Sunday Night Open Thread

While some of us are watching tv and commenting there, I don't want to leave anyone out.

Here's an open thread for all other topics.

< The Emmys and Other TV Tonight | Palin in Florida >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Scrambled eggs (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by andgarden on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:05:40 PM EST
    have to be the most underrated food. They're cheap, easy to prepare, and in my opinion, every bit as enjoyable to eat as a good steak.

    Can you guess what I just had for dinner?

    I like them (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Faust on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:21:37 PM EST
    with feta and spinach

    If I'm feeling like complicating the eggs (none / 0) (#9)
    by andgarden on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:22:31 PM EST
    I'll fry up some chopped onions.

    if you want to get stupid fancy I recomend some (none / 0) (#12)
    by Faust on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:25:32 PM EST

    And black olives (none / 0) (#14)
    by tootired on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:26:38 PM EST
    Ugh, can't stand olives (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by andgarden on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:28:22 PM EST
    Really, I've tired. But they're vile to me.

    I know I'll have to turn in (none / 0) (#15)
    by andgarden on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:27:40 PM EST
    my foodie credentials, but I don't much like prosciutto. I find it waxy.

    If I were going to get stupid fancy, I'd go with caviar. (Yes, I've tried it, and yes, you can get 90% of the same effect with chopped nova).


    Then you haven't tried (none / 0) (#23)
    by tootired on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:36:49 PM EST
    the really good stuff. When it's sliced very thin, it just melts in your mouth. My favorite way to eat it is with heirloom tomatoes, fresh mozzarella and a little balsamic vinegar. Fresh basil, too. If I want to make it a movable feast, I stuff it into some foccacia bread.

    Well, I'm always willing to try again (none / 0) (#26)
    by andgarden on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:40:44 PM EST
    Tomatoes, for example, are almost uniformly useless if purchased from most supermarkets.

    You must have tried the cheap. . . (none / 0) (#27)
    by LarryInNYC on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:43:12 PM EST
    $40 a pound stuff.  You need to get the $80 a pound stuff.

    Seriously, I was in Italy in the spring with a friend of mine who is a minor food celebrity and one place we stopped we were given this ham which was the best I've ever tasted.  It basically melted in your mouth.

    And Fairway, a low-cost, good quality food store in New York now has an Iberico ham which I believe is $120 a pound.


    What is a "minor food celebrity"? (none / 0) (#29)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:45:40 PM EST
    I prefer prosciutto with fresh melon, and mostly in Italy.

    Someone known. . . (none / 0) (#34)
    by LarryInNYC on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:50:26 PM EST
    in the foodie world who shows up on TV a lot but doesn't have his own show (or line of products).

    Prosciutto is known to my daughters as "melon ham" -- one likes melon, one likes ham, so they trade.

    I haven't been able to convince the ham lover to try ham costing less than $14 a pound, which is what we pay for domestic prosciutto crudo.


    You elitist you. I prefer fried okra and (none / 0) (#31)
    by Teresa on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:47:03 PM EST

    Interesting (none / 0) (#32)
    by andgarden on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:49:37 PM EST
    Truth told, I don't buy it often enough to remember how much I paid.

    Have you had your cholesterol checked lately :) (none / 0) (#3)
    by steviez314 on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:09:27 PM EST
    High cholesterol runs in the family (none / 0) (#4)
    by andgarden on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:10:59 PM EST
    so I'll be on pills before long.

    Eggs aren't that bad (none / 0) (#86)
    by Fabian on Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 05:32:44 AM EST
    especially if you aren't a serious carnivore.  I'm an occasional carnivore, but mostly do dairy and eggs.  It cuts out a huge chunk of animal fats.  Besides, I was raised on what is now called "grass fed beef" so the bland corn fed stuff just doesn't do it for me.

