Sunday Morning Open Thread

Tom Watson goes for history - trying to become the oldest winner of a golf major, in this case the British Open. The final round at Turnberry (where Watson had his legendary (for golf fans anyway) duel with Nicklaus) is must watching for golf aficionados (Spanish is IN, as Larry Wilmore might say.) You can follow online here. One interesting sidebar - Watson's closest opponent, Englishman Ross Fisher, has said he will leave the final round if his wife goes into labor today (she is due apparently.) Interesting question - is he a mensch for doing this or a louse for playing the tournament in the first place?

The Tour de France heads to the Swiss Alps today with a mountain top finish. Lance Armstrong and Johan Bruyneel (team manager of Astana, the Armstrong team (Contador is ostensibly the team leader, but Bruyneel is working for Armstrong)) spent the night deflecting criticism from George Hincapie. It seems not to have worked. The NYTImes late filing has this: "Rich Hincapie said that his brother was saddened that the Garmin-Slipstream team and Astana had been working out at the front of the pack Saturday, while the breakaway struggled to stay out front. . . . “I don’t think he has called the Astana guys or the Garmin guys to say anything, but there have been an awful lot of excuses flying around,” he said. “Why do they feel like they have to explain anything if they haven’t done anything wrong? They are obviously guilty or worried.”" Yep. Anyway, today's stage should be dramatic. You can watch it on Versus or online here.

Update - Contador explodes up the mountain. Demolishes the field. Takes yellow.

This is an Open Thread. You can even talk about politics or the criminal law if you like.

< Saturday Night Media Roundup and Open Thread | Sam Riddle Arraigned in Detroit Corruption Case >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Are the Dems selling us out once again? (5.00 / 6) (#2)
    by MO Blue on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 07:31:49 AM EST
    Rep. Charles Boustany (R-La.) asserted that an "interesting development" is taking place underway that, if true, could effectively remove Democratic leadership from the driver's seat on healthcare reform legislation in the House.

    "There's an interesting development occurring behind the scenes, wherein moderate Democrats -- so-called "Blue Dog" Democrats -- and business-friendly new Democrats are actually starting to have conversations with us to build a coalition from the center outward, to actually really come up with substantive and well-founded healthcare reform," Boustany said during an appearance on Fox News. "And that's the only way to do this."


    Hopefully this isn't true but it is very consistent with the actions of Blue Dogs in the past. If true, with Dems like these, Republicans don't need to get elected. Democrats will pass Republican policies for them. The way things are going the final so called Health  Care Reform bill will be nothing more than a very expensive give away to the insurance companies with no cost containment and little benefit to the average citizen.

    Reading aroung this morning (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 08:48:02 AM EST
    and coming to the same conclusions.  In my mind's eye there is nothing more important than the health of our nation.  It is the lynch pin to any other possible successes we ever want to have.  As my grandmother once reminded me, if you have your health you have everything....you have quality of life.  If you don't have your health, your quality of life is diminished.  And if you you have challenged health and must fight every single day to get whatever healthcare you can....you have no life.

    It is really sad to watch people already (5.00 / 4) (#15)
    by MO Blue on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:19:36 AM EST
    dealing with a major illness have to spend what little energy they have fighting with their insurance company to let them have the treatment that their doctor wants them to have.

    We aren't talking about fly-by-night doctors or institutions either that might be trying to scam the system. These doctors and hospitals are well recognized in their field and the community for the exception knowledge and care that they provide.

    If we had real journalists, rather than simpering media prima-donnas, they would be reporting on the shortfalls of our current health insurance on a nightly basis rather than repeating the lies of politicians that have been bought and paid for by the insurance industry.


    Yes. (5.00 / 4) (#13)
    by Carolyn in Baltimore on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:18:19 AM EST
    And it is unfortunate. I believe we need single payer to compete with countries that have universal health care. I don't understand why employers aren't clamoring for this: it would decrease health insurance costs and therefore product costs and energize any manufacturing capability we have left.

    A robust and accessible public option is the compromise position: it puts us in a position to move to single payer eventually and helps with the transition away from the rent-collector class. But does not solve the core problem.
    I would even go for an expansion of income limits and age limits for Medicaid  and SCHIP and Medicare so it slowly makes sure the poor and harder to insure people are covered. Or allow paid opt-ins at some point and start expanding from there.

    I believe we are being sold out and won't even get that. This sucks. We will get a plan with a nominal public option so Obama and the Dems can declare victory even as the insurance collection agencies increase their mandate.


    Even before being further watered down, (5.00 / 5) (#17)
    by MO Blue on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:36:55 AM EST
    the bills do not contain a robust and accessible public option. As it stands, the bills have severe restrictions on who may participate in the public options, reducing any chance that it will compel the insurance companies to reduce their rates or clean up their act. By restricting participation and size, the politicians have insured that it will be ineffective. The way the public option is currently structured, I fear that it will only be available to those whose premiums are highly subsidized  and those with preexisting conditions and will not be self-sustaining, It may, in fact, become a constant drain on the budget and provide proof positive for the insurance industry and their political minions that private insurance is the only way to go in America.

    I have this exact same fear... (5.00 / 5) (#28)
    by sallywally on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 10:36:34 AM EST
    that the Obama/Dem plan will fail because of the compromises and that will show there can't be any reform - instead of showing the truth: that it was co-opted by the insurance lobby and their minions in the Obama admin, the Congress and the media.

    Haven't we seen this movie before? (5.00 / 4) (#30)
    by Fabian on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 10:41:07 AM EST
    You'd think that people would learn - but, wait, these are politicians we are talking about.  It's as if it didn't happen in the past two years, it's completely off their radar, down the memory hole!

    Let's not let (5.00 / 8) (#91)
    by cal1942 on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:41:52 PM EST
    Obama himself off the hook.  He placed the minions in his administration.  He talked about baby boomers whining about their entitlements.

    He failed to send specific legislation to Congress.

    This is his failure.


    Goldman Sachs contributions to key players (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by lambertstrether on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:33:02 AM EST
    Dodd, and Snowe and Collins.

    Suggests to me that the key action is in the Senate. Which is unfortunate, since that makes HR3200 as good as it gets.


    What do you want to bet that (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by MO Blue on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:42:35 AM EST
    HR3200 will be further watered down until it bears no resemblance to the current bill? IMO HR3200 as it stands is not very good because of the restrictions it places on who may participate in the public plan but it can and probably will get a lot worse before all is said and done.

    Well, here's hoping (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by nycstray on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:53:52 AM EST
    CA goes single payer. Sounds like it might be down to that as my last hope?

