Monday Night TV and Open Thread

I'm finally done with court today, and about to watch the finale of the Bachelor Pad (even though I know who wins.) It should be fun to see what the pros from DWTS can do with them in such a short time.

Update: Congrats to Dave and Natalie. Of the two final pairs, they were my fave by miles. I've always liked Natalie, she has so much moxie and not an ounce of fake goody-two shoes-ness.(We also have the same birthday.) Dave really rehabilitated himself from his angry, psycho, over-macho performance on Jillian's season, something I never would have thought possible. I actually liked him on this show. [More...]

But my favorite part may have been Wes and Gia. They make a great couple, and he's so due some love after the way the show trashed him with its hatchet-editing job on Jillian's season. I'm glad Chris Harrison acknowledged it -- and they let him sing at the end. I doubt Kiptyn and Tenley will make it, she'll drive him crazy with her two note repertoire, little girl giggles or crying, and I don't care one way or the other, but I really hope Wes and Gia last. I think Gia is the best looking woman to appear on the show, all seasons combined, and she seems to have a big heart to match. As a whole, the show pretty much sucked until tonight. I fast-forwarded through big portions, especially the sorry Elizabeth, but the finale was terrific. Memo to Michelle: Yes, Karma's a b*tch. Which is why you should have forgiven Tenley when she apologized. It will come back to bite you.

Final word: Melissa looked stunning. Even her "baby bump" was cute.

Now it's time to watch the new episode of "Weeds."

On an unrelated note, I was also out at the federal detention center earlier and ran into a co-defendant from a drug case I tried in 1992. We recognized each other immediately. (He's now housed at the minimum security prison next door to the detention center.)It was a pretty routine drug case (in my view, but my client was acquitted.) 19 years later, and he told me he has 9 more to do -- he got 28 years. What a needlessly long sentence. On the plus side, he's lost about 50 pounds, doesn't look any older except for gray hair, was in good spirits and told me he runs 10 miles every day.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Underpants Bomber Fires Attorneys, Wants to Represent Himself | 9th Circuit Affirms Suppression in Baseball Steroid Use Investigation >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    After increased daddy daycare duties... (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Dadler on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 08:32:04 PM EST
    My friend who works at a (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 08:36:44 PM EST
    Federal detention facility also pays and uses prepaid legal all the time.  She is paranoid about what someone could ever get her found guilty of.  When I tease her for sending out a letter from her attorney at the drop of a hat she tells me that if I knew what some people were in a Federal detention facility for I'd be paranoid too :)

    Josh came home from school today as his class secretary.  For the past two years he has wanted to be the student council class representative but when it comes time to deliver his speech before the vote he chickens out.  That's okay, he will get there, he is only ten.  For those who wanted to be secretary and take notes at meetings for the class, they asked that the students write a sentence with at least three participles in it and the teacher didn't reteach participles. It was a sort of test.  They voted Josh the best writer and their secretary:)  I have no idea where he learned how to dangle participles like that :)  He said that in order to "sew up" a portion of the voters, he decided to go after the boys because he understands them the best.  He told me that he chose aggressive action participles and it worked :)  What a political animal he is.  And the kid who has the most difficult time physically writing is the class secretary, let's not allow our disabilities to define us I guess!

    Congratulations to Josh! (none / 0) (#15)
    by byteb on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 09:07:43 AM EST
    He seems to have great political instincts. Who knows, maybe, someday I'll be voting for him.  :)

    wow (none / 0) (#16)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 09:15:16 AM EST
    He told me that he chose aggressive action participles and it worked :)

    and you say he is 10?


    He was three when we told (none / 0) (#22)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 09:48:49 AM EST
    him one night it was time for bed and he said, "Let's negotiate".  The kids with Classic Freeman Sheldon Syndrome all test high on intelligence testing.  Their collagen is slightly different due to the gene anomaly, it is more dense and contrary to calling someone dense if you think they are a bit dim, having dense brain tissue is often the reverse.  The one adult that I have grown close to on the web who has FSS is a civil engineer and a father with two sons.

    Josh's scoliosis was so bad early on in his toddlerhood, they were trying to prepare us to lose him.  At the same time though we took him to all his therapies and he kept developing other abilities in such stunning ways and at stunning rates.  It was an agony, how do you prepare for this person to leave life?  He was all about life.  When the titanium rib surgery was a success and his worst curve was suddenly 11 degrees, all of our lives changed instantly. I felt a little normal again.  Before that though I felt like my life was always skirting hysteria with this gorgeous gifted child who was also doomed.


    Nielsen has selected my household (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 12:12:42 AM EST
    for a survey.  Will they be sorry when they learn the only thing I watch is Padres games?

    New subject:  defendants. I once prosecuted a tow truck driver for running over a guy whose truck was being repossessed.  About 10 years later, the driver, who was convicted and sentenced to state prison, recognized me in the court house parking lot, to which he had towed a car at my request (for the jury to inspect).  He thought I was his defense attorney.  I did not disabuse him of that idea.