    I find it ironic that people who wolf down feed lot beef complain about bland tofu.  


    cooked in olive oil (none / 0) (#66)
    by esmense on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:33:42 PM EST
    with peppers...then, if you're in the mood, piled on some really good French or Italian bread

    Eggs rock!.... (none / 0) (#90)
    by kdog on Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 10:25:03 AM EST
    for Breakfast, Lunch, Dinner, or a snack.

    Can't eat 'em without some type of animal flesh though...preferably bacon.


    I guess it's ok that John McCain has 13 cars (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by steviez314 on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:08:21 PM EST
    because he has 8 houses, and that's less than 2 cars per house.

    I mean, even I have 2 cars per house!! (That's 2 cars, 1 house)

    He is trying to (none / 0) (#6)
    by Wile ECoyote on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:20:26 PM EST
    keep up with the corrupt Charlie Rangel.

    Hey, who let in the bourgeoisie? n/t (none / 0) (#7)
    by LarryInNYC on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:21:34 PM EST
    forgive me (none / 0) (#11)
    by BrassTacks on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:24:46 PM EST
    But I've never noticed, or cared, how many cars people have. Why would I care how many houses or cars or goldfish anyone has? As long as they aren't asking me to pay for them, to each his own.

    You could always ask Taraza Heinz Kerry (none / 0) (#13)
    by BrassTacks on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:25:59 PM EST
    To lend you some of their houses and cars.

    But the Kerrys are ELITES! (none / 0) (#64)
    by Radiowalla on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:31:56 PM EST
    McCain and Cindy are normal folks, just like us.

    or the Kennedys (none / 0) (#84)
    by andrys on Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 02:00:07 AM EST
    It's as if those who have cannot care about those who don't, but then on the other hand, McCain keeps voting AGAINST the average person in need of help, even the troops fighting the war he has pushed.

      I don't know if anyone else here saw this early on in the primaries -- but I watched McCain tell a crowd of people that never again should our young people have to go fight a war for oil.

      For some reason it caused a ruckus for only one day.


    But, can it be true the Obamas (none / 0) (#19)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:31:08 PM EST
    have only one car?

    Barack lives in DC a good part of the time. (none / 0) (#25)
    by tootired on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:39:12 PM EST
    Maybe he takes public transportation? Or as a senator would he have a car service?

    I've seen Obama described. . . (none / 0) (#28)
    by LarryInNYC on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:45:06 PM EST
    as "one house, one spouse" (in contrast to McCain)  so if you can think of some rhyming word for "car" you can slip it in there.

    One house plus one and 5/6th (5.00 / 4) (#33)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:49:55 PM EST

    You are in trouble now. You forgot your (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Teresa on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:51:54 PM EST
    snark tag. Rule breaker.

    Takes all the fun ouf of it! (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:53:00 PM EST
    I guess McCain has been... (none / 0) (#73)
    by LatinoDC on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 10:23:59 PM EST
    trying to make the case that an Obama admnistration would favor him and Cindy...since Obama is an elitist...

    60 MINUTES interview (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by kraftysue on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:27:46 PM EST
    Did anyone else catch McCain answering the question "where have you lived the longest?" and he answered "in Hanoi --for 5 1/2 yrs".  The man can't tell the truth to save his soul.

    He's been representing Arizona for nearly 26 yrs. Unless he's moved every 5 years, what he said tonight is another lie.  Most accounts say he and Cindy have lived in their Sedona home since 1984.

    he might of meant it felt like (none / 0) (#61)
    by bjorn on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:30:00 PM EST
    the longest, but still he is digging a hole so deep for himself.  He just seems to be withering like a dead vine.  Telling lies does that to a person.

    It's another trap. (none / 0) (#72)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:52:39 PM EST
    How bout them Gators? (none / 0) (#5)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:14:49 PM EST
    Hi everybody. I missed a big weekend of news I know.

    So huge (none / 0) (#10)
    by Faust on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:23:39 PM EST
    I'm still trying to get my head screwed back on straight.

