home

Friday Morning Open Thread

Open Thread.

< HAMP'd | Friday Evening Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Escapist TV recommendation (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by ruffian on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 10:02:39 AM EST
    2003 Brit TV series of Galsworthy's 'The Forsyte Saga', 2 seasons available on Netflix. Starring  Damian Lewis, who I have recently discovered via the show 'Homeland' (Brody). It is a late-Victorian generational story about a large English family, part of which are very traditional (Lewis) and conflict with the more bohemian side of the family. The acting across the board brings extra depth to the story. I thought even the point of views of the 'bad guys' were portrayed very movingly.

    Highly recommend!

    I much prefer the sixties version ... (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:58:30 PM EST
    which is also available on DVD.  It's in black and white.  Shot mostly on video tape on interior sets.  But has a much better cast.  And much better writing. And there's more of it.  26 episodes!

    Those not familiar with Brit TV of this era may take a few episodes to get used to the style.  But then you'll be hooked!

    This was also the series which began the U.S. obsession with Brit dramas, and led to creation of Masterpiece Theater to regularly import more shows of this type.

    Parent

    Interesting, thanks! (none / 0) (#42)
    by ruffian on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 01:22:05 PM EST
    I recently watched the 60's  Glenda Jackson 'Elizabeth R' series. You're right - the production values are hard to get used to by today's standards, but it was still very good.

    Parent
    Elizabeth R is great! (none / 0) (#48)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 01:44:06 PM EST
    Actually from the early seventies not the sixties.  But also done in the videotaped interiors/filmed exteriors style of UK TV of that era.

    I lived in the UK as a child in the seventies, so this style of shooting TV drama is totally familiar to me.  But, as I said, it takes some getting used to for those who've not experienced it.  

    Parent

    Yea! Loved the Forsyte Saga... (none / 0) (#25)
    by christinep on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:29:57 PM EST
    all those years ago. It will be fun to see again. 'Appreciate the info.

    Parent
    Don't miss Downton Abbey (4.00 / 1) (#122)
    by robert72 on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 07:16:56 PM EST
    The first 4 episodes were on Masterpiece Theater last spring, and the concluding episodes are coming on in February 2012, I believe. The first set was fabulous - I hear the second is not as good, but I am anxiously waiting for it.

    Parent
    Yes, I saw that. Wonderful! (none / 0) (#135)
    by ruffian on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 10:07:26 PM EST
    I'm really looking forward to the new episodes.

    Parent
    I think I missed it then because (none / 0) (#34)
    by ruffian on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:50:01 PM EST
    I tried to get through the book at one point in my life and could not do it. Maybe I'll try again.  I loved that the plot twists were so different than what you would find in present day writing. Always surprising. Fascinating characters.

    Parent
    You mean books! (none / 0) (#141)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 01:59:05 AM EST
    It's four or five or six, I forget.

    I absolutely loved them, wished it had gone on for six more, at least.

    Parent

    When I was a kid our parents subscribed to (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by ruffian on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 06:45:28 AM EST
    one of those book clubs with the nice embossed leather bound editions. The Forsyte Saga came in one massive volume. I still have it. It was the only one I started and could never finish.

    My brother and I loved those books so much. We read Rebecca, The Caine Muriny, Jane Eyre, Wuthering Heights, Connecticut Yankee - I think that was the first we got. Aesops Fables. Bulfinch Mythology, collected Edgar Alan Poe. I wonder if my brother still has the Gone With the Wind edition. We read that one so often it was falling apart.

    I think getting those books in the mail was one of the highlights of my youth- explains my current Amazon habit!

    40 years later I guess I better finish The Forsyte Saga.

    Parent

    Tracking software on smart phones (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Yman on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 10:10:26 AM EST
    Researcher discover a rootkit installed on many smartphones that logs every text message, Google search and phone number typed on a wide variety of smart phones and reports them to the mobile carrier.

    Surprised this hasn't gotten more attention.

    Sen. Franken is on the case, (none / 0) (#13)
    by Farmboy on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 11:19:50 AM EST
    as is usual when tech-related privacy issues come up. link

    From what I've read it appears the company that wrote the tracking software is blaming the carriers, the carriers are blaming the manufacturers, and the manufacturers are blaming everyone else.

    Then there's Apple. They admit that users could opt-in to turn the software on but it didn't do keystroke logging like on Android, just cell tower tracking. They also said it doesn't work on phones running IOS 5.

    Parent

    Is the tracking on both (none / 0) (#161)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 06:25:20 PM EST
    3G & 4G phones, or just 4G?

