home

Thursday Morning Open Thread

Tom Watson leads the British Open at Turnberry. Stage 12 of the Tour de France was uneventful.

This is an Open Thread.

< Sotomayor Hearing, Day 4, Blog 1 | New Report on Faulty Eyewitness Evidence And Wrongful Convictions >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Bernie Sanders for President (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by MO Blue on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:05:29 PM EST
    Bernie Sanders discusses existing U.S. healthcare systems that work that are socialized healthcare or single payer. Per Senator Sanders: "Our job is not to protect the private health insurance industry." The entire video is on Crooks and Liars and is well worth seeing the entire clip.

    Bernie Sanders gives John McCain an uncomfortable moment asking him if the VA is socialized health care, and if he or anyone else in the Senate is advocating doing away with it.

    What we need is people like Bernie Sanders running for office in all 51 states.

    Better examples? (none / 0) (#34)
    by coast on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:41:18 PM EST
    I think Bernie needs to come up with a few other examples besides Medicare (a program that is in desperate need of reform already and has huges deficit projections) and the VA (2008 article in Stars and Stripes praised the reforms that were being made but ended with this not so encouraging quote "The list 'is down to 45,000 people [who must wait for care] for more than 30 days'")  Neither example is what I would call encouraging.

    Just an aside, I imagine you were using your keypad and hit "1" rather than "0" or did I miss something? :)

    Parent

    If andgarden can create a monarchy, (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by MO Blue on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:51:21 PM EST
    I think I should be able to add another state. LOL

    Parent
    I thought there were 57 states? (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:55:33 PM EST
    Rim shot! (5.00 / 0) (#42)
    by MO Blue on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:58:12 PM EST
    That was an estimate (none / 0) (#145)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:46:41 PM EST
    He said he had 2-3 states yet to visit, and had already been to, "2-3 states to go, so we've been to what, 57??" [paraphrasing]

    Parent
    Only if (none / 0) (#48)
    by coast on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:10:47 PM EST
    it has a lower unemployment than SC.  I don't want to lose our shot at the top spot with the highest unemployment.

    Parent
    With Lindsey Graham representing your (none / 0) (#55)
    by MO Blue on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:16:58 PM EST
    state, how could you lose?

    Parent
    Sorry, (none / 0) (#58)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:21:56 PM EST
    South Carolina is 3rd highest.  Michigan is #1.

    I wish we could comfort you in this time of devastation of being knocked off.

    Parent

    And Oregon is #2 (none / 0) (#60)
    by caseyOR on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:25:11 PM EST
    Sadly. Our state economist said the other day that the real unemployment number, counting the underemployed and those who have given up, is closer to 23%.

    Parent
    Official Numbers (none / 0) (#155)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 06:40:20 PM EST
    for June come out at 10AM tomorrow morning, but I have to think the Maize and Blue will finish atop the Garnet and Black.

    Parent
    Surgeon General Pro Choice (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:25:56 PM EST
    Obviously Dr. Regina Benjamin had to be, imo, but for those here who believe Obama is a stealth reactionary here is the story:

    WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama's nominee for surgeon general is a Catholic best known for founding an Alabama clinic that treats the poor, but her lesser-known support for abortion rights puts her at odds with her church and some of the groups that have praised her work.

    McClatchy

    I've liked what I've heard so far. (5.00 / 3) (#29)
    by Fabian on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:34:22 PM EST
    And I just keep hearing more good things.

    (Beats Gupta by light years.)

    Parent

    Ditto (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by CST on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:06:06 PM EST
    Seems like a stellar choice.

    Parent
    Along the same lines (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by lilburro on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:36:12 PM EST
    Prospect has an interesting article about Hillary Clinton advancing reproductive rights internationally.

    Even if Pres Obama does not use the bully pulpit the way I would like when discussing reproductive rights, it is very reassuring to know he has a team that supports choice and does so meaningfully.

    Parent

    Benjamin... (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:25:43 PM EST
    is a real American hero from everything I've heard...an awesome pick in a sea of awful ones for the Obama admin.

    Parent
    Well, to be precise, (none / 0) (#32)
    by dk on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:38:17 PM EST
    that articles reports:

    1. that the White House says she "supports the President's position on reproductive health issues"...whatever that means.  

    2. she serves on the boards of organizations who have both pro-choice (Physicians for Human Rights) and anti-choice (Catholic Health Association) official positions.

    3. the people interviewed who actually know her said that they do not know what her position on choice is.


    Parent
    Come on. (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by lilburro on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:39:45 PM EST
    The President may not support it as intensely as I'd like, but he is pro-choice.

    Parent
    Well, I'm not quite sure what (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by dk on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:46:58 PM EST
    a non-intense support of bodily autonomy actually means, but I suppose time will tell.

    Parent
    Trying to reach agreement with pro-life. (none / 0) (#39)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:52:40 PM EST
    Is someone still pro-choice if (5.00 / 3) (#45)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:03:18 PM EST
    he doesn't seem comfortable with a woman making the decision all by herself?  Without the help or input or advice of her significant other, her spouse, her parents, her spiritual/religious counselor, etc?

    When someone precedes the phrase, "it is the woman's choice," with the word, "ultimately," - which I have heard Obama say - and when he always - always - wants to make room in the woman's life for the men to have their say, I question just how committed he is to women having an unqualified right to make this decision.

    Am I being picky?  I'm sure that could be said.  But then I look at some of the appointments he's made, and where he's placed some of these decidedly anti-choice individuals, and when I consider him telling the Pope he is committed to reducing abortions in this country, it makes me think maybe I am not being picky enough.