    I know it's hard to believe (none / 0) (#17)
    by andgarden on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:29:08 PM EST
    but the world goes round without you!

    (Heck, you got the important bits anyway).


    In fact, you did. "The Road (none / 0) (#18)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:29:57 PM EST
    to Nowhere."

    Actullay, that refers to my Vols. We stink. (none / 0) (#22)
    by Teresa on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:36:46 PM EST
    And so does my typing. (none / 0) (#24)
    by Teresa on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:37:25 PM EST
    Have you heard of Alice Parker, (none / 0) (#20)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:34:55 PM EST
    a renowned composer, arranger, and choral director?  She is 83 years old and conducted a "sing" today.  A marvelous musician and icon.  

    Anyone? (none / 0) (#80)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 11:06:57 PM EST
    see what happens when public schools axe music education?  

    While perusing the lefty news (none / 0) (#21)
    by Lil on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:36:07 PM EST
    I was struck by how little Palin there was; Although I haven't been to Kos for awhile. I was happy to see that the race seems to be Obama vs. McCain. I also love eggs and am cheering the Giants going 3-0, but the Mets, OMG; melt down 2 years in a row.

    I also thought Palin's star was fading (none / 0) (#39)
    by BrassTacks on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:02:58 PM EST
    Until I saw this.

    You think she really drew 60,000? (none / 0) (#40)
    by Teresa on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:05:13 PM EST
    Miami Herald says the crowd was huge (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by Cream City on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:24:45 PM EST
    and adds this, ouch:

    The visit drew a few contrasts between Palin and Obama running mate Joe Biden.  The largest was the crowd. Some people had to wait in line about 90 minutes just to park their cars. Biden's largest crowd during a visit earlier this month was about 2,000.

    Btw, a local fire chief is a better source, to my mind, than a campaign (i.e., the German crowd claims here, not what the Euro press reported).


    Wait, does that make her a celebrity? (none / 0) (#77)
    by Realleft on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 10:48:14 PM EST
    I thought the ability to draw a crowd was supposed to be bad now.  

    fighting fire with fire? (none / 0) (#83)
    by andrys on Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 01:57:27 AM EST
    ... celeb with celeb ?

      The danger is the 'enthusiasm' factor that propels people to the polls who then vote for the lower ticket.  And older voters tend to be really reliable at the polls.

      I think a danger has been the constant attacks on Palin that are overrun with some really bad errors to the point that factcheck.org (and Newsweek's republishing of factcheck's long article) has a large list of corrections at their site, which includes in its filename, "sliming palin" ... the upshot of which is she gets an 'underdog' status and gets an even stronger crowd reaction -- people waiting for hours in 92 degree heat.  NOT good for Nov. 4.

      I saw a hysterical article about her today that went crazy about her religious belief in a 'plan' or 'will' of a 'God' when the same writer did not see anything worrisome about Obama saying 3 times while I was watching that he prays every night that he will understand God's will and that he will become an instrument of God's will.

      Can you imagine if Palin said that a few times in interviews?  (With Chris Matthews at a college event,  "I pray every night..." that he understands what God's will is and that he will be an instrument of that.)  I think the Jerusalem wall message was similar.  I first saw him say this on a train in a documentary and I was flabbergasted.

      The best thing Dems can do is concentrate on McCain's explosion of gaffes and just plain errors.  He's the one that voters would need to worry about most because, like Obama, he IS the heartbeat, if voted in.  And, frankly, he doesn't seem to remember what he said the day before - diametrically opposed to what he is saying the next day.  He is constantly attacking without thinking, it's like a reflex.  I give his economic adviser credit, though, for coming across with a plan early Thursday that's quite similar to the one that was put out by TPTB Friday.  

      Even George Will said today on one of the talk programs that McCain has seemed "unpresidential" this week during a time of national trauma.


    I don't know. But, inquiring (none / 0) (#43)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:14:12 PM EST
    minds must know:  which three Palin kids were present?  