    Parent
    It looks like it has been installed for years, (none / 0) (#170)
    by Farmboy on Mon Dec 05, 2011 at 09:07:36 AM EST
    perhaps since smartphones became popular.

    Here's some really comprehensive coverage: link

    Parent

    Thanks! (none / 0) (#175)
    by BackFromOhio on Tue Dec 06, 2011 at 07:23:44 AM EST
    occupy Boston update (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by CST on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 10:24:01 AM EST
    the city of boston and occupy were in court yesterday

    "Suffolk Superior Court Judge Frances A. McIntyre said at a hearing that she would decide no later than Dec. 15 whether Mayor Thomas M. Menino's administration will be barred from forcibly shutting down the camp without prior court approval. Until then, protesters will be able to continue residing on the half-acre property next to South Station."

    Meanwhile police have taken a new tactic, prohibiting "winterization".  So far, the weather is not cooperating with the police as winter hasn't arrived yet.  Also, the protesters > police.

    Four people each bid$10,000each for Hughjackman (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by oculus on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 10:57:17 AM EST
    to sign his tank tops hand them out. For Actors Equity aids charity.   Amazing

    Imagine what his BVD's would fetch (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Dadler on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 11:01:49 AM EST
    Come on, Hugh, it's for charity, give up the real goodies. Ahem.

    Parent
    There were lots of. Middle aged couples. The women (none / 0) (#14)
    by oculus on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 11:22:30 AM EST
    enthralled.  The guys were "present."

    Parent
    Will he sign my tank top with me in it? (5.00 / 2) (#16)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 11:28:04 AM EST
    Where's my checkbook?  Sorry, I'm just drawn this way :)

    Parent
    Yes, he's a (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by Zorba on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 11:39:54 AM EST
    hunk, isn't he?  ;-)

    Parent
    He is (5.00 / 0) (#33)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:46:51 PM EST
    Good on his wife...snagging that :)

    Parent
    The 10 large... (none / 0) (#20)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:08:00 PM EST
    was for Jackman's sweat, the tank top was free.

    That f*ckin' guy will be lucky to escape from NY alive, without being mauled by cougars:)

    There is some serious music going down tonight Oc, so wish I could make this one but no can do (self-imposed hermitude and family obligation exacta prevents it)....Steve Wynn and The Miracle 3 at Bowery Electric, and only ten bucks!  I'd imagine you're booked but they won't go on till 9:30-10, bring industrial strength earplugs and check it out...they are phenomenal.

    Parent

    Jackman & fam live in NY now. (none / 0) (#59)
    by oculus on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:17:02 PM EST
    Hard to think how he deals w/the groupies. Tonight: Alan Ackbourn directing his  new play

    Parent
    Hey, Dog! (none / 0) (#74)
    by Zorba on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:43:30 PM EST
    Who you calling a cougar?  I think I'm insulted.  Besides, Jackman's at least ten or fifteen years too old to be quite in "boy toy" territory.    ;-)  

    Parent
    43. (none / 0) (#84)
    by oculus on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 03:38:08 PM EST
    Yep (none / 0) (#85)
    by Zorba on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 03:39:29 PM EST
    Too old to be a "boy toy."  "Man toy," maybe.   ;-)

    Parent
    He isn't all that hunky now but sd. (none / 0) (#87)
    by oculus on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 03:42:34 PM EST
    he has to bulk up for movie.  

    Parent
    Well, he certainly (none / 0) (#88)
    by Zorba on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 03:43:34 PM EST
    "bulks up" quite well.

    Parent
    He mentioned Barry Bo nds & flax seed. (none / 0) (#117)
    by oculus on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 06:40:57 PM EST
    Things are bad for a lot of people, BUT (5.00 / 5) (#12)
    by Gerald USN Ret on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 11:10:37 AM EST
    on a personal note, I have finished all my Christmas shopping AND IT IS BEING SHIPPED or PREPARED TO BE SHIPPED right NOW, except for the grand kids which is a pleasure that never stops all year long.  

    I wish all could have such a good year. I will help there as I can.

    I'm asking all my platonic male friends: (5.00 / 4) (#21)
    by ruffian on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:12:29 PM EST
    Please send money. I won't tell your wives, even if you do run for president.

    Love to help platonic friend... (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:33:58 PM EST
    but things are tough all over.

    I guess we gotta "blame ourselves" that we ain't Cain's "platonic" friends.  Who knew he was so charitable? lol

    Parent

    that's what I get for hanging out with (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by ruffian on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:52:59 PM EST
    the proletariat. Why don't I ever meet such charitable rich guys?