    Obama's already lulled too many people, on too many issues, into thinking he shared their views, only to say and do things that went in another direction.

    Parent

    You do have a point (none / 0) (#70)
    by lilburro on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:38:12 PM EST
    and I do vastly prefer the pro-choice POV that holds this is about the freedom of women and the control women must and ought to have over their bodies.

    President Obama's team (ex. SoS Clinton) and his support of the Freedom of Choice Act give me some confidence.  

    Parent

    Annoying (none / 0) (#81)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:01:57 PM EST
    I believe that the repeated spin some have on Obama's statement is  really a gross distortion.

    If anything he was arguing women's right to choose against the backdrop of sexist morons who want to legislate a woman's body. A context in which some promote a case that women are irrational, inferior and incabable of making decisions on their own.  Making a decision on ones own often includes the advice of others, Seeking advice does not in one iota mitigate the fact that it is one's own decision, iow choice.

    The presumption, not mandate or demand,  that women are just as likely as a man,  to take the decision about their own body seriously, by discussing it with their closest advisors, doctors spouse etc, is not sexist. That in no way precludes the option that a woman may also wisely opt to "choose" without resort to any outside council.

    Parent

    Disagree. (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by lilburro on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:26:59 PM EST
    My own perspective is the same as expressed in Dr. Molly's comment on this old thread.  

    There is a major dog-whistle here in my opinion that plays into the whole anti-choice crowd who insist on parental consent, father's consent, etc.

    I hear a dog-whistle as well esp when Obama must be well aware of all the consent-oriented obstacles thrown in a woman's way when she wants to get an abortion.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#128)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:55:12 PM EST
    The dog whistle must have been broken, because those whose ears pick up that frequency gave Obama a zero rating.

    Not to mention the so called dogs have not been seem anywhere near the WH, except to protest..  lol.

    Since his election to the Senate in 2004, Barack
    Obama has compiled a 0% voting record on pro-
    life issues scored by the National Right to Life
    Committee.  By contrast, he has a 100% rating
    from NARAL Pro-Choice America.

    National Right to Life Org (PDF)

    Parent

    I don't think he's talking about the (none / 0) (#129)
    by dk on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:58:44 PM EST
    organizations as much as he is talking about voters.  And those voters will expect something in return if they are to vote for him for re-election.

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#131)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:02:24 PM EST
    If true, those suckers must be mighty disappointed. Although, I do not believe for one second that voters associated anti abortion politics, cast a single vote for Obama.

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#136)
    by lilburro on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:13:52 PM EST
    there is one pro-lifer at the WH.

    I believe his support for the Freedom of Choice Act is important, and I think the fact that Hillary Clinton is our ambassador to the globe and a staunch feminist and reproductive rights advocate is important.

    But if he signals compromise or room for compromise I get nervous.  And I think he does signal that.  He is trying to court votes after all - he may at some point decide that to get more conservative votes he'll throw them a policy bone (he discussed the prolifers voting for him in his Notre Dame speech).

    That's why we've gotta bust his @ss for seeming less than 100% an enthusiastic pro-choice advocate sometimes.

    Parent

    Yuk (none / 0) (#140)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:31:02 PM EST
    Gotta keep an eye on that appointment. Although I am sure that Kathleen Sebelius won't let her get out of hand. If her function is only to help those who want to carry a child to term get funding, pre natal care, by either fighting insurance cos or providing grant money, all the power to her.

    Anything more than that, she must be watched.

    Parent

    Remember, Anne (none / 0) (#91)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:18:57 PM EST
    Michelle said that she couldn't take a job with Valerie Jarrett (her future boss) until Barack met her. Why should a medical decision a woman has to make be any different?

    Parent
    How Silly (5.00 / 0) (#97)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:49:14 PM EST
    And sexist of you to suggest that the reason a woman Harvard Grad Lawyer would only ask a man to help her decide to take a job because he is a man. Outrageously sexist comment, imo.

    If anything that initial meeting was quite prescient, considering that Jarrett is Obama's chief senior advisor. To think that such a sexist pig would take advice from a woman... lol..

    Parent

    I guess Michelle is the sexist then (none / 0) (#103)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:02:36 PM EST
    since she's the one who said it:

    By then, Michelle had grown restless with corporate law. In 1991, before her marriage, she had joined the crew of energetic young people surrounding Mayor Daley in his early years in office. Jarrett, then deputy chief of staff, remembers interviewing Michelle for an assistant's job in the chief of staff's office.

    "The moment I met her I knew immediately we would be lucky to have her,'' said Jarrett, who has since vacationed with the Obamas in Martha's Vineyard. "I was instantly impressed. I think I offered her a job at the end of the first meeting.''

    Before she signed up, Michelle told Jarrett her fiance wanted to meet her "so he could figure out if he was comfortable with her going to work for Mayor Daley.''
    Obama had "some trepidation'' about Michelle working in politics, Jarrett said. (Michelle later was not thrilled with the idea of Obama running for state senator.)

    "I can remember sitting in [a restaurant] booth, with Barack on the other side, interrogating me in the nicest possible way,'' Jarrett said.

    "I can't think of many people you hire who say, `I'd like you to meet my fiancé,' but I would have done just about anything to get Michelle.''

    But I don't expect things let fact to deter you.

    Parent

    Sure (5.00 / 0) (#112)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:19:12 PM EST
    But why are you insisting that this is about sexism. WTF does gender have to do with any of this. Seems to me that it has to do with partnership and respect.