    The three youngest I'm guessing. (none / 0) (#45)
    by Teresa on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:15:19 PM EST
    The Palin Kids (none / 0) (#47)
    by MTSINAIMAMA on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:16:46 PM EST
    I think they're back in Alaska. Haven't seen any photos of them on the campaign trail.

    No, they went to Disney World with the kids. (none / 0) (#52)
    by Teresa on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:18:10 PM EST
    From today's Palin appearance (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:27:55 PM EST
    in FL:

    One teenage girl held up a sign that read, "When I grow up, I want to be Sarah Palin."

    Also, according to a local TV station, Sarah Palin handed the mic to my fave, Piper Palin, who wanted to say thanks.


    No, I Don't (none / 0) (#44)
    by MTSINAIMAMA on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:14:45 PM EST
    The guy who gave the 60,000 was a "local fire official supplied by the McCain camp". I've heard other commentators say "tens of thousands", and another one said 20,000.

    St. Pete Times says 25,000 per Politico. (none / 0) (#48)
    by Teresa on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:16:54 PM EST
    No (none / 0) (#51)
    by befuddledvoter on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:17:51 PM EST
    Read the comments following the article.  Here is an excerpt:

    CNN reports 12,000 people in attendance, and now this website claims 60,000.  


    Huh? (none / 0) (#75)
    by MTSINAIMAMA on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 10:29:53 PM EST
    It'd a big difference between 12,000 and 60,000!

    Brass Tacks is at 9 comments today (none / 0) (#50)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:17:50 PM EST
    one more, s/he's a new user.

    So, here's a below the radar campaign (none / 0) (#30)
    by andgarden on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:46:28 PM EST
    Nick Carter is running for Senate against appointed John Barrasso. It's Wyoming, so nobody thinks he has a shot. But I saw a poll a few weeks ago that suggests otherwise.

    In any case, he just released an awsome set of new ads. You folks know how critical I am of bad ads, so I don't say I like ads very often. Anyway, here's one on healthcare I like in particular. I think the music really works.

    Good thing Nick isn't running in California. (none / 0) (#37)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:55:18 PM EST
    That music bar me from voting for him.

    heh (none / 0) (#38)
    by andgarden on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 08:56:51 PM EST
    Just heard on TV that McCain will call for (none / 0) (#41)
    by Teresa on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:11:39 PM EST
    a bipartisan committee to oversee Paulson's plan. Bloomeberg, Buffet, and Romney (?).

    I guess Buffet is (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by bjorn on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:12:12 PM EST
    the democrat?

    And Bloomberg (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by nycstray on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:28:55 PM EST
    well, he's indie now, but was a Dem the rest of the time aside from that Repub stint.

    Buffet has endorsed. . . (none / 0) (#63)
    by LarryInNYC on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:31:40 PM EST
    Obama, but I have no idea whether he's a registered Democrat or not.

    Must be. He's for higher (none / 0) (#65)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:32:47 PM EST
    property taxes in CA!

    That just makes him. .. (none / 0) (#67)
    by LarryInNYC on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:34:21 PM EST
    a Nebraskan.

    Good move -- for us, I hope (2.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Cream City on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:17:38 PM EST
    and for political purposes.  McCain scores one.

    Glanton, why don't you think (none / 0) (#76)
    by Cream City on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 10:47:10 PM EST
    that this was a good move?  Not a good move for the taxpayers to have bipartisan oversight -- or you prefer no oversight at all or partisan oversight?  Or not a good move by McCain?  If Obama had called for this, and with such a really bipartisan roster, wouldn't you consider it a good move?  Such a low but oddly not lowest rating by you must mean something interesting.

    Larry in nyc has the Talk Left (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 11:02:23 PM EST
    commenters all figured out.  Ask him. <snk>

    McCain Promises Bi-Partisan Oversight!!! (none / 0) (#88)
    by glanton on Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 09:21:39 AM EST
    Wooo-hooo!!!  Beer and skittles for everyone.  Score for McCain indeed.  

