home

Sunday Late Night Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 10:54:12 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Here's a late night open thread for those of you with something to say.

< Timing the Guantanamo Trials | $4.00 a Gallon and Rising >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Sunday Late Night Open Thread | 187 comments (187 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Another bit of music (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by JavaCityPal on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 10:59:17 PM EST
    There must be some parrotheads and country music fans around here :)
    Parrothead here (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by samanthasmom on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:20:09 PM EST
    I got my 2 year old grandson started with this one.

    [ Parent ]
    Wow!! (none / 0) (#26)
    by JavaCityPal on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:29:37 PM EST
    THANKS for that link! I just emailed that one to my daughter. My 8 month old grandson loves music, and we're a family of parrotheads. I babysit every Tuesday night, and we need new music to dance to since Dancing with the Stars season ended.

    Last time I saw him in concert was just 3 years ago at the Cricket Pavillion in Glendale, AZ.

    People are such beautiful fools around him :)

    [ Parent ]

    My younger brother and I ditch (none / 0) (#36)
    by samanthasmom on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:34:42 PM EST
    the spouses and head out for the concert together every time Jimmy's in the Boston area. The concert at Fenway Park was my favorite.

    [ Parent ]
    He's touring now (none / 0) (#65)
    by JavaCityPal on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:55:19 PM EST
    but, not coming to western Washington this year.

    I just got an email from Margaritaville with the tour dates for the rest of the year.

    [ Parent ]

    If I Were Two, Three, Four or More (none / 0) (#44)
    by squeaky on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:39:36 PM EST
    I would also be wondering about the amphibian band that takes over the night in the Caribbean. Buffet's youtube seems like a perfect answer.

    Nice one.

    [ Parent ]

    On an evening in Toronto, with no wind to (none / 0) (#9)
    by chrisblask on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:17:19 PM EST
    speak of, I sailed our small boat past Ontario Place where Jimmy was playing.  It was amazing - like a private live concert to accompany my slow drift into the harbor.

    [ Parent ]
    Sounds quite lovely. (none / 0) (#19)
    by oculus on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:23:09 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Really was. Totally unexpected and the sound was (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by chrisblask on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:35:51 PM EST
    perfect.  We had bought an old 28 footer and were living on Centre Island and I had to sail the small boat (the little scow I've had since I was 11) over from the Toronto Sailing and Canoe Club to our place on the island.  I went after work and sailed straight out for an hour so I'd have enough of a run to get a straight shot at the western gap and as the sun set what wind there was just fell off to as close to nothing as possible.  

    Jimmy lit it up as the boat crept toward Ontario Place (outdoor forum, great acoustics).  It took forever, fortunately.  The lights of the city, the lights from the show and the stars all shining on the water...  Singing along with some of it, zenning out to the rest.  

    A perfect night by every measure.

    [ Parent ]

    I would have thought I'd died and gone to (none / 0) (#28)
    by JavaCityPal on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:31:09 PM EST
    music heaven.

    He brings out the very best in people.

    [ Parent ]

    It was. Life was just coming together after (none / 0) (#52)
    by chrisblask on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:46:35 PM EST
    a very very stressful few years.  Donna was pregnant with our first child, work was finally starting to pay off (just in time).  That night listening to Jimmy was like a final assurance that the world was a good place and everything would be fine.

    Shortly thereafter (the first day of summer, 1995) we took a water taxi at dawn across to the city, Damien was born and we were back the next morning.

    The name of the boat we lived on?  Damien's Cradle.  :-)

    We'll never get rid of it.

    [ Parent ]

    Great story (none / 0) (#76)
    by JavaCityPal on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:02:11 AM EST
    Have you ever written to JB to tell him?

    I love watching interviews with him, rare though they are. The man has no idea why he has this cult following, but he's genuinely grateful to his fans for their loyalty.

    Funny guy. He said he learned to the play the guitar so he could pick up women.

    Is your son a parrothead?

    [ Parent ]

    Good idea. My brother has lived in Key West (none / 0) (#117)
    by chrisblask on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:26:18 AM EST
    for 16 years, we go down there all the time.  Should write up the story in more detail and deliver it in person.

    Just love the guy's zest for life.  Cynicism is about as useful a world view as wearing sack cloth and ashes.  Sure, life is f'ed up sometimes, but griping about it makes no difference and just saps the joy out of the good parts.

    We aren't pure parrotheads, but you are right (and thanks to the poster above for the Kermit video!), we need to play more Jimmy around here.

    [ Parent ]

    Can't be miserable with Jimmy (none / 0) (#130)
    by JavaCityPal on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:51:08 AM EST
    playing.

    [ Parent ]
    NORML goes to Key West (none / 0) (#136)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:58:55 AM EST
    every December, it's my favorite trip of the year despite the fact that it's incredibly arduous to fly from Denver to Key West.

    NORML always stays at the Pier House. I love the Caribbean Spa rooms.

    Here's Jimmy singing the National Anthem (no, not the real one.)

    I'm going to miss it this year because I decided after coming back from the Iowa caucuses Jan. 3 that I wasn't getting on an airplane during 2008. I'm half-way there and intend to keep my goal.

    [ Parent ]

    link fix (none / 0) (#137)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:00:24 AM EST
    for Caribbean Spa rooms.