    That you would spin this as sexism is absurd. Michelle also needed to "feel comfortable" about issues in their partnership. I am sure that you do whatever the f*ck you want, your partner be damned. If he or she feels uncomfortable well, not your problem.

    Your distortion is so absurd, quite a poor reflection on you.

    But maybe it is just a case of jealousy and sexism on your part:

    She is a 1985 cum laude graduate of Princeton University; a 1988 graduate of Harvard Law School; a former associate dean at the University of Chicago, and currently a vice president at the University of Chicago Hospitals.

    Michelle, who declined an interview request, sits on six boards, including the prestigious Chicago Council on Global Affairs and the University of Chicago Laboratory Schools.

    What a sexist pig Obama is, marrying such a powerful accomplished woman.. lol  He must have just wanted to subjugate her so he could get male children with good genes..

    You need help.

    Parent

    Did She Say That? (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by daring grace on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:58:24 PM EST
    Or did she say she wanted her fiance Obama to meet Jarrett before she took the job so that he could feel more comfortable before she went to work for Mayor Daley which is what this reports.

    At most, you might infer she wouldn't take the job without the meeting. But I think even that inference is a stretch, especially given what we know about the formidable FLOTUS.

    Parent

    I gathered Michelle Obama wanted (none / 0) (#106)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:06:21 PM EST
    Valerie Jarrett to meet Barack Obama was because Barack Obama was interested in a political career and was well-aware of the benefit of a good connection w/i the Daley administration.

    Parent
    Maybe, but (none / 0) (#109)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:14:26 PM EST
    She still had to have him meet Jarrett before she was allowed to make the decision of whether she wanted to take the job.

    Parent
    Obviously (5.00 / 0) (#117)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:27:58 PM EST
    Barack Obama was going into politics. Michelle wanted to make sure that Barack did not see this as a conflict. He obviously did not want her to go into politics but caved because she wanted it. She also was not keen on him becoming Senator but she caved.

    That is how successful partners do it. They do not take each other for granted and realize that the sum of their relationship is greater than the parts.

    Instead of looking for sexist dirt, as you seem to be doing, most sane people would see their partnership as a model of how two equals can manage.

    Parent

    That's a whole lot of (none / 0) (#119)
    by dk on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:30:43 PM EST
    "obviously" for someone who doesn't know them personally.  Just sayin'.

    Parent
    It Is Relative (none / 0) (#126)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:47:21 PM EST
    I would venture to say that most role models are not personally known but are ideals. Literature provided the first role models and film took over and is now the biggest purveyor of contemporary role models, imo.

    Much is written about the Obama relationship. I would take theirs as a model over any other president, (and most others), I have read about.

    Of course there are many models who I have a personal attachment to as well, goes without sayin.

    Parent

    I guess the question is when (none / 0) (#141)
    by dk on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:31:20 PM EST
    does believing in an idea cross over to cultism.

    Parent
    That Is Another Subject (none / 0) (#147)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:47:10 PM EST
    I would say that one test of cultism, or at least the one you seem to be referring to, is to measure Hillary and Obama on policy positions. Anyone who would say that they are miles apart and then go on to shill for either, is a cultist.

    As for those who see Obama as doing everything they want, well that person may either be a cultist or more to the right of my position.

    An average progressive, who has nary a criticism of Obama is clearly a cultist.

    Parent

    And one who (none / 0) (#150)
    by dk on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:54:45 PM EST
    claims no actual knowledge of either of them, but who says they only have an ideal of what they are, or what their relationship with their spouse is in one's own mind, who can then say they "obviously" can interpret certain aspects of their lives?

    Parent
    Huh? (none / 0) (#152)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 05:20:08 PM EST
    I used the word "obviously" because the Obamas seem to take great effort to model a balanced relationship free of sexism and full of mutual respect. For jbindc to argue that Barack Obama has an overtly sexist relationship with his wife counters what is obvious to most.

     

    Parent

    But how can one argue (none / 0) (#153)
    by dk on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 05:27:07 PM EST
    that something is obvious when one has no idea of the actual situation but rather only an ideal?

    Parent
    Or (none / 0) (#154)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 05:49:57 PM EST
    How can one argue with someone who is being so obtuse.

    I will try one more time.

    Here are few public figures that became models for many people:

    Jackie O, and John Kennedy,
    Elizabeth Taylor and Montgomery Clift
    James Dean
    Princess Di and Prince Charles (albeit short lived)
    Bill Clinton and Hillary (also short lived but transformed)
    Hillary Clinton
    Madonna
    Judy Garland
    Humpehry Bogart and Ingrid Bergman
    the list is endless. These are public figures that were loved and were models for thousands, millions of people who did not know them personally

    Obviously James Dean was a tough bad boy who had deep problems. For someone to see Dean as a well balanced law and order type counters what is obvious to most.

    Parent

    Wow (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by daring grace on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 06:42:57 PM EST
    That's quite a lens you're looking through at this:

    She had to have him meet Jarrett, before she was allowed to make the decision whether she wanted to take the job?

    I've never seen any credible account either by the Obamas themselves or anyone close to them that suggests this is the dynamic of their marriage.

    If we're speculating, Oculus suggests another one that makes more sense to me. And I can come up with others that are more consistent with what I've seen and heard about Michelle Obama's personality and character.

    Parent

    A person whose user name was "Kathy" (none / 0) (#111)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:18:31 PM EST
    used to comment on this issue during the primaries.  Really bugged her.

