home

Friday Evening Open Thread

Tonight is the BSG premiere. So who is the unrevealed Cylon? Guesses only. No spoilers. This is an Open Thread. I won't be around but J should be back later.

< The Magic Number And Gaining Legitimacy For The Nominee | Hillary and Bill Clinton's Tax Returns Released >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Obama & the Recommitment March absence (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by NO2WONDERBOY on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:48:07 PM EST
    in Memphis today,and why?  Hmmmm, let's see:
    Obama talks the talk of being "Black in America", but he doesn't "do the walk". He has 'declined' to attend the two most important convocations of Black affairs so far this year. The first was The Black State of the Union Conference held in New Orleans a week or so after the Louisiana primary. Here, the most prominent Black leaders of the United States convened and invited all the presidential candidates of both political parties to attend. Not surprisingly, none of the Republican candidates attended; John Edwards and Obama also CHOSE NOT TO ATTEND! HILLARY CLINTON DID.

    Senator Clinton could have very well done the same as the other two, especially after how the black voters did a number on her, not recognizing her great efforts to help the people of New Orleans in our most desperate hours, choosing to give their vote to Obama, who for the life of me, I swear, was not heard from, not even seen in one of the many Senators-carrying tourist buses "surveying" or "assessing" the devastation, much less contributing with his time or effort like the Clintons were (in spite of what all the pundit Clinton haters might now say were his or her motives). Some commentators manifested she had done so, attended I mean, because she was behind in the polls (the same ineffective reason they give all the time for anything and everything she does). I saw it as her way of saying "you may have abandoned me, but I haven't abandoned you" in your cause; but I guess that's just me.

    Now, two months later, there is this humongous, full of symbolism, important RECOMMITMENT MARCH through Memphis, AND ONCE AGAIN, OBAMA CHOOSES NOT TO ATTEND! There have been other similar decisions on his part to NOT ATTEND APPARENTLY INSIGNIFICANT EVENTS REGARDING BLACK ISSUES, BLACK CONFERENCES, BLACK AFFAIRS. No one notices I guess. He gives the same lame excuse every time: he's campaigning. Ok? does this mean that the other two candidates' campaigns are not as important as his that they can afford to go? Or that they have been intimidated by the specter of what they might be accused, by-we-all-know-who and his flock(read this pundits), of being 'dismissive' about the importance of the Civil Rights movement and its leader MLK; or worse yet, have the R card thrown at them? But the media, that 'typical white' media typically gives him a typical green light, typically without questioning.

    So, what do we have here? What kind of person are we dealing with here? By these absences are we to deduce that: He's Black to 'typical whites', but he's too White to associate or show solidarity with those very meritorious and valiant Black men who have really stood against all odds to shout the call of freedom?

    Well, (3.00 / 0) (#43)
    by kayla on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 07:02:54 PM EST
    He said he had already spoke at King's former church a few weeks ago and spent time with the King family.  He also said that he just did a big race speech and that we have to realize that King's work isn't finished yet.

    I don't see anything wrong with his decision to skip the march, but there's something about his "tone" that rubs me the wrong way.

    Parent

    Rather than celebrate King's death in Memphis... (1.00 / 0) (#41)
    by tbetz on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:59:48 PM EST
    ... thereby exploiting his memory for political gain, Obama chose to honor King's principles, by speaking where RFK spoke the day of King's death, thereby preventing rioting in that city.

    Parent
    Why is it that (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by kayla on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 07:07:52 PM EST
    Speaking at a March that honors King's legacy an example of exploitation, but speaking at the location where RFK spoke the night of King's death on the 40th anniversary of King's death not exploitation?

    Let's be consistent here.

    Parent

    That's right, troll rate me for telling the truth. (none / 0) (#70)
    by tbetz on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 02:14:26 PM EST
    Hillary's speech was all about her reaction to King's death.  "I, I, I, me, me."  McCain's speech was full of lies about his own history with the MLK holiday.  Entirely self-serving.

    Only Obama's speech was about putting King's principles into action.

    An excerpt from his Fort Wayne speech:

    In the dark days after Dr. King's death, Coretta Scott King pointed out the stars. She took up her husband's cause and led a march in Memphis. But while those sanitation workers eventually got their union contract, the struggle for economic justice remains an unfinished part of the King legacy. Because the dream is still out of reach for too many Americans. Just this morning, it was announced that more Americans are unemployed now than at any time in years. And all across this country, families are facing rising costs, stagnant wages, and the terrible burden of losing a home.