    A friend of mine and I were laughing a few weeks ago about the pros and cons of marrying just for money (like it is even a choice for us).  I said one of the cons is that the guys don't live somewhere else and just send the money. You have to live with them!  How could I be so wrong about that?

    Parent

    Probably the same reason... (none / 0) (#41)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 01:13:48 PM EST
    I can't find me a sugar momma...:)

    Just when I think I hit the sweepstakes and charm a doctor, she is Mexican, and Mexican doctors make about the same as broked8ck American cubicle jockeys, although with a much lower cost of living.

    I guess I'm too proud to inquire about becoming an ex-pat sugar baby:)

    Parent

    you're not wrong (none / 0) (#45)
    by CST on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 01:30:02 PM EST
    you just can't marry them if you want that :)

    Mrs. Cain still had to live with him.  The key is not to marry them but be their very good "platonic friend".

    Parent

    I believe a slight fix (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by CoralGables on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:29:27 PM EST
    in punctuation is in order. You said:
    The key is not to marry them but be their very good "platonic friend".

    I believe you meant:
    "The key is not to marry them but be their "very good" platonic friend.

    Parent

    One of Prerequisites for the Loot... (none / 0) (#92)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 04:00:37 PM EST
     ...is you have to be unstable, Big Daddy Cain doesn't mess with mentally stable women or that's his lame claim with each one so far.

    Parent
    hah! (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by CST on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 04:05:33 PM EST
    I think I could be very unstable if the occasion called for it.

    Based on how I react to PPJ's posts, I would say an interaction with a person like Herman Cain might do the trick.

    Parent

    I think i have that base covered! (none / 0) (#136)
    by ruffian on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 10:08:56 PM EST
    Well (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:14:05 PM EST
    We just got a letter from Regence informing us that due to the "affordable" care act, insurers are being forced to eliminate the cap on prescription drug coverage.

    We were warned that this will increase our premiums, but we haven't been told by how much.  I am predicting that this change will make my rates high enough that carrying prescription drug coverage is no longer cost effective for me and I will be eliminating prescription drug coverage altogether.

    Thanks, Obamacare.

    Yes, it's good that people who need expensive prescriptions no longer have a cap.  However, it sure would have been nice if we'd implemented something like a public option at least to cover the excess over the cap instead of making people on already over-priced, low benefit individual plans pay the cost -- or, like me, cease having any prescription drug coverage at all.

    My cardiologist (5.00 / 2) (#133)
    by Amiss on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 08:57:47 PM EST
    was so shocked at the price of my co-pay that unless something is wrong when they do the usual tests, he doesn't charge, usually.

    Parent
    Can't wait... (none / 0) (#26)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:30:51 PM EST
    to see what it does to my employer's plans rate next year...this year bossman opted for another plan downgrade instead of the increase...I don't think there will be any room left to downgrade the plan.

    On the brightside, there is always the emergency room under an alias, and less expensive drugs from Canada or the DR or India.  

    Breaking the law, Breaking the law...

    Parent

    Aha, ha, ha, ha (none / 0) (#31)
    by me only on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:38:38 PM EST
    I don't think there will be any room left to downgrade the plan.

    And I am sure that you never expect the Spanish Inquisition...

    Trust me, the system can always make a worse plan.

    Parent

    For sure you're right... (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:41:56 PM EST
    silly me, they probably got the best and brightest working on it, like the brainiacs who invented all the "financial products" behind their "financial crisis".

    Parent
    "Change Is" (none / 0) (#134)
    by Edger on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 09:10:15 PM EST
    Obama Turns To A New Campaign Phrase: 'Change Is'
    "Change is health care reform that we passed after a century of trying."

    It certainly has reformed a lot of bank accounts... and reformed health care treatment options for a lot of people like you, Teresa.

    Parent

    WEll, at least MKS was smart enough (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by observed on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 12:32:21 AM EST
    not to include ACA on his list of Obama's accomplishments.

    Parent
    Yes, but (none / 0) (#144)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 05:58:54 AM EST
    Obama still includes it on Obama's list of accomplishments.

    Parent
    Those who know history...of health care (none / 0) (#158)
    by christinep on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 03:28:19 PM EST
    in America...put the ACA on their list of accomplishments. As one who advocated for/and worked with others wanting health system changes, we know that ACA was a good step forward to that day when care will be truly universal.