    Parent
    Now see (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by Steve M on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:22:36 PM EST
    and you accuse ME of having a sharp memory!

    Parent
    Huh? (none / 0) (#118)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:29:18 PM EST
    Kathy posted over 10,000 comments in a less than a year. How could anyone forget.

    Parent
    Who? (none / 0) (#120)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:30:46 PM EST
    lol (none / 0) (#122)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:39:25 PM EST
    I really wasn't joking. (none / 0) (#144)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:46:33 PM EST
    I remember the name, kinda, only. No idea what she was about.

    I guess her comments are not something that caught my eye all that much as I skimmed.

    Or if they did, they were just part 'n parcel of the election white noise that made my eyes glaze over.

    They come, and they go, here on TL...

    Parent

    I confess (none / 0) (#127)
    by Steve M on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:54:37 PM EST
    I had completely forgotten, and I still can barely remember that name.  My wife must be right about the selective memory thing.

    Parent
    Kathy (none / 0) (#130)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:59:23 PM EST
    She was one of the most clever, witty and sometimes knee slapping funny Hillary cultists that posted here. Of course she was also relentless in trashing Obama.

    IMO, she was a paid blogger working for Hillary's campaign.

    Parent

    How come (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by Steve M on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:20:00 PM EST
    no one is interested in paying an occasionally witty guy like me to blog in support of their preferred candidate?!

    Parent
    I bet you could find the (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by dk on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:24:29 PM EST
    work if you wanted to.

    Parent
    Last sentence. Baseless speculation. (none / 0) (#132)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:05:48 PM EST
    Hence the "IMO" n/t (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:08:48 PM EST
    IMO (none / 0) (#133)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:08:12 PM EST
    Means in my opinion, just in case you did not know that.

    Parent
    Thank you for instructing me. (none / 0) (#139)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:30:25 PM EST
    Well (none / 0) (#142)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:35:33 PM EST
    You seemed to have missed that I was stating an opinion. It did occur to me to give you the benefit of the doubt that you may have either not seen IMO, or did not know what it meant.

    Now I know that your were just being disagreeable.

    Parent

    I would hope most opinions expressed here (none / 0) (#146)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:46:41 PM EST
    would be based on something.  Maybe not.

    Parent
    Or (none / 0) (#149)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:51:50 PM EST
    It is not worth the time, nor has much importance for me to go into why I formed that opinion. Nor is it a pejorative, as your hostile reaction would suggest.

    I did state that opinion during the primary and it was not refuted.

    Would it shock you to know that Hillary hired PR people to comment on blogs? Or is that only something that you think Obama would have done, because he cheated?

    Parent

    Nice Article (none / 0) (#108)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:10:31 PM EST
    Obama, 45, would never make a run for president without his 43-year-old wife's approval and careful counsel, those close to her say.

    and

    Before she signed up, Michelle told Jarrett her fiance wanted to meet her "so he could figure out if he was comfortable with her going to work for Mayor Daley.''

    Obama had "some trepidation'' about Michelle working in politics, Jarrett said. (Michelle later was not thrilled with the idea of Obama running for state senator.)

    Quite the sexist arrangement... lol.

    Parent

    What does it say...? (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:54:40 PM EST
    When the conservative editorial page editor of The Detroit News, Nolan Finley,  has this to say about DADT?

    Obama to gays: Don't ask me

    Gays always seem to get thrown under the bus by the politicians who are supposed to love them.

    President Bill Clinton disappointed his gay supporters with "Don't ask, don't tell," a policy that opened the door to the military for gays, but only if they stayed in the closet.

    Now, President Barack Obama is reneging on campaign promises to make things right. He is leaving "Don't ask, don't tell" just as it is.

    Letting them serve their country shouldn't be so much for gays to ask of presidents who received such overwhelming support from them.

    Now that the military is fully integrated by gender, there doesn't seem to be much of an argument for keeping gays out. Sexual relations between male and female soldiers run the full spectrum, including marriages, pregnancies and, unfortunately, assaults. And the armed forces are handling it.

    Obama should keep his promise. This is an outdated and discriminatory policy that deprives the military of good soldiers. If gays want to fight and die for their country, they shouldn't have to beg.

    Particularly not of a president who vowed to embrace them.



    Tidbits (5.00 / 2) (#68)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:36:08 PM EST
    An Illinois teen knew he was too drunk to drive home after a Dave Matthews Band concert south of Milwaukee. So he fell asleep in his car, only to be awoken by a state trooper. Travis Peterson, 19, of Dixon, Ill., said even though he told the officer he was drunk and sleeping it off, the trooper ordered him to leave because the lot was being cleared.
    Once out of the parking lot, Peterson was arrested for drunken driving. He was subsequently found guilty and ordered to spend 60 days in jail.

    A Wisconsin appeals court on Wednesday commended Peterson for doing the right thing by trying to sleep it off, and said the trial court was wrong not to let him argue that police had entrapped him.

    Link

    And one for kdog (you think you're paying too much for smokes!)

    A New Hampshire man says he swiped his debit card at a gas station to buy a pack of cigarettes and was charged over 23 quadrillion dollars.

    Josh Muszynski (Moo-SIN'-ski) checked his account online a few hours later and saw the 17-digit number--a stunning $23,148,855,308,184,500 (twenty-three quadrillion, one hundred forty-eight trillion, eight hundred fifty-five billion, three hundred eight million, one hundred eighty-four thousand, five hundred dollars).