    Part of the problem is that for a long time, we've had a politics that's been too small for the scale of the challenges we face. This is something I spoke about a few weeks ago in a speech I gave in Philadelphia. And what I said was that instead of having a politics that lives up to Dr. King's call for unity, we've had a politics that's used race to drive us apart, when all this does is feed the forces of division and distraction, and stop us from solving our problems.

    That is why the great need of this hour is much the same as it was when Dr. King delivered his sermon in Memphis. We have to recognize that while we each have a different past, we all share the same hopes for the future - that we'll be able to find a job that pays a decent wage, that there will be affordable health care when we get sick, that we'll be able to send our kids to college, and that after a lifetime of hard work, we'll be able to retire with security. They're common hopes, modest dreams.  And they're at the heart of the struggle for freedom, dignity, and humanity that Dr. King began, and that it is our task to complete.

    You know, Dr. King once said that the arc of the moral universe is long, but that it bends toward justice. But what he also knew was that it doesn't bend on its own. It bends because each of us puts our hands on that arc and bends it in the direction of justice.

    So on this day - of all days - let's each do our part to bend that arc.

    Let's bend that arc toward justice.

    Let's bend that arc toward opportunity.

    Let's bend that arc toward prosperity for all.

    And if we can do that and march together - as one nation, and one people - then we won't just be keeping faith with what Dr. King lived and died for, we'll be making real the words of Amos that he invoked so often, and "let justice roll down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream."



    Parent
    First of all: (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by kayla on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 09:51:57 PM EST
    Why would somebody troll rate you?  What did you do?

    Second of all:  Thank you for posting some of Obama's speech.  I heard this portion and all of Hillary's speech.  Hillary's was good because it acknowledged all that King had accomplished.  I actually thought it was great to hear where she fit in all of it.  King's dream reached out to all different sorts of people and she lived it.  I love when she said that he took her hand and didn't ask who she was or where she was from, but just thanked her for coming.  She also spoke about how King understood that government can expand just as our hearts can and she has faith that the future will further realize his dream.  Barack pretty much said the same thing.  He said that King's work is unfinished while showing that we all connect to it somehow.  Maybe he had a better written speech than her, but that doesn't mean her sole purpose of attending the March was to pander.  I don't understand why location matters at all.

    Parent

    Ask the obviously-named NO2WONDERBOY... (none / 0) (#73)
    by tbetz on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:17:31 PM EST
    ... who seems to be here solely for the purpose of downrating other people's comments, while contributing nothing to the conversation.

    Obaka's remarks seemed to me to be more in the spirit of Dr. King's approach, because he exhorts people to action, while other politicians emphasize "what I will do" or "what I have done."

    While activists have always done this, the last Democratic presidential candidate I recall who exhorted Americans to action was JFK.  Others all echo the theme of "I, I, me, me."  Today, when politics has been so corrupted by big money, the idea of the people taking back the government is a winning message, one that is activated by the way the Obama campaign has managed itself and its fundraising.

    Something that movement conservatism learned long ago, and that lefties need to take to heart now, is that every day is a campaign day.  No matter who we elect in November, we need to continue this activism as part of our day-to-day routine long after the election campaigns have endedw

    Parent

    Well, I agree with you (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by kayla on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 07:46:50 AM EST
    100%.  But I just can't get behind the idea that Hillary is completely self-serving.  Hillary did have a call to action in her speech as well.  She said we should stop whining about poverty and do something about it.  She said that King always answered the call to action and it's time we do the same.  She's not a lazy politician who's only end is to win.  She is looking beyond that.  She wants to make a change in Washington too.  Just because her message is different doesn't mean it's disingenuous.  And I actually like a politician to say "What I Have Done".  If they've had a successful and productive political life before running, then I have an easier time trusting them.  I actually prefer hearing the "have done"s over the "will do"s.  Barack is more of a "we will do" and "I am doing" type of candidate.  Which I think is a great part of his appeal.  His language is very different from the norm.

