Monday Morning Back to Work Thread

BTD is traveling today, and I'm going to be trying to catch up at work. I wish Labor Day was this weekend, I'm so ready to take a break and do something different. But that will have to wait another week.

Are any of you going on trips that weekend?

In case I get swamped and don't get to the news until later, here's an open thread for you.

< Sunday Night Open Thread: What's Behind All the Emotion? | Lawsuits Against Blog Commenters On the Rise >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Visiting relatives during the long (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by jeffinalabama on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 07:10:29 AM EST
    Labor Day weekend, and watching/listening to college football! For big college fans (like me), it's a child waiting for Papa Noel to show up!

    War Eagle!

    And College Football (none / 0) (#136)
    by cal1942 on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:46:31 PM EST
    is the greatest game of all.

    Every year I swear I won't get wrapped up in it as much and won't take it so seriously.

    Then August arrives.

    Go Spartans.


    BTW, I heard a Greek man who teaches (none / 0) (#140)
    by oculus on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 01:23:27 PM EST
    at MSU play a beautiful all-Chopin piano recital in Breckenridge CO last month.  I had never heard of this wonderful musician before that concert.

    More info: (none / 0) (#141)
    by oculus on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 01:26:44 PM EST
    Thank you (none / 0) (#154)
    by cal1942 on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:26:41 PM EST
    I've never heard of him and I wasn't aware until recently that Quentin Marsalis had done some teaching on campus.

    On the down side, George Will taught a course at State a number of years ago.  We must be prepared to take the good with the absolutely awful.


    Tried to watch CNN this morning (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 08:53:48 AM EST
    and had to turn it off.  I guess I missed some sort of email about how Obama has to be considered a Muslim because his father was.  So the media cycle seems to be taking that email and what they called the "anti-Muslim" protests in NY and making a newsy marriage of sorts.  Creating the news out of winger viral emails and a protest about specific location is literally nothing more factual than MAGIC.  Modern journalism, it is magic.

    Yup..... (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by ruffian on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:16:08 AM EST
    truly a perfect storm of lunacy.

    The GOP's Long (5.00 / 0) (#36)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:36:30 AM EST
    Hot, Racist Summer

    First came a harsh new immigration law and calls of white racism; then we turned up the heat with an "n-word" flap and the ground zero mosque hysteria. Kirsten Powers on a season of grievance jihads.

    Welcome to the summer of hate.

    In a rambling Facebook post, the former Alaska governor asked incredulously: "Does anyone seriously believe that Dr. Laura Schlessinger is a racist?"

    Why, yes, Sarah. Yes, we do.

    In Palin's world, Dr. Laura is a victim.

    Let's be honest: The problem is they are Muslims.

    The argument that people's feelings are still raw after the 9/11 attacks only makes sense if the group behind the community center was al Qaeda. To equate these moderate Muslims with that horrific act is pure bigotry, a bigotry that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and former Gov. Howard Dean sadly signed on to.

    President Obama waded into the fray with a lukewarm defense of religious freedom. For that, Rush Limbaugh dubbed him "Imam Hussein Obama."

    But he meant it in a nice way.

    I just spit coffee (none / 0) (#45)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:00:39 AM EST
    Long Hot Racist Summer :)

    Why Fox News' (none / 0) (#49)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:05:24 AM EST
    'Southern Strategy' could sink the

    Fox News host Glenn Beck recently compared America under the Obama administration to the Planet of the Apes. Fox News doesn't like black people, so is it any surprise that blacks don't tune in?

    But does it matter? With a diversifying U.S. population, does it matter that Fox News, a major news outlet, only seems to cater to a white audience? Could a lack of diversity come back to bite Fox News?


    We were sleeping in on Sunday (none / 0) (#54)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:16:02 AM EST
    Laying in bed and 'Breaking the Huddle' came on HBO.  Here I am, no big fan of college football.  I holler 'War Eagle' for Joshua usually when he pokes me :)  I had to hold back tears though about three times watching that special.  It was a movement of players, a movement of people risking their lives and even their children's lives to break through.  And I did need to live here to really grasp it, but I cried.  It isn't even my fight or my difficulties but that special did make it possible for me to touch that pain and THAT COURAGE....of families trying to support their sons to be spit on and beaten and have them threatened that snipers would shoot them from the stands.  Blacks weren't even allowed in the stadiums to watch games at one time.

    No one I know thinks (none / 0) (#81)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:47:20 AM EST
    Laura is a "victim." Capable of making really stupid remarks, yes. And I think it is time for her to go, just as I thought it was time for Imus to go.

    As for Powers:

    Let's be honest: The problem is they are Muslims.

    No, the problem is what they want to do.


    how wrong? let me count the ways (5.00 / 0) (#87)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:53:11 AM EST
    first, wrong.  many people think she is a victim.

    as for the muslims.

    "its not that they are muslims, its that they dont know their place"


    Only 18% think Obama (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by hairspray on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:00:11 PM EST
    is Muslim.  Eighteen percent believe the world if flat too and alien creatures live within our solar system.  Why do they spend so much time on that nonsense?  Why not focus on the fact that the majority don't believe it or don't care!

    Good point. Let us be grateful (none / 0) (#128)
    by Cream City on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:24:31 PM EST
    that the pollster didn't ask whether he was born not only to a Kenyan father but also to a Martian mother.  And perhaps born with two heads.

    Some people actually believe those grocery-store tabloids, according to studies I have seen.


    Oh come on (none / 0) (#198)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 05:10:24 PM EST
    Where are we going now? (none / 0) (#201)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 05:22:09 PM EST
    wha (none / 0) (#202)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 05:26:05 PM EST
    I thought you knew.

    but seriously.  think some people are not just plain evil?

    watch this


    You want someone in the military (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:49:43 AM EST
    to tell you about how the fight for the hearts and minds is going?  I am LMAO

    First of all, that is a meme that the anti-war left created in order to equate all of our current actions to the perceived failures of the Vietnam War.  If they were going to tell you about such a dynamic occurring I don't know what they would call it but they sure as hell aren't calling it that.

    Everyone deserves to know what our greater mission is though, and Obama is the CIC and he is who sets the greater mission.  He isn't giving us anything solid though, just like he does on everything.

    I have googled more than 10 quotes (none / 0) (#52)
    by PatHat on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:13:50 AM EST
    from US military officials detailing the importance of winning the "hearts and minds" of the Iraqis and Afghans. I can post them if you'd like.

    It is not a liberal thing, it's what the military finally figured out was the problem with our strategy. We are still using the military strategies that didn't win the Vietnam war.

    From CNN.com:

     -- The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan wants more troops and a new strategy -- but most importantly, he wants to win the battle for the hearts and the minds of the people in the war-torn country.

    Gen. Stanley McChrystal says the U.S. will fail in Afghanistan without more troops. "What I'm really telling people is the greatest risk we can accept is to lose the support of the people here," Gen. Stanley McChrystal told CBS's "60 Minutes" in an interview aired Sunday night.

    "If the people are against us, we cannot be successful. If the people view us as occupiers and the enemy, we can't be successful and our casualties will go up dramatically."

    OK, McChrystal didn't use the specific term, but he understands the concept.


    You misunderstand her point. (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:29:03 AM EST
    Concept....dynamic? (none / 0) (#82)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:47:26 AM EST
    There is nothing new under the sun and everything in life is about getting along with each other.  If you have direct quotes from any Commander in the past four years to call anything going on "the battle for hearts and minds" I'll fall down in a faint.

    Now, we had a lot of doofuses at the start of this saying so much doofus stuff......I can't say someone at the beginning wasn't so stupid they went there or had someone questioning them verbally lead them to those words.  I stood one time for a very long time in order to hear some Lt. Col. quote this Shakespeare to a group of early twenty wives with crying babies on their shoulders and we never could find enough Prozac to fix that.

    This story shall the good man teach his son;
    And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
    From this day to the ending of the world,
    But we in it shall be remember'd;
    We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
    For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
    Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
    This day shall gentle his condition:
    And gentlemen in England now a-bed
    Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
    And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
    That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

    But he left service just when things started getting REAL Shakespearean :)


    Quotes (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by PatHat on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:57:19 AM EST

    "This is a race," Petraeus said in October 2003 on National Public Radio. "This is a race to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people. And there are other people in this race. And they're not just trying to beat us to the finish line. In some cases, they want to kill us."