    Some states (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by Carolyn in Baltimore on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 10:08:32 AM EST
    will be able to go that way: those with such high volume and costs that setting up a single payer system is cheaper than continuing with current programs and those that are already setting up an infrastructure moving in that direction.

    For example, Maryland has been fairly decent at expanding their state/federal programs well over the federal poverty mandates, and currently has plans to continue expanding not just eligibility but services/benefits. And they have an insurance pool for people unable to get affordable insurance through other means. Currently when you are eligible you have a choice of several private HMO plans. At some point I think the state could decide to administrate themselves.

    I'm sure there are other ways to do this. I'm just guessing that the states who might move in this direction will be the same states that have also gone further with expanding formal family relationships (gay marriage, civil unions, domestic partnerships, and state benefits for domestic partnerships).


    Unless the bill that passes outlaws single payer (none / 0) (#96)
    by lambertstrether on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:49:33 PM EST
    I believe that ERISA as it stands could make state experiments with single payer legally impossible. Kucinich got an amendment passed that rescinded that, but IIRC there are two other committees involved, and at least one of them rejected the idea.

    You'd think that "Let the states experiment" is so simply it has to be allowed, but not necessarily.

    Also, the Kucinich success was due to a "strange bedfellows" vote from Progressives and states' rights conservatives (!!).

    No time for links, sorry.


    According to PNHP, (5.00 / 2) (#106)
    by Anne on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:04:41 PM EST

    What about ERISA? Doesn't it stand in the way of states implementing universal health care plans?

    No. ERISA (the Employees Retirement Income Security Act) prevents a state from requiring that a self-insured employer provide certain benefits to their employees. However, a single-payer plan would not mandate the composition of employer benefit plans - it would replace them with a new system that would essentially be "Medicare for all." The state would require employers to pay a payroll tax into the health care trust fund, which is clearly legal.

    I don't know enough about ERISA to know if this is accurate, but I have no reason to think it isn't.


    This is correct, but I wouldn't rule out (none / 0) (#144)
    by allimom99 on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:01:27 PM EST
    some tweaking of COBRA provisions, or eventually their elimination, since guaranteed insurability would eliminate the barrier of pre-existing conditions to getting other coverage.

    That being said, I have also become discouraged at the prospect of anything worthwhile coming out by the time everyone, including Obama, is done 'compromising' (that is, caving to the Rs). Please let me be wrong, but this would be about par for the course. What a disappointment.


    I was thinking of the DK amend (none / 0) (#100)
    by nycstray on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:58:39 PM EST
    I can't even imagine what health care is going to cost while we wait for at least 4 yrs for some sort of crappy non-reform.

    Given how abominable the proposed (5.00 / 5) (#25)
    by Anne on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 10:12:20 AM EST
    reform legislation is shaping up to be, I'm not opposed to this whole thing turning into a stalemate, with neither Dems nor Preublicans having enough of a coalition to pass anything; in this case, I think nothing will be much better than the something - anything - there seems to be a push to pass.

    What is being proposed is not the "half a loaf" that the we-support-Obama-no-matter-what crowd would argue it is.  How can it be when it is being crafted to prevent ANY possibility of eventually moving toward a single-payer plan?  And it isn't "a start" toward more substantive reform, either, unless you consider the eventual gutting of Medicare and Medicaid the eventual reform that is likely to happen.

    When the process of reform starts with an emphasis on insurance, and not on improving access to and affordability of health CARE, the end result can only be a boon for the insurance industry; if you leave them in charge, we will not be getting better care, more affordable care, we will not be reducing the cost of care or spending by the government.  We will be sicker and poorer and the a$$hats that put this plan together will be completely baffled (no one could have anticipated...) that the only change they managed to bring about was change for the worse.

    And there will be no appetite or interest in starting over; if anything, I think we could expect more hare-brained ideas about taking more money out of programs for the oldest and poorest, and then going after Social Security.  What it will really be is a perfect set-up for Republicans who would like nothing better than to dismantle any program that provides a benefit to people who are too old and too poor to deserve a place in this world.

    And the fact that they are too chicken to implement their changes until after the 2012 elections, leaving the people who most need help to wait even longer, is just evidence - more evidence - that it isn't the people they care about, but the massive donations from the health industry and the assurance that they can continue to walk the halls of Congress.


    At bottom (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by cal1942 on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:52:09 PM EST
    much or all of this, including the destruction of Social Security, is to avoid additional taxation on the very wealthy and to support share values for the very wealthy.

    Its not all blue dogs (2.00 / 0) (#54)
    by DXP on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:46:31 AM EST
    Senator Wyden is very ethical and liberal and opposed the health insurance ("care"?) bill. Interesting alternative:

    "It's very rare to see something like this and a reflection of the fact that Wyden's plan cannot easily be characterized as either liberal or conservative ... it's just different."



    It's not. (none / 0) (#68)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:06:37 PM EST
    Rep. Polis (certainly not a Blue Dog, by any stretch of the imagination) is also against it.  Or, in particular (as I understand it), the fact that a S-corp business would pay a higher surcharge than a C-corp would.  This, he argues, creates an unfair playing field.  

    Is this simply Jared looking out for Jared or a reasonable objection?  Having not read the entire bill (as thick as a big city phonebook as it stands), it is hard for me to say.


    Wyden way too invested in bipartisan (none / 0) (#134)
    by caseyOR on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 06:01:37 PM EST
    nonsense. And, he is not a supporter of a robust public option. Wyden's health care proposal is nothing more than a give-away to the insurance industry. It requires people to pay for their own insurance (eliminates employer paid insurance), but does nothing to rein in the ridiculous practices of the insurance parasites.

    I put Ron Wyden in the category of politicians whose goal is to pass a bill, not to reform healthcare.

    As an aside, when reading about anything Wyden does or says, it is wise to keep in mind that even in ego-driven Washington, D.C., the most dangerous place to be is between Ron Wyden and any camera or microphone.


    Could end up being the best beginning (none / 0) (#135)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 06:09:29 PM EST
    Wyden's health care proposal is nothing more than a give-away to the insurance industry. It requires people to pay for their own insurance (eliminates employer paid insurance), but does nothing to rein in the ridiculous practices of the insurance parasites.

    That's no give-away to the insurance industry. What percentage of people currently covered by employers do you think can afford to pay their own premiums?

    Let's just, as an example, say 50%. The insurance industry would take that big of a hit in one day, and with every premium increase they attempt, they would lose another 10% of their customers.

    That just might be the only way to wake up the congressional body on just how much the voters in this country are willing to assist them in their coddling of corporate money.


    Don't understand your comment. (none / 0) (#136)
    by caseyOR on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 06:17:11 PM EST
    If people are required to purchase health insurance, but nothing is done to rein in costs, how is this a hit to the insurance companies? No matter how much they raise premiums, people must buy the insurance.