    Many, many people actually worked directly & indirectly for health care reform---notkibitzing, but working. People working saw failure after failure. That left continuing failure (in view of certain political & ad $$$ realities in the American health care system & the mythology thereof) or the opportunity to move forward incrementally. Again: Risk it all (with the probability, based upon history, of losing it all for everyone) or move incrementally (gaining health insurance reform in areas very important to the chronically sick & others most in need.) That is why so many of us first accepted & then went for the middle-path to reform: Gain pragmatic steps that we hadn't been able to get at all & press after consolidation.

    As always...where you stand depends upon where you sit. For me, the eye-opener came in my youth when my sister was diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis; luckily, whe was under my father's insurance &, then, was able to work substantially for some years before she lost part of a leg due to gangrene caused by a clot from the arthritic condition. Don't get me wrong...she lived a full, active, & wonderful life. By the time she was in her forties, she became very worried about the $$ cap on insurance payouts...this because, like many chronic health conditions, RA flares up in both a physically & medically costly way from time to time. She didn't live to hit that cap; and, I know how happy she would be today because the ACA ensures the lifting of said $$caps...now for all the others who would have been facing that loss.  Oh...she also worried about losing insurance & then being denied in view of "pre-existing conditions--as so many were prior to the ACA, which gradually through 2014 removes that bar. Another cause for celebration for the chronically ill & disabled in our country.
    Read the Act...study the history of medical care & attempts to reform it in this country, edger. I can't say that you would change your mind; but, I believe that it would help you understand the very real & helpful changes in that legislation.

    Parent

    Would change your sentence (5.00 / 1) (#159)
    by sj on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 03:38:04 PM EST
    from
    Those who know history...of health care in America...put the ACA on their list of accomplishments.

    to
    Some of those who know history...of health care in America...may put the ACA on their list of accomplishments.

    Because some long-time health care activists in Colorado of my acquaintance are not among them.  Just saying.

    Parent
    Just got a letter (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by NYShooter on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 07:24:03 PM EST
     from my insurance company informing me that one of my meds will be having a co-pay price "adjustment" in 2012. Current co-pay, $7.00; new co-pay, $40.00.

    This is the third co-pay "adjustment" of 300% or more I've been informed of.

    As bad as that is, I have to be considered one of the lucky ones. At least, I have insurance. Imagine what the out-of-pocket price would be with no insurance.

    I guess that's one way to reduce the cost of "health care" in America. Simply let those who need it die off early.


    Parent

    I have had (5.00 / 2) (#163)
    by Amiss on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 11:44:56 PM EST
    several co-pays raised and being diabetic on a special diet is expensive enough, watching how many test strips a day I use, etcs expensive enough. Back in the spring, thank goodness we had no cap on our Major madical because two hospitalizations alone were over $300,000.

    Parent
    The accelerated rate of (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by sj on Sun Dec 04, 2011 at 03:51:21 AM EST
    increase to health insurance is truly frightening.  I had a major surgery two years ago and it cost me a $200 co-pay.  Now my co-pay to my primary care physician is $40.  I'm not on any meds so I don't have that problem, but no doubt that won't be true forever.

    Parent
    Donald Trump's next job (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Tony on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:28:40 PM EST
    Republican debate moderator:

    Hilarious

    sheesh, what a blowhole (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:31:52 PM EST
    the least he can do is tell them all "You're fired!"

    Parent
    Amanda Marcotte (5.00 / 3) (#27)
    by lilburro on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:31:14 PM EST
    at Pandagon wrote a great post about the Bell Curve dustup from this week.  She recaps some of Stephen Jay Gould's book length response to the Bell Curve and makes some interesting points directly related to the research.  Here is one point that she makes that I found interesting:

    Sullivan also neglects to remember---despite his claims to have done his research, he doesn't seem to have read Gould's masterpiece on this topic---that in addition to trying to find IQ differences between established racial categories, IQ studies of old targeted ethnic groups such as Italians. I'm sure Sullivan wouldn't find it so scintillating and provocative if I argued that science demonstrating that his Irish heritage puts him in a group that is morally and intellectually inferior to the groups the compose my heritage (French, German, Welsh), but the kind of studies he's so enamored of would have, in the past, done exactly such a thing. That the supposedly agenda-free researchers have stopped bothering to measure white ethnic groups against each other tells you everything you need to know about Sullivan's silly claims that this is about pure science and not about manipulating research to prove a pre-determined conclusion about people the researchers feel racism towards.

    Or to put it more simply, since the Irish and Italians became white, interest in finding "scientific" evidence that they're inferior people has completely dried up.

    It's a good read.