    In truth, the idea of indicating any sort of praise at all for McCain on this score shows a willingness to trust him that intentionally elides the lessons of the past twenty years vis a vis Republicans.  A willingness that, more glaringly given the contrast after Clinton's at least economically sane Presidency, elides the last eight years of deregulatory economic policy.  Deregulatory policy to which McCain has thrown, needless to say, his full support.

    As always on the comment boards, Cream City. You show a willingness to give John McCain and his running mate the benefit of the doubt.  Hmmmmm.  Why that is we will not say because it is not longer worth anyone's time to even articulate.  But still, it is a willingness that bears no relationship to reality.

    Oh.  And as for your question, how would I respond if it were Obama who called for the same thing.  Well, that the Democrats have been so wonderful in the area of oversight.  But we can take it to the bank (pun intended) that: be it by hand-picked committee, or be it by way of appointed Cabinet Members, an Obama Admin.  Compared to the Bush/McCain continuum.  Will hold these people far more accountable for their behavior.


    My approach is as a strategist (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by Cream City on Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 12:07:24 PM EST
    and not as a cheerleader.  That is the difference between us, and the difference you do not get.

    I do not need to come to boards like this to know how to vote -- or to rah rah others, as this board was populated by bright people, high-info voters who brought something to the table here.

    I come for discussions of strategy and tactics, at which BTD and some commenters are quite good.


    Speaking as a Strategist!!! (none / 0) (#92)
    by glanton on Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 12:49:41 PM EST
    Since when did constantly picking at Obama and making gymnastic leaps of logic to make the GOP ticket carriers seem like reasonable people.  Since when did all that constitute anything but rhetorically aiding the GOP.

    When you show yourself willing to give Obama credit for anything at all beyond praising him when he he does something BTD thinks Clinton would have done.  THEN....  Well, nevermind, it aint gonna happen.

    And we know why it aint gonna happen. Don't we?

    But remember this, when you talk about what these boards "used to be populated by."  What you are really doing is lamenting the end, and of course the electoral result, of Primary season.  Anyone who has been following things knows this to be the case.

    But on TalkLeft, as everywhere else.  There was a time before the Primaries and now there is a time after them.  Issues, not identity politics, are now, albeit too slowly, emerging as the focus here for most commenters.  

    BTW: To your "point" about strategy.

    McCain's bluster about committees and his newfound interest in oversight MIGHT play well strategically.  But then, if a lie plays well strategically, is it any less of a lie?  

    My hope is that voters will prove themselves too intelligent to be duped into voting GOP by specious "tactics," this time around.  Hopefully the last two Pres. terms have been a better teacher than your praise for McCain's "Strategy" suggests.

    Finally.  By Dante standards alone.  Your Rhetoric these last couple of months renders you deliciously deserving of the consequences of a McCain Presidency.  Too bad others who knew better and fought it every step of the way, will be visiting the Inferno as well.


    That's funny (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by CST on Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 12:57:59 PM EST
    Since Cream City just had a post about how good Obama's economic speech in Wisconsin went.

    This is over-the-top.  And it is ok to occasionally agree with McCain or admit it when he wins something strategically.  That doesn't make you a republican or a republican apologist.

    Personally, I like keeping the Obama sceptics around talk left.  Because when they say something good about him, I am more likely to believe it.


    Yeah (none / 0) (#94)
    by glanton on Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 01:07:59 PM EST
    That, like it's follow up comment, was a real vote of confidence.  Come on, now.

    Too many shades of PUMA from the commenter in question, not enough acknowledging the many things that Obama is obviously right about, and the many things he has clearly done well throughout this campaign.

    Look, I agree as much as anybody that skepticism re Obama, as with any politician, is not only good but necessary.  Indeed, the tenor of his most ardent believers has bothered me greatly from the beginning, and continues to.  But what is at stake is clear enough, here; the more people come home to that simple truth, the better for our Republic.