    OK, that was almost 7 years ago.

    But I am not arguing that the US military is somehow villainous or inept or whatever. However, I do think the military leadership is running the show. While it is true that the President is CIC and there is civilian control of the military, we have seen repeated arguments to "let the generals have what they want". The generals want to find a way to "win" the war (that's what generals do). But there are military, humanitarian and foreign policy concerns with the various approaches to winning. The way I see it, you either kill all the insurgents, get them into the political process, or pack your backpacks and go home when it just isn't worth it anymore. Our military is great at the first approach, but winning that way wouldn't really solve the problem, since another group would rise up to fill the void. The second approach is best, but the Afghan government is corrupt and ineffective.

    What I am trying to say is that the American people have taken this long to realize the Afghan war is not worth it. Had we had better information, that would have been reduced to a few years; with less casualties and cost.


    You can see all the arguments about (none / 0) (#149)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:21:40 PM EST
    anything you want to see an argument about, particularly since we have this internet thing now. Does not make anything so, or even mean it is currently happening.  You give me evidence, because I have PLENTY of evidence that the military IS NOT RUNNING this show.  Unfortunately our CIC does not want to openly lead much on anything.  He hires people to create infighting to get where he wants to go.  He never openly leads on anything though so what's new?  He owns the Sec of Def though and he owns the Sec of State and everything that is happening in Afghanistan is happening under his guidance and his sometimes hourly briefings of what is going on on his current battlefields.

    Your above post IMO is nothing more than another heinous attempt to demonize the United States military because you cannot grapple with the fact that they are completely under the control of the Democratic party and President Obama, and under that authority are doing things the anti-war don't like.  It is typical though that when this happens most lefties will attempt to argue that the military is doing all of this stuff all by themselves and have actually gone ROGUE.

    Friggin constant conspiracy theories trying to demonize the whole miliary because people on the left can't handle the reality.


    I think some of us don't care who is (5.00 / 1) (#178)
    by Anne on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 03:21:02 PM EST
    in charge - Democrat, Republican, men in uniforms wearing lots of stars on their shoulders, whatever - we just see the lack of information as being damaging at multiple levels, one of which is that it is part and parcel of a strategy designed to keep us quiet and complacent.

    Speaking only for myself, I don't believe anything they do tell us anymore, I really don't - and no one has been able to convince me I'm wrong to feel that way.  I don't know how you weigh all the lives lost and tortured and the families separated and damaged through deliberate action and strategy against those that might be lost not through revelation of the truth, but because the Pentagon/DOD/WH decided it was more important to call Wikileaks' bluff in hope of shutting Assange down, than take the steps necessary to redact the documents - and safeguard the people they claimed to care about.

    Wikileaks wanted the people to have the information while protecting those who might be in harm's way, which is why they sought help with redactions, but Pentagon/DOD/WH were willing to sacrifice lives in order to be able to vilify Assange, and make the truth stop coming out.

    There is no honor in that, I'm sorry; it's more strong-arm, authoritarian tactics by a government that has been moving in that direction with frightening steadiness and focus - and I have to say that I am far more alarmed by that than I am of Julian Assange and Wikileaks.  Far more.


    Wikileaks obviously did not care about (none / 0) (#196)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 05:04:42 PM EST
    protecting anybody but themselves by excusing themselves from any and all responsibility, and I ain't buying.  What earth shattering info that was being kept from you did they reveal?  How have they changed history and changed our current course based upon anything they have revealed?  What they did do is reveal exactly how bloodthirsty and ferocious the Taliban is though in terrorizing the general population of Afghanistan.  Not a good argument for leaving today so that Afghanistan can quickly return to religious extremist control and begin organizing and more easily funding terrorist attacks again.  Did you happen to catch that?  Wikileaks unloaded a bunch of first person reports that don't reveal much of anything except places and people who helped us and reported things to us.

    If so, we definitely need to leave (none / 0) (#167)
    by Cream City on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:57:48 PM EST
    Afghanistan, if neither the military nor the  Commander in Chief are leading.

    That leaves leadership to, what, Pakistan?


    Your President is the leader (none / 0) (#193)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 04:58:06 PM EST
    That is never in question.  All I was addressing was his seeming need to not be on the record for many military decisions.  He stays off the record, but he is the CIC and nobody is rogue.  They get fired for that because once again, they are not ultimately in charge, they serve the President of the United States.

    The NYT Editorial (8/23) (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by KeysDan on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:14:51 AM EST
    opening paragraph: "The Obama Administration owes the American people plain talk about the oil spill...particularly about how much oil remains and the dangers to humans, wildlife and the environment."  It concludes with this statement: "..The administration's larger problem is one of credibility, which can only be fixed with much clearer answers about the spill."   I agree.

    In between, the editorial posits that their is no evidence that the White House is being dishonest, but does note that the rosy narratives have been badly "shaken", by independent scientists, including the report on the disappeared oil (the prematurely released  four-pager where 'ballpark' was substituted for data and algorithms) . Or, the belated recognition by NOAA  (earlier on the same page as BP) that  underwater oil plumes do, in fact, exist. NOAA's earlier reluctance to acknowledge plumes was said to be based  on an unwillingness to make a premature report. The journal Science reports that there is a plume the size of Manhattan.

    The administration also announced flat out that it is safe to eat fish and shrimp caught in the 78 percent of federal waters open to fishing. We can only hope that fish eat and swim close to home. NOAA director, Dr. Lubchenko, explained that fish eat the oil, but degrade the oil and process it so it does not accumulate, so don't worry.   It was not pointed out that fin fish are vertebrates and invertebrates, like oysters and shrimp, have different metabolic processes.

    However, maybe this will help us  account for some of the disappeared oil--inside the fish and shrimp.    Carcinogens are politician-friendly, in that their toxic, if not deadly effects have a prolonged onset and are not likely to show up during their terms of office, excluding that of most senators.

    If the administration was completely (none / 0) (#119)
    by hairspray on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:10:35 PM EST
    honest about the spill they would have to come up with a plan to address it and perhaps pass tough legislation to deal with the deep water drilling and oversight.  Have they done that in any meaningful way?

    I recommend the last few Atrios posts (5.00 / 2) (#130)
    by ruffian on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:30:21 PM EST
    on HAMP and housing in general. He is spot on on this issue. Always has been.

    satire is dead (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 03:19:09 PM EST
    (stole that line from nojo at stinque)

    republicans killed it.

    Rhode Island Democratic Lawmaker Goes After `Anchor Embryos'

    WikiLeaks (none / 0) (#1)
    by lentinel on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 06:24:17 AM EST
    Will they never stop?

    Here is a man who presents us with evidence of the fabrications and deceptions and horrible realities of the war.

    What is the answer?
    To smear him as a rapist.

    The charges were withdrawn within hours, but the damage to the victim, Mr. Assange is done.

    I know that the charges came from Sweden, but like many other people, this has the scent of the USA behind it. It has been their modus operandi from Daniel Ellsberg to Scott Ritter.

    I'll be willing to bet that news organizations will be referring to him as an "accused rapist" when the next set of documents appear.

    Between this likely frame-up... (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 08:25:58 AM EST
    the murder of Marvin Booker, the Paladino idea to bring back the poor house in NY, and the ever-more depressing Cordoba Center debate...I'm kinda wishin' I never sobered up and returned to the real world this morning.  No wonder his associate Mr. Applebaum is so paranoid...he should be.

    Luckily I don't have to wait for Labor Day for the next escape...off to Woodstock this weekend for a Midnight Ramble at Levon's farm to dry these Tears of Rage.


    I watched 'the Last Waltz' (none / 0) (#5)
    by ruffian on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 08:39:26 AM EST
    when it happened to be on the tube one night last week. What bliss - just what I needed. I envy you taking the cure this weekend!

    All music soothes the soul... (none / 0) (#8)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 08:44:20 AM EST
    but The Band's music is like Percocet to other artists Tylenol....super soothing strength.