    Consider giving Christiane Amanpour (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by andgarden on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 09:29:26 AM EST
    a shot on Sunday? ;-)

    Yes! What a great chance to have Oculus channel (none / 0) (#33)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 11:02:46 AM EST
    our programming desires to the Nielson folks!

    Please watch Masterpeace Mystery this week too!


    Masterpiece, that is! (none / 0) (#34)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 11:03:09 AM EST
    Masterpiece Theater and Mystery (none / 0) (#49)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 01:43:31 PM EST
    used to be "don't miss" for me.  Don't why I stopped watching.  Maybe because my TV screen is smaller than my laptop screen?

    Sounds like an extra income... (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:30:13 PM EST
    opportunity oculus..."yeah I'll watch your favorite show, 20 bucks please"...:)

    and Rubicon, too? (none / 0) (#47)
    by byteb on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 01:30:07 PM EST
    I do love that show.

    And I watched a good movie last night (none / 0) (#3)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 08:41:57 PM EST
    when I couldn't sleep again at midnight titled 'Layer Cake' from 2004.  It was on the IFC channel, and I originally started watching it because Daniel Craig was in it.  I'm not a 007 fan, but I have liked him in other things he has played in.  Anyhow, he plays a middleman drug dealer.  Very good movie, killer soundtrack.  The beginning of the film reminded me a lot of reading Jeralyn and kdog and the subject of prohibition and drugs.

    I'll check it out (none / 0) (#4)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 09:13:37 PM EST
    Thanks for the tip. I watched the new Clive Owen movie this weekend, "The Boys Are Back." The Australian scenery was awesome, and while kind of sad in parts, it was also inspirational. I recommend it. The little boy in it was so good, what a hard role to play.

    Thanks for the recommend (none / 0) (#8)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 10:26:50 PM EST
    I saw Layer Cake theatrically in 2004 (none / 0) (#5)
    by andgarden on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 09:46:48 PM EST
    Barbara Broccoli and I apparently had the same thought, because that was the role that put Craig into contention for playing 007:

    "Bond 23" was moving forward on the heels of more than $1 billion in worldwide grosses from "Casino Royale" (2006) and "Quantum of Solace." Craig's addition to the team was a stroke of genius that came after Broccoli viewed Matthew Vaughn's "Layer Cake." MGM had asked her to watch the film because Vaughn was under consideration to direct, but Broccoli noticed another talent.

    "Barbara said, 'I really like this guy, Daniel Craig,' " the source said. "We were horrified. We liked Eric Bana, Hugh Jackman. To her credit, she thought (Craig) was a great actor, had this magnetism. We wanted to do one more with Pierce (Brosnan). ... (The producers) are generally cautious, but they are capable of doing bold strokes."

    I liked Craig in' Defiance' too (none / 0) (#7)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 10:25:39 PM EST
    I hope to enjoy long term Daniel Craig talent.  I still can't believe that Heath Ledger is gone and I can't believe that I actually mourn the loss of someone's acting talent, but I do.  I thought I would grow old enjoying that talent.

    Revis Island - not a factor... (none / 0) (#6)
    by Anne on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 09:59:10 PM EST
    Jets have no offense and lose in an ugly win by my Ravens; Rex Ryan writes checks he can't cash.

    Am wrung out, and God knows the Ravens will take some important lessons from this game, but geez-a-whiz, Rex Ryan can just suck it: karma is a b!tch.

    Good luck against New England and Wes Welker...

    Didn't see much Ravens offense either (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by nycstray on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 11:28:08 PM EST
    effective on the score board offense that is  ;)

    No kidding...Jets are great against (none / 0) (#11)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 06:50:24 AM EST
    the run, for sure - and it was an ugly win, but what the Ravens learned from the game is, I think, easier for them to correct than what the Jets learned.  I was shocked, really, that it was the Jets committing so many penalties last night - I would have thought, with the noise and all the hype, it would be the Ravens with 14 penalties, not the Jets.

    The Ravens did have offense, though, and you saw Flacco throwing it downfield, converting third downs again and again; no, it didn't translate to the scoreboard as it should have - some costly turnovers took care of that - so I know, as we move on to the next game and the next game, that the Ravens will be putting up the points - I'm not sure the Jets offense is there.  In fact, they remind me a lot of the pre-Flacco Ravens, who for years won their games on defense.  Hell, that's how we got to the Super Bowl, so we know it can be done!

    Bet you're kinda missing Thomas Jones about now, though, huh?

    Your guys were great on defense - but the question I have is, why isn't Sanchez being allowed to do more?  If he's the guy, he needs to be the guy - year two is a huge year, I think, in terms of QB development.

    Interesting to me is that so many teams this weekend that were expected to be great, weren't - and some that were expected to be awful, weren't.

    Any given Sunday - what makes it fun!