    And even if Congress somehow took note of the burden this was putting on the American people, what evidence is there to suggest they would respond with meaningful action?  To date, i would say absolutely none.


    They can tell people all they want (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by nycstray on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 06:38:39 PM EST
    that they must buy insurance. If the money is not there, it just isn't there. How many people can afford COBRA when they lose a job? Especially middle/low income folks? How many people "go naked" each year because their employer provided insurance is too high? They really can't force people to buy insurance.

    Exactly (none / 0) (#138)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 07:17:59 PM EST
    Short of taxes, what authority does our government have to force us to spend our own earnings on their priorities? I think such a plan would have consequences our congressional representatives haven't even considered.

    Is there any plan under serious (none / 0) (#139)
    by caseyOR on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 07:51:49 PM EST
    consideration that does not require that everyone have insurance? Set aside single payer, which is not taken seriously by Congress, the plans that have come out of committee all have mandates for coverage. Some may provide a little subsidy to help people purchase insurance, but the subsidies are hardly substantial, and they cut off at what I think is too low an income point. And none has any serious cost controls on the insurance industry or providers.

    The plans all have penalties for not carrying insurance. And, IIRC, none of them provides a serious public option.

    So, unless your point is that any mandate that requires people to have insurance will trigger a citizen revolt, I don't think your comment is realistic (although I hope you are proven correct, and I am wrong).


    Do you even need to ask? (none / 0) (#12)
    by nycstray on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:04:54 AM EST
    Oh, the happy-talk! (none / 0) (#90)
    by Sumner on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:39:58 PM EST
    If you wish to be a success in the world, promise everything, deliver nothing." ~~Napoleon

    I don't see anything wrong with Fisher (5.00 / 4) (#5)
    by nycstray on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 08:24:12 AM EST
    playing/leaving if labor happens. I know someone who "should" have had her baby last Sat. She was still very pregnant (and working) when I saw her yesterday . . .

    Agreed (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by CoralGables on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 08:30:49 AM EST
    Mothers and Fathers everywhere work right up until the time they head to the hospital.

    The week before my wife was due (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by Steve M on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:43:28 AM EST
    I had to go to an arbitration hearing 2.5 hours away all week.  No choice, the arbitrators wouldn't give me an adjournment.  Kind of rough but everything worked out ok.

    Fisher is just lucky the tournament isn't in St. Andrews this year.  60 minute ride to the closest delivery hospital from there!


    Phil Mickelsen did the same thing (none / 0) (#31)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 10:55:28 AM EST
    a few years ago.  Of course he may not be a pro golfer's best role model.

    Sounds like a mensch. (5.00 / 6) (#7)
    by Dr Molly on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 08:32:15 AM EST
    Probability of going into labor on due date pretty low.

    Too true. (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by Cream City on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 10:31:06 AM EST
    My first apparently was a ten-month pregnancy, even with an ultrasound to "pinpoint" the due date.  Ha.  I just kept working, my spouse just kept working, and it all worked out as the stork, not the humans, planned. :-)

    If Fisher's wife is comfortable with the (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 08:55:20 AM EST
    arrangement my goodness, I would think everything is absolutely fine and he's a good person and so is she.  I'm all about seeking equality in all things but the truth is that when you are pregnant and due, outside of foot rubs and back rubs there isn't a whole lot the male part of this equation can do at this point until labor kicks off.  My husband couldn't even get me a tasty treat because I didn't really have much appetite at this point either.

    More evidence that fox "news" (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by kenosharick on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:37:12 AM EST
    is completely divorced from reality: this morning Chris Wallace stated to his panel, and no one (including "liberal" Juan Williams) disagreed, "we can all agree that the Republicans were very easy on her [Sotomayor]." I thought he was joking at first.

    'Easy' (5.00 / 0) (#26)
    by Carolyn in Baltimore on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 10:13:59 AM EST
    only because they couldn't get any traction with their attempts to rile her or get her to admit to anything. Nothing stuck, but not because they were 'easy' on her.

    Uh. Um. er... (none / 0) (#23)
    by Fabian on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 10:04:09 AM EST
    Good thing I don't watch those shows.  I'd either be frothing at the mouth or drooling slack jawed.

    I have to hand it to Obama, Sotomayor was a good pick from a likelihood of easy confirmation POV.  It's hard to imagine how any campaign to oppose her could be launched.  She's over qualified compared at least some of the current Justices, she has no skeletons, she has no radical judicial philosophy.  

    I'm beginning to think that eight years of Bush means that there are now plenty of qualified people for appointments who were ignored because they didn't have the right "qualifications" for a Bush appointee.  Heckuvajob Brownie, among many, many others.


    The controlled corporate media (none / 0) (#50)
    by Sumner on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:43:02 AM EST
    When I commented in Saturday morning's open thread, on Harry Potter as an icon of power for kids and that they also love vampires because vampires exist outside of the rules and norms of Society, I stopped far short.

    I deliberately chose not to further explain about the sexual allure of vampires, that they represent an extension of Walter A. Davis' "eroticization of thanatos", theory, where through cultural psychological operations, "Eros must be turned into evil, sin, pollution. So that all of one's desire can go into thanatos." Voilà, vampires embody eroticism.

    I did not get into Der Spiegel's recent report on the massive cultural trend of pubic shaving that cuts across age and gender. A trip to a nude beach or nudist resort will reveal that men, women and children are shaving, about half of people, according to the report. The articles state that children, "who are just entering into puberty, are already waging battles against their pubic hair", "because they feel that pubic hair is disgusting" and "that they now see their genitals as inherently dirty".

    None-the-less, I watched for the two tale-tell propaganda blitzes that automatcally come in response to posts about young people and their empowerment and desires.

    The response was swift, CNN's Headline News blitzed about pedophiles and that they had to be castrated, that there was no other way to deal with the "psychopathy".

    The other usual response, was on Fox, and dealt with "America is a nation of Czars". We know these stories are coming from the administration. Our president, is one-third the power of a king. A king vests the executive, legislative and judicial power all in himself. A czar is the same as an emperor, and is more powerful than a king, with empire often containing a number of kingdoms.

    The notion that the president can appoint and rule over czars, is utterly oxymoronic, completely preposterous, as a czar is free of any law, restriction, or constitution. How convenient for the president to promulgate such a self-serving deception, that he is above czars. Operation Mockingbird, and then some.


    Employment! (5.00 / 11) (#29)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 10:41:06 AM EST
    i got hired, start on August 10! hooray!

    Yay! (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by andgarden on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 10:56:26 AM EST
    I hope it's something to your liking.