    [ Parent ]
    Thanks, may have to plan around that (none / 0) (#150)
    by chrisblask on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:30:23 AM EST
    We live in Florida now, so it`s a drive.  Very handy, that.

    Grew up in Denver (well, Woodland Park, Co. Springs and Arvada - yeah, I move a lot).  Miss the mountains here, love the sun.

    -cheers!

    -chris

    [ Parent ]

    A good friend walked down the aisle (none / 0) (#155)
    by JavaCityPal on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:41:03 AM EST
    to that national anthem. Well, danced down the aisle.

    My daughter's husband graduated from college, hit the road until he found a place that looked like a fun place to live, and stayed 2 years in Key West. He took her there on their one year dating anniversary and gave her a ring.  I was surprised that wasn't the destination for the wedding...we all went to St Lucia for that, but Jimmy Buffett was on all the boom boxes the entire week we were there.

    That hotel looks fabulous! Is it as nice as the photos?

    [ Parent ]

    FYI: Typo in Comment Rules legaleeze (none / 0) (#189)
    by chrisblask on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:27:18 AM EST
    "TalkLeft is not be"

    [ Parent ]
    As usual, (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:00:25 PM EST
    Paul Krugman is worth reading:

    [A]lthough everyone makes fun of political correctness, I'd argue that decades of pressure on public figures and the media have helped drive both overt and strongly implied racism out of our national discourse.

    [. . .]

    Unfortunately, the campaign against misogyny hasn't been equally successful.

    By the way, it was during the heyday of the baby boom generation that crude racism became unacceptable. Mr. Obama, who has been dismissive of the boomers' "psychodrama," might want to give the generation that brought about this change, fought for civil rights and protested the Vietnam War a bit more credit.

    [. . .]

    Moreover, despite Hillary Clinton's gracious, eloquent concession speech, some of her supporters may yet refuse to support the Democratic nominee.

    But if Mr. Obama does win, it will symbolize the great change that has taken place in America. Racial polarization used to be a dominating force in our politics -- but we're now a different, and better, country.
    Not sure about that last sentence, but (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by oculus on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:03:39 PM EST
    the remainder--yes.

    [ Parent ]
    So, if he doesn't win, it is status quo.... (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:16:18 PM EST
    If obama becomes the nominee and not the selectee, we will see how this pans out.  If we find the Bradley Effect came into play, then it will tell us a thing or three.

    [ Parent ]
    Th e world hasn't become a perfect world, and it (none / 0) (#14)
    by chrisblask on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:20:18 PM EST
    won't.

    But the overarching "can't be president" question has been answered.

    Interestingly, Bobby Kennedy said - forty years ago - that things were moving so quickly that "in forty years a Negro could have the office my brother has had".

    Bright man, that Bobby...

    [ Parent ]

    Yeah! A man will be prez! (5.00 / 3) (#27)
    by Joan in VA on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:30:20 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    That was priceless (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Valhalla on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:38:07 PM EST
    When will I ever learn not to drink and TL at the same time?  Fruit juice all over the keyboard...sticky.

    [ Parent ]
    Keyboard covers are great (5.00 / 0) (#58)
    by nycstray on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:51:55 PM EST
    that's experience talkin'  ;)

    [ Parent ]
    I'm fairly sure obama has not reached (none / 0) (#22)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:26:38 PM EST
    the WH yet.

    [ Parent ]
    Obama's Chances (2.00 / 4) (#35)
    by Gambit on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:34:25 PM EST
    He will if the "kiddies" like myself come out strong despite some of the legit anger. A lot of clinton supporters are right angry now, but most of them won't betray our country. SHE BARELY LOST PEOPLE its not like the whole party turned against her and all women.

    [ Parent ]
    Please do not equate not voting for (5.00 / 8) (#40)
    by Valhalla on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:36:59 PM EST
    Obama with treason.  Thank you.

    [ Parent ]
    Not treason (2.33 / 3) (#53)
    by Gambit on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:47:00 PM EST
    to NOT vote for obama, but it IS traitorous for a progressive to vote for mccain. that's all i'm saying. anyone who votes for mccain at this point will be responsible for the deaths of american soldiers in iraq not to mention the innocent iraqi people. and that's not even mentioning the economic policies that are sinking the dollar and civil rights, women's rights, etc.

    [ Parent ]
    So if you're not a progressive, (5.00 / 3) (#57)
    by samanthasmom on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:51:45 PM EST
    it's OK to vote for McCain?

    [ Parent ]
    Samantha (1.00 / 2) (#77)
    by Gambit on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:02:24 AM EST
    now there's an a heck of an argument! lol But seriously, if you don't have progressive values, i don't begrudge you voting for mcbush. BTW its your american right to vote for whoever, but a spade is still a spade just like the media had a right to spew sexist hatred and attitudes, that doesn't make it honorable. Are we clear on that point now yall?

    [ Parent ]
    See, (5.00 / 5) (#102)
    by samanthasmom on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:16:34 AM EST
    if the media had spewed racist hatred and attitudes, would you say they had a right to do it?

    [ Parent ]
    Can I ask... (none / 0) (#90)
    by otherlisa on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:08:40 AM EST
    How old are you? Just curious.