    The natural surroundings and swimming in ice cold creeks doesn't hurt either.


    kdog (none / 0) (#18)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:07:36 AM EST
    the Paladino idea to bring back the poor house in NY,

    To go there you would have to volunteer. That neither of us would do so is a given, but then many Americans went to CC camps during the Depression.. The camps had barracks, showers, job instruction, etc....

    The GZ mosque problem will be over within 30 seconds as soon as the proponents decide to get their thumb  out of our eyes and build someplace else.


    Paladino... (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:17:17 AM EST
    is talking a divert money from the city to upstate scam...if they can't fill the prisons to keep those upstate employed, find "volunteers" on welfare.

    Besides, it would be more cost effective to bring the work to the inner city than to bring inner city people to a labor camp upstate...plenty of work to do in the city, last I checked.

    As for the Cordoba Center, I can't even call that the issue anymore...the issue is the hate in so many hearts.


    The GZ mosque (none / 0) (#47)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:04:06 AM EST
    is the cause of the current situation. Without it the rest doesn't happen.

    I go back to "volunteer." That means no one has to do it.

    As for "bringing work to the inner city," fine but I haven't seen anything come from that.


    I have an idea (none / 0) (#51)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:07:55 AM EST
    why dont we let Jim be the only TL commenter who continues to use any of the following:

    "GZ Mosque, Ground Zero Mosque or GZM"

    how about the Sufi community center of lower manhattan?


    Thanks (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by PatHat on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:37:34 AM EST
    I was almost thinking of feeding the troll again.

    If you can't debate (none / 0) (#150)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:22:30 PM EST
    then running off is an option.



    Grow a pair (none / 0) (#158)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:35:10 PM EST
    (if that's possible), and let's see your source for that Cordoba Center opening date story.

    Sorry squeaky.... (none / 0) (#72)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:40:48 AM EST
    If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck.....

    It is a duck.



    Yeah (none / 0) (#79)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:45:22 AM EST
    I guess you are right. All Southerners should be immediately arrested and put in holding cells.

    Let me practice (clears throat) (none / 0) (#152)
    by jeffinalabama on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:23:28 PM EST
    Noooobody knows the trouble I've seen....
    Nooobody knows but Jesus....

    Somebody play a mouth harp, and I'm ready.


    Let me know when (none / 0) (#153)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:24:25 PM EST
    al rebel starts flying airliners into buildings.



    McVeigh (none / 0) (#162)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:52:22 PM EST
    And if he isn't southern, then lock up all christian white men.

    if it squirts sh*t continually (none / 0) (#146)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:14:19 PM EST
    like a duck, it could be a certain poker player..

    How nice of Pali-nutso... (none / 0) (#59)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:20:34 AM EST
    to make his proposal voluntary...lol.  Lucky for NY, I have a better shot at winning the gov's chair than Pali-nutso.

    I don't think the community center birthed all this hate...just brought it out into the open...and I guess, for that, we should be grateful.

    Summer of Hate is right...lets hope we find the love by fall, but I won't hold my breath.


    Probably, I mean the Demos (2.00 / 1) (#71)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:38:52 AM EST
    have done such a great job in NY - ;-)

    And it aint hate to ask someone to not insult you.

    What would we say if the KKK wanted to build a "center" in Harlem?


    jim jim jim (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:40:56 AM EST
    pathetic and desperate.  even for you.

    thanks (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by CST on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:06:46 AM EST
    I no longer have the energy/desire for these "conversations" with Jim.

    So you have a double standard? (none / 0) (#157)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:33:52 PM EST
    I almost thought better of you.

    But I was wrong.


    I have a double standard (none / 0) (#160)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:38:22 PM EST
    I dislike peeing into the wind.

    What if Christians (none / 0) (#78)
    by PatHat on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:45:13 AM EST
    wanted to build a missionary church in China or Africa or anywhere else. What if that annoyed the neighbors?

    or (none / 0) (#91)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:54:18 AM EST
    what if Israel wanted to build settlements in occupied territory?

    Or if Limbaugh (none / 0) (#147)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:20:45 PM EST
    wanted to start a proctology clinic near a military base..

    Or if the Tea Baggers held in a rally near a community with more than three latinos and two AAs..


    Just a related comment (none / 0) (#120)
    by christinep on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:10:48 PM EST
    One of the biggest, emotional arguments about 1st Amendment rights that I recall concerned a proposed march by neo-nazi types through a town in Illinois populated by many of Jewish descent(including a number with close experience with the WWII concentration camps.) I recall that the town was Skokie; but, more vividly than the town's name was the issue involving thoughtless, mean provocation on the one side vis-a-vis who we are in terms of the 1st Amendment on the other. A friend of mine living in northern Illinois at the time and I spent hours on the phone trying to sort through our own beliefs, reactions. Eventually--after much debate, controversy--the march occurred. We all survived.
    Another more recent memory involved the proposed building of a convent by the Catholic Church nearby Auschwitz. Lots of concerns voiced by Jewish leaders & lots of statements from the Church about its sincerity (indeed, priest & nuns also perished in the camps or outside when assisting in the underground.) Eventually, the Church pulled back its proposed location, as I remember, after many diplomatic endeavors on behalf of both positions.

    While I clearly think that the community center/mosque issue in NYC is the exacerbated result of rightwing manipulation (probably having run out of its patented standby wedge & pushbutton issues), nonethess, the prickly questions surrounding religious interaction in policy usually hit the intersection of rights, diplomacy, "sensitivities," and raw emotion.


    Re: the march in Skokie (none / 0) (#151)
    by Zorba on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:23:06 PM EST
    The ACLU defended the right of the neo-Nazis to march, and won in court, but the march, after all that, never actually took place (see link).  There was a lot of controversy about the Chicago office of the ACLU's decision to defend the Nazis' right to march (link):
    According to David Hamlin, executive director of the Illinois ACLU, "...the Chicago office which chose to provide legal counsel to neo-Nazis who have been planning to march in Skokie, has lost about 25% of its membership and nearly one-third of its budget." 30,000 ACLU members resigned in protest. The financial strain from the controversy lead to layoffs at local chapters.  In his February 23, 1978 decision overturning the town ordinances, US District Court Judge Bernard M. Decker described the principle involved in the case as follows: "It is better to allow those who preach racial hatred to expend their venom in rhetoric rather than to be panicked into embarking on the dangerous course of permitting the government to decide what its citizens may say and hear ... The ability of American society to tolerate the advocacy of even hateful doctrines ... is perhaps the best protection we have against the establishment of any Nazi-type regime in this country."

    Thank you, Zorba (none / 0) (#156)
    by christinep on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:32:34 PM EST
    for the correction (geez, I really thought the march took place after all the arguments, etc.) 'Appreciate the comment, and find the judge's comments particularly useful now.

    Yes, the judge's comments are, (none / 0) (#165)
    by Zorba on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:55:00 PM EST
    aren't they?  That's why I included them. Unfortunately, though, plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.  (And that's why I've been a long-time member of the ACLU.  Freedom of expression, freedom of religion, all of our Bill of Rights and other constitutional rights do not not, thankfully, depend upon the popularity of the cause)  

    They did march..... (none / 0) (#192)
    by coast on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 04:45:46 PM EST
    in the Blues Brothers movie. :)

    If that happened (none / 0) (#184)
    by jbindc on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 03:54:26 PM EST
    People here would be screaming that those Christian missionaries should respect the local culture.

    You need a better example.


    if that happened (none / 0) (#185)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 03:57:28 PM EST
    IF it happened.  are you seriously not aware that it is happening at this very moment?

     it happened.  are you seriously not aware that it is happening at this very moment?


    What Would We Say? (none / 0) (#99)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:14:03 AM EST
    What would we say if the KKK wanted to build a "center" in Harlem?

    Going by your logic the prudent thing to do would be pre-emptive action: Arrest all White Southern Males, and put them in camps...  Guantanamo will have alot of free space soon..


    Your strawman is burning (none / 0) (#155)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:31:57 PM EST
    No one is advocating arresting Muslims..


    BTW - I have spent time at GITMO, probably back in the day when you were demonstrating over the Vietnam war, and it has a pleasant climate. Much better than NYC.


    Well (none / 0) (#163)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:53:19 PM EST
    You are doing worse.