    Hurray! (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by MO Blue on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 10:56:56 AM EST

    Excellent. I was hoping you would (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 10:56:58 AM EST
    keep us posted.  Will you need to change your screen name to jeffinXXXXXXX?

    I thought I might, but changing location within (5.00 / 7) (#36)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:03:15 AM EST
    the state-- north alabama... Sand Mountain, snake handlers, 20 percent Hispanic. Being bilingual has already come in handy. Was asked by some Central Americans ( I was explaining a sign in a store) if I was from Spain. They said my accent was very Spanish, not South American.

    Also, a significant raise... time to pay some bills in a couple of months.


    Oculus, I pulled a Medgar Evers 10 years ago. (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:09:29 AM EST
    I quoted, "I don't know if I'm goint to Heaven or if I'm going to Hell. I DO know that I'm going FROM Alabama."

    What better place to fight the good fight than home?


    What is that Bible verse about (none / 0) (#39)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:19:36 AM EST
    Jesus being "in" the world, not "of" it?  Maybe you are jeffofalabama.  

    John 18:36? (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:30:48 AM EST
    I am certainly 'of' alabama, and though my faith might not be mainstream,  certainly far from either literal or fundamental,  I still learned all sorts of things from VBS ;-)

    Heck, it was the early-mid 60s. you went to your church's vbs, and then every other church's VBS!
    VBS in the morning, then the community center pool in the afternoon.

    Where I grew up, the CC pool was integrated from as far back as I can remember. The first time I went to a segregated pool, it was at the Elks club.

    Odd, what memories emerge. Especially given recent events, not 45 year old events, in PA.


    Here is my most vivid VBS memory: (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:36:00 AM EST
    craft project was to spell out the Lord's Prayer with macaroni letters on popsicle sticks to which we applied shellac.  Very tough, as the letters kept slipping out of line.  Lanyards would have been easier.

    Although my dad was a minister, I don't remember having to go to VBS at other churches, just ours.  I did spend a whole lot of time at the municipal pool.  I think it was integrated but hard to remember as then (same now) not a high percentage of minorities in Iowa.

    P.S.  PA?


    Sorry, Pennsylvania. (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:39:24 AM EST
    I think the reason we wnt to so many was, quite simply, to give parents a break!

    Quite ecumenical. Did you go to (none / 0) (#47)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:40:17 AM EST
    Sunday School when you were vacationing out of town?

    Only at one of the grandperents' (5.00 / 3) (#58)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:57:18 AM EST
    At the other, divorced, born in Potsdam, there was a 'happy hour' every afternoon. Children were allowed either one 5-ounce glass of beer, or one 'highball,' usually made with about 3 drops of rye whiskey.
    Adults? well, it was happy hour, and these were all teachers from Hackensack NJ, who all built zummerhauses on the same lane on the same lake.

    Now, while we didn't go to church there, every sunday afternoon we rolled up the carpets, the neighbors came over, and people danced the polka. Oh, and there was always a barrel of beer on sunday afternoons. No electricity, an outhouse, (electricity and indoor plumbing werent installed in the summerhouse until I was about 8), but thousands of books, from classics to anatomy, to biology to archaeiology to even Rosicrucian tracts!

    A lake in which to swim and bathe, a hand-wringer washer (laundromats 15 miles away in town)...

    interesting times. I'd love read about Iowa at that time, too.


    Pretty sure you could get a book, or (none / 0) (#84)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:27:22 PM EST
    at least a novella, out of those experiences.

    Surely not...that can't be right... (none / 0) (#89)
    by oldpro on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:38:07 PM EST
    everybody knows teachers can't possibly afford summerhouses...

    Yes. Snark.


    Oh, those luxury summerhouses... (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 02:33:32 PM EST
    I ALWAYS slept on the porch. I'm 49, and my age would still put me on the porch if we still had it!

    also, 49 but at the kidddie table? wow. I'd be glad to sit there. Now it's owned by people who commute to nyc by interstate. Before the interstate, it was isolated... Delaware Water Gap, Poconos... I wish I could summer there now.


    Might I suggest... (none / 0) (#94)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:46:23 PM EST
    ...this for a view of Iowa back in the day? Bryson describes life growing up in Des Moines in the 50's.  Not much changed between the period he wrote about and what is was like for me, a decade or so later.  

    My brother really liked this book. (none / 0) (#95)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:49:27 PM EST
    I haven't read it yet.  When I read Doris Kearns Goodwin's "Wait Til Next Year," I was surprised life in Brooklyn and Far Rockaway was so similar to life in SE Iowa during the same time period.

    Oh, got it. The PA swimming pool. (none / 0) (#48)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:41:02 AM EST
    Royal Crown Cola bottlecaps? or something similar?
    at full-screen theaters, with movies you can't even seem find on the IMDB? I fell in love with sci fi movies from these bad movies!

    10 AM (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by CoralGables on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:56:21 AM EST
    Saturday mornings when movie theaters had one screen.

    Great news (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:57:51 AM EST
    Very good news (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:58:59 AM EST
    BTD, MT, thanks. (5.00 / 3) (#62)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:00:54 PM EST
    I'm gushing today, but it's the open thread... is that all right?

    If you can't gush (5.00 / 5) (#66)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:03:01 PM EST
    over becoming employed in this economy and also getting a raise in the process, I don't know what you can gush about :)

    Congrats! (none / 0) (#122)
    by BackFromOhio on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 02:05:00 PM EST
    Absolutely (none / 0) (#145)
    by ap in avl on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:46:34 PM EST

    Nice to hear some good news.....


    Congrats Jeff (none / 0) (#146)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 12:13:54 AM EST
    great to hear!

    Sweet jeff... (none / 0) (#147)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 09:39:15 AM EST
    Proof ya just can't keep a good man down...best of luck with the new gig!

    Congrats! (none / 0) (#151)
    by CST on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 09:51:52 AM EST
    Good luck at the new gig!

    Hillary in India (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:18:57 AM EST
    She is loved there. People turned their backs on Bush when he traveled there, but Hillary had quite the opposite effect:

    The meeting with the rural women, affiliated with the 1.1 million-member Self Employed Women's Association (SEWA), was a reunion of sorts for Clinton. She became aware of the group during a trip to India as first lady in 1995. Guuribden Brahman, one of the women Clinton met 14 years ago, presented her with a deep red, hand-embroidered runner, an 80-year-old family heirloom. Brahman had received it from her mother for her wedding trousseau.

    People all over south asia remember her tour of 80 or so countries in 1995 where among other things she gave her famous China speech focusing on Human Rights with an emphasis on Women's Rights.

    and this:

    The nine business leaders were almost evenly divided between women and men. They included Mukesh Ambani, the head of Reliance Industries, one of the world's richest men; he is building a 27-story, 400,000-square-foot house here. Clinton and the business executives animatedly discussed education, health care, micro credit and cooperation between Indian and American universities.