    [ Parent ]
    I said not voting for Obama, not voting (5.00 / 4) (#62)
    by Valhalla on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:53:33 PM EST
    for McCain.  Although I could make an argument about that too.  But just because I disagree that Obama represents actual progressive values, nevermind would be a leader of them, does not make me a traitor to the cause.

    Treason, betrayal -- these are very strong words which should be used carefully.

    [ Parent ]

    Responsible For The Deaths In Iraq? (5.00 / 5) (#73)
    by MO Blue on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:01:33 AM EST
    That would only apply if you believe that Obama will end the occupation of Iraq. I do not believe he will end the occupation. I believe he might reduce the troop size but U.S. troops and the mercenaries will remain in Iraq for the foreseeable future. By the same token, military and political necessity may well require any president reduce troop size in Iraq.

    Political Punch gave Obama a score of 75% and he ranked 41st on Human Rights/Civil Liberties.

    [ Parent ]

    Hmmm (5.00 / 4) (#85)
    by JavaCityPal on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:06:36 AM EST
    We can only hope they have enough Arabic interpreters to share with Afghanistan for an extended stay.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm more worried about how he'll end it (5.00 / 2) (#95)
    by Valhalla on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:12:12 AM EST
    He doesn't have enough experience just plain governing.  Withdrawal, removal, however it's termed, you don't get a second chance.  Lots more people could die during a bad withdrawal plan, I fear.

    [ Parent ]
    Don't worry he won't end it, First of all he (5.00 / 1) (#172)
    by kimsaw on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 05:55:15 AM EST
    lacks the conviction and his courage in taking stands is questionable. He's pretty much backed off of his timetable I think by offering it will all depend on what's happening on the ground again. To be fair by 2009 who knows what will be happening. If he can't start withdrawal he can blame it on Bush or say the Iraqis are not be ready. It's his standard operating procedure anyway.  He will not be held accountable for his words or his actions, 'cause he's Obama, the one chosen. I mean literally chosen by the DNC SD's so they really won't care, they haven't taken any action in the past- what makes you think any of them will do anything in the future? It's been pandering to the left by the guy who wants republicans to play a larger role in his new party, so jumping out of Iraq in 16 months forget about it, it ain't going to happen.

    [ Parent ]
    Just Goes To Show (none / 0) (#81)
    by squeaky on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:05:24 AM EST
    How far to the right our party (country) has gone.  Obama is as hawkish as Hillary and the notion that he may be slightly less hawkish is a liability.

    [ Parent ]
    My Position On Obama And Hillary (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by MO Blue on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:23:11 AM EST
    in regards to Iraq are exactly the same. I have been on record for quite some time that I didn't believe that any of the top Dem candidates would end the occupation of Iraq. Also, I don't believe that Obama is any more or any less Hawkish than Clinton. Basically the same positions except the rhetoric is somewhat different. THe one exception is that Obama has stated he would meet with foes without preconditions. IIRC he has tried to walk that statement back somewhat. I do not believe he would actually do that nor that it would be prudent to do so.

    [ Parent ]
    Agree (none / 0) (#116)
    by squeaky on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:26:03 AM EST
    Although what I am saying is that even a perception that Obama is less of a hawk, is a liability, even among Democrats.

    Go figure.

    [ Parent ]

    Disagree (5.00 / 5) (#145)
    by MO Blue on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:18:30 AM EST
    The perception that Obama is less hawkish is a positive to many of the people who support him for precisely that reason. It is a wash to many people like me who really don't believe there is any real substantial difference and a negative to those who prefer what they believe is a stronger foreign policy. Different strokes for different folks. The Democratic Party has never been monolithic and it isn't on this either IMO.

    I'm going back to my original statement to try and get across the point I was trying to make. Talking points that go against what a person believes to be true are not persuasive. Gambit believes that Obama will end the occupation thus his blood on your hands comment. I do not believe that Obama will end the occupation and his argument doesn't work with me. Dems too often take the tack that everyone believes what they believe or have the same value system as they do. They lecture too much, ignore data that disproves preconceived ideas and fail to take the time to listen to what voters tell them. They keep thinking that voters will GET IT this time. IMO it is the Dems that don't GET IT.  

     

    [ Parent ]

    OK (none / 0) (#147)
    by squeaky on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:21:25 AM EST
    Gambit believes that Obama will end the occupation thus his blood on your hands comment.

    Have not been reading his or her comments. I did not know that was the context.

    [ Parent ]
    Your first point is well taken (none / 0) (#83)
    by Gambit on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:05:31 AM EST
    but mccain has made MORE of a guarantee and committment of not only iraq but possibly iran than either obama or clinton.

    [ Parent ]
    Gambit (5.00 / 2) (#101)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:16:07 AM EST
    you are a new user with 49 comments in 3 days. Please respect the commenting rules. New users are limited to 10 comments a day. And since you intend to promote McCain, which is a view directly opposite from TalkLeft's you are chattering. No more than 10 comments in 24 hours from you and be careful not to shill for your candidate.

