Tuesday Night Open Thread

Mark David Chapman, the killer of John Lennon, was denied parole today.

This is an open thread.

< Appeals Court Upholds Dismissal of Plame Civil Lawsuit | Mark Warner to Give DNC Keynote Speech >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Via Poltico, hillary won't be (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by masslib on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:13:14 PM EST
    the keynote speaker...just "one of four".  For the keynote, "stay tuned", because ya know they got someone way bigger than Hill for that spot.

    You know, the DNC just keeps ticking me (5.00 / 2) (#16)
    by Valhalla on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:30:35 PM EST
    off more every day.  Every time I think they can't sink lower in my estimation, they exceed expectations.

    Was the original information incorrect, or is this an adjustment?  Punishment, maybe, for her comments about her name in nomination being catharsis (or more likely, the not hideously anti- press coverage of same?)?  At this point, there's little I wouldn't put past them.


    Incorrect, I believe. Ben Smith has it. (none / 0) (#17)
    by masslib on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:32:53 PM EST
    I don't know the appropriate way to link here.

    When's Bill speaking? (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by nycstray on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:46:26 PM EST
    I read a yahoo article earlier today that did not list him as Wed Night. Had a blank as to who was introducing the VP.

    Via Ben Smith (none / 0) (#20)
    by americanincanada on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:38:36 PM EST
    Contrary to some early reporting, Hillary Clinton's Tuesday night speech at the Democratic National Convention won't be the event's "keynote speech," a defining convention role occupied in 2004 by Sen. Barack Obama.

    The Convention Committee never actually put that out, but it's been fairly widely reported (and, in a few cases, corrected).

    Clinton "is one of four prime-time headline speakers. We will have a separate keynote speaker," said Jenny Backus, a consultant to the convention. "Stay tuned."


    rev. Wright (5.00 / 0) (#75)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:19:04 AM EST
    will be keynote speaker and he'll be reciting his list of people who haven't been called.........

    An odd interview experience (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by boredmpa on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:15:34 PM EST
    I interviewed with a federal agency last week, and I spent about 10 minutes explaining/defending my undergraduate transcript.  I'm 31 and have an obvious gray hair or two, so it's been quite a long time and didn't seem very relevant.  

    My transcripts are odd...I completed 2 degrees in three years (BAs) and in the next two years did half of a MA while getting a CS certification from the university (decided I didn't want an MA in English).  They seemed interested in my ability to fail calculus, then withdraw, and then get an A. o_O  And these were not questions from junior staff or HR.

    On the one hand, I wondered if they were probing me for how I respond to criticism.  On the other hand, I just assumed they had a flawed methodology for understanding behavior/performance.  

    But the thing that really got me is that for the first time in my life I was forced to out myself in an interview.  After all, they wanted to know why things were the way they were.  Well, because I grew up gay in the south; the fact that the undergrad was in gender studies, coupled with my suit + earrings should have clued them in.  Their response was blank, completely blank.

    Overall, it caused a very bad vibe.  And as an MPA it really ticked me off; you are going to hit a lot of class and minority and death in the family issues with that line of questioning.  I honestly wondered if they were fishing for "drunken male undergrad behavior" or some such.  I interviewed with 4 women, and I never felt that scrutinized even as the only guy in a women's studies program.    Maybe I'm projecting.

    Anyway, as a result of the experience I'm  withdrawing my application.  They actually wanted my graduate transcripts as well; I originally gave them the averages because that's all you're required to do for most federal agencies.

    It's kinda funny though, it was the only federal agency i wanted to work for...but if the interview was that odd, i'm sure the polygraph and background check would leave me so agitated in their offensiveness that'd i'd resign. Besides, I have an offer and a half on the table.

    Ugh (none / 0) (#7)
    by Steve M on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:21:25 PM EST
    I'm sorry you had such an unpleasant experience.

    I'm sort of confused at how the conversation got around to your orientation.  Maybe I'm really poor at reading between the lines.

    I wonder if interviewing under a new administration might make a difference.  It could.


    they asked why (none / 0) (#15)
    by boredmpa on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:30:05 PM EST
    my grades were all over the place...

    I could have lied, but I suck at that (usually), and said something along the lines of:

    Well, I grew up gay in the south--thus the Gender Studies degree--and was more focused on other things/personal growth.  Or something like that.

    though probably not well phrased, i was caught off guard on so many levels.

    Even google wasnt that bad when they interviewed my housemate for a sales position and wanted his GRE/SAT scores.  He's 51.


    My sympathies (none / 0) (#43)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:46:01 AM EST
    Bad stuff.  But two thoughts.  One is what you already figured out, you don't want to work with these people, even if they decided they wanted you.

    Secondly, the basic question is really not all that unreasonable, so you need to figure out a way to answer it without having to go deep into the personal emotional history.

    Most people have no clue how to interview or how to evaluate job candidates, so they glom onto whatever they can to make an issue of to prove to themselves how tough-minded they are.  Feh.

    Last thought reflects the comment above-- the Bush administration has infiltrated their approved minions into all levels of the federal government, and it sounds like you may have run into one of those.  If Hillary had won, I'm confident she would have claned out all that garbage as a high priority.  If Obama wins, not so much.  But it still may well be better in a few years since many of these people will want to move on if there's a Dem. administration.


    Intern party (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by boredmpa on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:26:36 PM EST
    I got roped into a thank you party by a couple of interns.  Only when we went to lunch to discuss the party, I found out that it was the interns giving the party and baking/bringing snacks.  I and another graduate+ intern were utterly dumbfounded that they did this last year and were psyched to continue the tradition (maybe that makes me cranky and old).  Anyway, we were speechless when they said we needed to bring for 30 people. Each.  We work in a 4 person team and we just happen to share the floor with a different group.