    At one point, Ambani called for setting up joint institutions between the United States and India to develop clean technology. He noted that, with help, India could emerge at the forefront as rapidly as it embraced mobile phones.

    "What we have is exactly what happened in the telecommunication revolution," he said. "Because of technology, we are able to leapfrog India to 500 million cellphones in nine years."

    Clinton was so delighted with the analogy that she repeated it twice at public events during the day.


    Re HIllary's previous SE Asia (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:43:43 AM EST

    In a jewelry store in Saigon is an enlarged photo of Hillary Clinton, in a yellow suit, emerging from that very jewelry store.  I asked the salesperon if she bought anything.  No.  The store was proud she browsed.


    Wonderful photo of Clinton and the women (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by Cream City on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:48:53 AM EST
    in my morning paper today, although I also saw her impact as no surprise, because it all also brings back memories for me of her impact in Beijing.  And I know, have read many testaments, that women around the world remember that, too.

    As for India and technology, a family member who teaches the latest techie twists here went there this year to teach it, too, and returned to report that the speed at which India is embracing it all is stunning.  So he saw quite a land of contrasts, with laptops becoming as common as the camels and elephants all competing with the cars in the streets, the goatherds and gurus still looking and working as they did 1000 years ago while walking alongside other Indians in the latest business styles.  He found the students stunning, too -- also encompassing centuries with their thirst for the latest knowledge to add to excellent educations, while also retaining the courtesies to professors that are long gone here.  I try to imagine a student, coming late to class, who stops at the door to bow deep apologies to the class and to request the prof's permission to be allowed to humbly enter and sit in back. . . .

    Family member would agree that India somehow will accomplish what it sets out to do.  And it is bringing him and others back next year. . . .


    Wonder if India's richest man (none / 0) (#40)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:23:58 AM EST
    travels solely by helicopter in India.  People chop the limbs off trees by the roadside in the city to burn them to cook in their "permanent" tents along the roads.  Also, how green could a 400,000 sq. ft. (!!!!!) house be?

    Silly (5.00 / 0) (#42)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:32:15 AM EST
    Yes, the wingnuts et al, dismissed Al Gore's environmental work because he lives in a big house and takes planes and helicopters as well.

    Would you have it that a mega rich environmental activist live in  a solar powered wood hut and travel everywhere on foot bicycle?

    Changing the world, unfortunately takes up a lot of energy, not just human energy.

    But, hey, jump on the bandwagon, it is in favor for global warming deniers to call environmentalists hypocrites.


    I think the fellow is a hypocrite. (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:38:52 AM EST
    India, according to NYT yesterday, has not experienced the same economic slump as other developed countries.  The article failed to mention the vast chasm between the haves and have nots.

    P.S.  Please don't extrapolate from my comments that I am a climate change denier.  Hogwash.


    Not Extrapolating Anything (5.00 / 0) (#56)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:53:45 AM EST
    Just pointing out that it is silly to condemn someone who has the means (Gore et al) to move the earth to a place where we are harnessing clean technology, and using self sustainable energy sources.

    A hypocrite in this case would be, someone who making billions off building coal fired plants, while at the same time seeking cover by giving lip service to environmental concerns.

    The anti environmental movement, largely GOP, used the very same argument you are using to discredit the work of Al Gore.
    Both your and the anti Gore crowd's argument is empty, imo.

    You can argue that no one should take Ambani's money or listen to him until he changes his lifestyle so that it is suitable to your image of a green activist.

    I think that this is a huge positive, if he delivers on his promise.


    You are doing a poor job of reading (5.00 / 2) (#63)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:01:17 PM EST
    my mind today.

    Just The Facts Ma'am (none / 0) (#72)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:12:41 PM EST
    No mind reading. Al Gore Hypocrite.

    Sound familiar?


    Doesn't Gore's home (5.00 / 0) (#126)
    by BackFromOhio on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 02:10:39 PM EST
    use all sorts of low/alternative energy features?

    Yes (5.00 / 0) (#129)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 02:33:46 PM EST
    But makes no difference, because he takes planes, to raise public consciousness about global warming. Here are some comments by our very own:

    Whatever you think about man-made global warming, (1.00 / 0) (#65)
    by Pancho on Mon Oct 15, 2007 at 12:29:52 PM EST
    there is NO question that Al Gore is a hypocrite with regards to his own carbon emmissions.


    Well, Al Gore decided to go commercial, (none / 0) (#8)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 01:23:50 PM EST


    Twenty times national average on power consumpation, private jets to dump carbon d into the atmosphere, and when he does travel commercial, he doesn't know that he has to do through secutriy??

    And he lectures us? This guy is a hypocrite

    Makes a difference (none / 0) (#132)
    by BackFromOhio on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 03:55:51 PM EST
    to me

    that's an almost 10-acre (none / 0) (#43)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:33:03 AM EST

    I can't imagine. And I don't want to, either.


    More (none / 0) (#93)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:45:56 PM EST
    India served notice on Sunday that it remains opposed to legally binding targets to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, digging in its heels against the United States as the Obama administration begins marshaling support for a new global agreement on climate change.


    India's environment minister, Jairam Ramesh, said, "There is simply no case for the pressure that we, who have among the lowest emissions per capita, face to actually reduce emissions."
    "If this pressure is not enough," he continued, "we also face the threat of carbon tariffs on our exports to countries such as yours."


    Indian newspapers questioned whether their government was setting the stage for further concessions on emissions. Even Mr. Stern's presence here has raised eyebrows: On Saturday, the Times of India published an article with the headline, "Climate man's visit shocks India." American officials insist Mrs. Clinton had long planned to bring Mr. Stern with her.

    Mr. Stern, a soft-spoken Washington lawyer, portrayed climate change as an economic boon for India, giving it the chance to invest in windmills and solar panels. "India, with its knowledge base and entrepreneurial talent and élan, is well positioned to be a winner," he said.

    Mr. Ramesh leavened his tough words with a promise of cooperation between India and the United States in "green technology." He proposed teaming up in solar energy and biomass, and setting up joint Indian-American institutions to study the long-term effects of greenhouse-gas emissions.

    Despite India's opposition to binding reductions, he said the Indian government was committed to reaching an agreement in Copenhagen. "It is possible for us to narrow our positions," he said.

    Seems to me that Indian business people, such as Mukesh Ambani, who have the means to influence policy and the capitol to invest in green technology are serious allies in the fight to reduce global warming.

    Ambani's riches are from oil and his company has been a major polluter. He backed a conference on environmental awareness in 2006 which was apparently successful.