    [ Parent ]
    Think you are reading the words wrong (1.00 / 0) (#149)
    by chrisblask on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:22:55 AM EST
    If he or she was promoting McCain then this comment would not have been posted:

    to NOT vote for obama, but it IS traitorous for a progressive to vote for mccain. that's all i'm saying. anyone who votes for mccain at this point will be responsible for the deaths of american soldiers in iraq not to mention the innocent iraqi people. and that's not even mentioning the economic policies that are sinking the dollar and civil rights, women's rights, etc.

    Agreed that some of the users comments are pretty extreme - I would not go there - but seems to me s/he is being sincere about supporting Obama.

    Considering what passes for commentary still on TL, vigorously defending the Dem nominee should be fair comment.

    At what point will it not be OK to put forth GOP talking points against Senator Obama?  Next week?  Next month?  December...?

    [ Parent ]

    Oh good grief, PssttCmere08 (none / 0) (#156)
    by chrisblask on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:44:59 AM EST
    Sure, TR every comment I make.

    Here`s another one.  TR this one as well.

    [ Parent ]

    Is Obama still open to replacing troops (none / 0) (#109)
    by nycstray on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:21:48 AM EST
    with private contrators?

    [ Parent ]
    So much for the economy (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by JavaCityPal on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:23:39 AM EST
    if that happens.

    [ Parent ]
    Most progressive men never were (5.00 / 5) (#120)
    by Cream City on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:30:44 AM EST
    that good on women's rights, from the start of the movement.  We usually did land well down that list, as it is here -- y'know, "women's rights, etc."  

    I remember being told that's just 'cause they were thinking alphabetically.  I'm serious.  Had we thought more about it, not have been so da*ned optimistic about men, maybe we ought to have gone with "broads' rights" to be higher on the list, huh?

    Any progress for women was won by progressive -- and other -- women.  Looks like it's still gonna be that way.  

    [ Parent ]

    well (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by boredmpa on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:07:54 AM EST
    i don't want to disrespect your experience, but your ending remark is hurtful.

    I say that as an ex-member of NOW with an undergrad in gender studies (self-designed major).  I protested when I was in college, I was a GA at the national women's studies association journal, and have been a solid supporter of equal rights and respect in the workplace thoughout my life.  The only reason I'm not teaching queer studies or gender studies is because I had no concept of getting a job with such a thing when I went to school in NC.

    Regardless, being a feminist in programmer land is about as fun as being a str8 looking male at a campus NOW meeting.  The point is, I have plenty of cards I've carried in my life, but the most difficult one has been the feminist card -- it even edges out the gay boy from NC card in terms of total emotional mindf&ck.  So please don't discount the contribution of progressive men to the feminist movement...especially the third wave.  

    [ Parent ]

    I did not discount some men (5.00 / 4) (#146)
    by Cream City on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:18:51 AM EST
    which is why I said most progressive men, now, didn't I?  As I've said before, women's history is like the Marines:  All we need is a few good men, and I'm grateful for them.  But that's all we ever get.

    I repeat, and I have the historical evidence for it:  Most progressive men never did nor do they now put priority on women's rights.  And let me go farther to say that some progressive men are really against women's rights but go along with it to get worker bees in the movement and votes for . . . progressive men.

    [ Parent ]

    Sorry, I don't buy the assertion that most (1.00 / 0) (#183)
    by chrisblask on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 09:42:10 AM EST
    progressive men do not put a priority on womens' rights.

    That is what is known as a back-handed compliment.  There is no difference imho to the classic "some black folks are OK" line.

    [ Parent ]

    You don't know progressive movement (none / 0) (#186)
    by Cream City on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 10:02:50 AM EST
    history, and I happen to specialize in it.  Read up and come on back when you have something to contribut on this topic.

    And you are getting a 1, yet again, for a backhanded accusion of racism.  In doing that, you really show that you don't know me at all.  You are laughable.

    [ Parent ]

    Being an expert gives you an educated opinion (none / 0) (#187)
    by chrisblask on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:06:36 AM EST
    but not likely the only educated opinion.  I have yet to find an area of expertise where experts always agree.

    Your lack of control in using personal attacks does nothing to increase my respect for your professional credentials.

    As well, having just reviewed again the site rules, "abusive" and "name-calling" comments are supposedly not condoned - aside from the childishness of name-calling me "laughable".  When I do so to anyone I accept down-rating, as do you by doing so.

    Finally, your assertion that I accused you of racism is without basis.  I compared two separate types of group-attributions that in my opinion do not vary in type of validity.  There is nothing in what I wrote or intended that accuses you - back-handledly or directly - of racism, and the context of the conversation does not support your interpretation of my intent.

    [ Parent ]

    You called ma a racist (none / 0) (#194)
    by Cream City on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:07:27 PM EST
    with this:  "That is what is known as a back-handed compliment.  There is no difference imho to the classic "some black folks are OK" line."

    And so, I call you out as a race-baiter.  

    That tells me that anything else you write here is just as foolish.  I will be watching for you and your tactics.


    [ Parent ]

    OK, read it how you like, but puting intent into (none / 0) (#197)
    by chrisblask on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:17:54 PM EST
    other people's words is not an exact science.

    If I wanted to accuse you of racism I would do so specifically.  What I stated was that I see no difference between assigning broad characteristics to groups of individuals regardless of which group those characteristics are being assigned to.  I have no ideas what your views are on the topic of race, and if I did believe you endorse racial bias I would not call you "a racist".  I wrote this piece The R Word on specifically that topic.