    Anyway, I didn't want to screw up their party, but I had to be fairly direct in supporting my team's unpaid undergrad intern.  It was beyond ridiculous to suggest he should be thanking the organization for the privilege of working for free to gain experience/improve the resume.  

    SF (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by boredmpa on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:46:33 PM EST
    and i agree it's a small price to pay, but our economy doesn't suck so bad that we can't afford to compensate interns for business or govt work.  And a lot of the internships that are unpaid perpetuate race/class issues and lopsided hiring/admissions because only well off or desperate-but-better-than-rock-bottom folks can afford it.  

    I completely (none / 0) (#90)
    by lilburro on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 09:18:47 AM EST
    agree with you about unpaid internships.  I think it is ridiculously unfair that employers cannot offer some level of compensation, or even minimum wage for the work they are purchasing.  I know with determination you can perhaps get an outside group to fund your unpaid internship, but that is not a guarantee.  

    It seems that some people have no sense of the value of their labor.  I guess Marx is to be only studied, not lived.


    Whee open thread (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by echinopsia on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:07:09 AM EST
    Tonight I harvested and ate my first sweet corn - the first sweet corn I have ever grown from seed! I can't imagine how a girl who grew up in Illinois missed this experience - except that of course I didn't have to grow it in IL. It was everywhere.

    I was back for a visit several years ago and I could not find fresh corn on any restaurant menu. In August. It was ridiculous. Just outside of town were thousands of acres of sweet corn, and not a single restaurant was serving it - all I could find was some execrable frozen cr@p at a chain.

    My own corn tonight was delicious, of course. And the tomatoes, squash, cukes, and beans are coming ripe too. Yesterday I made fresh tomato soup. It was awesome.

    I will probably be able to live on my own fresh vegetables for the next two months. I love not paying for those watery mealy red things they call tomatoes at the grocery. And next year, look out - I'm going to triple my planting space and grow broccoli, Brussels sprouts, eggplant, peppers, onions and garlic.

    Look into getting a freezer and (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by nycstray on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:27:32 AM EST
    also canning. I just got my pressure cooker today, so now I can do both water and pressure canning. That means along with tomatoes and pickles, I can do my homemade soups and other veggies etc. Last year I relied on the freezer. I made it until late spring/early summer on what I froze last year :)

    I've been roasting tomatoes tonight for sauce and making fruit toppings for yogurt and ice cream. Last night I made (to freeze) eggplant mushroom meatballs and eggplant parm.

    I had so many cukes last year that I ended up making a facial tonic that was great during the dry winter, lol! Unfortunately, I'm limited to what I can grow in my Brooklyn apt. Fortunately, we have a CSA which is where I get a majority of my produce. This year they added fresh chickens and an orchard. I'm in heaven!

    Do you have pics of your garden/corn etc? You need to share! Don't forget to plant lettuce and herbs!


    My corn was so pretty (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by echinopsia on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:40:11 AM EST
    I almost took a picture of it before I ate it. It was perfect - full, even rows all the way the end, and that silky buttery yellow color of a perfectly fresh ear. There will be others.

    But tomorrow I will go out and make pictures of the vegetable beds for posterity. The produce is completely bug-free and perfect and totally organic - I didn't even use fertilizer.

    I have a large herb bed already - chives, thyme, parsley, sage, lavender, rosemary, tarragon, fennel, basil, dill, lovage. I grow lettuce in a large planter.

    Next year, besides the extended veg beds, I'm seriously thinking of raising hens for eggs. I can get a coop built for a couple hundred bucks.

    Four and a half years ago when I bought this house the front yard was dead sod and the back yard was nothing but concrete, dirt, rocks, and weeds. The first time I tried to grow a veg garden was pathetic - everything just died. Now I have raised beds full of compost, a small lawn, a pond, and plenty of space left over for more plants (and chickens!). It's a mini-farm.


    You must take pics! (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by nycstray on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:01:05 AM EST
    sounds like you have quite a set up, I'm jealous!

    I have my herbs started for winter along with some cherry tomatoes, bush beans, lettuce, peppers, peas and a couple other things I don't remember. I'm using all my windows as a garden for the winter with the help of plant lights. Luckily, I get great light. I'll have the planter boxes on the inside along with shelves going up the sunniest windows. I'm saving seeds from the CSA produce I'm getting this year for next summer's garden (if I make it to CA in time!)

    you may want to check out PetConnection.com. It's a pet info blog, but one of them just started keeping chickens for eggs this year. If you search through the blog, you'll find her adventures :) She just picked up 3 more hens yesterday.

    Sounds like you've done wonders with your "yard"! I'm looking forward to following your example next year. I'll have the challenge of being in the mountains and wildfire territory. I may do container gardening depending on what the vegetation fire code is for clearing and the soil is like. They do grow up there (heh, I've already scoped out CSA's etc!) and just down the mountain is a great wine growing area.

    Look forward to seeing your pics! {grin} no pressure  ;)


    Pictures (none / 0) (#109)
    by echinopsia on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:45:33 PM EST
    Ech...you've been busy. I remember (none / 0) (#111)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:50:44 PM EST
    when we had a veg garden...the cherry tomatoes were as sweet as candy, the zucchini plentiful, swiss chard was great...miss those days.

    I am a city girl myself and (5.00 / 0) (#93)
    by zfran on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 09:39:11 AM EST
    have often wanted to try and "grow" something but don't know where to really get started at a level I could truly follow and understand. I'm educated and smart and can laugh readily, however, my thumb is not green (or at least it didn't used to be) (maybe it's grown with age as I have). Anyway, how did you get started? By the way, congrats and I'm truly impressed and in awe!

    Radishes (5.00 / 0) (#107)
    by echinopsia on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 11:57:37 AM EST
    Are a good first-time vegetable to build your confidence. If you don't like radishes, try carrots or zucchini.