    As for the Cordoba Center, (none / 0) (#116)
    by KeysDan on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:00:44 PM EST
    an opportunity for honoring the dead and healing the living has given way to opportunists who stoke fears in the service of their otherwise programmatically blank agendas.  

    apparently (none / 0) (#122)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:16:41 PM EST
    it cant even be called Cordoba any more thanks to history teacher Newt:

    The proposed "Cordoba House" overlooking the World Trade Center site - where a group of jihadists killed over 3000 Americans and destroyed one of our most famous landmarks - is a test of the timidity, passivity and historic ignorance of American elites. For example, most of them don't understand that "Cordoba House" is a deliberately insulting term. It refers to Cordoba, Spain - the capital of Muslim conquerors who symbolized their victory over the Christian Spaniards by transforming a church there into the world's third-largest mosque complex. [...I]n fact, every Islamist in the world recognizes Cordoba as a symbol of Islamic conquest. It is a sign of their contempt for Americans and their confidence in our historic ignorance that they would deliberately insult us this way.

    I like the alternate version better:

    The proposed "Cordoba House" overlooking the World Trade Center site--where a group of jihadists killed over 3000 Americans and destroyed one of our most famous landmarks--is a test of the timidity, passivity and historic ignorance of American elites. For example, most of them don't understand that "Cordoba House" is a deliberately insulting term. It refers to the Chrysler Cordoba, a car made famous by a foreign kind of Mexican man who touted its un-American "soft Corinthian leather." [...I]n fact, every Islamist in the world recognizes Cordoba as a symbol of soft Corinthian leather. It is a sign of their contempt for Americans and their confidence in our historic ignorance that they would deliberately insult us this way.

    Newt needs to go back to school (none / 0) (#173)
    by Zorba on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 03:14:10 PM EST
    Cordoba was Muslim about 525 years out of a history of being non-Muslim approximately 2210 years.  (Link)  Obviously, 1/4 trumps 3/4.  Get a grip, Newt.

    not to mention (none / 0) (#175)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 03:17:52 PM EST
    that by his own definition it is likely the largest mosque complex in the west.
    so Cordoba outreach center seems completely logical sans any reference to "conquest"

    More substantively, the Pentagon (none / 0) (#2)
    by observed on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 06:49:27 AM EST
    has refused to help him redact documents, and then accused him of putting people's lives at risk because he prints their names.

    He is responsible for what he does (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 08:48:58 AM EST
    Not them.  He claims he is helping the world by releasing classified information, and IMO he is 100% responsible for how he is helping the world.  If our existing media agencies actually work to not be as irresponsible about putting people at such risks when delivering the news why does he get a pass?  He gets no such pass with me.  If he has such terrific hackers and such, he had better get himself some terrific redactors too.

    If the Pentagon and MSM (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by PatHat on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 08:53:51 AM EST
    would actually tell us what is going on, there would be no need for Wikileaks, imo.

    The media used to actually QUESTION the government.


    If they tell you (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:01:35 AM EST
    all of their troop movements it puts your troops at risk.  If they outline exactly what they are doing, the Taliban immediately begins working to sabotage that.  This isn't rocket science.  Your Armed Services Committees and your Congressional leaders are who is kept in the know, and if you can't trust them I would say that is the fault of the voters who keep voting for those they can't trust.

    And is Assenge detailing troop (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by observed on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:07:00 AM EST
    movements? I don't think so. I thought what he released was years old.

    You said that the Pentagon and the media (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:14:32 AM EST
    should tell you "everything" going on, and yes...troop movement is exposed in the documents that have been released but our troops aren't complaining much.  They feel much more capable of defending themselves though than the Afghan civilians he placed on Taliban kill lists.

    I disagree with you 100%, but that's not the (5.00 / 3) (#16)
    by observed on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:06:02 AM EST
    point. The point is that the Pentagon is blaming him for not redacting, and lying about being contacted for that purpose.
    Given the circumstances, it's on the military---which, by the way says that his documents have caused no harm.
    Not to mention the fact that the dozens of civilians (or more?) killed in bombings each week
    do far more harm to the "cause" than Assenge printing the truth.

    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:10:11 AM EST
    They can't have it both ways... Smart of WikiLeaks to give the Pentagon the opportunity to redact.

    And the Pentagon made a political decision not to redact.


    No (none / 0) (#44)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:59:33 AM EST
    He did the deed. He is responsible for the damage his leaks do.

    And he has blood on his hands.

    He is the Son of Jane Fonda and the cousins of many others.


    Compared to our hands... (5.00 / 2) (#68)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:38:07 AM EST
    wikileaks has bars of Ivory for hands.

    If they still do have Ivory hands (none / 0) (#85)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:50:47 AM EST
    It is only because the military has been able to get the people they fingered out of harms way.

    Poor Jane (5.00 / 2) (#83)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:49:45 AM EST
    Leave Jane Alone........LEAVE HER ALONE :)

    Once again (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:12:13 AM EST
    The media does not irresponsibly release classified information that can place our national security at risk or people's lives.  He is no hero for doing so and nobody should enable him to be ever more irresponsible.  He needs to shoulder his own burdens he commits himself to.  We are each responsible for our own actions and the harm they cause.  No matter what the military does though, on the Left they will never be anything other than evil.  They should cut costs but magically hire people to redact thousands and thousands and thousands of classified documents that someone stole....total fecking insanity IMO.  But freely kicking the military in any way possible is always going to be something the Left relishes.

    I respectfully object (5.00 / 2) (#118)
    by PatHat on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:05:31 PM EST
    to your comment that the Left is necessarily anti-military. I have family in the military. I support and pray for our troops. It is not unpatriotic to believe that the military is not being used correctly in supporting our national security.

    It is a BIG LIE that liberals spit on soldiers or the we hate America or that we wish America would lose wars. And to say that the Left "relishes" kicking the military is a ridiculous statement. If I was in a jovial mood, I might say that the statement doesn't pass mustard.


    Do you believe this? (none / 0) (#137)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:57:30 PM EST
    There were a few tense moments, however, including an encounter involving Joshua Sparling, 25, who was on crutches and who said he was a corporal with the 82nd Airborne Division and lost his right leg below the knee in Ramadi, Iraq. Mr. Sparling spoke at a smaller rally held earlier in the day at the United States Navy Memorial, and voiced his support for the administration's policies in Iraq.

    Later, as antiwar protesters passed where he and his group were standing, words were exchanged and one of the antiwar protestors spit at the ground near Mr. Sparling; he spit back.

    New York Times


    three years ago (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 01:10:08 PM EST
    someone spit on the ground "near" someone else. Truly unbelievable.

    That's the king of thing that's (almost) enough to make certain chickenhawks forget their rectal cysts and sign up for duty in a war zone somewhere.


    And no one ever spit (none / 0) (#148)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:21:08 PM EST
    at/on/near a soldier/naval/airforce/marine/coast guard person during the Vietnam era.

    Sure. Yes. No doubt.

    (A serious sarcasm alert has just been issued.)

    BTW - I served 10 years in Naval Aviation.

    And you??


    "No one"? (5.00 / 1) (#171)
    by Yman on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 03:02:29 PM EST
    I don't know if anyone ever did, but the prolific spitting claims are more like an urban legend than anything approaching reality.

    So you admit that it happened (none / 0) (#195)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 05:03:55 PM EST
    OK We're getting there.

    They offer ... (5.00 / 1) (#200)
    by Yman on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 05:18:57 PM EST
    ... remedial reading in almost any community college, Jimmy.

    safely out of the line of fire (none / 0) (#169)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 03:01:25 PM EST
    that you're all-too-eager to push young American men and women into.

    You and Rectal Cysts and Sean and Glenn..


    I was against (none / 0) (#194)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 05:02:15 PM EST
    Kosovo and even called and wrote my elected reps.. But when I lost the argument and the troops went in harms way I shut and supported them.

    You haven't.

    And whatever I did in the service is more than you.


    I already knew (none / 0) (#199)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 05:11:14 PM EST
    that you were "against" virtually any policy course associated with a Democratic Administration.

    You're about as robotically predictable as your mentor-at-a-distance Hannity, in that respect..

    And speaking of the service of b.s, let's see your source for that Cordoba Center opening date..

    Put up, or quit posting wingnut b.s at your site.