    These are just two different campaigns, appealing to two different kinds of people.  They'd both be a vast improvement to what we currently have.  Any Democrat is fine with me.  And even though I'm not the biggest fan of Barack, I know that he's not just any Democrat.  He's intelligent, he's inspiring millions, and he's running a great campaign.

    Parent

    Excellent question. (none / 0) (#16)
    by oculus on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:56:14 PM EST
    What do we have here? (none / 0) (#61)
    by FlaDemFem on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:40:29 AM EST
    We have a "black" candidate who goes with the Kennedy connection instead of the MLK connection. No surprise, the Kennedys endorsed him. MLK is dead and not endorsing anyone.

    We have a candidate who runs as a black man in America, a constitutional lawyer who has never done any civil rights work.

    We have a politician who is a "community organizer" when it comes to getting out the vote, but absent when the community needs help with decent housing and not able to travel a mile from his own home to see the situation for himself.

    We have a black man who belongs to a church that is enraged about slavery and its long-term effects on Afro-Americans, and that black man has not one relative of any generation who was ever a slave.

    What we have here is a phony.
    (That's "phony", not "pony".)


    Parent

    Divided We Fall (5.00 / 0) (#23)
    by john horse on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:32:19 PM EST
    I was listening to this piece on NPR that said there was a poll showing that
    almost 30 percent of Clinton supporters and nearly 20 percent of Obama supporters say that if their preferred candidate doesn't win the nomination, they'll vote Republican.

    I don't believe this poll.  However, if it is true, then all I can say to the 30 percent Cllinton supporters and the 20 percent Obama supporters is are you guys crazy.  I expect this from Nader supporters but I thought us Democrats were still living in the reality based world.  

    Voting for McCain because your preferred Democratic party candidate did not win the nomination is the equivalent of a political hissy fit and, also, a betrayal of everything that your candidate stands for.  And in case you've forgotten what Obama and Clinton stands for, its pretty simple.  They are both against four more years of Bush because a vote for McCain is a vote for Bush's third term.

    Have we learned nothing from the 2000 election?

     

    They said they would vote for McCain?. (none / 0) (#27)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:34:54 PM EST
    ...yikes I thought they just said that they wouldn't vote for the other candidate and I assumed that a large number of them would simply not vote.

    Parent
    I Don't Believe It (none / 0) (#44)
    by john horse on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 07:06:26 PM EST
    Maria,
    Like I said I don't believe the poll.  As far as the NPR broadcast goes, they never actually interviewed anyone who said he or she would vote for McCain if either Obama or Clinton lost.  The closest they come was to quote a Clinton supporter who said that she knew people who said that.  

    I mean after 8 years of Bush I find it hard to believe that there are 20 to 30 percent of Democrats who would do that.

    Parent

    The problem is not dems voting McCain (none / 0) (#49)
    by Kathy on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 08:11:51 PM EST
    the prob is dems staying home.

    It's the same thing that handed Bush the presidency and the same thing that lost it for Kerry.  If just ten percent more had turned out, then the results would have been different.  We have got to have someone who energizes the base.

    You know, like Clinton.

    Parent

    Lots of crazy going around. n/t (none / 0) (#35)
    by Faust on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:47:43 PM EST
    As one of the disenfranchised Florida voters (none / 0) (#42)
    by john horse on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 07:01:54 PM EST
    rose city,
    As a fellow Clinton supporter and one of those disenfranchised Florida voters, I understand where you are coming from.

    However, I would vote for Obama if he won the nomination.  The differences between Obama and Clinton are miniscule compared to the differences between either of them and McCain.

    You are partially right.  One of the lessons of the 2000 election was that every vote should count.  However, another lesson is that there will be consequences to allowing the Republicans to win the election by sitting it out or wasting your vote.  Isn't eight years of Bush enough?

    Parent

    even though I will vote democratic (none / 0) (#47)
    by Florida Resident on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 08:03:54 PM EST
    in November.  My personal impression is that I don't trust Obama to be a good president or that we are not going to regret it if he becomes president.

    Parent
    I will vote for the Dem candidate.. (none / 0) (#62)
    by FlaDemFem on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:45:36 AM EST
    however, I don't think Obama is capable of doing the job. There is real work involved in the office of President, and he doesn't seem to work much. And I don't think he is as capable a legislator as Hillary is. Fortunately, I can vote the straight Dem ticket, there is a little box for that, so I am spared the necessity of actually checking off Obama's name on the ballot, should it come to that. I am not sure I could bring myself to actually do that.