    All you need are soil, water, light, and seeds (and for zucchini, you need a lot of room). Follow the directions on the seed packet and you'll have radishes in about two weeks. Make sure the soil doesn't get dryer than a damp dish sponge, and make sure they get eight hours of direct sun.

    I got started planting flowers with my mother. I had my own little bed and I probably grew zinnias and sunflowers - really simple things for kids to grow. By the time I had my own grownup garden, growing things was not a mystery, although the aesthetics of ornamental gardening took a little longer to figure out.

    But vegetables are easy. So are herbs. I know that doesn't help much, but truly, all you have to do to get started is get started. You'll learn from your mistakes.


    Thank you soooo much. Had I read your (none / 0) (#116)
    by zfran on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 04:34:08 PM EST
    reply earlier, I would have gone out today to buy the seeds. I'll go tomorrow. Again, thanks. I can almost see my thumb turning a sort of shade of green.

    Good luck! (none / 0) (#118)
    by echinopsia on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 10:12:46 PM EST
    You might find it difficult to find seeds at this time of year, although there is no reason you shouldn't start them right now. There is plenty of time before frost in most of N. America to get in late season crops like radishes, lettuce, chard, and lettuce. Basically anything that doesn't need a long growing season can be started now. Garlic is best planted in fall, if you're planting outdoors.

    You should look online for seed catalogs. They'll sell you seeds now and you'll get catalogs for next year starting in December. The catalogs are what get avid gardeners like me through the dark cold months - and some of us start seeds indoors (it's easy, all you need is a space, plastic seed starting cells, fluorescent lights, soil, and a timer) as early as February. I start my seeds on a single shelf in my mudroom.


    Mmmm. Yeh, I deplore pink tomatoes (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:28:01 AM EST
    and have some lovely red ones ready for my favorite fast lunchtime salad tomorrow:  chunks of tomatos tossed with chunks of feta cheese and black olives, all tossed in a basic Italian-style dressing . . . but lightly, lightly, because nothing ought to get in the way of great organically grown tomatoes.

    When I can't get good ones, I can't eat the others.  They look and taste like pink styrofoam to me.


    Fantastic! (none / 0) (#45)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:54:24 AM EST
    What variety of corn did you grow?

    We've had such a deluge of water this last month here in Vermont, all my sweetcorn got to 12 or 15 feet tall, and then got smashed down in a thunderstorm a couple days ago, so I don't think I'll get anything from it, darn it.

    Growing food from the ground is just an incredible high.  I'm also a huge Brussels sprouts fan.  Just be aware next year that they're only good after the first frost, which sweetens them up.  Before that, they're disappointing as heck, sour and old-cabbagy.


    I grew two kinds (none / 0) (#108)
    by echinopsia on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:10:41 PM EST
    Early Sunglow and Precious Gem. The ears I ate last night were from Early Sunglow. They had a tree fall on them the last week of July when they were under a foot tall, but they perked up after that and the recent thunderstorms haven't done much more than make them lean a little.

    Thanks for the tip about Brussels sprouts. I found a great recipe for them - here. I leave out the pasta, though.


    Should be (none / 0) (#110)
    by echinopsia on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:47:16 PM EST
    the tree fell on them in the last week of June.

    Don't grow my own (none / 0) (#84)
    by Fabian on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:50:17 AM EST
    but I do grill the growers at the farmers' market about what they are selling.  Standard sweet corn can be starchy if it is old, so cook it the same day.  "Sugary enhanced" is best for me, sweet without losing too much corn flavor.  "Super sweet" tastes too sweet for me, not enough corn flavor plus the sugar profile gives me indigestion.  Both sugary enhanced and super sweet types convert sugar to starch at a much slower rate so you can keep them for a few days.

    The best check of freshness is to check the stem end.  Pale, moist stems are a great sign of recently picked corn.  As the corn sits, the stem ends will get browner and drier.  Discolored, dry stems are a bad sign.  If you still want to buy it, peel the husks back and look for firm, round kernels.  If any of the kernels are dented or shrunken, don't buy it.


    Is there anyone (5.00 / 3) (#34)
    by weltec2 on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:27:16 AM EST
    who deserves to be booed off the stage more than Nancy Pelosi. I just found the following headline on Yahoo: "Pelosi, Michelle Obama to kick off Dem Convention." You can go here for that. Nancy needs to give account for her complicity in the crimes of this administration. People need to yell at her from the floor and demand a full account.

    One article I read today was trying to (5.00 / 3) (#42)
    by Valhalla on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:42:38 AM EST
    bill the Michelle/Pelosi kickoff as being the Dems promoting strong women, or some such cr*p.

    Really, sorry, but I refuse to claim Pelosi.  She's an embarrassment, really.  Although I did laugh -- the DNC is showcasing its 'strong women' faction with Obama and Pelosi?  They couldn't find anyone else?  The whole party and this is what they produce?

    Michelle is no doubt a strong woman, but she's hardly earned her stripes yet.  And Pelosi deserves to have hers ripped from her shoulder given her performance of the last 2 years.  What a rioting disappointment she's been.


    I will need, that night (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:56:26 AM EST
    to wash my hair, I b'leeve.  Maybe get to my backlog of movie dvd's or tivo'd Robin Hoodses.  Is that the plural of several episodes of the great BBC series?!

    I have made it a point to keep up with my Weeds watching, so incredible is the writing of that show.  But maybe I'll tivo the next couple of weeks of it to watch on the opening night of the convention.

    Somehow, Weeds would seem to be the best antidote for curing the dreaded disease of Pelositis.  It's a nasty parasite that robs its hosts of leadership and turns them into parasites on the public.  And it's epidemic in the Democratic Party leadership now.

    Down with Pelositis!  


    I was already not going to watch night 1 (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Valhalla on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:03:10 AM EST
    but now I want to find a way to not watch more.