    Finally, assuming that you know my mind and can assert that "anything else (I) write here is just as foolish" does nothing to convince me of your detached academic credentials.  In my experience there are many very bright and educated people who nonetheless insert their own bias into their research, thus invalidating its objectivity.

    [ Parent ]

    subject line (none / 0) (#161)
    by boredmpa on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 02:01:09 AM EST
    I realize you were responding to a troll and I probably should have let it pass.  Even so, I really don't like having a "now, didn't I" sent in my direction.  

    You opened with one descriptive statement (a negative with a positive allowance for some men) and ended with the opposite (only women).  Then you added on a predictive statement (a full negative toward male allies).  You effectively ended a post on male participation by discounting all men from future action on their own.  

    It's not my intent to say that's a bad idea or play PC thug with someone's rhetoric in a blog post, but it's a blog and I wanted you to be aware of the response it got from me.

    [ Parent ]

    No, I did not say all or "only women" (none / 0) (#196)
    by Cream City on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:10:52 PM EST
    I said "progressive and other women" because some Democratic women also worked hard for women's rights.  The progressives were Republicans, y'know.

    I don't know why you keep looking for evidence that I omitted all men from the women's movement.  I simply did not, so it is your problem in perception, not mine in communication.

    [ Parent ]

    True (none / 0) (#181)
    by echinopsia on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 09:05:51 AM EST
    Most progressive men never did nor do they now put priority on women's rights.

    They keep telling me that women's rights is a "niche" issue.

    51.1% of the population is a "niche."

    Oooooohkay.

    [ Parent ]

    treachery (5.00 / 0) (#179)
    by Nessuno on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 08:34:19 AM EST
    Was it traitorous for "progressives" to sit by and allow misogyny to be hurled at Hillary Clinton?  I think Obama and his supporters have some treachery of their own to answer for.  What is a movement if it does not live up to it's ideals?  I'm a man, and a centrist, but to see the blatant unfairness of this primary shocked me.

    If Obama was willing to let progressive principals fly out the window in the primary in order to get an advantage, what tells you he will fight for them in the White House, especially if they become inconvenient to "Mr. Post-partisan?

    By the way, why do Obama supporters feel the way to win people over is by accusing them or scaring them out of not voting for Obama.  Maybe it's just me, but I never see pro Obama arguments, just anti-McCain arguments and "you'll be a traitor" arguments.  Is there a reason to actually vote for him?

    [ Parent ]

    Betray Our Country (5.00 / 9) (#48)
    by MO Blue on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:44:00 PM EST
    I have heard that I betrayed my country for almost 8 years because I did not support Bush and his agenda. Now I hear that if I don't support Obama and his agenda I will betray my country. Change? Not so much.

    [ Parent ]
    Good for the Kids! (1.00 / 1) (#93)
    by chrisblask on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:11:58 AM EST
    This middle-aged fart is with you.

    Its time to dump the GOP talking points from Progressive discussions.  Sure there are folks who will always feel betrayed, but already its almost down to those for whom nothing will change their minds.  The angst over this shrinking demographic is overstated.  By the wildest estimations it could be assumed to be 3M folks, much more likely a few hundred thousand, by my guess in the end five figures of folks bound and determined to vote against their own interests.

    Sad, but not a deal breaker in a time when the real opposition has nothing positive to say about their own message.  GOP.COM is nothing but an attack site (gosh, think they'd has something positive to say about their own candidate), leading Republicans are wailing about the end of times and Sean Hannity can't stop forecasting doom long enough to finish an anti-Obama sentence.

    [ Parent ]

    How many votes did Gore lose FL by? (none / 0) (#103)
    by Valhalla on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:17:51 AM EST
    n/t

    [ Parent ]
    If the anti-voters all live in one state (none / 0) (#157)
    by chrisblask on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:53:00 AM EST
    it could make a difference.

    But they don`t.

    Every vote is worth trying to get, but if someone insists on voting against someone no matter what information, policies, alternatives, etc are visible to them, there`s no point in banging you head against a wall forever.  I do not believe that Sen. Clinton`s supporters are a single monolith bloc, nor that very many will vote against their first party of choice in Nov.

    Voters aren`t puppies.  You cannot actually force them to do anything they do not want to do.  If anyone wants to vote for McCain, Nader, Barr or Chuck the Wonderdog that is a choice that no one else can make for them.

    [ Parent ]

    A Few Hundred Thousand? (none / 0) (#126)
    by MO Blue on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:43:51 AM EST
    June 6th CNN Poll

    Sixty percent of her Democratic supporters would vote for Obama, 17 percent would vote for McCain, and 22 percent say they would stay at home in November and not vote for anyone.



    [ Parent ]
    sure looks like at least 7.2 million to me (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by DandyTIger on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:50:59 AM EST
    and since that says supporters and not voters, that may mean more -- since that could include for example some supporters that couldn't vote then or voted for other candidates but now support her. Sure sounds like a number I'd be worrying about. But what do I know, I voted for the one candidate that can win in November.