    Parent
    New high or low? (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by TalkRight on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 09:33:25 PM EST
    While Obama calls for politics to live up to his legacy Michelle Obama mixes her MLK Jr. commemoration with a donations !!!

    Today is the 40th anniversary of the tragic assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King and I want to share a video that reveals how far we've come and how much this campaign owes to Dr. King's legacy...  Now make a donation.!!

    Using MLK event to raise more money..

    uhhhh (none / 0) (#60)
    by waldenpond on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 10:55:09 PM EST
    that was wow, just ugh.... :(

    Parent
    Zarek (none / 0) (#1)
    by Step Beyond on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:16:51 PM EST
    That's my current guess. May change over the next few episodes though. I think we have until mid-season before they reveal the final cylon.

    If you have some time... (none / 0) (#2)
    by Universal on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:20:41 PM EST
    and you would like to read about: why I believe I was banned unfairly from MyDD, George Wallace & Barack Obama -- the similarities, and why I won't be writing the site seeking their reinstatement of my posting privileges, please feel free to take a look:

    http://www.villarrealsports.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=340

    No ratings to give or recommendations I'm seeking. Just a piece to examine if you're so inclined.

    It's only 6:20 PM my time, and I feel like I am about to fall asleep. WTF?!

    :)

    I was banned there too (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Edgar08 on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:34:26 PM EST
    The autoban hasn't got me yet at dailykos.

    Parent
    Did you write a diary about it? (4.00 / 1) (#6)
    by oculus on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:35:24 PM EST
    No (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Edgar08 on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:41:24 PM EST
    Read this:

    link

    highlight:

    Imagine reading the equivalent of a novel EVERY DAY, only to have it not be a novel, or a book, but angry comments on a blog.


    Parent
    Excellent until I reached the Elton John (4.00 / 1) (#14)
    by oculus on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:54:04 PM EST
    recommendation.

    Parent
    Me either, Edgar (none / 0) (#34)
    by Universal on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:45:31 PM EST
    I can't believe you got banned from MyDD. What a joke!

    I've been staying away from Daily Kos because of the strike, although I did post a diary when I got banned from MyDD. I had to get a word in, and many of those people thought I had been banned from DK, so I wanted to show them I had not.

    I'll miss MyDD, but as I said in the piece, I'm not playing beggar for anyone, especially when I didn't do anything wrong.

    :)

    Parent

    thanks (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by desert dawg on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:12:38 PM EST
    for the chance to see what this controversy was all about. Please post those old diaries asap so we can all make up our minds.  Will say, though, that I've seen a shift in mydd lately (and Beeton is anything but neutral).

    Parent
    Will do, desert dawg (none / 0) (#37)
    by Universal on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:51:00 PM EST
    I'll throw those diaries down ASAP.

    Glad that the piece helped give you some idea of what happened. I had not realized that Edgar had been banned or I certainly would have included him as well in the post.

    What's your opinion of Todd? Is he an Obama supporter?

    Parent

    No, I stand corrected (none / 0) (#71)
    by desert dawg on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 04:39:51 PM EST
    I went back and reviewed his posts and the ones I remembered as objectionable (like this doozy from a few days ago http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/4/3/135517/1385) were all from Singer.

    Parent
    Your "save your breath" diary (none / 0) (#17)
    by digdugboy on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:03:33 PM EST
    How can anybody call himself or herself a true democrat if he or she promises not to vote democrat in the presidential nomination unless it's your favored nominee?

    Bob Johnson's "cesspool of hate" diary made a lot of sense. The rec list over there has been a cesspool of hate.

    Anybody so outspoken ought not be surprised by banning. It's a big wide blog world. You can always start your own.

    Parent

    One of the pillars of the Obama movement (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Edgar08 on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:23:13 PM EST
    Is to establish the idea that if someone won't vote for Clinton in the General Election then that person can still be a Democrat.

    When we find an Obama supporter who won't vote for Clinton in the GE that's an example of Obama's electability and expanding the party.

    Of course when we meet a Clinton supporter who won't vote for Obama in the GE, that's an example of disloyal divisiveness.

    Right?