    Don't know if Jones would have (none / 0) (#35)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 11:40:57 AM EST
    made any dif last night. BTW, he only went for 39 and his team won! (he's on one of my FF teams). I do wonder about the offensive changes though. We shall see.

    I was glad the game stayed close, even though ugly. I had a Sunday of the Raiders and '9ers. OY. I ended up cheering for my FF players if any happened to be playing (C Johnson!), lol!~


    Congrats... (none / 0) (#13)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 08:30:21 AM EST
    on your offense s*cking slightly less than ours Anne.

    Good analysis, they need to let Sanchez play to win instead of playing not to lose.  But I'd say Revis was a factor, Flacco stayed away, and he wasn't the one getting flagged repeatedly like Cro and Wilson...though I wonder why Rex had him matched up on Mason instead of Boldin....I gotta give the Ravens credit for getting the good matchups, the coaching chess match goes to Baltimore.

    Kris Jenkins going down was a killer...we're still awesome on D without him, but he brings the run defense to another level..1-2 yards per becomes 3-4 without him wreaking havoc in the middle.  Hope it's not serious...looked nasty.

    Schotty needs to get the O together...don't wanna be 1-3 or 0-4 when Santonio comes back.


    Kdog - we were on the edges of our (none / 0) (#14)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 08:55:19 AM EST
    seats the entire game - stomach in knots for three hours - and I'm sure you felt the same way - if that ugly game had been pretty, without the turnovers and penalties, who knows how it would have all gone down?

    One thing the Ravens are pretty good at is going on the road and winning big games: they embarrassed Dallas in their last game in the old stadium when no one gave us a chance, they smacked the Patriots from one end of the field to the other in last season's playoff game in spite of the predictions that it would be the other way around.  This game wasn't a blowout on the scoreboard, but the statistics tell a different story - Ravens beat the Jets in almost all categories - and when your defense can't get off the field, there comes a point when they begin to show the effects.

    The Jets offense should have been fresh and rarin' to go, as little time as they played.  Does Sanchez even know there is field beyond the down markers?  Is he the one going to checkdowns or is Schottenheimer holding him back?  Guess that will be a big topic in the NY sports media and blogs this week - because the Jets are going to need offense against the Pats - Wes Welker was a beast on Sunday against the Bengals, and Brady, I fear, is really back.  We've got them in their house in Week 6 - so you can be sure we will be paying attention to your game on Sunday!

    Week 1 is in the books, and all the teams have learned something.  On to Week 2 - we have the Bengals that got embarrassed by the Pats and who will be looking to get a division win, so we have our work cut out for us, too.  

    Really pleased with Boldin and Houshmandzadeh - Ozzie Newsome really should change his name to Ozzie Awesome - ;-)


    Stomach in knots allright... (none / 0) (#17)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 09:20:35 AM EST
    painful game to watch...flag, flag, punt, commercial, flag, flag, punt, commercial:)

    I think it's a little bit of both...the coaches stressing the checkdown, and then Sanchez strictly focusing on the checkdown. They need to open it up and let it rip...you can always scale it back if he starts throwing too many picks.  And enough with the pre-snap motion...I think it confuses ourselves more than the defense, causing false starts...let the kid focus down the field instead of a circus pre-snap.

    How about that Ray Lewis...still playing like he's 25, all over the field, plugging the holes and laying the hits...nobody plays with more tenacious joy.  One of the best MLB's of all time, and there are many all-time greats at that position.


    Too much time spent (none / 0) (#23)
    by brodie on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 09:49:21 AM EST
    with checkdowns checkoffs and Checkovs by the Jets offense -- for a 2d-yr QB this can be confusing and frustrating.  Not sure what Schottenheimer is doing except making things overly and needlessly complex for a talented Sanchez who's still in the learning stages.

    The Jets have a major systemic problem on offense.  The fussy and foolish Schottenheimer is to blame.  The Ravens weren't fooled -- on the contrary, they said later they'd prepared and were easily able to adjust to Sanchez' adjustments.  Next game the Pats will also not be fooled by the Schottenheimer scheme.  Better to scale it all back now and start with a simpler system.

    As for the Ravens, their talented receiving corps is not getting the throws with touch and accuracy they need.  Flacco also was asked to thread the needle to the sideline too often.  He's not quite ready to make those throws.  But the Ravens offensive problems are surmountable with more practice and small adjustments on pass routes.  The Jets by contrast have some major headaches already.


    sorry kdog (none / 0) (#37)
    by CST on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 11:48:45 AM EST
    next week against the Jets should be interesting too.