    [ Parent ]
    For the Record - TR this (1.00 / 3) (#140)
    by chrisblask on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:07:28 AM EST
    The following users believe it is appropriate to TR a young voter for voicing his or her opinion:

    echinopsia 1
    NO2WONDERBOY 1
    boredmpa 1
    PssttCmere08 1

    Your action is cowardly and weak, your intent is sordid, your ethics are beyond question only to the extent they there is no question that you don`t have any.

    I formally and publicly ask you all to kiss my shiny metal butt.  

    NOW you have something worthy of a TR.  Better yet, if you feel so strongly about public humiliation of Democratic voters, put your names where your psuedonyms are.

    Heck, gimme a call - 941 201 9277 - and explain why you think you are better people than Gambit.  

    Chris Blask

    [ Parent ]

    Gambit is violating site rules (5.00 / 2) (#148)
    by Cream City on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:21:43 AM EST
    and was warned by Jeralyn; go see.  

    Gambit also is writing untruths and is being offensive.  Actually, your comment is out of culture, too.  We all can click to see ratings.  I think you're new here, and you might lurk a bit to learn the culture of this blog.

    [ Parent ]

    I did look at Gambit`s comments after seeing (none / 0) (#154)
    by chrisblask on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:39:05 AM EST
    Jeralyn`s reply to him.  Agree some of it is overboard, but I understand the frustration (if he isn`t a troll, don`t think he is).

    I have been here a while and on progressive blogs extensively, though been gone from TL since I joined so I could spend time elsewhere (love MyDD, for example).

    As far as site rules go, I get TRed here just for saying OBAMA (here they come! ;-).  My ratings are trashed because I have not said what a scumbag Sen. Obama is, which itself to date is TR-worthy with no repercusssions for the raters.

    The comment of Gambit`s I replied to got TRed to death without justification imho.  And trashing Senator and Democratic Nominee Obama gets mojo all day long.

    Still trying to `give people space to mourn`, but endless ranting against the Dem nominee for president cannot be allowed forever. Sooner of later this should (I think) be a place where we support the guy.

    Thanks for a civil response, though.  

    -chris

    [ Parent ]

    What?? (5.00 / 0) (#180)
    by FlaDemFem on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 08:51:37 AM EST
    but endless ranting against the Dem nominee for president cannot be allowed forever
    Since when are you a site moderator?? Since when are you the person who defines what speech or opinions are "allowed"? Here's a news flash for you..this is a free country and we are allowed to have our own opinions. If the Democratic party didn't want their candidate to be criticized by people in the Dem party, they should have chosen a better one. They didn't. If Obama can't stand the heat, he should stay out of the kitchen. And so should you.

    [ Parent ]
    I am not a moderator, but like you I get to have (none / 0) (#182)
    by chrisblask on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 09:33:56 AM EST
    an opinion, too.

    Maybe I don't know the rules here.  But Jeralyn just last night said to Gambit that promoting McCain (and he wasn't, however much some of his comments were over the top) was not allowed.

    GOP.COM is now using anti-Obama sites on their front page.  Many post-Clinton folks - many here - do not much more than post comments that the GOP will use verbatim against Obama.

    I put the question to Jeralyn and I'll put it to you.  When does it become an offense to specifically do the work of the GOP on talkleft.com?  Next week?  Next month?  December...?

    [ Parent ]

    The least of Obama's problems (none / 0) (#185)
    by Cream City on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 09:58:27 AM EST
    will be what the GOP finds about him here.  

    By the way, there are no troll-ratings here.  A "1" means something different under this site's rules.  We can see that you have only been back for a few days after an earlier drive-by, but site rules are easy to find.  And you're bordering on violating them yourself in your last paragraph.  Cheers.  

    [ Parent ]

    Well, the greatest of Obama's problems (none / 0) (#188)
    by chrisblask on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:19:45 AM EST
    specifically are what is said against him by those proporting to be progressives/democrats.  I happen to believe that one person can make a difference, and the specific and aggregate accusations against him being made on progressive sites like this are in fact the singlemost used tool of the GOP.

    I did review the site rules (again) and you are right.  Unlike other progressive blogs, attacks against progressive politicians are allowed here, at least in a liberal reading of the rules.  This is not something I am intrinsically against, I have written a fair bit about the need to get more than simply a Democratic Party conversation going in the blogosphere.

    My "drive-by" early membership you can read any way you like - not my job to think for anyone - but I will state that it did not have the negative intent many have attributed to it.  I simply found other forums where it was possible to have a higher level of discourse which, while still extremely heated, did not in total sink to the abusive and name-calling treatment I received when I first came here.  Everyone is free to decide that this and everything else I say is a lie and I will not spend a significant amount of time defending myself from those accusations, such exchanges do nothing to change opinions.

    Discussing issues is my primary interest and passtime, so while it may be possible to shout me away from a forum from time to time, I will just as likely return to persue my own purposes.  Like any normal person I will from time to time also allow personal attacks to get under my skin or otherwise act in a less-than-perfect fashion and regret my words.  But being bullied into silence is not something that I believe in.

    -thanks

    -chris

    [ Parent ]

    "The greatest of Obama's problems"?! (none / 0) (#191)
    by otherlisa on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:37:22 AM EST
    Oh, Chris, that is beyond absurd and well into the zone of magical thinking.