    Oooh yes... (5.00 / 0) (#61)
    by weltec2 on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:13:09 AM EST
    We really should hold a telethon. Imagine the repercussions for our children and grand children if nothing is done.

    End Pelositis now!


    try (none / 0) (#86)
    by cpinva on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 04:44:33 AM EST
    "Black Adder" instead. a great BBC series starring a pre "mr. bean" rowan atkinson. delightful black comedy, you'll love it!

    I'd like to get a huge (none / 0) (#50)
    by weltec2 on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:03:33 AM EST
    inflatable baloon about 20 feet high one human body with two heads (Bush and Pelosi) with a sign on the front that says "NO IMPEACHABLE CRIMES" and float it about thirty feet off the ground right in front of the podium and keep it floating there thrughout her while speech. It should have their heads bobbing back and forth with a big smile on their faces.

    interesting article (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 09:31:42 AM EST
    from NoQuarter.

    And no, it's not about birth certificates or "Whitey" tapes.

    It's about how one Clinton supporting convention delegate was treated as reported by a local Denver TV station.

    It's kind of scary and would have thought it would have been picked up and reported nationally.  But, I haven't seen it anywhere else.

    http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/08/13/a-sign-that-the-dnc-and-the-one-are-channeling-stalin/#more- 4145

    Maybe if enough Hillary (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by zfran on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 09:48:59 AM EST
    delegates speak up this way, it would make the national media,

    "I think that it was calculated to have an impact on other delegates and I think this kind of communication does have a very chilling impact on other delegates because people become afraid to speak up. They become afraid to say what they think."

    This is appalling, eerie and frighteningly maddening. This article should be widely circulated.


    If It Was This Delegate (none / 0) (#95)
    by daring grace on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 09:49:49 AM EST
    and this story

    Denver Post

    It seems to be the Colorado state Dem party doing the questioning/pressuring. At least the Obama campaign is taking the appropriate position:

    "Obama campaign spokeswoman Shannon Gilson issued a statement Monday saying it was the campaign's "priority to ensure Ms. Millstone's delegate status was not in jeopardy.""


    the aprt I was having a major problem with (5.00 / 2) (#99)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 10:08:12 AM EST
    was that she told a friend she wasn't sure she could vote for Obama at the convention.

    So, what.  She's a Clinton delegate.  She's suppossed to vote for Clinton, isn't she?  You know, I mean if they actually BOTHER to have a vote.

    I did hear one Obama supporting talking head a few nights ago.  I don't remember who it was.  She said Clinton may not be happy wit a roll call vote, because she may get FEWER votes than she thinks.  Yep, let's keep up with the threats.  It helps every time you kick that Unity Pony in the butt.


    Speaking For Me (none / 0) (#113)
    by daring grace on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:15:55 PM EST
    as an Obama supporter, I support a roll call vote for Clinton.

    But wasn't part of the issue that she had to sign something requesting one or something, and so far, she hasn't.

    Admittedly, I'm not up to date on the details.


    Even so, it is still a "gestopo" (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by zfran on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 10:18:09 AM EST
    type tactic to take. Another delegate turned her in before she (the other delegate)even informed this woman she was going to do so. They did that in Germany in WWII. It would be "disloyal" to the "presumptive" nominee? Didn't someone in another thread way back when discuss that in order to get into the convention, the delegates had to sign a pledge to support Obama? Is that a usual tactic (I'd never heard it before). When you add this story to other stories we know of how this election (Obama and his campaign) is being handled (moving the DNC to Chicago, replacing his people with DNC workers in cities, etc), it becomes a very disturbing pattern. More of a repub. pattern then a dem. pattern.

    I Don't Know Enough to Judge (none / 0) (#114)
    by daring grace on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:22:13 PM EST
    But what I saw suggested this was a local or state party fiasco--not one that had reached the level of national party or Obama campaign. It reads to me like some local official trying to snap everybody into a uniform line so they (the state party officials don't feel...embarrassed? i don't know. Having worked in all kinds of groups for years this kind of petty control-freak mentality does not surprise me

    I take the Obama campaign at their quote (which I pasted). It would surprise me that they were involved with this. Not saying that, necessarily from an idealistic standpoint, but rather that it would be below their radar and low priority when there is so much else to attend to.

    If you've heard something from a news source that says otherwise I'd love to see it.


    Even if it's at the "local" level, (none / 0) (#115)
    by zfran on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 04:16:13 PM EST
    I find this type of behavior unacceptable. These delegates, whether for Hillary or Obama or the man in the moon are adults, not property or children who are "tattled" on by other children. That this delegate was taken to task and felt that her right to free speech was being infringed upon, does not "excuse" even at the local level. My guess is (and I have nothing to base this on but common sense) is that the national campaign have their people on the ground in Denver, and LA and Philly etal and are running things. It is Sen. Obama's convention and he gets to establish the rules.

    I Guess We Agree AND Disagree (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by daring grace on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 05:16:57 PM EST
    I find this kind of behavior toward the delegate reprehensible as well.

    Now there was a Clinton delegate in Wisconsin (?) I think who was very vocal that she was voting for McCain or supporting McCain or something. And THAT, I feel was appropriately handled because how can you be a Democrat delegate supporting a Republican? Unless your last name is Lieberman, of course.

    Clinton supporters still supporting Clinton are a different kettle of fish.

    But I still think it sounds like the kind of self important 'big fish in a small pond' kind of posturing or CYA behavior to look good (they think) to the national party or the campaign.

    Until I see evidence of a larger (DNC or Obama campaign) hand, I have to go by what's reported.

    But, as I say, we can agree this is wrong and should not be happening anywhere.


    No Wright Book Tour This Fall (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by daring grace on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 09:35:49 AM EST
    Roland Martin at Essence

    He's in Ghana.

    According to his daughter:

    ""I asked him if he was writing and he said, 'Nope. I'm not publishing anything. I'm not going on any book tours.'"