    Those games are always fun.  Gotta say I'm feeling confident though, and am perhaps not as gracious as Anne when it comes to sports :)


    It's on kid... (none / 0) (#39)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 11:57:55 AM EST
    hopefully we can find an offense in practice this week or it could be a long day for Gang Green.  Hopefully a hated division rival gets our sh&t together:)

    I know you ain't lighting us up like you did the Bengals, buy you might not need many points unless the Jet D or Special Teams finds paydirt on their own a couple times.


    it's on like donkey kong (none / 0) (#53)
    by CST on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 01:50:27 PM EST
    glad football season is here.  It's an excuse to continue ignoring the baseball fiasco that is the red sox this year :)  Although as things go in the AL East, we are still the best or second best team in MLB that will miss the playoffs.

    what's the deal with the jets locker room shenanigans?  too much testosterone...


    No excuse... (none / 0) (#58)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:06:22 PM EST
    for sexual harassment....I don't doubt the players got out of line, and should apologize to the reporter if they did....not just Woody "Mr. Burns" Johnson on behalf of the team.

    Not for nothing though...did you see how tight those jeans were?  They looked painted on.  Lots of cleavage on display as well.  I'm all for equal gender access to the field and locker room, but there is such a thing as appropriate workplace attire.  I consider myself a gentleman and I'd be hard pressed not to stare at a woman who came in my office dressed like that.

    I kinda smell a desire for someone to get their name in the paper...but as I said, no excuse for sexual harassment...it's uncalled for, the players play a kid's game, but they ain't kids and should know they are always under a microscope for behavior, especially in Goodell's NFL.


    Is that the players' "packages" (none / 0) (#59)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:09:42 PM EST
    vs. female reporter thing?  I was reading about that at Huff Post.  The comments show we haven't come a long way baby.  Not at all.  

    the comments on anything like this (none / 0) (#63)
    by CST on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:19:15 PM EST
    are always the worst of the worst.

    For what it's worth, I mostly agree with kdog.  No excuse for the player's behavior.  And no, I would not wear something like that to work, even if I were a sports reporter (perhaps especially).

    That being said, I also wouldn't be surprised if her employer encouraged her to dress that way.

    And Portis is a complete @ss.  As is just about anyone who comments on a sports thread.  What a rediculous thing for him to say.  Women work with men all the time.  Believe it or not, we can contain ourselves.  They should learn to do the same.


    Any thoughts on Tomlinson? I am taking (none / 0) (#65)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:20:56 PM EST
    my tutoree--Tomlinson fan--to pro soccer game tonight.  Tomlinson is sure to figure in our conversation.  Need a little help here!

    Foootball is back! (none / 0) (#27)
    by CST on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 10:12:45 AM EST
    I am feeling pretty good about this season.  The Pats/Bengals game was not nearly as close as the score suggests.  I think this is the year the Pats come back in a big way.

    See you in week 6!


    I was pretty impressed by the way the (none / 0) (#30)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 10:25:33 AM EST
    Pats played the Bengals - but here again, I think that was the hype factor.  Bengals won the division last year, and they added TO, and the conventional wisdom was they were on their way to bigger things this year.  Meanwhile, the Pats weren't getting the same kind of love - there were worries about Brady, and Welker, and so on - and so, to see how masterfully the Pats handled the Bengals was impressive.

    It was another case, I think, of a team just ignoring the hype, focusing on what they needed to do and getting the job done; some of that, I think, is management style and locker-room leadership.  Hey, Rex Ryan did a great job in his tenure with the Ravens, first as a position coach, and then as D-coordinator - and his players loved him - but he coached within an organization where he was not the leader - and I think that makes a difference.

    Pats are probably going to want to get the taste of that Ravens post-season beatdown out of their mouths, so it should be another wild and wooly game - thank goodness it's the 1:00 pm game, so I have the bulk of the evening to come down from it, however it turns out!  Hate these night games - I get so wound up it takes me forever to go to sleep...


    yea (none / 0) (#32)
    by CST on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 10:44:38 AM EST
    I was not so worried about the pats offense.  With Brady, even coming from an off-year, he always commands a certain level of confidence, and within 5 minutes it was clear he had shown up to play.

    The real question mark going into the game was the defense, and that I think was the real exhale that came from that game.

    I'm sure Brady and co. are still holding that playoff grudge, so game 6 should def be a fun game.

    I know what you mean about the night games, in 2007 when the pats made their run at undefeated, the second half of the season it seemed like all of their games were Sunday/Monday night games.  And by that time none of the games were relaxing.  Pro Football is stressfull, but wonderfull (not really into college sports).  Thank goodness it's only once a week, I don't think I could handle more than that.


    Pariah or no pariah (none / 0) (#38)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 11:54:14 AM EST
    The Eagles are crazy if they don't give some very serious thought to making Michael Vick their starter; particularly on an offense with less than ideal pass blocking. What a weapon it is to have a qb who not only has an above average arm, but who can keep defenses honest-to-a-fault by threatening to turn into Devin Hester and getting you twenty or thirty yards anytime the pocket breaks down.  



    They should, ... (none / 0) (#42)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 12:24:07 PM EST
    ... but they're too heavily invested in Kolb at this point to bench him after only 1/2 game.  I'm still waiting to see what the coaching staff is talking about when it comes to Kolb, but I think it'll take a few losses for enough pressure to build to replace him.