    Link

    That will probably go down in history (none / 0) (#74)
    by MO Blue on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:47:46 PM EST
    as the largest overdraft evah.

    Parent
    On the overdraft.... (none / 0) (#75)
    by coast on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:50:03 PM EST
    First two hours to get it cleared up?  I would have given up after fifteen minutes.  Second the $15 overdraft fee is really priceless.

    Parent
    Damn... (none / 0) (#80)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:57:32 PM EST
    musta been some high-class smokes:)  Seriously, god forbid we ever go cashless...I wonder if it would have been cleared up by the next day if it was 23 bucks, or 23 hundo.

    Good on the appeals court in the case of the Dave Mathews fan...if that ain't entrapment I don't know what is.  Obviously the officer who made the kid drive doesn't think DWI laws are about safety...he must think they are about racking up collars and fines and overtime, as many of us believe to be the case.

    Parent

    I was surprised... (none / 0) (#86)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:08:47 PM EST
    ...the kid didn't get arrested in the parking lot.  They'll arrest you here if you're in the back seat sleeping one off.  As long as you are in possession of the keys.  

    Parent
    Really... (none / 0) (#88)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:12:29 PM EST
    so people forced to live in their cars in this economy are basically barred from drinking legally?  What about RV's and motorhomes, zero tolerance there too?

    Thats f*cked up....Thanks MADD, thanks a lot.

    Parent

    People who live in their cars (none / 0) (#89)
    by Steve M on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:15:23 PM EST
    are still allowed to visit bars!

    Parent
    Sure... (none / 0) (#94)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:28:16 PM EST
    they just can't go home!  I know a couple all-hours joints, but most close at 4am:)

    Parent
    Im surprised BOA... (none / 0) (#105)
    by professorWagstaff on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:05:40 PM EST
    didn't call him to say, "Uh, what are you buying that costs 23 quadrillion dollars?" I bought a TV once and BOA called me within a few minutes to make sure I was indeed buying one. 23 quadrillion is a ridiculous number to try and comprehend, for sure!

    Parent
    I imagine... (none / 0) (#110)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:16:54 PM EST
    ...since it was a debit card and not a credit one that they just figured he was a quadrillionaire and could cover it.  

    They probably would have looooooooved to get the interest on that it it was a charge...

    Parent

    we choose the moon (4.50 / 2) (#1)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:07:59 AM EST
    A 40th anniversary simulated recreation of the Apollo 11 moonshot, that
    happens in realtime

    a good time to reflect on where you were at the time.
    as for me I was in Nancy Thomas' basement and with her parents away I was getting to third base for the very first time.

    one small step for man one giant leap . . .

    not to confuse anyone (5.00 / 0) (#18)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:56:47 AM EST
    I was getting to third base for the very first time

    with a girl

    Parent

    Too much information. (none / 0) (#30)
    by shoephone on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:35:37 PM EST
    I was... (none / 0) (#4)
    by Steve M on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:13:58 AM EST
    ...well, I was born in April of 1970, so someone can probably do the math...

    Parent
    sounds like (none / 0) (#5)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:15:52 AM EST
    someone else may have been doing the same thing at about the same time.

    Parent
    I was at Camp Muir on Mt Rainier (none / 0) (#9)
    by Carolyn in Baltimore on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:35:15 AM EST
    We listened to War of the Worlds on the radio at sunset with pink clouds below us and commented about them being on the moon while our landscape felt like Jupiter. I was 16.

    Parent
    I was (none / 0) (#10)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:39:05 AM EST
    17

    Parent
    WAY TOO MUCH INFORMATION (none / 0) (#22)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:01:07 PM EST
    Capt

    Parent
    Ha. Did we really need the girl's name? (none / 0) (#23)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:02:39 PM EST
    sorry (none / 0) (#43)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:02:14 PM EST
    the whole thing is sort of fixed in my memory as a unit.
    besides even if it was still her name, which it isnt, its not like anyone here is going to know her.

    I'm pretty sure it was one giant leap for her too.


    Parent

    I'm sure it was (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:02:45 PM EST
    Let's let her speak for herself! (none / 0) (#46)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:03:59 PM EST
    Nancy Thomas was my mom's maiden name. (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:10:12 PM EST
    Ha. How old are you? (none / 0) (#49)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:11:06 PM EST
    i was (none / 0) (#53)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:16:16 PM EST
    afraid to ask

    Parent
    I joke, of course. (none / 0) (#56)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:17:06 PM EST
    You joke? But not snark tag? Ha. (none / 0) (#100)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:58:53 PM EST
    Mid-40's. (none / 0) (#54)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:16:37 PM EST
    Being woken up to watch Armstrong and Aldrin walk on the moon was a very special treat for me and my sibs...

    Parent
    Good memories, sarc. (none / 0) (#66)
    by caseyOR on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:33:33 PM EST
    For me the memory is of my sister and me being awakened by our parents to watch the very first Mercury launch in 1961. My mom made us hot chocolate, my parents drank coffee, and we all marveled at the sight of Alan Shepherd hurtling into space and safely returning.

    It was so amazing, the feat itself and the promise of discovery it represented to us.

    The space program is a constant throughout my growing up. I am still waiting for manned flight to Mars. Oh, and where is my flying car???

    Parent

    I feel (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:37:20 PM EST
    the same way.   at the time I had no idea that future generations of kids would not only not have the hope of the space age to grow up with but would have to deal with a persistent reappearance of the conspiracy theory that it never really happened.

    my youth somehow, even though it was in the middle of the cold war, seemed much more hopeful and optimistic.

    more than the scientific benefits to society I think hope and optimism was the greatest product of the space age.