    I am the farthest thing from a PUMA (none / 0) (#95)
    by Cream City on Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 01:24:04 PM EST
    and your waving of that orange flag to quell questions about the Obama campaign is just tiresome.  As are you cheerleaders.  Rah rah blah blah.  Why come here for what we can get on the Obama site, the orange site, etc.?

    I notice, of course, that you don't dare take on BTD for his questioning of Obama's campaign.  That says it all about you.  Pfffft.


    I took on BTD plenty (none / 0) (#96)
    by glanton on Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 01:38:20 PM EST
    Invited him to ban me from his threads, got banned from his threads.  

    His inability to praise Obama for anything beyond doing stuff that kind of reminds him of what Bill Clinton would have done.  Sort of.  Mirrors.  Yours.  

    I say sort of because at least he hammers on McCain's mendaciousness with some consistency.  And at least his Dem support is clear at this crucial moment, even if it isn't as important to him as his own sense of being reveaqled to be right about whatever the topic du jour is.

    Calling me a cheerleader is really banal.  I've recorded serious ideological and rhetorical divergences with Obama on this site, and you know it.  Only those who don't bother to read comments will buy what you are selling.  Same with connecting me with KOS, just because I recognize the silliness of PUMA rhetoric.

    But, in seriousness.  Did KosKids invent the term PUMA? Is it really such a straw man (heh) as all that?  God I hope so.  Hmmmm.  Either way I am glad you don't associate yourself with it, and I hope your implication that it is largely a straw man (heh) fallacy is correct.


    I don't spend much time on McCain (none / 0) (#97)
    by Cream City on Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 04:34:26 PM EST
    and only when it matters to the Dems because McCain doesn't matter to me.  Neither does Palin, except in historic terms -- so watching the stupid and Dem-defeating frenzy about her matters, as do the dumb attacks on McCain.

    That's why it's about their strategy and tactics, i.e., how that matters to the Dem campaign.  I'm not a Dem now, but how they do still matters --  even if only on a few issues now, as they sadly have not exploited the Politics of Difference that could have been and would have won for sure.
    They only exploited differences that were divisive.

    As for PUMA history, I watch that as well as it's fascinating for anyone who studies movements, as I do, but you can find its history (no, hardly Kos) here or on its sites.  For whether they will matter, see my comment here today on a useful analysis that you can see at pollster.com.

    In sum, I will continue to call out stupid stuff that I see, and I tend to see it more on the Dem side because I watch it more -- and because it is sadder to watch, when this ought to have been a walk, and because I think that the ramifications will make a difference to the Dems down-ticket and down the line.  There will be books written about this campaign -- I already have read initial studies and heard one of the scholars on it -- that may teach Dems a lesson.  Or not.


    Typo in last paragraph (none / 0) (#89)
    by glanton on Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 09:23:22 AM EST
    And an important one.  Should read: "Not that the Democrats have been so wonderful in the area of oversight."

    Bloomberg (none / 0) (#46)
    by MTSINAIMAMA on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:15:41 PM EST
    Is really a Democrat anyway.

    Bloomberg is a projective test, evidently. (none / 0) (#54)
    by Lil on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:22:35 PM EST
    Weird thing about thic economic mess (none / 0) (#53)
    by befuddledvoter on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:21:14 PM EST
    This happened under GW's reign and he has an MBA from Harvard.  Does anyone else get the impression he has not a clue, not even the business jargon?

    Believe me. . . (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by LarryInNYC on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:23:13 PM EST
    there are heaps and heaps of people with Harvard MBAs directly implicated in causing this mess.  Bush may be an idiot, but what's the excuse for the rest of these guys?

    Harvard Business School (none / 0) (#57)
    by befuddledvoter on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:24:57 PM EST
    You think there is something defective in the curriculum?  LOL  I think I will take a peak, just curious what the heck they do there.

