the troops from Iraq to Afghanistan.


    Obama seems content to coast (none / 0) (#26)
    by esmense on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 07:05:39 PM EST
    I don't believe the campaign believes he needs to step up with new ideas and real leadership -- nor does it believe he should risk doing so.

    Initially I thought this could lose the election for him -- by turning the enthusiasm of his early supporters into apathy. But the economic crisis has, I think, put an end to any chance McCain has. So Obama most likely wins by default, despite the electorate's real disappointment in both candidates.


    David Brooks on Palin (none / 0) (#18)
    by Jlvngstn on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 02:51:43 PM EST
    "a cancer to the republican party"


    He also says Obama will win by 8 points which is what I said on this very blog 6 weeks ago (although I said 8 at a minimum as I believe it may be 10 or 11 but 8 is more realistic).

    "Reagan had tremendous (none / 0) (#21)
    by jondee on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 03:35:54 PM EST
    faith in the power of ideas"? Right, all three of them.

    Talk about self-romanticizing historical revisionism. Brooks cant bring himself to admit that the "anti-elite" populism and pandering to the Rapturists and red-baiters (that Brooks himself used to champion), started with Reagan.


    I never liked Reagan (none / 0) (#22)
    by Jlvngstn on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 03:41:59 PM EST
    but Palin is no Reagan.  Reagan was full of ideas, they just happen to have been mostly based in defense.  

    Reagan is in the top ten presidents of all time, like it or not.....


    I dont like it (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by jondee on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 03:51:14 PM EST
    and I couldnt disagree more.

    If you're basing your assessment on what his administrations accomplished, other than the mythology that "he ended the Cold War", he certainly accomplished the laying down of the template of the marriage of the Religious Right (which his people gave mainstream cred to) and the militantly lasse faire Goldwaterite tradition,which persists to the present. A line goes from Reagan right to Dubya and McCain and Palin.


    I don't rate presidents (none / 0) (#24)
    by Jlvngstn on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 04:05:52 PM EST
    historians do.  Take the issue up with them.

    The question is, (none / 0) (#28)
    by jondee on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 12:30:19 PM EST
    WHICH historians?

    Maybe I dreamt all this, but we ARE talking about a man and administration that: foisted on us as exemplary spiritual leaders people who would burn witches if they could; rolled back civil rights protections; gutted environmental regulations; told us Latin American death squads, torturers and nun-rapers are "freedom fighters"; the poor are lazy and immoral and the affluent, simply by existing, sustain us all; cut funding for alternative energy research; escalated the arms and high tech surveillance race into space; treated the electorate and congress with utter disdain during the time they were raising private armies and making secret arms deals with our alledged sworn enemies; degraded, IMO, the dignity of the office, and jump started the big dumbdown which eventually lead to the election of GWB, by substituting aw shucks jingoism and Hallmark card messages for speaking to Americans as if they were thinking adults..

    This is what passes for a great leader in the late
    20th century?


    it was started by Arthur Schlesinger (none / 0) (#29)
    by Jlvngstn on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 01:14:41 PM EST
    and over the years they have been accused of being too liberal.  I think the rankings are fair and despite my personal feelings about Reagan, believe they get it right based on the criteria they use....

    I'm just disappointed in the case in Alaska (none / 0) (#25)
    by thereyougo on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 06:22:12 PM EST
    It seems like the judge is throwing out crucial evidence in the Ted Stevens trial. The testimony of the 2 men who did the work and a check having to do with a Land Rover purchase by Bill Allen the pres. of Veco, for Ted in exchange for a Mustang.

    If Ted walks I'm just going to lose it.

    Not a troll, but a question (none / 0) (#27)
    by jccleaver on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 04:29:55 AM EST
    This just came out and it looks both a) well-sourced, and b) bad. How might this play out once Drudge (or Fox) gets ahold of it?

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/10/08/will-msm-report-obama-membership-socialist-new- party