    I am not going to list what I feel is the greatest of Obama's problems because from your statement above, I doubt very much that you are receptive to hearing my opinions. But let's just say that IMO, the problems with Obama's candidacy have largely to do with Obama and no one else.

    [ Parent ]

    I may or may not be receptive, and you can (none / 0) (#192)
    by chrisblask on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:49:02 AM EST
    choose to put your thoughts forward or not.  If they are the common ones heard here, then I probably won't agree with them - and I have lots of company in that - and you may not be receptive to my rebuttals - and you have lots of company in that.

    But in either case, your choice to put your thoughts forward is just that.  Pre-judging what my thoughts and responses might be overstates your understanding of me as an individual.

    [ Parent ]

    You basically equated (none / 0) (#193)
    by otherlisa on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 11:54:38 AM EST
    criticizing Obama with betrayal of progressive principles. What am I supposed to think?

    In any case I have to go to work, so this will have to wait.

    [ Parent ]

    I try to be very specific (none / 0) (#195)
    by chrisblask on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:09:41 PM EST
    If I wanted to equate "criticizing Obama with betrayal progressive principles" I would do so specifically.  

    Criticizing people and ideas is something I defend with a great deal of vigor, particularly when the criticism is unpopular.

    Also, specifically, I see the extreme criticisms (more accurately in many cases, "assertions against") of Sen. Obama being used by the GOP as a major part of their campaign. Whether such criticisms or assertions being used by the GOP is a betrayal of progressive principles is a separate issue.

    [ Parent ]

    You said (none / 0) (#199)
    by otherlisa on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:46:41 PM EST
    "Well, the greatest of Obama's problems specifically are what is said against him by those proporting to be progressives/democrats. "

    I think I will just let that sit.

    [ Parent ]

    Please don't. Provide some specifics (none / 0) (#200)
    by chrisblask on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 05:31:37 PM EST
    because I cannot read your mind and honestly do not understand your intent.

    Are you objecting to the "proporting" word?  If so, my intent was to be exceedingly careful to not accuse anyone in particular of anything, and to cast a wide enough net that would include any freepers who are bound to exist...

    [ Parent ]

    Obama's biggest problem is Obama (none / 0) (#198)
    by FlaDemFem on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:51:43 PM EST
    not anything someone says about him on a blog on the internet. If he is such a strong and able candidate, anonymous comments should have no effect on his candidacy. And the GOP doesn't need help digging up dirt, they are expert at it. Obama's problem is that there is so much dirt to dig up, not that he is being criticized on progressive blogs. Why would anyone think that a Chicago Combine pol would promote a progressive agenda? Because he says so?? Yeah, right.

    [ Parent ]
    and at least one of Gambit's (none / 0) (#158)
    by otherlisa on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:53:05 AM EST
    worst comments has been deleted.

    It was a doozy.

    [ Parent ]

    Chris (5.00 / 4) (#160)
    by standingup on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:58:14 AM EST
    I am not certain of what you hope to gain here.  I do hope you are not visiting with the intention that you blogged about on your my.barackobama page.  

    We have a nice community of people here.  We don't all agree and some of the comments can get heated but we try to be respectful of each other, for the most part.  This is not the same as MyDD or Dkos.  There are rules for comments and the comments are moderated.  

    [ Parent ]

    Oh, yuck (5.00 / 2) (#167)
    by otherlisa on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 02:46:33 AM EST
    Chris, as standingup said...this is a nice community. The only reason it remains so is that it has a fairly vigorous comment moderation policy.

    I was one of the people who left Kos (no big loss, as I've thought it was pretty hopeless since the Pie Wars). I've also dropped TPM, HuffPo and a bunch of other sites from my blogroll.

    Maybe you can't see this, given that you support Obama. But those of us who have dissented from the Obama love have been driven off more sites than I could count right now.

    Too many Obama supporters have no idea how to positively advocate for their candidate. Although I have a whole list of reasons, one of the reasons that I do not support Obama is the quality of his advocates and their ham-fisted bludgeoning that passes for advocacy.

    [ Parent ]

    How nice (none / 0) (#174)
    by Nadai on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 06:44:57 AM EST
    Yet another group of people flinging around the word "treason" to describe their opponents.  How Rush Limbaugh-ish of you.

    [ Parent ]
    "kiddies" (none / 0) (#178)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 07:44:03 AM EST
    aren't enough to win an election. The "youth vote" thing is a fallacy that the Obama campaign and his supporters should disabuse themselves of. The most reliable voting group is those over the age of 60 which doesn't bode well for Obama since he does poorly with that group.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm pretty sure I agree with that too (none / 0) (#4)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:05:45 PM EST
    It follows his "if," which I think is meant to apply.

    [ Parent ]
    I am sure about that last sentence, but (none / 0) (#6)
    by chrisblask on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:13:05 PM EST
    the qualifiying IF is not needed.

    A woman can be president, a person with dark skin can be president.  Regardless who won this week - regardless who wins in November - those barriers are broken.

    [ Parent ]

    Sigh (5.00 / 11) (#7)
    by Valhalla on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:15:02 PM EST
    Yes, it's all just hunky dory here in post-racial, post-sexism land.  Nothing to see here folks, move it along...

    [ Parent ]
    I think it's absolutely true (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:21:54 PM EST
    that Obama's ability to come as far as he has demonstrates real change in our society.