    Parent

    Hope and optimism (none / 0) (#73)
    by caseyOR on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:46:51 PM EST
    and a respect for science in particular, and knowledge in general. When did science become a dirty word?

    Back to hope and optimism-- the 60s certainly had their ups and downs, but the space program always gave us hope and brought us together as a nation, even if only for those major space events.

    Parent

    My generations... (none / 0) (#76)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:50:41 PM EST
    NASA space moment was the Challenger disaster...we watched live in grade school.

    Parent
    40 years later (none / 0) (#77)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:51:31 PM EST
    yikes (none / 0) (#78)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:54:26 PM EST
    probably no more watching live stuff in your school.
    too bad that.
    at the time I was just completing a very elaborate ad campaign for budweiser that had a challenger/space launch theme.
    it was scrapped.
     

    Parent
    Almost a microcosm (none / 0) (#85)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:08:36 PM EST
    of the country at large...the hope of the 60's and that hope getting crushed in the 80's.

    Parent
    Heh. (none / 0) (#82)
    by brodie on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:05:30 PM EST
    But too many astronauts over too long a time period would have to be awfully good actors, plus the very real possibility that one of them would no longer be able to continue to keep the secret.

    NASA would have to kill 'em off.

    Like they did in that movie from the 70s, the one about our faked mission to Mars.  Capricorn One.  Highly recommended.

    Parent

    Pres Nixon and (none / 0) (#90)
    by brodie on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:15:49 PM EST
    Sen Walter Mondale, for different reasons, played a major role in defunding NASA (though they weren't alone, nor the first), forcing it to cut back on further planned moon missions (iirc, they were scheduled to continue up to Apollo XXIII).

    Plus the public had become somewhat jaded and complacent about the moon shots, and the astronauts didn't seem to be finding anything terribly interesting on the lunar surface.  Public support began to wane as attention was refocused on earthly concerns.  

    Much of the magic of space exploration seemed to vanish, as NASA  concentrated on boring earth-orbit missions, then the crummy low-cost, and fairly dangerous space shuttle.  

    Parent

    yep (none / 0) (#93)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:26:06 PM EST
    for anyone who doesnt remember that I suggest the excellent film Apollo 13, full disclosure - I got a credit for effects on it.
    one of the main plot points of the movie was that the public had mostly lost interest in the space shots.  to the point that they were not even televising them live, that is, until things went wrong.  THEN they broadcast it live.
    they did not tell the astronauts.  they were doing their thing thinking they were going out live to america when the only ones seeing it were the people in NASA.


    Parent
    Apollo 13, definitely (none / 0) (#101)
    by brodie on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:00:58 PM EST
    a quality space entertainment, and highly accurate, since they had mission commander Lovell advising the filmmakers.

    NASA really blew it though in tempting the Fates and not skipping the number 13, then launching at 13 hundred hours and so forth.

    As for not televising the astronauts, it was inevitable since none of the flyboys were very charismatic, and people by 1970 had already seen the inside of the capsule and weightlessness from space many times, and beyond that all there would have been to talk about would be technical stuff, which was bound to force teevee viewers to reach for their remotes -- had remotes been widely available at that particular time ...

    Parent

    Lovell was around at (none / 0) (#107)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:09:14 PM EST
    Digital Domain when we were doing the effects several times.
    its funny.  there was movie stars there regularly like Arnold and Tom hanks and Cameron (who was part owner at the time) and Ron Howard.  pretty much a different one ever day and I was totally ho-hum.
    but around Lovell I got all girley.

     

    Parent

    btw (none / 0) (#123)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:40:32 PM EST
    a bit of trivia for fans of that film.
    there is no stock footage in that film.  many people thought the launch sequence used stock footage.  nope.  it was 100% CG.

    Parent
    It was so amazing, the feat itself (none / 0) (#72)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:41:56 PM EST
    It was so amazing, the feat itself and the promise of discovery it represented to us.
    Very well said.

    Parent
    Hey, Capt. I believe we are the same age. (none / 0) (#50)
    by caseyOR on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:12:17 PM EST
    I was 17, too. Alas, i was watching at home with my Mom and sisters. Not having nearly as much fun as you.

    Parent
    whats more (none / 0) (#57)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:21:23 PM EST
    my name is casey

    Parent
    More fun facts, capt. (none / 0) (#62)
    by caseyOR on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:26:41 PM EST
    You live, IIRC, in central Illinois. I was born and raised in central Illinois.

    Parent
    this is (none / 0) (#64)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:29:00 PM EST
    getting creepy

    Parent
    Maybe just an interesting convergence (none / 0) (#71)
    by caseyOR on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:38:58 PM EST
    as opposed to creepy. For me, creepy would be finding out you were my long lost twin, or something like that.

    Parent
    just (none / 0) (#79)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:55:50 PM EST
    kidding.  

    Parent
    Okay, but you're not (none / 0) (#84)
    by caseyOR on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:08:06 PM EST
    my long lost twin, right?

    Parent
    not (none / 0) (#87)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:10:53 PM EST
    as far as I know.  but if I was, meeting like this we could totally get on Oprah.


    Parent
    So totally an Oprah show (none / 0) (#95)
    by caseyOR on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:35:00 PM EST
    Do you think she would give us new cars?