    Hmmmm. Anybody else suspicious (5.00 / 0) (#96)
    by zfran on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 09:54:24 AM EST
    of why it all happended back then the way it happend. Perhaps the Rev. Wright gave Sen. Obama the cover he needed to distance himself from Trinity and the Rev. Without the cover, the Sen. from IL perhaps couldn't be considered as a presidental candidate due to the church's teachings. Does anyone else find it odd that the Rev. has been way away since all of the bruhaha and has stayed away. How come? And, now no book. Anyone surprised?

    Just A Thought (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by daring grace on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 10:06:58 AM EST
    Maybe Wright is like the rest of us (most of us) and has a life outside of the presidential campaign and politics.

    And maybe he was scheduled to go to Ghana and 'teach and minister' for a while and his being there at this moment has nothing to do with politics whatsoever.

    As for 'giving cover", this was extensively commented on at the time--that as damaging as the Wright tapes were to Obama in the primary season, it was very advantageous to have to deal with it earlier rather than later.


    Perhaps it is all very innocent. (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by zfran on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 10:20:29 AM EST
    Perhaps when he told us to "read his book coming out in the fall" he was upset and had intended to write it. Perhaps he just happens to be in Africa way out of email/contacting range and will remain there. Perhaps!@

    it worked out in a very timely way (5.00 / 0) (#100)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 10:10:37 AM EST
    for Obama.  The Wright fiasco happened just LATE enough in the primary to not stop him from winning.  But, early enough in the process to stop it from coming back too strongly in the general.  And, it also gave him the opportunity to make that "greatest speech of all time" in Philly.

    Why do you think (none / 0) (#1)
    by samtaylor2 on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 10:44:14 PM EST
    Intelligence of our presidential candidates is not something that is talked about at the level of a candidates "patriotism" or "judgment"?  Knowledge and general problem solving abilities could be tested in an objective fashion.  I envision a test with general logic questions and broad, not necessaryly broad questions  

    Certainly I don't think we should elect our president based on a multiple choice test, I am just talkin.

    Book smart doesn't equal street smart ;) (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by nycstray on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:19:25 PM EST
    Obviously, you and CC have a different conversation going, but hey! you did put it out there :)

    I think intelligence does come up on the logic level. We generally look at their past work and actions. I think Sen Clinton is a very good example of showing smarts, logic and application in her stumps. As is her husband apparently  ;)

    At the recent Aspen Institute Ideas Conference, academics, business leaders, journalists and fundraisers sat "in rapt silence" as Bill spoke about energy, education and rural poverty, Fineman said, adding:

    "I knew what they were thinking: the guy is flawed (as are we all), but what a once-in-a-generation talent. Obama sure could use him."


    I don't think we need to test the candidates, but they do need to deliver some show of "intelligence", imo.


    I wished I'd taped (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:22:39 AM EST
    some of Bill Clinton's press conferences as president.  They were an absolute tour de force of both knowledge and intelligence.  One of the many great tragedies of the Lewinsky/impeachment crap was that he stopped doing them for a long time.

    The only president who came close to that kind of performance was Jack Kennedy, who was a bit less of a policy wonk, but overall more broadly erudite and with unparalelled wittiness.  People used to sit down in front of their televisions all over the country to watch them because they were so much fun.


    I like watching his yearly (none / 0) (#41)
    by nycstray on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:41:03 AM EST
    Global Forums and the interviews he does around them. Hopefully this talk he just gave is around online. I would like to see/hear it. Gawd, I can't believe we followed him with GWB. TWICE!!!!

    I think I was about John Jr's age when Kennedy was pres. My childhood memories around the TV were the  space program. My dad would get us in front of the TV to watch. We were in Ca, so it seems like I was in my PJ's for a few. And then there was the time our beagle was having puppies in the middle of the night . . .  lol!~


    Intelligence in Presidents (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by Valhalla on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:27:26 PM EST
    I was just talking about this today with a friend.

    If you're not v. smart, you can't process all the information you need to to make good decisions.  You might be talented enough in another way to pick really good people to advise you, but that gets iffy.  We've certainly seen how that works the past 8 years.

    If you're really smart, that's no guarantee you'll make good decisions.  But at least you have a chance of being able to analyze and consider in a good way.

    So, intelligence is one of those necessary but not sufficient qualities.


    If you're talking about the Bush creature (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:25:16 AM EST
    he's plenty smart enough, he's just both intellectually desperately lazy and has other fatal personality issues that totally supersede the basic intelligence.

    Give me a president who actually enjoys thinking about stuff!


    I don't know, I just never found him (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Valhalla on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:36:03 AM EST
    particularly smart.  Of course, I've been trying to avoid listening to him for 8 years so I could easily be wrong.

    But I agree a fundamental intellectual curiosity and interest is a must.  Sigh.  If only...

    I suppose the debates are supposed to be the intelligence test sam brings up.  I don't know if they ever really fit that purpose, but I don't feel like they do today, at least not with the MSM moderating.


    No, the debates are like a bad (5.00 / 0) (#53)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:06:48 AM EST
    job interview, all gotcha and little actual thought.  They maybe show ability to think instantly on your feet in sound bites under pressure, but that's not high on my list of presidential qualities.

    The only really revelatory one I ever saw was a Phil Donahue show before the NY primary with Bill Clinton and Jerry Brown at a small table with no moderator, no audience and no preset agenda.  It's what made me a rabid Bill Clinton fan.


    Looking for video (none / 0) (#105)
    by sj on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 11:24:39 AM EST
    of that interview.  Do you know where to find it?  thanks.

    No idea, sorry (none / 0) (#112)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:57:03 PM EST
    I'd be really surprised if it was available anywhere.