    Not sure (5.00 / 2) (#168)
    by Yman on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:58:26 PM EST
    The piece you cited doesn't provide any information to verify the incident.  Did the reporter witness it?  Are there any other witnesses?  Is the reporter just reporting claims made by Mr. Sparling?  If so, is the reporter aware that Mr. Sparling contradicted parts of this story just days later?  Did the reporter ask Mr. Sparling about the prior allegations of "hatred" that Mr. Sparling reported to the media (claiming he wasn't allowed to board a plane, receiving a hate letter at Walter Reed, etc.)?  Did the reporter ask Mr. Sparling why all these incidents keep happening to him?

    That would be a good start.


    the spitting happened (none / 0) (#172)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 03:13:02 PM EST
    anyone who says it did not is either lying or uninformed.  I have seen that globe thing before.
    much of it is crap.
    I was on the front lines of the vietnam protests and I have seen it.  personally.  with my own eyes.  more than once.  I did not do it, I had to many friend serving, but I know people who did.
    and I know people who were spat on.

    Maybe (5.00 / 1) (#180)
    by Yman on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 03:29:00 PM EST
    But the comment you're responding to had to do with a particular allegation of spitting by Joshua Sparling.  The incident, reported in the NY Times, is the third incident of alleged hatred focused on Mr. Sparling.  It's also hard to believe that he would be spat at and yet fail to mention it during a video he made recapping the events of the protest.

    BTW - I have no idea whether anyone ever spat at soldiers at the Vietnam War protests, but the sheer number of the claims combined with the fact that the author of a book on the very subject could not find a single, documented instance leads me to believe that such claims are, at the very least, grossly exaggerated.

    BBTW - When you saw it, what did you do?


    yeah (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 03:35:21 PM EST
    well we didnt have iPhones then to capture such things and does it really surprise you that no one wants to verify they did it?

    as far as what I "did" what would you think I did? in the middle of a loud and borderline dangerous protest go up to the person and unload on them about how righteous I am and how deficient they were?  you would have done that Im sure.

    I didnt do it.  my friends didnt do it. we disapproved of those who did.  things were a little different then.  disapproval was far less righteous.  on many fronts.


    far less (none / 0) (#183)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 03:40:35 PM EST
    self righteous, I should have said.

    a friend of mine (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 04:01:41 PM EST
    was in Chicago in '68 and told me that before the convention began, there had been numerous, well-attended meetings held at which it was agreed - with little, if any disagreement from anyone - that everyone would strive to keep the demonstrations peaceful. Then, almost as soon as they began, "out of nowhere" appeared these young men - always working their way to the front to face the news cameras - who started the "kill the pigs" chants and throwing things at the cops..

    Of course, it came out later that cointelpro-type provocateurs had been mixed in with the crowd; probably to fan the flames of irrationality and attempt to show up the demonstrators to the American public as little better than a bunch of ill-bred, unwashed, hysterics, unworthy of a fair hearing.  


    there were many plants (5.00 / 1) (#188)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 04:10:20 PM EST
    and to speculate that some of them were spitters is completely logical.

    No Iphones? (none / 0) (#187)
    by Yman on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 04:07:11 PM EST
    Weird, although Jerry Lembcke wasn't looking for actual video - though I'm sure that would have been nice.  He also found not even a single press account of a protestor spitting on a veteran.  Of the hundreds of such accounts that arose by the 1980's, they all bore a similar storyline, ending with a protester spitting on the serviceman and the serviceman walking off in shame.  Do you seriously think that's likely?  I think it's far more likely that, as Jack Schafer of Slate points out, "Most servicemen would have given the spitters a mouthful of bloody Chiclets instead of turning the other cheek like Christ. At the very least, wouldn't the altercations have resulted in assault and battery charges and produced a paper trail retrievable across the decades?"

    Barabara Ehrenreich was also intrigued by this issue.  She had her research staff review the national news papers of the time to document incidences of this happening, and they only found one instance - Ron Kovac (of Vietnam Vets Against the War) was spit upon in Dallas by a woman at the Republican National Convention.

    I'm not saying it never, once happened (can't prove a negative, right?), but absent any compelling evidence to the contrary, I'll defer to those who have studied the issue -and to common sense - and found it's mostly urban legend.

    BTW - You seem so justified in your reaction and so certain of what I would (not) have done.

    Is that what you mean by "self-righteous"?


    The reporter didn't say (none / 0) (#197)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 05:07:14 PM EST
    "he said."



    The story is unclear (none / 0) (#203)
    by Yman on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 05:28:03 PM EST
    But either the reporter is reporting something he witnessed (and lying when he claimed Mr. Sparling "spat back") - in which case the story is obviously false - or Mr. Sparling is lying when he denied it.

    You choose.


    You know what's also very strange (5.00 / 1) (#182)
    by Yman on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 03:35:43 PM EST
    In addition to all of the other problems with this story, Mr. Sparling made a video at the end of the protest recapping the day, and yet didn't once mention the alleged spitting.

    Weird, huh?


    I'd spit back too (none / 0) (#166)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:56:44 PM EST
    The Left looks for any opportunity to demonize the military.  And all this business about how it is a Christian military.....pfffft.  We have a military with a few crazy Christians...and we had that damned crazy Muslim too.  I don't know how the Jews in uniform put up with our crap, but they manage.  Generally speaking though, IMO the military has a smaller percentage of religious crazies than the civilian population has.  And I'm fine with creating an organization that protects all soldiers from ANY kind of religious persecution but just because one was created doesn't mean we are or ever were a Christian military and they are or were barely able to contain us or rein our insane Christianity in.  We got one barely twenty punk though telling a reporter that his magic Mormon underwear saved him from the flying bullets and suddenly the United States military all thinks they are the new Crusaders according to the next Leftwing headline.  Some people need to get out more often.

    At least they are predictable though.  I can scan the news and cha ching....if anything happened that concerned the military I can fairly closely predict exactly what the headlines demonizing the military will be the next day on the left blogs.


    When Wes Clark was running (none / 0) (#110)
    by hairspray on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:49:09 AM EST
    for President back in 2004 he was vilified by the left for having been an "architect" of war policies and should not run on a Democratic ticket. On the big orange it was really vicious.  On the other side he was a failed general as specified by certain battles as far as the right wing was concerned. Sheesh!

    Man (none / 0) (#174)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 03:17:05 PM EST
    get the holier-more-patriotic-than-thou's dander up and they get out that same monstorously broad brush they accuse "the Left" of using..



    It seems to me that our media (5.00 / 3) (#133)
    by Anne on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:39:32 PM EST
    work a little too hand-in-glove with the government - and the military - and help them hide way too much behind a stone wall of "national security" or "protecting the troops."

    No one expects to be told everything.  But I think there has been a concerted effort to hide and cover up and dissemble and stonewall in order to keep public sentiment about war from boiling over - which has probably kept the war machine chugging away, which has itself put thousands of our personnel in harm's way.  I mean, what if they had been more open, resulting in an end to engagement several years ago?  How many died in those several years who wouldn't have or didn't need to?

    So, I think you ought to pardon some of us for not blindly supporting the wholesale withholding of information under cover of "saving lives."

    I think about the media's withholding of information about black-site prisons and warrantless surveillance, about their nodding complacency about torture (among many other things - the list is long), and I wonder, what about those lives?  Do they not count?  

    When the military that seems increasingly in thrall to authoritarian leadership, and beholden to the defense industry and private contractors, stops treating its own as fodder for never-ending war, I'll start feeling guilty about how truth puts lives in harm's way.


    Hear hear (none / 0) (#139)
    by PatHat on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 01:15:03 PM EST
    That is what I was trying to say. Thanks, Anne.

    P.S. about two days (none / 0) (#13)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 08:57:58 AM EST
    after the first dump, the military began contacting those that he outed and attempting to make them safe if they could and the families desired it.  And they did it quietly, I wonder why.  In spite of his finger pointing that the U.S. military is a bunch of disgusting murderers, they actually went out and risked their lives some more to try to keep people from being murdered that HE placed in such risk.  So please don't act like the Pentagon is doing nothing.  Very far from it.