    It was nice... (none / 0) (#43)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 12:33:09 PM EST
    to see those crazy legs in action again...I'd start him next week if I was Reid, he outplayed Kolb and McNabb...he can always tell Kolb they're just being extra cautious with his health:)

    We were wondering why Revis wasn't (none / 0) (#36)
    by nycstray on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 11:45:38 AM EST
    on Boldin. Although Mason can still burn ya . . .

    Mason is very good... (none / 0) (#40)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 11:59:55 AM EST
    but he's on the wrong side of his prime...Cro coulda handled him, where he could not handle Boldin...and Revis can shut anybody in the league down.

    Hate to bring it up again, dog (none / 0) (#41)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 12:00:51 PM EST
    but, it was just the kind of game that Leon could've broken open. But, what do I know..

    I don't know... (none / 0) (#44)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 12:39:03 PM EST
    we've got the horses, I don't think Gayle Sayers would have helped last night with that play calling.  LT was the lone bright spot on offense, he had 2 nice runs.  Brad Smith in the Wildcat too...maybe we should run the Wildcat full time.

    Well (none / 0) (#12)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 07:56:10 AM EST
    I came too late to comment on the Hillary thread but I guess I can put it here. The writer comes pretty close to expressing how I felt.

    Dont Ask Dont Tell (none / 0) (#18)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 09:28:19 AM EST
    Do you suppose anyone told the Senate (none / 0) (#77)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:52:49 PM EST
    Judge Phillips decided DADT is unconstitutional?

    maybe a primary prediction thread? (none / 0) (#20)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 09:35:53 AM EST
    I have a feeling it may be a big day for the tea baggers.

    like dis (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 09:38:07 AM EST
    Insurgents Vex GOP Mainstream in Northeast

    Several Republican primaries Tuesday serve as the latest test for a party establishment that has seen many of its chosen candidates overtaken by tea-party activists looking for a renewed commitment to conservative principles.

    and we are not in the south anymore!


    What Principles though? (none / 0) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 10:02:29 AM EST
    I know the tea baggers talk about balanced budgets, while they pack guns on their hips :)  I don't remember that being anyone's principle after the West was won :)  The principle of Republican racism?  How can that be a Republican principle when you've been hanging with Michael Steele, Alberto Gonzales, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, and Mel Martinez?

    This is what the wedge issue makers (none / 0) (#25)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 10:04:39 AM EST
    reap though, they totally have this instantish karma due them.  I hope they have the day they deserve.

    I dunno (none / 0) (#26)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 10:07:04 AM EST
    maybe libruls like us should be careful what we wish for.  we hope the teabaggers win so they will lose but what if they dont lose.


    like I said, its a freaky deaky year.


    Man in the Sky forbid (none / 0) (#29)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 10:23:18 AM EST
    Are you certain the person in the sky (none / 0) (#50)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 01:44:59 PM EST
    is a man?

    What are the tea baggers (none / 0) (#45)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 12:58:59 PM EST
    but, in the main, hard-right republicans who are too embarrassed to admit they voted for Bush and too pissed about McCain being nominated?

    In other words, they've already won twice: in 2000 and in 2004.  


    There is some sort of DADT (none / 0) (#28)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 10:22:17 AM EST
    vote this week.  I just listened to Barbara Starr say that there is a loophole about how it won't be "immediately" enacted if it is going to affect troop strength or morale.  I know some of TalkLeft is personally not going to be overall happy with the wishy washy of it but I think it is fairly aggressive because it looks like all the doorways are OPEN now to walk through at the miliary's earliest convenience while they take on the missions at hand which are complex and deep and wide.

    This gives gay soldiers something to stand on though,  nobody will be booted due to sexual preference ever again after this.

    I don't worry about DADT not being fully overturned and done away with, mostly because we can't stand how stupid it makes us look in front of our NATO allies.  We can't stand to be the military who hasn't figured something out yet while everyone else has.  The activists need to make sure they glean all the social wins out of it though for the rest of society that can be had IMO.

    A lot of heads will explode, but if DADT is yanked the military will acknowledge a gay marriage from a state that has it.  Look out world :)  But the gay community is going to have to get over the military making military comic books about being a gay soldier, because they make horribly illustrated teaching comic books about all new policy :)

    Primary Day (none / 0) (#31)
    by CST on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 10:36:17 AM EST
    today in MA.

    It will be interesting to see if this becomes a bit of a referendum by the left on HCR.  Lynch was the only MA state rep to vote against it.  Although I'm sure that stance will win him some votes as well as lose them.

    Of course, he voted yes on the Stupak amendment, so it's more of an economic question than anything else.

    In general Lynch is sort of a conserva-dem, at least by MA standards.  But then again, the 9th district is not exactly the liberal Mecca of MA either.

    His challanger D'Alessandro is a union organizer.  They both have union backgrounds.