    It wasn't an interview, though.  It was just Bill and Jerry sitting at a table.  Donahue introduced the show for about 2 minutes and then wasn't seen again until the last minute.  There was no format.  The two candidates had to figure out how to proceed.

    It was in I think the last year or the next to last year of his syndicated daytime talk show.  If you can track down who the syndicator was, they might be able to tell you whether the video still exists anywhere.


    I have a friend that I grew up with. (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by Grace on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 04:43:01 AM EST
    He's no great intellect but he managed to rise through the ranks of a huge organization.  Not to the very top, mind you, but to a reasonably high position.  

    We went out for drinks about 20 years ago and he was telling me how he had become so successful.  

    "I get along well with other people," he said.  

    It was true.  While he never scored high on any tests and probably was a C/D student in high school, and barely got out of college (he never would have made it out if it hadn't been for another friend of ours who helped him).  

    Anyway, those words have always stayed in my mind.  People can talk about intelligence, schooling, everything else -- but in the end, isn't being able to work with other people one of the most underestimated talents there is?  


    Book vs Street (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by nycstray on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:37:13 PM EST
    I like a combo of both. I don't care how smart someone is if it isn't applicable. I'm the same with talent as I work in the creative field. Sometimes it isn't that great talent that ends up producing and shining. If you can't work your talent and grow with it {shrug}. Same with smarts  ;) And being able to take a test, no matter what kind, doesn't always translate into results. That's where "history" comes in when weighing the balance, imo.

    Talent (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:31:21 AM EST
    I used to work in the "creative field" for quite a few years, and one of the things that used to fascinate me was the complete disconnect between the "talent," the ability to move people and reach some kind of almost spiritual truth, and the personality that housed that talent.

    I agree totally that discipline is the other necessary component along with talent, but I knew some almost unspeakably talented musicians who were also unspeakably gross human beings.  Make you cry with something as simple as "Greensleeves," but utterly vacant as human beings.  Very strange phenomenon.

    I'm not religious in any recognizable sense of the word, but I surely did feel that there was something much larger out there that was using these people as basically unwitting vessels or channels or something.


    I'm not religious in any recognizable sense (none / 0) (#64)
    by nycstray on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:20:22 AM EST
    either, but . . . I'll be the first to admit when I'm doing my personal work . . . it comes from "somewhere". I do come from a creative family history, so maybe it's genes, but it sure doesn't feel like it. I do think of genetics as a gift in some cases regarding me, but not sure about the talent part. I think it may be part genetics, but I think there is also another component. And I see the same with many who I've known over the years. If I had to peg it, I would say it's in the soul. How it gets there, well, that then could go to personal belief.

    Discipline is key and I think the other component is drive. And where the drive comes from is almost as much of a mystery as talent. And we mustn't forget passion ;)

    And I should say, when I talk about talent, you can flop in the word intelligence or combine the 2  ;) And we also need to add in outside elements such as situation. My dad is an example of that as are his brothers.


    There's a lot of academics (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Valhalla on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:50:56 PM EST
    who put themselves out into the discourse ether who are very smart but really detatched from reality, or present their ideas in a way that sounds really callous.  There's just as many bloviators in academia as on the web, but they're considered 'experts' and are regarded as authorities.  

    Plus the life of most college professors looks really, really sweet to most people -- summers and school vacations off, show up to teach a few hours a day, etc.  

    I know that's not what it really is, but folks slogging off to work 8 hours a day at some cr*p job, IF they only have one job look at that as a pretty nice deal.  

    I do really wish that as a country we prized academic achievement and prioritized education more, but some educators and academics just don't help make that case.


    My dad was an academic (5.00 / 3) (#39)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:37:23 AM EST
    so I know what you're talking about.  He had a lot of unscheduled time, but he never really ever had "time off" because his job was to think about stuff, and you could never, ever think you had finished that work.  So in truth, it was a 24/7 profession with enormous pressure.

    For my part, after having many different kinds of jobs, I learned I really needed to make my living in a way that when I was through work, I was through work and didn't need to think about it for 30 seconds outside of official work hours.


    And that was before email (5.00 / 4) (#68)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:44:43 AM EST
    so now, students can find us 24/7.  Including when the bars close.  Now, those are fun emails.

    Glad to see that someone understands that the life of an academic is not "summers off" to play -- since we don't get paid then, either, so many of us have to get summer jobs.  Yes, that guy selling peanuts at the baseball game may have a Ph.D. -- seasonal concessions sales is one of the big ones here.

    And of course, even in the academic year, teaching is to be only 40% of our jobs.  There's so much more that is required of us, or we still would be teaching the same courses that were taught a century ago.  A few fields have cropped up since then, and a few things have been learned.

    And if we're really lucky and not spending the summer prepping new courses, we get to do what we have to do to keep our jobs.  I bet you know, watching your father, that it's really hard for us to research and write -- and, yes, think through -- our 500-page books between classes and committee meetings. :-)


    My dad was lucky (5.00 / 2) (#72)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:58:29 AM EST
    because he loved doing what he was paid to do and thoroughly enjoyed the non-stop work of thinking, reading, writing, etc., about stuff he found fascinating and satisfying.  So to some extent, it depends on the definition of what's "work."  I think he would have done it for free.  But my mental image of him will always be sitting out in the sun in the back yard with a book and a pad of paper in the middle of summer, reading and scribbling notes for a class or an article or an idea for the department.

    He was at a level where he wasn't plagued by endless inquiries, protests, etc., but antsy undergraduates, but I do remember regular phone calls from all over the globe from a grad student still strruggling with her PhD thesis a full 20 years after she'd finished her coursework and left the university.  Gah.


    My first quarter of my freshman year (none / 0) (#88)
    by Grace on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 05:03:58 AM EST
    of college, I took a senior level law class.  I took it because it didn't have any prerequisites and I couldn't get the other classes I needed or wanted.  