    The Pentagon put their lives at risk, (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by observed on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:08:34 AM EST
    MT. Assenge did what any responsible reporter would have done, and the Pentagon refused to make sure than none of these people were put at risk. Assenge did his job; the Pentagon did NOT do its job. Put the blame where it belongs.

    No reporter (none / 0) (#30)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:19:20 AM EST
    is putting anyone at such risk, you are crazy.  Sy Hersh knows tons and tons and tons more about what is really going on because he has sources.  And he keeps those sources too because he never ever releases anything that directly damages our national security or puts lives at risk.  Your statement is utter bull.

    I am not saying (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by PatHat on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:28:27 AM EST
    that a massive document dump is the right thing to do. But why is EVERYTHING regarding both wars confidential? Why can't we know what is going on in the name of America?

    Keeping the citizens detached from the war was the plan from the beginning and both the govt and the media are partners in that.

    When the Pentagon says that the release of ANYTHING endangers our mission, that is ridiculous. And isn't Wikileaks trying to avoid this by involving the Pentagon in redacting names before the next dump? And why won't the Pentagon help? Maybe because they get more mileage out of demonizing him if people DO get outed.

    We really don't know much of what has happened over there, what the future plans are, or what the final results will be. We don't even know what the military THINKS will happen.


    Exactly. Managing information (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Cream City on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:36:21 AM EST
    is the professional approach as well as the ethical responsibility of government in a democracy, with the public's right to know -- to a point.  Instead, there was the usual lockdown on important information while pushing only pap.

    The Pentagon's approach invited investigative reporting.  No information still secret that the public has a right to know?  Then there would have been no "unknown unknowns," and no story.


    This isn't a Pentagon issue (none / 0) (#38)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:43:47 AM EST
    Your Pentagon is under civilian leadership.  Everyone on the left ignores that at this time when they choose to and they feel the need to do a little demonizing, and then when some General talks $hit about a President they rightfully scream bloody murder that the true military leadership is civilian.  Look, either the leadership is civilian or it isn't....you don't get to have it both ways to fit whatever you are currently throwing a fit about.

    Actually (none / 0) (#189)
    by hookfan on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 04:19:37 PM EST
    one can have it both ways as Obama seems to blink on then off when it comes to leadership. Let's see? Does any issue enhance his ego and appearance to himself of his leadership? Blink on. Is there a controversy that makes him look bad or controversial to his ego demands, or what he views his image to be? Blink off. See? Easy. Works both ways. . .

    I don't completely disagree with you (none / 0) (#37)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:40:25 AM EST
    about how the country is being kept in the dark on some things.  It seems to me that most of the things that people want to know and isn't directly damaging to national security or lives is being kept from them for political gain and manipulation......but that isn't the Pentagon's fault at this point, the fault lies with your civilian leadership.

    And that civilian leadership is trying to duck out of being responsible for all military decisions too now, and trying to roll back rules that prevent them from being in the dark about anything clandestine they want to be able to be in the dark about.  Our greatest problem at this time though is our civilian leadership and how they are trying to avoid being leaders, not miliary leadership (except for that one yahoo who tried to have spiritual fitness day and send everyone to a Christian concert or you have to clean the barracks....he is crazy and now he is in big trouble too).


    "That isn't the Pentagon's fault (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Cream City on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:45:22 AM EST
    at this point, the fault lies with your civilian leadership."

    That is splitting hairs, diverting discussion -- a standard pr ploy.  Let's see if it still works!


    Who is the boss Cream City? (none / 0) (#43)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:52:41 AM EST
    This isn't splitting hairs at all, not at all.

    So you're saying that it's Obama (none / 0) (#48)
    by Cream City on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:04:40 AM EST
    that is endangering the lives of the military?

    Then why have you been arguing against the point at the start? -- that the smearing of the Wikileakers has

    the scent of the USA behind it.

    So you are saying that the Pentagon is not the source for these "dirty tricks," but the President is?  Wow.


    You think the Pentagon is setting up (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:20:01 AM EST
    Assange?  I thought you were talking about something else.  I seriously doubt that the Pentagon is behind setting him up if he is indeed being set up.  I have no reason at this point though to assume he is being set up.

    Now you're back to the Pentagon (none / 0) (#65)
    by Cream City on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:36:54 AM EST
    when you said the responsibility was above the Pentagon.  The same ploy -- but it probably will work on someone.

    We are talking about setting someone (none / 0) (#89)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:53:57 AM EST
    up though now right aren't we?  Anyone can do that.  I can even do that.  I can hire someone in Sweden to say something, perhaps someone working at the Pentagon could do that too and you would say the Pentagaon did it.  That isn't a command decision is it?

    But has Assange really been set up by someone?


    Sounds more like a movie to me. (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by oculus on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:57:10 AM EST
    The Sweden thing (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by cal1942 on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:22:20 PM EST
    had the scent of Black Ops.  CIAish.

    Am I alone in this.


    Nope, you're not alone in that. (5.00 / 1) (#132)
    by Cream City on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:36:50 PM EST
    Entirely possible, isn't it (none / 0) (#95)
    by Cream City on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:04:09 AM EST
    if the civilians were endangering the lives of the military, as you say, and someone in the Pentagon -- or previously so -- wanted to put pressure upon the civilians?  Or, of course, the converse?

    It has happened.


    Sorry, I require evidence (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:06:42 AM EST
    I require understanding (none / 0) (#124)
    by Cream City on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:19:47 PM EST
    of the difference between "possible" and factual.

    For example, it is entirely possible that you are correct in your comments.  

    But I do not know that you are entirely factual.


    It is possible for any one of us (none / 0) (#145)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:10:02 PM EST
    to have hired someone to make untrue statements about him.  There is an ongoing investigation, I suppose we will know soon enough.  

    How can you be so sure it was a "smear"? (none / 0) (#179)
    by Nemi on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 03:26:13 PM EST
    The charge - coming not only from but also in Sweden - of rape was withdrawn, but not the accusations of molestation; and not "within hours" but 24 hours later as the chief prosecutor took over the case.

    Here's her statement on the Swedish Prosecution Authority website:


    No labor Day trips for me (none / 0) (#6)
    by ruffian on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 08:41:38 AM EST
    Still paying off my summer vacation.

    Just not having to come into this office on a Monday will be vacation enough!

    Just got back (none / 0) (#7)
    by PatHat on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 08:43:16 AM EST
    from a week on Lake Ontario. Normally a wonderful time, but I had work to do still. Working vacations are pretty useless.

    Brian Wilson Reimagines Gershwin (none / 0) (#12)
    by ruffian on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 08:54:40 AM EST
    is my new favorite record. Download at least a couple of tracks and see if it does not bring a smile to your face. I recommend "You Can't Take That Away From Me", but there is not a bad track on the thing.

    I like it to (none / 0) (#20)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:09:38 AM EST
    but I have not publicly admitted it until now

    It made me realize why I was never a Beach Boys (none / 0) (#28)
    by ruffian on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:17:44 AM EST
    fan - I like the general sound, but the lyrics and the songs themselves left me cold. Put that sound on some great songs and I am all for it!

    thats it! (none / 0) (#31)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:25:04 AM EST
    exactly.  hadnt thought about it.  but I never got the beach boys.  like, at all.  
    that is why.  precisely

    thank you! It really was a flash of revelation (none / 0) (#41)
    by ruffian on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:48:22 AM EST
    to me.

    I heard an interview with Wilson in which he said that for a couple of the tracks he had unfinished Gershwin music to work with, and wrote the lyrics himself. You can pretty much figure out which tracks those are when you listen.

    This was the rare time I bought a whole album on itunes - but now I wish I ha the liner notes.


    I recently heard a concert during which (none / 0) (#80)
    by oculus on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:46:13 AM EST
    pianists Gabriela Montero and Christopher O'Riley played Percy Grainger's two-piano "Porgy and Bess" arrangements.  Stunning and fun.

    I was just reading how (none / 0) (#84)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:50:13 AM EST
    Progy and Bess was a total flop when it came out.
    opera people didnt get it.  and then there was the racial factor.

    I thought it was interesting.


    Except for high school concert bands (none / 0) (#88)
    by oculus on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:53:50 AM EST
    the score was pretty much moribund.  Then Jack O'Brien directed it for Houston Opera and his production toured.  So interesting and such wonderful music.

    did I just link Bess (none / 0) (#159)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:36:20 PM EST
    to a Polish dumpling?