    \

    Parent

    Don't forget.... (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:33:09 PM EST
    ..in addition to being divisive, they might also be racist if they happen to be white.

    Parent
    Isn't this stuff... (none / 0) (#39)
    by Universal on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:53:22 PM EST
    ...getting incredibly old?

    So tired of the race-baiting junk from Team Obama.

    Parent

    Agreed, Edgar (none / 0) (#38)
    by Universal on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:52:29 PM EST
    Isn't it funny how that works :(

    Parent
    Don't forget (none / 0) (#53)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 08:41:05 PM EST
    If you won't vote for Obama you're also petulant.

    Parent
    I will, when I have the time (none / 0) (#36)
    by Universal on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:48:18 PM EST
    I have to learn some more stuff and get a number of other things done, but one of these days.

    Bob Johnson's diary was typical Bob Johnson. If you like Obama, you'll like his stuff. Bob's a good guy, I just don't have the same viewpoint as him. But he has the right to say what he wants.

    Parent

    cant say about BSG (none / 0) (#3)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:27:11 PM EST
    but here is StarWars explained.  by a three year old.

    you tube

    My guess (none / 0) (#4)
    by davnee on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:33:51 PM EST
    Zarek was a good one by the poster above.  My guess will be Dee, with my wildcard being Caine if the final five have the capability to come back to life, which I have no idea if that is possible.

    Gays: earlier thread closed (none / 0) (#7)
    by Molly Pitcher on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:35:35 PM EST
    Before I could chase down the quote from Hillary on the net yesterday.

    I remarked about Obama's 'against my faith' attitude toward gay marriage.  Got a reply that HRC was 'agin' it too.  

    "Clinton said she opposes a measure that would ban gay marriage in Pennsylvania."

    Mark 9:40
    "For he who is not against us is for us."

    Gutsy lady. (none / 0) (#9)
    by oculus on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:41:07 PM EST
    Here is my take on gay marriage.. (none / 0) (#64)
    by FlaDemFem on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:00:08 AM EST
    Churches have the right to refuse to marry people whose "lifestyle" is inimical to their faith. HOWEVER, the government does not have the right to deny the right of entering into a contract to two adult citizens. That is what pisses me off about the gay marriage question. It isn't about religion for me, it's about the denial of the right to enter into a basic contract to a large portion of the population.  

    Why the lawyers don't take that tack when it comes to fighting for gay rights is a mystery to me. It doesn't have the emotional baggage that "marriage" brings with it. Never mind blessing anything, the gay citizens of this country have the right to enter into a contract, whether it be regarding living arrangements or buying a house. A contract is a contract, and no one has the right to deny any one the right to make one.

    Remember the days when a woman had to have her father or husband's name on her credit card because she wasn't allowed to sign the contract on her own?? Same difference. Gays are citizens too, and should be allowed the same rights to enter contracts as other citizens. Period.

    Parent

    The final cylon (none / 0) (#8)
    by digdugboy on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:40:42 PM EST
    Either Hannah Montana or Little Timmy Turner.

    I think it's Obama..snicker..nt (none / 0) (#65)
    by FlaDemFem on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:01:06 AM EST
    I've been thinking about the Baltar/Roslin (none / 0) (#12)
    by Edgar08 on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:46:43 PM EST
    Election episodes.

    Baltar the charismatic, highly intelligent, incredibly inspirational visionary politician selling a new brand of politics.

    Roslin the experienced (though only recently) practically minded leader with a record of some success but some compromises along with it.

    Did read in EW that Mary McDonnell doesn't think Clinton took responsibility for the war vote.

    I've forgiven her as it's a popular view to have of Clinton.

    Not even gonna guess who the 5th is.  

    BSG: Adama, elder or younger (none / 0) (#15)
    by Sandra on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 05:55:06 PM EST
    I think it would be a big letdown if the final Cylon is not one of the principal characters, so an Adama, or Gaius Baltar. I think we've already been given reasons to rule out Laura Roslin and Kara Thrace, although you never know. If it IS Zarek, that will be irritating; there would be something very stereotypical about it.

    Ron Moore (none / 0) (#20)
    by Adept Havelock on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:24:30 PM EST
    Has already stated it's not the Adamas, Starbuck, Roslin, or Baltar.