    That class was DAMN hard!  I didn't realize how hard it was until I started listening to the people sitting around me -- and many of them were taking it for the 4th and 5th time!  (Unfortunately, it was a required class in my major.)  

    Anyway, this professor gave three tests every quarter.  After you took the test, he would grade them and pass them out so you could look at your grade.  After you looked your test over, you had to turn it back in to him so he could include it in your grade.  

    Well, as a freshman, I never heard him say that -- so I took the test home.  

    Over the Christmas break, I went to look at my grade from him and was shocked to see an F.  I looked at the raw score and it was something like 80 points off -- which was the same amount as the test I had taken home.

    I totally freaked out and called him at home over the Christmas break.  He told me to bring the test in and he'd fix my grade once classes started up again.  (I ended up getting the highest C in the class, which he later told me should have been a B.)

    Anyway, I had him several times when I was in college and he ended up being my favorite professor.  Unfortunately though, he believed the bell curve meant that at least 1/2 of the students in each class should fail.  In one other memorable class I took with him, I got the highest grade.  I got the only B.  He was so tough!  


    I dunno (none / 0) (#103)
    by lilburro on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 10:45:05 AM EST
    that you can really take measure of a candidate's true understanding of different important academic disciplines.  Ask them about economics, and they'll get someone to tell them the answer.  That's why experience is important...SHOW us you know economics, SHOW us you get political science.

    I agree McCain's admission is terrible.  


    And John Edwards bites the dust.... (none / 0) (#5)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:18:31 PM EST
    Ok, I said this before... (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:27:10 PM EST
    but, the O team wants all or nothing for the convention.  It's bizarre.  You mean this thing could not have been kept under wraps for a few more months?

    Yeh, that part of Kerry and Kennedy's (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:21:03 AM EST
    master plan for remaking the Democratic Party -- and reaming the Clintons out of it -- kinda fell apart.

    But the Kennedy-Kerry machine still got their guy in the top spot.  It took a bit more than they expected to have to do for that one, too.  But no amount of amending party rules and even violating Michigan state law and whoknowswhatall can rehabilitate their previous golden guy.


    I agree. (5.00 / 0) (#89)
    by weltec2 on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 05:11:21 AM EST
    I think politically... Edwards is doomed. He was a great lawyer. He can always fall back on that. It would probably be better for his family as well.

    that's dumb (none / 0) (#77)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:25:44 AM EST
    he should be shunned because he hurt poor people by helping Obama win.

    They make it sound (none / 0) (#83)
    by Fabian on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:35:24 AM EST
    like he's down there with Heckuvajob Brown!

    Yes, it hurt him.  Yes, he's going to be less popular.  Right now we are three months from a major election, six months from now, people will have other issues on their mind and it's unlikely that JE+RH are going to be in the top ten.


    What did I do? (none / 0) (#9)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:23:07 PM EST
    Oh, brother.  Again. That?  Oyeee!!!

    Looks like txpolitico's comment (none / 0) (#29)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:15:20 AM EST
    was deleted.  It would seem that might ought to have been then, too.  

    Oh, sister.  I didn't want to go there again, either.  But txpolitico credited your comment to me.


    Stellaa (none / 0) (#81)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:56:17 AM EST
    you are fine on my threads, I have no problem what you said.

    Heh, Cream, I would love it if (none / 0) (#10)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:25:09 PM EST
    you came over to Open.Salon and started posting some of your great stuff on feminism.  

    Thanks, I'll check it out (5.00 / 0) (#32)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:23:22 AM EST
    as I'm really enjoying wandering around some new-for-me blogs lately.  Love TalkLeft for what it does so well.  But it's making me nervous lately, not knowing what term next will be racialized right out of our vocabularies!

    Stellaaa (none / 0) (#21)
    by Valhalla on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:39:44 PM EST
    Do you blog over there as Stellaaa?

    Just Stellaa (none / 0) (#28)
    by Stellaaa on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:08:42 AM EST
    I zipped over and registered (none / 0) (#54)
    by Valhalla on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:07:44 AM EST
    Not sure I'll be joining the fray, but I wanted to reserve my username.  I've run across a few sites where someone else has dared to preempt me using Valhalla for themselves.  Hmmmphf!

    Looking forward to digging into your posts and any by CC though.


    Cool....I will look for you (none / 0) (#62)
    by Stellaaa on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:18:23 AM EST
    So, another fun Olympic night (none / 0) (#25)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Aug 12, 2008 at 11:59:13 PM EST
    So far, it has been a lot of fun to watch. Those Chinese girls were a bit young. They were suppose to be 16, but looked 12 or 13. Probably 14, but very very young. And they use their passports as proof. BUT, they were very good.

    The other night, my British friend was fast asleep when he was awoken by his American wife yelling, "Go USA, Go USA". He hadn't even realized she had the TV on that late.

    Dominique Moceaneau (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Little Fish on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:19:14 AM EST
    was 14 in Atlanta and she looked very young, but a couple on the Chinese team look like babies.

    More importantly, there's an abuse of blue eyeshadow that's running rampant amongst the women's gymnastics teams. I kind of want to grab some of the gymnasts, take them to Sephora and help them out a bit.


    I noticed that (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by Valhalla on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:50:20 AM EST
    Not that I'm one to talk about any sort of makeup type things.  But you'd think with all the resources they pour into their athletes, they could at least hire a style consultant who isn't stuck in the 70s, eyeshadow-wise.

    I know this is probably a cultural thing, but members of the Chinese teams hardly ever smile, even when they've just won big.  It makes me sad for them.


    Thanks for that link! (none / 0) (#65)
    by nycstray on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:27:37 AM EST
    I always liked her. Powerful and with spirit.

    If you look at her muscles and also her face, she def looks older than some of the Chinese girls. And if you look at Shawn J who's competing now and only 16 . . . .

    And yes, we need the Blue Eyeshadow Police to get off their bums and do their job!!