    Well put... (none / 0) (#32)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:26:56 AM EST
    aside from "Pet Sounds" I was never crazy about Beach Boys songs either...Brian's vocals and the harmonizing, otoh, hell yeah.

    I'll have to check this Gershwyn stuff out.


    What's not to like (none / 0) (#56)
    by brodie on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:19:31 AM EST
    about the wonderful lyrics of "Wouldn't It Be Nice", "California Girls" or "God Only Knows", their 3 sublime classics?

    The only major problem I had with the Boys was their tendency at times, or early on, to repeat the surf music songs.  Though look how far-ranging and creative their music was for a bunch of dudes from the beach (or nearby inland town, whatever).


    Yes, those are the three I like (none / 0) (#60)
    by ruffian on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:26:58 AM EST
    Not enough there to make me a huge fan, though I did appreciate the musical abilities. Just could not get into the lyrics of most of the other song. For me, if a song has lyrics, I have to like them. Can't listen if I don't.

    Sail On Sailor (none / 0) (#161)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:40:16 PM EST
    is a great song..

    I'll try it (none / 0) (#46)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:03:13 AM EST
    See what the music sector of the fam thinks.

    thanks (none / 0) (#15)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:04:15 AM EST
    I had totally forgotten we have a three day weekend coming up.

    this again (none / 0) (#22)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:10:43 AM EST
    A president in need of a political spark

    Surely it's obvious that I am describing Obama's second-term masterstroke: Vice President Hillary Rodham Clinton

    Not sure if I (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by brodie on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:14:29 AM EST
    follow Ignatius' reasoning here -- Hillary described as a "low-key, low-maintenance" adviser who could just as easily fit nicely in a "moderate Republican" admin, who somehow nevertheless would be able to "light a fire" under Obama.  I like the conclusion, but the getting there isn't quite clear.

    Then this interesting, somewhat amusing passage

    But Obama is different. He truly doesn't seem to relish politics, in the raw, mix-it-up sense. Most of all, he isn't needy for public attention in the way our most neurotic and gifted politicians have been -- walking outpatients such as Richard Nixon or Lyndon Johnson or Bill Clinton. He doesn't like red-hot; he likes cool and deliberative.

    Pretty accurate, except I would never include Clinton in the same certifiable category as basket cases like LBJ and Nixon, both of whom were inner-driven to imagine enemies that weren't really there.  Bill was not clinically paranoid as those two outpatients were; and his enemies -- virtually all the GOP and MSM -- were very real, from day one.  

    Clinton also worked from an other-directed moral principled core, something the glory-seeking narcicists Nixon and Johnson lacked.  The cool, deliberative Obama may well share many of Bill's principles, but has yet to equal Bill's political skills or willingness to forcefully and persuasively argue those principles and policies to the public.


    well (none / 0) (#55)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:17:50 AM EST
    if I am honest I have to admit that I think Bill was pathologically needy.  
    ironically I think that may be integral to the political success of the people he mentioned.

    There's needy and there's (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by brodie on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:29:36 AM EST
    needy.  Bill's need to be liked by everyone was a relatively low-key (mildly neurotic) thing compared to those other two.  

    Bill was sane enough to eventually realize he wasn't going to convince everyone and also didn't conjure up imaginary enemies.  LBJ and Nixon needed to find enemies, making them up and then itemizing and listing them literally in one case, a mental list in the other ("Kennedys", "Harvards", the "media", etc).

    Johnson was certifiable, as Nixey was.  Both never should have been allowed to become president.


    although (none / 0) (#66)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:37:09 AM EST
    I  believe it was the Clinton administration that produced the saying "even paranoids have enemies"

    Not really (none / 0) (#103)
    by sj on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:26:28 AM EST
    That's just a takeoff on "just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean they aren't after you" from Catch-22 published in 1961.

    as it is with very successful (none / 0) (#57)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:19:41 AM EST
    actors.  they have to want it almost to the exclusion of everything else.

    That's painting with (5.00 / 2) (#70)
    by brodie on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:38:12 AM EST
    a little too broad a brush.

    Yes, being ambitious, having drive is important to success in those two fields.  But some can be excessive in their drive and ambition -- in politics these tend to be the fast risers who also tend to cut corners because they're in such a hurry and don't have a strong moral sense, the ones who don't let anything or anyone get in their way, the ones who need power (or acclaim) desperately to affirm their own worthiness and who tend to abuse it or misuse it once they have it.

    I put Nixon and LBJ easily into the "excessively ambitious" category -- the "walking outpatients" as the Timesman aptly put it.  

    The merely "ambitious" Bill didn't need a straightjacket or institutionalization -- just the occasional headache tablet ...


    I don't think Clinton was so (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by hairspray on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:05:26 PM EST
    needy that he lost the big picture.  I think he relished the fight and winning with all odds against him more than anything.  He was a risk taker.

    I think it's called (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by jbindc on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:10:52 PM EST
    "having passion".  Also see "willing to fight for something."

    well (1.00 / 1) (#125)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:22:03 PM EST
    her certainly was undeniably a risk taker.

    never have expensive cigars been put at so much risk.

    (sorry bill.  that was for Blanch)


    Check, for the most part. (none / 0) (#129)
    by brodie on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:29:37 PM EST
    Mostly someone who stepped up to the plate and gave it a try.  A few times though when Bill should have been bolder -- as with laying down the law to the JCS on gays in the military, reminding them who the CinC was; in failing to reject the absurd call for a special Whitewater counsel, which Hillary recommended would be a disaster; and then in his 1996 re-elect which was a little too low-risk and uninspiring a calculated game of small-ball for me.  Then that one time we all know about when he took too much of a risk ...  

    But, to return to the discussion above, at least Bill was always well-rounded and well-grounded in reality.  Unlike Nixon, when stressful times happened, you didn't have the SoS or the SecDef quietly arranging to have certain dangerous powers taken away from the president because he seemed to be off his rocker and could easily start WW3, nor as with Johnson did you have top aides independent of each other seek outside psychological counsel as to whether their boss was losing his marbles.

    Bill Clinton -- ambitious, and often successful -- but never nuts ...


    Speculation (5.00 / 1) (#135)
    by christinep on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:45:17 PM EST
    Harold D Lasswell, once referred to as the "father of modern political science" wrote in his "Psychopathology of Politics" (circa late 1930s?) that a strain of need, sexual acting out, power displacement exists in public administrators and politicians. Interesting.

    That said...in terms of various Washington pundits' "analyses" of former President Clinton, it appears to me that their characterization of both Clintons often stretch to fit the writers' own needs and wants. Even more prosaic, I've always believed--that in addition to the Washington kingdom's malleability in that area, as helped along by Mellon-Scaife et al--some of those pundits reflect a simple envy or plain jealousy of the man who actually "looks too good and talks too wise."  


    - but never nuts ... (none / 0) (#131)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:33:07 PM EST

    reckless and irresponsible perhaps.  not nuts


    Don't forget cruel and unusual... (none / 0) (#170)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 03:02:14 PM EST
    he certainly didn't need to be loved by the stoner community...from my people he obviously wanted a war.

    Went to New Orleans to watch the Saints (none / 0) (#23)
    by republicratitarian on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:12:11 AM EST
    play this weekend. The stadium was packed for a preseason game, amazing.

    Good banana banshee's at Fat Tuesday, YUMMY!

    Very cool (none / 0) (#50)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:06:32 AM EST
    Glad in the extreme that the stadium was packed.  I think we are going to Fat Tuesday this year in order to support New Orleans.  They have had enough.  Bourbon Street always smells like vomit and urine, but New Orleans has had enough so we are going for some Fat Tuesday.

    Get a room with a balcony on Bourbon. (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by republicratitarian on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:33:15 AM EST
    You won't regret it, well, maybe. :)

    depends (none / 0) (#86)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:51:12 AM EST
    on what you are looking for

    May I suggest the (none / 0) (#90)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:54:05 AM EST
    Royal Sonesta?

    Probably one of the 10 best hotels in the world just because of its location.

    A truly civilized way to watch the antics of the peasants on Bourbon.