    No, I think the defect. . . (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by LarryInNYC on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:30:27 PM EST
    is in human nature -- the ability to look the other way where money is involved.

    I looked at the curriculum (5.00 / 2) (#68)
    by befuddledvoter on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:37:47 PM EST
    What amazes is me is that there is not even one course in ETHICS offered.  I even looked at the electives.

    JMc also said: (none / 0) (#70)
    by NJDem on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:40:11 PM EST
    "McCain told 60 Minutes tonight that he would name New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, son of former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo and Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) under President Bill Clinton, as chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Mike Allen reports."


    And there's about revenge on Rove?

    Did anyone catch 60 Minutes?  Anything not covered by the MSM--I missed it.  


    GW didn't earn (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by Coral on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:38:37 PM EST
    that MBA, his Daddy bought it.

    I think, back then (none / 0) (#71)
    by befuddledvoter on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 09:43:23 PM EST
    the MBA was not such a highly valued degree, not even at Harvard.  It was where many people ended up when they were not admitted to law school.

    As opposed to, . . . (none / 0) (#79)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 11:05:39 PM EST
    Why Did Palin Offer Monegan Another Position? (none / 0) (#74)
    by john horse on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 10:25:56 PM EST
    Palin's latest story about why she fired Monegan doesn't make sense.  She said that she fired him because he was essentially being insubordinate.  According to Palin, Monegan had a "rouge mentality" and was bucking her administration's directives.  The media has focused on internal documents that contradict what Palin contends.

    However, lets assume that Palin is right and Monegan was insubordinate. In her first story, she said that he was fired because he was incompetent.  She said that after he was canned, she offered him another position as head of alcohol beverage control board.  Now this might make some sense if a person is fired for being incompetent because he or she may be perfectly competent in another.

    But Palin says that Monegan was insubordinate.  Why would you appoint someone you thought was insubordinate to any position.  I'm afraid the level of BS coming from Palin is now up to her armpits.

    President Clinton on Letterman (none / 0) (#81)
    by nycstray on Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 11:46:30 PM EST
    Monday night. Also on the View tomorrow/today. His annual conference starts this week, so he should be popping up to talk about it in various places if my memory serves me at all these days :) I remember watching a live discussion session, but can't remember who carried it. It was a good watch.

    I hope Jeralyn blogs it. (none / 0) (#85)
    by lilburro on Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 05:21:49 AM EST
    The Michelle Obama appearance blog was hilarious.  And it's more than likely that this will be a more interesting show anyway.

    Let's see if he still has "it"! (none / 0) (#87)
    by Fabian on Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 05:37:20 AM EST
    Personal charm, that is.

    Paulson has made some changes in the bailout (none / 0) (#82)
    by Amiss on Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 01:21:46 AM EST
    Paulson has tweaked the language of the bailout bill, with the Freudian-slip acronym TARP ("Troubled Asset Relief Program") to make some additions that in theory make it more sweeping but in practice, with no review or oversight, the Treasury can do what it bloody pleases; the rest of the language of the bill, besides the maximum outstanding at any one time, is window-dressing.
    Changes assets eligible for purchase from " mortgage-related assets" to "Troubled Assets". This makes clear the willingness to buy instruments such as collateralized debt obligations, which may not contain only mortgages in their underlying assets, and LBO related paper, such as collatealized loan obligations, and any other dreck the Treasury might see fit to acquire.

    Changes the eligible sellers from "any financial institution having its headquarters in the United States" to "any Financial Institution" which is defined as

    any institution including, but not limited to, banks, thrifts, credit unions, broker-dealers, and insurance companies, having significant operations in the United States; and, upon the Secretary's determination in consultation with the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, any other institution he determines necessary to promote financial market stability.

    This change means that Paulson can assist the currently demonized hedge funds and foreign institutions. Note Nouriel Roubini, whose has one of the best records in calling this credit crisis, predicts in today's Financial Times that the next eruption will be a run on hedge funds.

    LINK for the entire story.