    Parent
    hmmmm (none / 0) (#96)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:43:36 PM EST
    Six degrees of separation. (none / 0) (#102)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:02:34 PM EST
    We were driving in a VW bug from (none / 0) (#12)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:41:21 AM EST
    Ann Arbor to Traverse City area.  Listening to the radio.  Decided to turn around and head to our TV to watch.  

    Parent
    We were sitting at a railroad crossing (none / 0) (#13)
    by Democratic Cat on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:44:12 AM EST
    on the way home from a Homecoming festival in a small town in Illinois.  We got stuck waiting for a l-o-n-g freight train, and listened to the landing on the radio.  It's one of the most vivid memories of my youth.

    Parent
    I was (none / 0) (#21)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:00:21 PM EST
    6 months old, so I assume I was asleep, since it was at 11:00 at night!

    Parent
    I should probably be shot for this, but... (none / 0) (#157)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 07:19:33 PM EST
    keeping with the spirit of the Capt at the start of this section, at 6 months perhaps you were at 2nd base.

    Parent
    Tiger +1... (none / 0) (#2)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:08:21 AM EST
    ...and tied for 75th place.  Nice to see a fellow old timer like Tom Watson in the lead (at least for now).  Does my heart good.

    2 questions... (none / 0) (#3)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:09:32 AM EST
    why is the NYPD still using typewriters?  Even my luddite arse moved on to Microsoft Word 10 years ago.  I know many officers aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer, but it ain't that hard to figure out a pc.  Swintec must have friends in this city.

    And more importantly, why is their budget 4 billion with a b?  I thought we were broke,  does that only apply to social services that actually might serve somebody?  Good grief.

    Easy (none / 0) (#7)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:24:06 AM EST
    Typewriter takes longer, corrections mean starting over, and no computer record that can come back to bite them in the a$$.

    They have to eat up a lot of time sitting around, and doughnuts, frequent showers and changes of clothes does not do it.

    I am surprised that they are so advanced. Probably fought typewriters when they were introduced.

    And they need lots of money, just like you and me. Thing is they are able to requisition it, unlike you or me, to keep us safe.. lol

    Parent

    I nominate... (none / 0) (#11)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:40:49 AM EST
    squeaky for police commisioner!

    Parent
    lol (none / 0) (#15)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:53:27 AM EST
    Thanks, but no thanks. I do not do well with managing people, and the idea of managing cops... ugh, a nightmare.

    Parent
    More proof of Vonneguts theory... (none / 0) (#20)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:59:44 AM EST
    that anybody who would be good for a government position is smart enough not to want the job:)

    Parent
    Ouch. (none / 0) (#37)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:51:19 PM EST
    Squeaky as police commissioner, (none / 0) (#104)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:03:39 PM EST
    nominated by k dog.  Maybe no police department?

    Parent
    Nah... (none / 0) (#114)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:22:42 PM EST
    though it might look like it compared to the army the NYPD has now...I'd keep detectives to investigate violent crimes and a couple squad cars for 911 calls...total cost estimate 4 million, with an m...and the cops that don't get a pink slip get raises.

    Parent
    You don't think the NYPD is part of the (none / 0) (#115)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:25:21 PM EST
    reasons persons such as me enjoy being in Manhattan these days as opposed to earlier?

    Parent
    I liked the old city better... (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:42:31 PM EST
    more dangerous, yes...but the place had character.  Now Times Square may as well be Disneyworld, and the only thing you can score at the Port Authority is a bus ride or a citation.  

    Boring.

    Parent

    Demographics (none / 0) (#135)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:10:11 PM EST
    Affect crime on the street far more than any thing else. But I am sure that sociology is irrelevant to a prosecutor.

    Parent
    I agree with your first sentence. You (5.00 / 1) (#148)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:48:57 PM EST
    didn't need to add the second.

    Parent
    I Apologize (none / 0) (#151)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 05:05:47 PM EST
    I projected from your comment that you were buying Giuliani's self serving fiction hook line and sinker. Obviously I was wrong.

    Glad to see that we are on the same page regarding that issue.

    Parent

    I think you are onto something... (none / 0) (#14)
    by Fabian on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:52:25 AM EST
    Working in a hospital, I was on at least a few audit trail logs.  Every computer system keeps track of who is logged on and exactly what and when they access information or enter it.  Plus the security systems - you swipe a card to enter or exit and the computer records it all.  

    No data, no record, less likelihood of being caught doing something you shouldn't.  

    Parent

    on $4b (none / 0) (#51)
    by BackFromOhio on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:12:34 PM EST
    I'm no expert, but I am here in NYC, and our police force not only protects our many millions of residents, but the millions more who work here daily, visit from other parts of the nation and around the globe, and has the responsibility for protecting dignitaries who come here for U.N. meetings and the like.  These things cost money, and yes, New Yorkers pay a good portion of the expenses of international meetings and protecting our own national leaders on the many occasions they come here on business.  As of a few years ago, I understood that NYC was spending $250M (and probably much more since) on protecting the city from terrorists.

    Parent
    Protects millions of residents? (none / 0) (#59)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:22:33 PM EST
    Perhaps, but they also endanger hundreds of thousands of non-violent freedom-loving people, if not millions.

    4 billion is nuts even if the Queen of England moved to the Upper East Side and Osama was living in Brooklyn.

    Where does it go?...rookie officers qualify for food stamps for crying out loud...something is rotten in Gotham.

    Parent

    Happy Birthday Washington, D.C.! (none / 0) (#6)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:20:30 AM EST
    On this day in 1790, Washington, D.C. was established as the capital of the United States, after the signing of the Residence Act.