    I'm expecting it will be Zarek...but I have a fear it's Lt. Felix Gaeta.  

    That would frakkin' stink, IMO.

    Parent

    In his podcast (none / 0) (#21)
    by Edgar08 on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:26:45 PM EST
    After the episode where the Starbuck "dies" he also said "She's not coming back, get over it."

    Parent
    Can't trust Moore (none / 0) (#25)
    by geordie on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:33:45 PM EST
    I agree - I was furious with Moore for jerking fans around on the Starbuck thing, just to maintain his little "joke".   But I ultimately forgave the show and am back with a vengeance - I've had the BSG marathon on every minute I've been home the last two days, even though I HAVE all three seasons on DVD, for frack's sake!

    Final Cylon:  I think Zareck is a great guess; it had better not be Dee, Callie or Gaida.  And Olmos said he has it in his contract - and Matalin said therefore it was also in hers - that he would never become a Cylon on the show.  So unless those two actors are in on the deception, I rule both of them out.  But not Lee - maybe he's really NOT Adama's son, after all this.  I also think it might be Cain or someone we haven't seen before - the original creator of the Cylons and hybrids, perhaps? And I don't think it's Baltar - he wants it too much.

    I don't want to be spoiled, I want to see the story, so nobody do that, OK?

    Parent

    Maybe... (none / 0) (#26)
    by Adept Havelock on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:33:56 PM EST
    It may be disinformation on Ron Moore's part, it may not.

    I know he also said we've seen the 12th Cylon many times, when he said it was none of them.  That's why I'm worried it's Gaeta.  All the others are in "key positions", and he's been a go-to guy since the attack on the colonies.

    Parent

    Moore lies (none / 0) (#48)
    by Kathy on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 08:10:03 PM EST
    but all good storytellers do.

    The photo in EW was said to have people who were NOT toasters.  So, if we believe that statement, then then Rosalin, Adama, Kara, etc, are not cylons.

    I think Gaida, but Litagatormom, who's pretty smart (at least about BSG! haha!) said Cain and now I've been thinking a bit about her as possibly one, too.

    (but I'd like my objection noted re: Razor that the first lesbian we see is a homicidal b*tch.  As a further aside, that Six certainly does seem to have a love algorithm or two--lovarithm?)

    Parent

    sorry, (none / 0) (#22)
    by cpinva on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:29:28 PM EST
    ever since the cheesy original, with lorne greene, i could never take the thing even semi-seriously.

    but hey, have fun with that! lol

    This is a completely different show (none / 0) (#29)
    by geordie on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:36:15 PM EST
    The only similarities between the original and the current BSG are some of the names and the basic plot of Cylon vs human - otherwise, it's a completely different, original and terrific show.  IMO, there has been no better commentary on the Bush administrations war on terra than the first 4 episodes of BSG's third season.

    You're depriving yourself of something great if you're not watching just because of the old show.

    Parent

    What's a BSG and why are people (none / 0) (#28)
    by inclusiveheart on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:35:03 PM EST
    watching it?

    See posts above (none / 0) (#30)
    by geordie on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:36:51 PM EST
    Hey, it's only the best show on television.

    Parent
    BSG (none / 0) (#32)
    by Step Beyond on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:40:13 PM EST
    Battlestar Galactica - a scifi series that is a remake of an old cheesy scifi series. I didn't have much hope for it since the original was so ... er... bad, but this remake really started as the best show on television. It stumbled a little last season but I'm still looking forward to it starting the final season tonight.

    Parent
    Aha. (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by inclusiveheart on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:41:26 PM EST
    Thank you :)

    Parent
    You're welcome (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Step Beyond on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 06:54:14 PM EST
    If you decide to watch, the SciFi channel website has an 8 minute summary to catch people up.

    Parent
    OBama Advsier: leave 60,000 or more troops in Iraq (none / 0) (#46)
    by felizarte on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 08:02:13 PM EST
    until 20010.  It contradicts his promise to withdraw all troops in first sixteen months.

    <http://www.nysun.com/politics/obama-adviser-calls-troops-stay-iraq-through-2010>

    Meet the Oboptimists: (none / 0) (#50)
    by oculus on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 08:28:12 PM EST
    NYT

    The Oboptomists (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 08:43:10 PM EST
    versus the Clinto-Realists.