    I want to teach them about bobby pins (none / 0) (#69)
    by Cream City on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:49:17 AM EST
    that match hair color.  Those crazy pink and polka-dotted and striped and all clashing hair clips make me want to reach into the screen and snap 'em off, never to be seen again.  Really, grow the hair long enough so that it doesn't need a clip every inch!  I find myself so fascinated by the festering hair clips that I forget to watch them flip the rest of their anatomies around in impossible ways.

    I never could stay on even a balance beam more than a foot at a time, I'm sure, but I love watching gymnastics.  It takes me back to when I took my daughter to lessons, just when the sport was starting to take off.  And she was good, so when she would take off, I felt like I was giving her wings.:-)


    Did you see the Chinese divers earlier (none / 0) (#27)
    by nycstray on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:08:36 AM EST
    in the broadcast? They were 15 with one just about 16. If you compare them to the gymnasts  . . . there's a difference, imo. And I 'think' they said they moved one or both of the girls from gymnastics to diving. Both teams were great though :)

    I didn't even realize how late it was tonight. I was just doing my thing in the kitchen and watching. Time sure flies!


    Just saw (none / 0) (#44)
    by Steve M on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 12:50:40 AM EST
    that the keynote address at the Democratic convention will be delivered by Mark Warner.


    Well, it wouldn't be a celebration (5.00 / 4) (#48)
    by masslib on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:01:30 AM EST
    of women earning the right to vote without Mark Warner, i guess.

    Well (none / 0) (#51)
    by Steve M on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:03:43 AM EST
    if only Barbara Jordan were available...

    Hillary's available. but let's face it... (5.00 / 0) (#55)
    by masslib on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:08:35 AM EST
    she can't hold a candle to Warner.

    Well, they could just rerun her 1976 (none / 0) (#57)
    by Valhalla on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:10:31 AM EST
    speech.  That would be awesome.  I'd watch that.  And Ted's sending a taped message, after all.

    Heh (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Steve M on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:12:33 AM EST
    I think I would prefer her 1992 keynote.  "Change - From What to What?"

    Both! A double bill n/t (none / 0) (#67)
    by Valhalla on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:42:42 AM EST
    Consolation prize? (5.00 / 0) (#52)
    by Valhalla on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:04:25 AM EST
    Or was he one of the people who refused VP ahead of time?

    I'm about past the point (5.00 / 2) (#58)
    by standingup on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:11:25 AM EST
    of caring.  2008 was an election I had been looking forward to since Kerry lost in 2004 but what has transpired over the course of the primaries has left me more cynical and less hopeful than ever.



    Comments?! (5.00 / 0) (#66)
    by nycstray on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:39:40 AM EST
    F*** THAT!

    here's hoping my Yank/Sox tix come through. At least my yelling will hopefully be for the good of a team. Not some BS show put on by Team Obama.

    Gwad, have they no soul?


    the gift that keeps on giving (none / 0) (#78)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:29:35 AM EST
    Obama mocks the netroots by choosing captain milquetoast.

    Maybe he'll rise to the occasion.


    Maureen Dowd is at it again (none / 0) (#56)
    by andgarden on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:09:48 AM EST
    Seriously, she needs a professional evaluation. No, no link.

    Yeah, I read that. She's lost it. (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by masslib on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:11:35 AM EST
    dowd lost it years ago, (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by cpinva on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 04:57:20 AM EST
    y'all are just now noticing?

    The Norma Desmond of the NYT (5.00 / 0) (#97)
    by KeysDan on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 10:00:27 AM EST
    is becoming increasingly embittered, maybe due to the knuckle rapping by the public editor.  Today's column is just plain destructive, to the Clintons as well as to Obama.  Ms. Dowd's column serves no cause, other than her own--to knock out a column.

    Interesting article from Slate (none / 0) (#71)
    by Makarov on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 01:56:26 AM EST
    on how forensic science needs large reforms:


    "But the charlatans are only half the story. Courts have also missed plenty of mistakes from well-intentioned, conscientious scientists, too. In fact, these may be even more common--and harder to catch. Studies show that crime lab fiber, paint, and body fluid analyses, for example, may consistently have error rates of 10 percent or higher. The error rate in fingerprint analysis is possibly between 1 percent and 4 percent. And bite mark evidence is notoriously unreliable though still widely used."

    wha' happened? (none / 0) (#76)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:22:27 AM EST
    Not knowing everything.

    I have no problem with the word (5.00 / 0) (#80)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:54:47 AM EST
    brother as used in that thread. It's not off limit in my posts.

    That was dumb (5.00 / 0) (#82)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:59:36 AM EST
    I don't know why btd pushes back and fights against people who would misconstrue Clark's words to  slander Clark, but accepts it and chides the speaker who would be misconstrued and slandered in other cases.

    I think I know why with respect to bill and Hillary.  But with a regular at this site, well I just don't know...


    CA legislature says no to snitches (none / 0) (#104)
    by fuzzyone on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 11:22:20 AM EST
    The CA assembly approved a bill already passed by the Senate that would bar uncorroborated jailhouse snitch testimony as the basis for a conviction.  Great news though I don't know if Ahnold will sign it.  He has said he will sign no bills while there is no state budget.

    Apparantly Obama is responsible for Cease-Fire (none / 0) (#106)
    by americanincanada on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 11:38:24 AM EST
    Via Jake Tapper...Obama's greatness moved Russia to cease-fire. /snark

    "The Senator's goal was to be tough and smart," Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine said of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, "and so when the action (in Georgia) happened on Thursday, he immediately called for a ceasefire, condemned the unwarranted use of force by Russia.  It was a bad crisis for the world.  It required tough words, but also a smart approach to call on the international community to step in -- and I'm very, very happy that the senator's request for a ceasefire has been complied with by President Medvedev."