    Seems like a great person to have on our side. That is if he actually delivers. It seems to me that investors backed by the government's of US, India and China can make new fortunes by investing in geese that lay golden eggs, AKA cost effective, self sustainable energy sources.


    Speaking of Hillary (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by BackFromOhio on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 02:25:33 PM EST
    When I heard that this morning, Chris Matthews was doing a segment on whether Obama is purposely eclipsing Hillary on foreign policy, I cringed. But I was pleasant surprised to find that Chris himself painted a rather flattering & positive picture of Hillary as Secretary of State.  He completed the segment by proclaiming that the Obama-Hillary partnership is the most successful political partnership in history.  He had also pointed out, among other things:

    • She is doing what she did when she first got into the Senate -- head down, nose to the grind stone, rolling up sleeves and mastering the knowledge needed to do the job well

    • Her harsher stand on Iran, before Obama himself came down somewhat harder on the regime's repression of dissent, etc., seemed like well orchestrated good cop/bad cop, not her getting out ahead of the Pres on foreign policy.

    Erin Andrews (5.00 / 3) (#53)
    by lobary on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:45:22 AM EST
    ESPN reporter and sports blogosphere megadarling Erin Andrews has confirmed that she was the victim of a crime months ago when she was surreptitiously videotaped nude in a hotel room through a peephole. The videos were posted online months ago but recently publicized through a website that noted the similarities between the anonymous blonde woman seen on the video and a certain ESPN sideline reporter.

    Here's hoping Ms. Andrews brings the full force of civil and criminal law against the creep who did this.

    Agreed (5.00 / 3) (#61)
    by CoralGables on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:59:29 AM EST
    People make videos of themselves at their own peril, but when people start taping through peep holes I'd love to see the perpetrator taken to the cleaners.

    Note to self: put duct tape in suitcase. (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:02:03 PM EST
    Or Juicy Fruit (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by CoralGables on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:10:26 PM EST
    Thats sick... (none / 0) (#148)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 09:44:28 AM EST
    the office manager at my job was showing me this catalog he got from a security company...so many variations on the hidden cam, the spy cam...really sick scary sh*t.  But there was one cool liberty product in there amidst the sea of tyranny products, a spy cam detector...we should all score one of those puppies...we're gonna need it in this new age.

    The first yip of the tourney for him (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by Dadler on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:25:48 PM EST
    Four holes to go.  Damn.  My converse is being basted in gravy as we speak.  Mmmm.

    Mensch or Louse (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by cal1942 on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:29:56 PM EST
    is he a mensch for doing this or a louse for playing the tournament in the first place?

    Mensch without a doubt.

    Fisher supports his family playing golf.

    How many men stop work altogether during the last days of a normal pregnancy?

    If his wife goes into labor he walks away just like anyone else, until then he works.

    The louse/mensch question should never have been asked.

    It seems to me both choices should be (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:32:21 PM EST
    in German.  Mensch oder Laus?  What say you.

    Yup (none / 0) (#119)
    by cal1942 on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 02:00:55 PM EST
    although mensch is in English as one of many wonderful Yiddish words but the German spelling not the Yiddish spelling is used.

    mensch oder laus is how my in-laws would have said it.


    When did TV golf announcers stop (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:51:38 PM EST

    They whisper... (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:01:25 PM EST
    ...when they are courseside calling the match live.  These guys are in a production booth far removed from the action, watching on video monitors.  

    I dunno, but budget cuts at Disney (none / 0) (#99)
    by andgarden on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:56:49 PM EST
    may have forced them to do this from NY. It's been known to happen.

    Like Cronkite and those football (none / 0) (#101)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:58:48 PM EST
    games.  Did you read the article describing his calling the game from teletypes and contacted the wives of bigwigs in the stands to find out what they were wearing?  Talk about "color."

    Not unlike Reagan... (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:05:56 PM EST
    ...doing his Iowa football "play-by-play" announcing from the WHO studios in Des Moines.  

    A common practice (none / 0) (#125)
    by cal1942 on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 02:09:59 PM EST
    in those days.

    My father said that Harry Hielmann called Tiger road games from a studio.


    Nope, didn't (none / 0) (#103)
    by andgarden on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:01:19 PM EST
    From NYT obituary: (none / 0) (#109)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:11:55 PM EST
    While visiting Kansas City, Mo., he was hired by the radio station KCMO to read news and broadcast football games under the name Walter Wilcox. (Radio stations at the time wanted to "own" announcers' names so that popular ones could not be taken elsewhere.)

    He was not at the games but received cryptic summaries of each play by telegraph. These provided fodder for vivid descriptions of the action. He added details of what local men in the stands were wearing, which he learned by calling their wives. He found out in advance what music the band would be playing so he could describe halftime festivities.

    Probably around the same time (none / 0) (#102)
    by Anne on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:00:29 PM EST
    the gallery started sounding like they had just come from a frat party...

    I didn't even notice (none / 0) (#105)
    by nycstray on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:02:58 PM EST
    it's so much calmer than the usual Sunday noise in the morning :)

    Coraline is out on DVD (5.00 / 2) (#112)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:21:44 PM EST
    I had seen that it was being released but just saw it advertised with a 3D versions also in the box and 4 pairs of 3D glasses.  I suppose I'll be shopping tonight :)  I hope Zoey likes it as much as I do, then I'll have company watching it.

    Coraline Jones, the voice of Dakota Fanning :) (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by Sumner on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:52:38 PM EST
    She has a voice like magic :)

    I had a wonderful experience this morning. There appeared a pandemonium of wild parrots in the backyard.


    We just watched her in 'Push' tonight (none / 0) (#141)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:47:11 PM EST
    I didn't realize she was in 'Push', but she made her first appearance on the screen and my husband asked me if I knew who that was?  I think she's going to make that transition from child actor to adult.  I thought she did well.

    Will you be reviewing the latest (none / 0) (#120)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 02:01:53 PM EST
    Harry Potter film here?

    It was a napish day previous to curtain (none / 0) (#140)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:41:33 PM EST
    I have a nine year old member of the family who spurred me on but ummmmm.....I nodded off just a tad in the middle :)  I didn't mean to, I swear.  And Snape killed Dumbledore, seemed 100% set up to me and I don't believe that Dumbledore is dead forever.  Spells and such, having a chosen Wizard pull a fast one is what it looked like to me. Our daughter is the only one in the family who has read all the books.  She claims Dumbledore has really been done in, but I don't believe her.  She's trying to manipulate the manipulators here.  She tells me I'm dead wrong though.  Harry has to slouch mucho whenever he is in a frame with a known "adult".  We really need to finish this story up before someone is married with two kids.