    Jonah Goldberg: (none / 0) (#46)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 01:03:41 PM EST
    You can't rule on personality alone LAT

    Interesting, as reading this I was thinking I could read the same thing on Talk Left.

    Jim Greer (none / 0) (#52)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 01:48:41 PM EST
    In September 2009, conservatives raised questions about the motives of president's back-to-school speech, which was beamed into many of the nation's classrooms. Greer was among them, charging that "taxpayer dollars are being used to spread President Obama's socialist ideology."

    "While I support educating our children to respect both the office of the American President and the value of community service, I do not support using our children as tools to spread liberal propaganda," he said then in a statement that made waves around the country.

    Greer is now apologizing for those comments.

    "In the year since I issued a prepared statement regarding President Obama speaking to the nation's school children, I have learned a great deal about the party I so deeply loved and served," Greer said in a statement Tuesday to CNN and other media outlets.

    "Unfortunately, I found that many within the GOP have racist views and I apologize to the President for my opposition to his speech last year and my efforts to placate the extremists who dominate our Party today. My children and I look forward to the President's speech."

    Dana Milbank is an a$$ (none / 0) (#54)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 01:52:21 PM EST
    Yup (none / 0) (#56)
    by squeaky on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 01:58:50 PM EST
    He sure is left of center.

    "Anybody reading my column would make an informed judgment that I'm left-of-center, and I wouldn't quarrel with that," he says. "But strongly ideological people on the left do not recognize me as one of their own."



    The authorities don't care what you type. (none / 0) (#60)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:12:50 PM EST
    Actually, I kind of anticipated you would agree w/me on the TL comment on Goldberg's op ed.  

    Never (none / 0) (#62)
    by squeaky on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:16:47 PM EST
    Goldberg is on a mission. Some here are also on a mission. Sad to see when some here imagine that they share common ground with such a slug as Goldberg.

    dont think that is what (none / 0) (#64)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:20:35 PM EST
    oc meant.  I actually agree that it did sound a bit like some things I have read here.

    Thank you, capt. Thought I was (none / 0) (#66)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:22:21 PM EST
    losing it there for a sec.

    Wow (none / 0) (#68)
    by squeaky on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:28:39 PM EST
    Well your reading ability is quite superficial.

    BTD no fan of Carter

    Doughy Pantload no fan of Carter

    Carter lost to Reagan

    therefore Obama is ushering in the Gingrich/Palin revolution?



    actually it was about (none / 0) (#70)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:33:34 PM EST
    governing on personality.

    Not Buying It (none / 0) (#74)
    by squeaky on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:49:33 PM EST
    Goldberg compares the "dilettante" FDR to Hitler. Obama and Hillary Clinton are the grandchildren of Mussolini.

    The conservatives are anti Fascist and the Liberals are Fascists.

    That is at the base of all his comparisons.

    Seriously different critique than BTD, and quite the insult to compare Goldberg and BTD as sharing views on either Obama or Carter, and with FDR goldberg is on another planet.

    What a moron.


    You are more intelligent than (none / 0) (#79)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:54:35 PM EST
    your reaction to my comment.  I wasn't referring to BTD or Jeralyn.  

    OK (none / 0) (#80)
    by squeaky on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 03:01:06 PM EST
    I will take your word on that. The obvious, yet really superficial and insulting comparison, would be with BTD, considering his rhetorical comparison of Obama to Carter and FDR....  

    ps (none / 0) (#71)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:33:57 PM EST
    and I am no fan of the Doughy Pant Load

    on a completely different note (none / 0) (#76)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:51:43 PM EST
    a fish story.
    you and I have joked before about my silly Polypterus and his unrequited love for the graceful female Arowana made even more difficult by the courtship of the two Arowanas and subsequent death of the male and a renewal of his chances.
    so.  fast forward a few months.  the Arowana he carried the torch for died some months after her male counterpart due to an untimely equipment malfunction.  
    last weekend in the fish store there was another that looked like the resurrection of my dear departed Arowana.  but he is a male.  I brought him home.
    he and the Polypterus were very curious about each other and not at all hostile. and the began swimming together just as he used to do with the female.
    but heres the thing.
    when he swam with the female he always did the "mirror dance" just like he was a male Arowana.  I assume he learned this by watching it.  I raised him from a tiny tadpole so I dont know where else he would have learned it.  BUT when he swims with the male he does a synchronized swimming thing.  he mimics exactly the movements of the male, and he is pretty good at it, but not the mirror thing he did with the female.  more like sort of a buddy duo.

    sorry to rant but it just amazes me that this weird little salamander/dinosaur could know how to do this.  or even why he would.
    but its fun to watch.


    Well, up to a point... (none / 0) (#81)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 03:02:38 PM EST
    I think the assessment of Obama's popularity is pretty accurate, and there are plenty of people here who have made similar assessments, but I don't know that any of those people see Obama as an instrument - of any kind - of the Lord or any other god.  