    Parent
    And they also think that they can (none / 0) (#51)
    by Florida Resident on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 08:35:24 PM EST
    disparage have the Democratic Base and still get all of their votes in November.

    Parent
    Meant half not have (none / 0) (#52)
    by Florida Resident on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 08:35:44 PM EST
    Maybe they don't need us? (none / 0) (#57)
    by nycstray on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 09:42:21 PM EST
    Or, as the French say...L'Obatomysts? (none / 0) (#55)
    by Kathy on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 08:44:40 PM EST
    Holy frack! (none / 0) (#58)
    by Kathy on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 10:19:22 PM EST
    I about crapped in my pants during the first three minutes!

    And, as usual, I can't wait until next week.  Dang BSG!  Why do you pull me in?!

    Good (none / 0) (#59)
    by waldenpond on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 10:35:46 PM EST
    I'm glad to hear it.  It took forever to get decent service in our out of the way area.  We still need another line.  Our line goes down several times a year.  It has been taken out by construction work, fires, even once for being too close to a house fire.  We are reached only by very curving roads and no one wants to cough up the money it's so expensive.  We had local fundraising, business fundraising etc and worked with our local provider.  If we could get a second line it would provide backup for our businesses and our hospitals.  It's really tough when our doctors offices and two hospitals go down.  Try knocking out your college, small university etc.  Our whole county is only 100k and we are wiped out when it happens.

    This subject may have past, BUT (none / 0) (#63)
    by gish720 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:55:47 AM EST
    I just wanted to put my two cents in regarding the not voting for one's opponent in the GE thing. To start I want to say I'm fairly new here at TL and usually just read all the comments and don't say a lot. It seems like a lot of people know each other and ongoing conversations take place. I,who am fairly new to the site don't want to jump in with a bunch of irrelevant comments so it can sometimes seem a tad intimidating.  I like this site for the fact that I'm a Clinton supporter and most other sites are so hostile to Clinton supports my chest aches when I read all the hatred aimed at her... okay enough said about all that. But a couple of things I've heard that I agreed with on MSNBC and CNN.  On MSNBC Tucker Carlson (of all people) said, people are mad and they take the car keys and announce "I'm leaving!" but all they'll do is drive around the block and come back home.  Idiotic remarks by people in the Obama campaign make that a much longer drive.  Comments like "I'll get her votes" sure don't help. Nancy Pelosi saying all her stuff doesn't help.  James Carville on last Sunday's Wolf Blitzer said that the more fair this process is seen, and he mentioned the people saying Clinton should drop out as a major problem, as well as Obama saying "She can stay in if she likes" are so negative and not good for uniting the party.  I hope the Obama people will see how so many things they do, Randi Rhodes, David Sirota calling Hillary Clinton's voters racists and on and on.  Bob Somerby had a really good post yesterday and talked about "the person who kidnapped Josh Marshall." I've felt that way about a lot of people...it's been very divisive. Rachel Maddow has used this divisive business as a stealth argument for Clinton getting out of the race NOW. Even Digby who I still read and like very much linked to an article the other day comparing Clinton to Nixon, it was okay I guess, it offended me some, but at the end was a paragraph about how Clinton should drop out and it made me bristle. Okay enough from me.

    Jersey Girl on Obama (none / 0) (#66)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:30:22 AM EST
    Wherein she tears into his ridiculous statement that "I don't think anybody predicted 9/11".

    Link

    I have trouble with a "Democrat" that spends more time defending Republican viewpoints and actions than those of Democratic.

    Whoops, link is here (none / 0) (#67)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:32:04 AM EST
    I'm not sure which is more annoying (none / 0) (#68)
    by Fabian on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:58:05 AM EST
    using the Bush Administration POV or failing to grasp that it was predicted in a broad sense and that we did attempt to track the operatives - and failed.

    It was a kind of "gotcha" question, but one that a candidate needs to be able to address.  I mean how obvious can it be that 9/11 still weighs on the public's mind?  If you want to go up against McCain, you'd best be prepared for that question a whole lot more on National Security.

    Parent

    Especially a candidate (none / 0) (#69)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:45:04 AM EST
    who believes he's best to answer the 3:00am phone call.

    Yep, his answer was basically, "I don't know?"  He all but said that those who believe he'd be lost are right.

    Parent