    What's the name of the movie (none / 0) (#142)
    by nycstray on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:55:15 PM EST
    that's out and the one following?

    I've done product on a couple recently and have movie stills. I haven't read the books or seen the movies, so I'm kinda clueless as to which I'm working on, lol!~


    This one is The Half Blood Prince (none / 0) (#143)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 10:10:34 PM EST
    Who turned out to be Snape, though they don't explain for us in the movie why he is.  Probably don't get that unless you read the book.  The last one is 'The Deathly Hallows'.  We heard a rumor that this last book may be split into two movies, certainly this is a rumor otherwise Harry will have his PhD by the time we are finally done :)

    Given "Harry" just appeared in the (none / 0) (#149)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 04:01:27 PM EST
    buff on Broadway to thousands of his adoring older female fans and their mothers, you are right.  How long can Radcliffe play Harry?

    Isnt "Muggles" (none / 0) (#150)
    by jondee on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 05:17:02 PM EST
    old New Orleans slang for Marijauna?

    Seems to me I heard that somewhere.


    Who knew that the Tour de France was barely a (none / 0) (#1)
    by steviez314 on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 06:45:59 AM EST
    race, let alone a tour.

    Puts me in the mood for a tripleheader today--The Great Race, Cannonball Run and Death Race 2000.

    Often there isn't anything (none / 0) (#3)
    by Fabian on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 07:39:55 AM EST
    "sportsmanlike" about sports.  Sometimes I think blood sports like gladiator fights were more honest.

    Turnberry (none / 0) (#4)
    by CoralGables on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 08:13:52 AM EST
    is playing a bit easier this morning with 14 players currently under par for the day thus far while only 5 posted sub par scores yesterday.

    A strength for Watson is having been there before and hoisted the Claret Jug. A downside is he's the only player in the top ten to score progressively worse over the three rounds.

    Someone Friday said no one would watch with no Tiger playing this weekend. As a sometime golfer and rarely a golf watcher, the Watson story has me glued to the TV this morning as the oldest player ever to lead a major prepares to tee off for all us old folks in about 5 minutes.

    Of Course (none / 0) (#8)
    by CoralGables on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 08:38:26 AM EST
    with the way things have started, Tom Watson may be a footnote before people wake up on the west coast while Ross Fisher and his very pregnant wife may be the talk of the day.

    Perhaps (none / 0) (#14)
    by CoralGables on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:19:16 AM EST
    I spoke too soon. As Fisher himself goes into labor on the 5th hole, it appears he may need an epidural before he is done to ease his golf pain.

    A snowman, ouch. (none / 0) (#22)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:57:34 AM EST
    One bad drive is all it takes at a course like that to go from leader to also ran.  Not a lot of make-up holes on a Championship course either.

    I have to wonder how many dozen of balls I would go through on that course--and if I could break 200.  


    For anyone not watching (none / 0) (#64)
    by CoralGables on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:01:56 PM EST
    The old man is tied for the lead with 2 holes to play. It's on ABC.

    i've been listening, time to go view. (none / 0) (#67)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:06:18 PM EST
    And root for the old guy.

    Is it agest... (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:15:28 PM EST
    ...to root for the old guy?  

    Not that it matters, I'm rooting for him either way.  What a story.  


    Hells no! (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by lobary on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:17:04 PM EST
    I'd love to see an old geezer win the Open Championship.

    Over 40's unite!


    Perhaps I'll turn on ABC. Chances of (none / 0) (#76)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:17:29 PM EST
    making Rockies/Pads game are slim as bro just called to say he'll be standby on a later plane.  

    Probably just as well... (none / 0) (#77)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:20:18 PM EST
    ...you know yesterday was just a fluke :)

    What's the pitching match-up today?


    Marquis v. Latos (0-0), (none / 0) (#80)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:24:37 PM EST
    a "top prospect."  First start.

    Watson is 59. Headline today (none / 0) (#83)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:26:15 PM EST
    says more people are living to 100 and beyond. Age is relative.  Of course, this is pro golf and a links course, whatever that means.

    Well... (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:37:59 PM EST
    ...first of all, I have no desire to live to 100+ if it means years and years of pain, suffering and not being to be in control of your life.  Quality of life is an issue for me, not quanity.

    Second, I think Watson is a fine example of the old Turtle v. Hare analogy.  He's not the longest hitter on tour or the flashiest.  Slow and steady (with a healthy dose of experience) sometimes wins the race--or at least gives you a chance to win.  


    No need to worry. Congress will fix (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:43:19 PM EST
    everything re health care.  Nirvana.

    He's got the lead now :) (none / 0) (#69)
    by nycstray on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:09:21 PM EST
    What a fantastic story (none / 0) (#74)
    by lobary on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:15:42 PM EST
    GO TOM!!

    The Wanted (none / 0) (#11)
    by nycstray on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 09:04:16 AM EST
    The producers call it a "follow documentary" and talk about "breaking through the fourth wall" with viewers by making them seem part of the investigation while it's happening. The goal is to marry investigative reporting on complex issues with high-end production values.

    "We want to make it seem like something you'd want to see on a Friday night at the movies," Ciralsky said.

    In fact, a trailer advertising the show looks just like a movie commercial. There are scenes of a helicopter trailing a car, with the target in what appears to be a gun sight. Tyler, Carstens and Ciralsky pose in sunglasses as the rock song "Cavalry" blares.



    BTD, you sportswriting is infinitely (none / 0) (#35)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 10:58:04 AM EST
    more comprehensible to the non-Tour watcher today.  Thanks. Now, turning to the world of opera--nada today.

    Back on Track (none / 0) (#49)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 11:43:02 AM EST
    After Obama got tough with Netanyahu about settlements, and Netanyhu lashed back, it seemed that US policy was backing off of its demand that Israel stop illegal settlements.

    Obama had his first International [utter] failure with his visit to Saudi Arabia last month, where he talked about the importance of the Arab comminity to be supportive of peace talks. The Saudis laughed at him over his naiviette regarding Israel's promises and willingness to be honest brokers in the Palestinian/Israeli peace talks.

    Well maybe that meeting had a positive effect, not that the Israelis are listening. From the NYT:

    Israel on Sunday rejected a U.S. demand to suspend a planned housing project in east Jerusalem, threatening to further complicate an unusually tense standoff with its strongest ally over settlement construction.


    Although Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently yielded to heavy U.S. pressure to endorse the establishment of a Palestinian state, he has resisted American demands for an immediate freeze on settlement expansion.

    On Sunday, Netanyahu told his Cabinet there would be no limits on Jewish construction anywhere in ''unified Jerusalem.''