    What we see is that when personality fails you, when reality runs smack into optics and bumper stickers and fairy dust - as it always does - there'd better be something else in your arsenal, you'd better know how to energize your base, and you'd better know how to lead, because if you don't, people are not going to stick around for long.

    Of course, Goldberg being the conservative that he is, everything is going to have some deeper religious meaning - and shoot, if what you want to see is the impending arrival of some sort of conservative revolution, why not see if you can make the current situation align with earlier ones?  Goldberg might as well have said, "when the 1980 election ushered in the Reagan Revolution, I was wearing my Captain Fantastic underpants - and guess what? - I'll be wearing them again on election night in November, so never fear people - Captain Fantastic is never wrong: the revolution is on the way!"  

    Sorry for the mental image, but, seriously - that's pretty much the equivalent of what he wrote in that piece - and I don't think anyone here is buying that - even if they agree that personality does not translate to leadership.


    I know Im in a minority (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 03:58:33 PM EST
    here and will be seen as an "O-polagist" by some, but I think these two occupations/wars and the still lingering post-9/11 atmosphere here have been a HUGE constraint on what Obama, or any other Democratic "leader" would be capable of reforming in some areas. People seem to be expecting him to, in effect, take the military and intelligence establishment to task in a way that NO Democratic President has done since JFK attempted to marginalize the Cold War jihadist wing of the Pentagon in the early sixties and talked about breaking up the CIA and scattering it to the four winds.

    Did Bill do anything to significantly scale back that bloated Leviathan of a defense budget, in a time of relative peace? Did he not okay the rendition program and vigorously sponsor the sanctions on Iraq? The School of Torture and Terror i.e., the School of the Americas, was in full swing under Carter and we were involved covertly in and supporting repressive regimes in Latin America and beginning to fund the Taliban-Al Queda "lesser of two evils" in Afghanistan.

    The last time we had a anything like a relatively effective, somewhat progressive Democratic wartime consiglere in this country was under Johnson, and that was only for a short period when he was under tremendous pressure from different quarters in his base and also during a time when his own advisers were telling him Vietnam was unwinnable.  


    Obama coming to office (none / 0) (#88)
    by brodie on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 04:20:20 PM EST
    in 2009 with two long-term small and mid-sized wars to deal with, that the public was beginning to tire of, was in a far stronger position to initiate fundamental change wrt those wars and to reflexive Pentagon hawkish mentality than, say, JFK was in the depths of the CW in 1961.  (and I'd add that Kennedy had more than just a "Cold War jihadist wing of the Pentagon" to deal with -- more like 98% of the bird was crazily hawkish.)

    But most of the lib base could live with some mere moderate-change only from Bush on FP if only O had taken greater care, and acted when the time to act was there, in dealing more aggressively with the economy.  That unfortunately involved a mistake in emphasis wrt HCR, and the Dems and O are now living with the consequences, with almost no pol out there touting ACA.

    (And I'm not sure what your 3d para means -- LBJ was neither a progressive nor a consigliere -- he was the Don (and nearly as personally corrupt and capable of evil as that term connotes).  What pressure from what base to do what?  The very strong-willed Johnson chose as he wished, his advisors and his policy, often for reasons not divulged.)


    I was refering to the pressure (none / 0) (#90)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 04:39:08 PM EST
    Johnson was under from the Civil Rights movement for progressive reform, which was significant and was comprised, to a large extent, of probable Democratic voters, or those who would become Democratic voters if and when Johnson expressed sympathy for their cause through policy initiatives.

    Was using "consigliere" in the most hyperbolic sense; I didn't mean that he was literally someone's adviser, or some mafiosi's adviser; or for that matter, that Johnson himself was any kind of ideological progressive.



    Oh, okay, CR and (none / 0) (#92)
    by brodie on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 04:57:45 PM EST
    related.  Pressure, yes, but LBJ knew he had to prove himself to the lib wing, particularly after Dallas and with his prior rep of being an anti-labor wheeler-dealer for Big Oil and the TX-based defense contractors.  And the key measure there was the '64 CR bill -- failure to follow up on Kennedy's initiative would have caused a huge rift in the party as Johnson looked to the Nov election.  Was never an option for him not to carry forth with Kennedy's bill, and the rest.

    As for consigliere, that might have been John Connally to LBJ's Godfather, or Abe Fortas, the lawyer who helped him legally in Johnson's theft of that crucial 1948 senate election, and of course he always helped to keep it stoled, and was later rewarded with the Scotus post.


    Well played, Sir or Madame (none / 0) (#93)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 05:08:00 PM EST
    the last part especially.

    maybe I am an O'pologist also (none / 0) (#89)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 04:21:24 PM EST
    since I agree with most all of that.

    An Irish jeweler? :) (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 04:44:19 PM EST
    Not Buying (none / 0) (#84)
    by squeaky on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 03:54:07 PM EST
    The article by Goldberg talks about Obama's personality, and that you cannot lead by personality alone.