    [ Parent ]
    I think the opposite (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by Edgar08 on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:31:36 PM EST
    because the way it happened shows not much has changed.

    [ Parent ]
    Could a black man using the same tactics (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:32:50 PM EST
    ever before have secured the nomination? I doubt it.

    [ Parent ]
    I don't know (5.00 / 4) (#47)
    by Edgar08 on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:42:12 PM EST
    but how something happens is just as important to me as the thing happening.

    [ Parent ]
    Are you thinking of the same tactics that I am? (5.00 / 0) (#49)
    by JavaCityPal on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:44:38 PM EST
    define "tactics".

    [ Parent ]
    What progress (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by Nadai on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 06:53:50 AM EST
    Now black men as well as white men can ride a tidal wave of misogyny to victory.

    Excuse me, I think I have to lie down now.

    [ Parent ]

    it would have been real (5.00 / 1) (#173)
    by kimsaw on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 06:05:24 AM EST
    change if he was elected as opposed to selected and identity politics didn't play into the process called his coronation or a nutcracker didn't exist.

    [ Parent ]
    I think we learned this week (5.00 / 16) (#21)
    by samanthasmom on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:25:52 PM EST
    that a woman can't be president. No ceiling was broken.  Hillary just got a pretty big bump on her head. 18,000,000 votes but little respect from the media, her peers,and certainly  her rival. It's a sad message to our daughters.

    [ Parent ]
    That's too cynical (5.00 / 3) (#37)
    by Alec82 on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:34:54 PM EST
    A woman can win the presidency.  Senator Clinton came close to the nomination.  I would have been happy to vote for her in the GE.  Not as happy as I am going to be casting a vote for Obama, but happy nonetheless.

     But you know who can't be elected president yet? A Muslim, a gay person, an atheist or agnostic, and probably a Mormon.  There are many barriers to overcome.  

    [ Parent ]

    A woman (5.00 / 2) (#56)
    by samanthasmom on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:49:10 PM EST
    "just not this one"?

    [ Parent ]
    Hillary's (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Gambit on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 11:54:24 PM EST
    negatives are as high as Obama's. where have you been? and you know full well the "deranged, zombie cult" of obama would support a sebelius ticket in the same numbers if not more.

    [ Parent ]
    I'd vote for any woman... (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by Alec82 on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:00:39 AM EST
    ...with a D beside her name and at least a center left stance. :-)

     In the GE, that is.  

     Look, Senator Clinton is not a candidate without a history.  It is hard to separate that history from the baseless right wing attacks, but there you have it.  

     I resent the tone. She is mostly a good candidate.  I would have gladly voted for the Democratic nominee.  This isn't about sexism.  Take that case to the media, where it belongs.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama is not a candidate (5.00 / 8) (#92)
    by ap in avl on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:11:25 AM EST
    without a history.  

    The difference is we've have had over 16 years to review that history.  I'm afraid voters are going to get a crash course in the presumptive nominee's history....

    courtesy of Republican 527's.

    Sexism, Clinton-hate, and the DNC leadership's lust for power gave us a nominee who would have been better off running 8 years from now.  We all would have been better served if Barack had been better vetted and had the time to gain enough experience to no longer be the blank slate whose story can be written by his opponents in the GE.

    [ Parent ]

    ap in avl (2.00 / 0) (#105)
    by Gambit on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:20:02 AM EST
    someone finally expressed their anger ACCURATELY without demonizing the other candidate. could you tell the clinton/obama haters to follow your lead please?

    [ Parent ]
    No, but I can tell you to take a hike (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by ap in avl on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 01:08:14 AM EST
    Your "massa" comment was particularly offensive.

    So thanks, I guess.....but I really don't want your endorsement.

    [ Parent ]

    Gee Whiz! (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by Gambit on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 02:02:09 AM EST
    My "massa" comment was obviously an over the top and childish satirical response to the comment preceeding it that insinuated all obama supporters (there are some in my family and circle of friends) abuse women for kicks. I apologize for stooping to her level, but i really want people to stop demonizing each other. Also, i was trying to be nice to ap in avl. I wasn't "endorsing" you so after i take my hike you can kick rocks.

    [ Parent ]
    Gambit, you have a message (none / 0) (#111)
    by JavaCityPal on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:22:16 AM EST
    from Jeralyn further up the thread.

    [ Parent ]
    You may have voted for her, or another (none / 0) (#108)
    by Valhalla on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:21:42 AM EST
    woman with a (D) next to her name, but surely you're not claiming that you represent the entire Democratic Party?  What you would or would not do is a single data point among millions.

    [ Parent ]
    Make that an openly gay person (5.00 / 2) (#82)
    by Mark Woods on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:05:27 AM EST
    Lots of closeted types have held office, including the White House I'm told. The affairs of 15th President James Buchanan and William Rufus King are an unresolved scandal, but these two devoted 'bachelors' who lived together for 15 years well past the age of 35 would make the press nuts today - back then they were openly mocked y Andrew Jackson as 'nancy', a Southern code for gay.

    But you're right, an openly gay person can be an Ellen or an Elton but not an Idaho Craig (snark).

    [ Parent ]

    Well, then, let's agree that Obama (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by Cream City on Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:43:03 AM EST