    It's also my mother's birthday, (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:33:50 AM EST
    but she isn't quite as old as Our Nation's Capital...only 79.  She made me promise - again - that she did NOT want any kind of big do for her 80th next year.

    Yes, Mom.

    Parent

    Give her a surprise Christmas party! (none / 0) (#16)
    by Fabian on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:54:47 AM EST
    Or do the scrapbook thing - have everyone contribute a page or two for a scrapbook.  Mail them to her.  No party, no fuss and bother - but every day another pleasant surprise in the mail.

    Parent
    That's a great idea! (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:14:53 PM EST
    The Christmas before last, my older daughter made scrapbooks for my husband and I, for my mother and for my brother and his wife.  She had pored over photos and letters and other memorabilia, family history, and put together three very remarkable books that will be treasured forever.

    We gave my mom a surprise party for her 70th, and she loved it; really not sure why she's so adamant that we not do something similar for her 80th, but it might be that she just cannot believe she's going to be 80 - and that 80 = old.

    We'll do something special to honor the milestone, and maybe it can be something that makes her feel younger, not older!

    Parent

    Really nice ideas to celebrate this very special (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:29:27 PM EST
    birthday.  Please permit a suggestion: don't make it a surprise party. For a couple of reasons, one of which is permitting the celebrant to build up to the joy of the event, which can be a part of the fun.  Another, is the excitement of surprise can be a bit much for some elderly people.

    Parent
    Happy Birthday Anne's mom! (none / 0) (#17)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:55:54 AM EST
    Also "Shoeless" Joe Jackson (1888), Barbara Stanwyck (1907), Orville Redenbacher (1907), Ginger Rogers (1911), Max McGee (1927), Margaret Court (1942), Jimmy Johnson (1943), Alexis Herman (1947), Stewart Copeland (of the band The Police) (1952), Douglas Feith (1953), Michael Flately (1958), Phoebe Cates (1963), Claude Lemieux (1965), Will Farrell (1967), Barry Sanders (1968), and Corey Feldman (1971).

    Parent
    Any thoughts on.... (none / 0) (#19)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 11:58:01 AM EST
    the SS admin. spending 700 large for their little conference out in AZ?  

    As anyone who has ever been to one of these things knows, everybody sleeps through the seminars and motivational speakers waiting for the free drinks and with any luck a random hook-up...its one thing when its on a private dime, but the SS admin.?  I know 700k of the federal budget ain't nothing, but its the principle.  It is supposed to be public service, not lets party on the public.

    Homophobic Human Rights Law (none / 0) (#25)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:15:19 PM EST
    Oxymoron? No just a moron. A seriously misguided homophobe has been hired by NYU law dept to teach civil rights law.

    Some of her choice quotes:

    she compared anal sex to "shoving a straw up your nose to drink," for example, and in a speech supporting the continued criminalization of sex between men (which she called "acts of gross indecency") let loose gems such as "You cannot make a human wrong a human right" and "Diversity is not a license for perversity."

    Of course the students are in an uproar, and Dr Thio claims that she is a victim here. lol...

    link via MeFi

    Not many signing up for her class, it seems..

    Wow, NYU blew it big time (none / 0) (#27)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:26:50 PM EST
    Scalia from south Asia.

    Parent
    Er, east asia (none / 0) (#28)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:28:06 PM EST
    Doesn't have the same rhyme, though.

    Parent
    the first one din't rhyme either (none / 0) (#63)
    by DFLer on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:27:53 PM EST
    "Assonance: a rhyme that doesn't work"

    - from Educating Rita

    Parent

    So sue me ;-) (none / 0) (#67)
    by andgarden on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 01:34:52 PM EST
    a poem for you (none / 0) (#158)
    by DFLer on Fri Jul 17, 2009 at 11:24:51 AM EST
    I'll sue you.
    Undo you.
    'Cause I see
    Right through you.

    I'll let loose what is due you
    To fine-tune and harden.
    For this I'll pursue you,
    To educate andgarden.

    Parent

    I was at work for the launch, no TV (none / 0) (#35)
    by rdandrea on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 12:46:37 PM EST
    I was at band practice when the first EVA started.  Got to see the tail end.

    Most people alive (none / 0) (#92)
    by brodie on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:20:54 PM EST
    at that time and of a certain age remember much more where they were at the time of the lunar landing and moon walk, but that was on Jly 20.

    I'm not sure if memories are so strong or vivid about the day of the launch itself, Jly 16, since while it was the beginning of an historic mission, launch was something fairly routine by then.

    Parent

    John McCain (none / 0) (#98)
    by CST on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 02:55:02 PM EST
    taking a stand against torture again.

    I wonder if he would support prosecutions.

    CBO blows up dem reationale for reform (none / 0) (#121)
    by Slado on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:35:11 PM EST
    CBO

    Glad someone is watching the store while congress tries to cram through more bad legislation.

    When will democrats put out real legislation instead of bad bills to make real issues worse.

    but, but (none / 0) (#124)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 03:40:51 PM EST
    I heard Obama saying on NPR just yesterday that he's going to get us "Less expensive, better, healthcare."

    Parent
    Read the transcript to the hearing (none / 0) (#143)
    by Slado on Thu Jul 16, 2009 at 04:36:47 PM EST
    D-ND asked him the same question multiple ways and the answer was the same every time.

    More expensive.

    The ultimate sign of arrogance was Reid when asked about the CBO...."He should run for congress".

    Another sign that if you're not on board with the agenda you will be taken down because something "must" be done.  

    I though Bush was out of office?

    Parent