    There has never been much talk about Obama's great personality here, as far as I remember. He certainly has not been compared to Bill Clinton, who was Mr Personality.

    The criticism of Obama here has been that he has not pandered to progressives enough. The earlier criticism was that his base was sold and stopped making demands, so Obama did not have to pander to them.

    Goldberg is taking a fact, that Obama's popularity ratings are down, and generalizing that he is just like Carter. This is politics on Goldberg's part. He wants Obama to be out of office so a Gingrich can take his place.

    The Carter presidency failed and his coalition dissipated because you can't hold a coalition together with personality alone. You need to actually govern in a way that satisfies your constituency.

    A cheap shot, that occludes Goldberg's political agenda. with a truism that actually is fairly meaningless. "It's the economy stupid".....

    Just as we linked McSame with Bush, Goldberg is linking Obama with Carter in an attempt to decrease his popularity more. He has no argument, and bolsters his talking point with a bunch of garbage, imo.


    Overly impassioned type (none / 0) (#87)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 04:07:14 PM EST
    that I am, I have trouble seeing Lucianne Jr's name in print without my blood beginning to vaporize..

    This is the guy who's been traveling the circuit of late promoting the idea that there's a direct line traveling from the Third Reich to "the Left" in America today; the one who said, not long ago, that what we need to prop up another Pinochet (put Saddam back in power?) to stabilize Iraq..  


    If I thought a Jonah Goldberg column made sense (none / 0) (#94)
    by Harry Saxon on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 07:59:52 PM EST
    my wife would take me to the doctor to rule out organic brain damage like a stroke or the beginnings of Alzheimers syndrome.

    very strange (none / 0) (#67)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:23:19 PM EST
    Famed civil rights photographer doubled as FBI informant

    Ernest Withers, a revered civil rights photographer who captured iconic images of Martin Luther King Jr. on the night King was shot in Memphis, actually played a different role the day before: FBI informant.

    The Commercial Appeal, a newspaper in Memphis, just completed a two-year investigation that reveals how Withers provided the FBI with details about where King was staying and information on his meeting with black militants on April 3, 1968 -- the day before the assassination.

    Withers' spying, however, extends far beyond the slain civil rights leader.

    The report involves the famous photos of a fatally wounded Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. on his back as Andrew Young and others desperately point in the direction of the shot.

    Withers didn't take the photos, but they were developed in his Beale Street studio.

    Louw overheard Withers (none / 0) (#72)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:43:27 PM EST
    say, on April 14, that HE suspected James Earl Ray was behind the shooting??

    How would someone like Withers be privy to that kind of information?


    though, I guess (none / 0) (#73)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:47:10 PM EST
    "a certain schizophrenic segregationist" could cover a lot of people besides Ray..

    that amazes me (none / 0) (#78)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:54:24 PM EST
    how many other key parts of our past need to the rethunk

    Well, the King family (none / 0) (#82)
    by brodie on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 03:22:49 PM EST
    (or most of it) tried to focus national attention on what they considered a gov't-sponsored conspiracy to murder MLK back in the 1990s when they sued a man (Loyd Jowers) who claimed to have played a role in handling and hiding the murder weapon.  

    Civil jury returned a verdict in favor of the Kings and finding a conspiracy to kill MLK in late 1999.  Sadly, but not surprisingly, only a few reporters from local Memphis media bothered to cover any part of the trial.  Complete shutout by the nat'l press, iirc, except to drily note the verdict and downplay its importance.

    The FBI, as we see in this latest accidental news scoop, was all over King in his final days in Memphis.  Bugged his motel room and tapped his phones, the MPD/FBI informant photographer, plus King was assigned a driver in Memphis who was MPD undercover reporting to all law enforcement concerned (later in the mid-70s he went to work for the CIA).


    sure (none / 0) (#83)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 03:32:47 PM EST
    I have read all about that part.  its just the iconic photographs.

    what next?  the fbi shot the Zapruder film?


    What a nifty thing for the (none / 0) (#86)
    by brodie on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 03:59:53 PM EST
    FBI in Memphis -- your own undercover man there as a photog, watching things and having a legitimate reason to do so.  Then when someone else happens to take photos at the key moment, that same informant is there conveniently with his own studio to have them developed.  Control of crucial photog evidence is vital.

    Re the Z film -- which the FBI managed to "screw up", switching a key couple of head-shot frames as they were then published incorrectly in another controlled outlet, Life mag -- it may as well have been shot by an FBI man.  Besides the key frames being reversed to blunt the effect of a shot from the front, you had Life holding onto the film withholding it from public showings, for some 12 yrs, until finally someone got a bootleg and US tv execs allowed it to be shown in the middle of the night for the first time -- 1975, Geraldo.


    no personal attacks on (none / 0) (#75)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Sep 14, 2010 at 02:50:18 PM EST
    other commenters please