    The new Jerusalem project is being funded by Irving Moskowitz, a millionaire bingo magnate from Florida and supporter of Israeli settlement in east Jerusalem who has funded similar construction projects in the past. Moskowitz purchased the Shepherd Hotel in 1985 and plans to tear it down and build apartments in its place.
    The approval, granted by the Jerusalem municipality earlier this month, allows for the construction of 20 apartments plus a three-level underground parking lot. The Jerusalem municipality issued a statement saying the purchase was legal.  


    Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said Jewish expansion in east Jerusalem jeopardizes peace efforts. The Palestinians have refused to restart peace talks until Israel halts all settlement expansion.

    Bingo magnate??? who knew that there ever could be such a thing...

    Surprised or Shocked (none / 0) (#133)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 06:01:24 PM EST
    Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Sunday he had been "surprised" by a recent U.S. demand that Israel halt a construction project in a Palestinian neighborhood in East Jerusalem.

    "I was surprised by the U.S. move," the premier told his advisors. "In my conversation with [U.S. President Barack] Obama in Washington, I told him that I could not accept any limitations on our sovereignty in Jerusalem. I told him Jerusalem is not a settlement, and it has nothing to do with discussions on a freeze."


    Hard to imagine that the US would ever call out Isreali development on contested territory.


    Watson just birdied 17! (none / 0) (#70)
    by Dadler on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:09:37 PM EST
    Holy sheet, this guy is gonna win it.  If he bogies the last hole, I will make like Werner Herzog and eat my shoe.

    Nuked an 8 iron over the green (none / 0) (#78)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:20:35 PM EST
    Has to get up and down now.

    Bad up (none / 0) (#79)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:23:30 PM EST
    10 footer to win now.

    More likely a 4 hole playoff.


    Bad miss (none / 0) (#81)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:25:35 PM EST

    if you're stewart cink... (none / 0) (#85)
    by Dadler on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:29:18 PM EST
    ...you KNOW you don't have the same edge you'd have in a playoff against, say, Westwood.  If the geezer takes it and goes extra holes to do it, damn, even more astounding.  either way, this is why athletics, as woody allen said about hoops in "annie hall", is just very beautiful to watch.

    Clutch par by Watson on 6. (none / 0) (#108)
    by oldpro on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:06:48 PM EST
    Brilliant.  Stays viable...

    Cink still ahead by one...keeps the momentum going.


    Oh my. Disaster. (none / 0) (#110)
    by oldpro on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:14:01 PM EST
    Can Watson even save par?

    Yep--that wasn't good. (none / 0) (#111)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:17:51 PM EST
    Looks like its Cink's match to win.  If Tom doesn't win, and it looks highly unlikely right now, I'm rooting for Stewart.  

    Man, I do wish I had a small army to look for my balls when they end up in the rough!


    Watson. Brave to the end. (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by oldpro on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:36:12 PM EST
    Cink earned it.  He is thrilled.  Finally...a major, and a great one.

    Definately a class act... (none / 0) (#114)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:43:48 PM EST
    ...all the way around.  Even in the face of defeat.  They both deserve to be very proud of their play.

    No shortage of good stories this week.  I think we can put the idea that golf can't survive life without Tiger to rest.  Especially when it comes to the Majors.  

    I have to wonder how many "older" folks will be inspired to take up the game, or find it again, after what Watson did this week.


    I don't understand the hostility (none / 0) (#118)
    by oldpro on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:56:41 PM EST
    to Tiger.

    And...so, OK. OK.  I'm taking my 5 and 7 irons and a bucket of balls out for a spin this afternoon!

    But I'll be stiff as Hell tomorrow.  I'm not in shape like Tom Watson!  Of course, I'm 14 years older than he is...

    Wierdos in the TV background chanting "USA!"

    Oh, Gawd...Cink crediting his new-found faith and God.  What kind of god would have deserted Tom Watson at the end of the miracle?


    Yeah... (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 02:08:31 PM EST
    ...I could have done without the shout out to God.  If there is one, I can't believe he/she/it is handicaping the match.

    I guess those weirdos are just doing their part to keep the "Ugly American" stereotype going.  Probably over served at that.

    I hope you have a nice day for hitting the driving range.  I'm always stiff as heck the next day and I'm a decade younger than him.  I'm mostly just happy to get out.


    Tom Watson... (none / 0) (#115)
    by Dadler on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:45:17 PM EST
    ...he became younger as the tourney wore on, until on the 72nd hole he succumbed to the nerves more reminiscent of a young guy in his 20's looking to win for the first time.  fitting in an odd and melancholy way.

    hat's off to stewart cink, probably the tallest guy to win a major since i don't know when.

    Vijay Singh (none / 0) (#117)
    by Dadler on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:55:45 PM EST
    Tall as Cink, three majors.  So there.  

    Did God favor Cink? Cink sd. (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 02:04:09 PM EST
    "Thanks be to God" in his post-win remarks.  Watson is talking about spirituality on the golf course.  Oh how my minister dad mocked people who sd. they were worshipping God Sunday mornings on the golf course.

    Not so sure it was nerves... (none / 0) (#123)
    by oldpro on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 02:07:06 PM EST
    Let's see what Tom has to say....

    "A great disappointment. Playoff was one bad shot after another."  

    Perhaps it was fatigue..."legs didn't work at 17"

    "My hat is off to Tiger as much as he goes through every week..."

    Watson is for real...


    Tom Watson is a Mensch (none / 0) (#130)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 02:38:56 PM EST
    Know nothing about golf. But for a time Tom Watson's family lived on my parents' street in Kansas City, and the guy as I remember is a total class act. He was married to a Jewish woman, and as I remember, he quietly resigned from a couple KC country clubs that would have been honored to have the golf star because they regularly didn't approve Jewish members.

    Laura Rozen

    Nice story (none / 0) (#131)
    by Democratic Cat on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 03:27:27 PM EST
    Hats off to all the old guys today. Tom Watson has always been a class act, as far back as I can remember.  

    And although some here don't share my admiration for him, hats off to Lance Armstrong's 37-year old legs that hung in for second in the GC after today's stage.  Lance has a Texas-sized ego, but he was gracious today and recognized Alberto Contador as the best man in the Tour.  I think the team reigned Contador in in the Pyranees because they didn't want to defend yellow for the rest of the race.  That was a good strategy, allowed Contador to rest, and he will almost undoubtedly win; no one can match his climbing skills.  (Unless Armstrong can pull closer before the individual time trial, in which case he may still have a shot.  But I don't see how he can pull closer, given the ease of Contador's performance today.)

    As for Lance being a jerk and not a role model, in my eyes, he's both. I can admire his sheer competitive and physical achievements without requiring that he also be a nice guy.