    Team Slado heading tot he Gulf (none / 0) (#39)
    by Slado on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 09:45:22 AM EST
    Destin awaits a week of sun and fun.

    I will give full report on BP spill when I get back.

    Destin wasn't badly affected, (none / 0) (#101)
    by jeffinalabama on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:17:41 AM EST
    according to folks I know. Panama City wasn't too bad some weeks ago...

    Please give a report on this area (none / 0) (#108)
    by MO Blue on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:45:11 AM EST
    Originally thought about spending some time in the Destin area in October. Would still like to do so if the beaches are in good shape. Main reason for going would be walking the beaches and would not enjoy that if I had to walk through oil effected areas.

    I was in Destin Friday (none / 0) (#123)
    by republicratitarian on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:17:57 PM EST
    I live in Pensacola, not an ounce of oil anywhere. I go to the beach in Pensacola or Fort Walton almost every week. Everything is open, they've even reopened all fishing down here.

    No oil on the beaches. Probably a good time to come, tourism is down so you  might get a good rate somewhere.

    My two cents.


    Off season prices is one of the reasons (none / 0) (#142)
    by MO Blue on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 01:38:13 PM EST
    I'm thinking about going in October. The other is that my birthday is in October.  The trip would be my present to myself.

    October is probably a great time to go. (none / 0) (#164)
    by republicratitarian on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 02:53:38 PM EST
    It's been hot as you know where here this summer.

    We have been in the high 90s (none / 0) (#190)
    by MO Blue on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 04:39:30 PM EST
    with heat indexes in the 100s for months. We have been getting the heat and humidity with no ocean or beaches to compensate.

    At least we have (none / 0) (#191)
    by republicratitarian on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 04:45:08 PM EST
    the gulf to compensate and the bikinis that come with it.



    A team from work was in that area last week (none / 0) (#127)
    by ruffian on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:23:47 PM EST
    They said the beaches are great!

    Come over and spend lots of money!


    "spending lots of money" (none / 0) (#143)
    by MO Blue on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 01:41:38 PM EST
    probably not in the cards. A trip done on the "cheap" might happen.

    Labor Day weekend (none / 0) (#61)
    by CST on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:27:13 AM EST
    not looking forward to it.  My ex-boyfriend's mother invited me to his sister's wedding that weekend on Long Island.  The guilt-tripping force in her is very strong (plus she's really sick) and I am not good at saying no.  So I will be spending the whole weekend with the ex and his entire extended family.  Frankly, I'm not really worried about him, we are fine.  It's everyone else and all the questions.

    You and the ex should make up wild stories (none / 0) (#69)
    by ruffian on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:38:09 AM EST
    to tell people. Tell everyone that asks nosy questions a different story.  Might make the weekend more enjoyable!

    totally (none / 0) (#75)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:43:43 AM EST
    like the way the joker had a different story about how he got the scars every time he told it.

    Sounds awkward... (none / 0) (#76)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:43:54 AM EST
    where on the island?  I could possibly recommend a good watering hole if you need to escape for a few hours.

    woodbury? (none / 0) (#94)
    by CST on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:01:53 AM EST
    I have no idea where that is.  Luckily I am flying into JFK, got a cheap ticket a few weeks ago, so it shouldn't be too bad getting there.

    As for the awkward.. yea.  At least the food will be good.  And knowing what I know about the brother of the bride, I have a sneaking suspician there will be plenty of vice to be had as well.


    Scratch that... (none / 0) (#102)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:17:42 AM EST
    Woodbury is fancy-schmancy North Shore...they don't even like peeps like me driving through there:)...but it's a quick train jaunt to NYC, closest station would be Syosset I think.

    I'd be worried (none / 0) (#74)
    by PatHat on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:42:50 AM EST
    about Long Island on Labor Day. Hope you're flying into LGA or Islip and not driving.

    Only thing worse than the traffic... (none / 0) (#77)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 10:44:45 AM EST
    is all the damn cops!

    Staying home on Labor Day weekend. (none / 0) (#93)
    by oculus on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:00:30 AM EST
    Baseball game on Monday, which happens to be my b-day.  

    But, yesterday I got many, many single tickets for Walt Disney Hall L.A. Phil. concerts so will be one the road a bunch later.

    the beat goes on (none / 0) (#96)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:06:19 AM EST
    just got this:

    At the Ft. Hood Memorial Service...
    The Crotch Salute Returns

    this pic

    I'm sorry folks, but is this the person that was elected
    President of our country?
    You know, the United States of America?
    I do believe that saluting the flag goes with that,
    and also to honor the servicemen who died,
    or is he above that??
    Shower us all with flowery words and
    dazzle us with Bull(#@*,
    But actions speak louder.  

    what can one really do but reply all with the snopes debunking?

    this is what that pew poll is all about.

    Coulter on HOMOCON (none / 0) (#104)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:35:27 AM EST
    The irony of this whole controversy, of course, is that Coulter's getting lots of support for speaking at HomoCon not only from younger conservatives  but, in her own words, from Christian friends too. Which is to say, for most people, it ain't all that controversial. Exit question: She calls herself the right-wing Judy Garland but is she actually the conservative Elton John?

    I could live with her being the conservative Elton John.

    hotair has done some responsible reporting on this.  but the post quoted at that link, I believe, misses an important point.

    So Farah is essentially elevating to the position of Worst Sin the one sin he has absolutely zero chance of committing, zero chance of even being tempted by.

    It strikes me as very convenient, self-serving position to take that the most important sin out there, the most destructive sin, the one, as Farah says, actually destroys whole societies, is the sin that those who are most concerned with it aren't ever tempted to commit in their entire lives.

    I think ace has it wrong.  he is projecting.  just because HE has never been tempted by that particular sin does not all IMO mean that people like Farrah is not.
    I think the ARE tempted.  big time.
    personally I never met a phobe I did not believe was latent.

    oops (none / 0) (#105)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:36:00 AM EST
    "The lady doth protest too much" n/t (none / 0) (#111)
    by coast on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:50:30 AM EST
    Most Expensive Menu Ever (none / 0) (#106)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:36:47 AM EST
    A cautionary tale re insults via (none / 0) (#107)
    by oculus on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:37:03 AM EST
    internet:  LAT

    Of course, a judge ordering the internet provider reveal a person's identity doesn't necessarily translate into money damages.

    Need to keep an eye... (none / 0) (#144)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 01:51:17 PM EST
    on thse types of cases...I, for one, find the (relative) anonymity liberating in expressing views and opinions online...though I see how it leads to people being nastier than they would under their real names, I think the free exchange of no holds barred ideas and opinions is worth it.  Everybody needs to remember it's just the internet, not to be taken too seriously.

    Paul Verhoeven (none / 0) (#109)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:45:43 AM EST
    to make a film about islamic fundamentalism.

    what could go wrong?

    The fungus... (none / 0) (#112)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 11:56:43 AM EST
    gave me a whole new appreciation for "Total Recall"...as a comedy.

    This new project will surely cause a few "schizoid embolisms"...watch your back and good luck Mr. V.


    oh yeah (none / 0) (#134)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 12:42:07 PM EST
    it only takes that scene where Arnolds eyes are bugging out of his plastic skull about 6 inches to be classified a comedy.

    ever see the Disney movie "Dinosaur"?  I spent 5 years of my life on that POS.  I suggest watching it with the sound down.  its pretty.

    but the interesting part is that script had been floating around town for many years.  it was originally going to be made by Verhoven and Phil Tippett the effects genius behind many movies from Dragonslayer to Starship Troopers.
    would have been quite a different movie, dont you think?


    zombies 1 (none / 0) (#177)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 03:20:46 PM EST
    Minneapolis 0

    Minneapolis will pay $165,000 to zombies

    Minneapolis will pay seven people who were jailed after a street theater protest.

    Why would someone (none / 0) (#204)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 23, 2010 at 07:29:34 PM EST
    who said anti-war protesters "aren't Americans as far as Im concerned" make up a story about being spat "near"?

    Or why, for that matter, would a regular poster here make up stories about the Cordoba Center being scheduled to open on the anniversary of 9/11?

    Useful lies to further the cause seems to a thread that runs through a lot of these narratives..