    Gould was one of my heros in grad school. (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by Dr Molly on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 01:28:09 PM EST
    He was an evolutionary biologist, and one of those rare ones that could make science accessible to non-scientists. I read all his stuff and heard several of his lectures.

    He abhorred sociobiology, and spent a good deal of his time in his later career fighting this kind of stuff -- leaving behind his own empirical research to do it.  

    He also spent a lot of time and energy fighting creationism.

     

    Parent

    Almost the Carl Sagan (none / 0) (#71)
    by brodie on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:41:30 PM EST
    for Biology.

    Both sought to reach out beyond their narrow specialties to speak to the broader public and both brought an intelligence and wit to their efforts.  Both also had an impatient, cranky side towards those espousing non-traditional views, a little too intolerant at times as I saw it.

    Not sure anyone has come along to replace Gould; perhaps physicist Brian Green for Sagan.

    Parent

    good to know that Amanda (none / 0) (#29)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:33:49 PM EST
    is making some sense for a change . . .

    Parent
    Ha! My comment on a TL thread two days ago (none / 0) (#35)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:52:32 PM EST
    regarding just that:
    Hate to find out us Celtic/Italian mutts have small brain genetics, but I'm sure we'd muster the strength to somehow keep on keeping on.


    Parent
    That makes you (none / 0) (#38)
    by me only on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:56:48 PM EST
    prescient, or at least pre-Amanda Marcotte.

    Personally, I am Ant-Amanda Marcotte.

    Parent

    Perhaps not prescient, per se, (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 01:06:39 PM EST
    perhaps my brain just intuitively recognized some patterns and made an unconscious prediction.

    Right Militarytracy?

    Parent

    Maybe....maybe not (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 01:37:53 PM EST
    That's part of the rub.  What are you only mimicking and what behavior that you demonstrate did you arrive at by being brilliant and literally creating something out of nothing?

    Parent
    That or Marcotte read my comment and then incorporated it into her comment, which could either confirm my brilliance or my stupidity, depending on your point of view...

    Either way, I'm choosing brilliance!

    Parent

    If taste in music... (none / 0) (#51)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 01:54:20 PM EST
    is an indicator, and its gotta be at least as good an indicator as IQ, ya sold me on your brilliance holmes.

    Parent
    Back in '07, I knew ... (5.00 / 2) (#54)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:07:09 PM EST
    one of the West Coast fundraisers for Obama.  And I told her that I'd give the campaign $200 if Obama had at least one punk rock song on his iPad.

    Needless to say, I never gave the $200.  One of the first indicators that Obama probably wasn't gonna be my guy in '08.

    ;)

    Parent

    that's not really fair (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by CST on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:16:12 PM EST
    the iPad didn't even come out until January 2010.

    How was he supposed to have punk rock on it in 2008? :)

    Parent

    Heh ... (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:22:32 PM EST
    I bet that's one of most common new typos in the last couple of years.

    I know it's one I do all the time.  I also say the wrong one too.

    Parent

    So do I (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by sj on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:24:44 PM EST
    and you know what?  I don't even own an iPad. :(

    Go figure.

    Parent

    Well, look at that (none / 0) (#61)
    by sj on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:18:52 PM EST
    I read that as iPod from the beginning.  I expect we both knew that was what was intended :)

    Parent
    Right back atcha. (none / 0) (#55)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:07:28 PM EST
    btw, saw your comment to Oculus re: earplugs.

    My wife and I recently picked up some earplugs from a guitar shop that are supposed to be scientifically designed.

    Tried them a couple times, they do seem to work really well. No more weird hearing the next day from standing in front of the speakers in a club...

    Parent

    For me... (none / 0) (#57)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:13:20 PM EST
    getting blown out is half the fun...how does the show sound with those plugs?

    Parent
    long-term effects.

    My dad is going deaf, he thinks probably from standing next to the huge Navy cannons during WW2, and seeing his loss of ability to communicate has been sobering.

    Anyway, the plugs were designed to let in exactly what's beeing played, but just less of it.

    Not the most comfortable things in the world, but they did seem to perform as advertised.

    Parent

    Sorry about your pops... (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 03:57:57 PM EST
    know what thats like, my WWII vet great-uncle is also have some hearing problems, he was the guy manning the machine gun on bombers.

    I've really noticed the age slippin' in the last year or two...hearing, memory, arthritis in the knees...he's quickly becoming a shell of his former self.  And he was spry as a 60 year old at 80.

    Only a matter of time before somebody in the fam is gonna have to take him in, checking in every now and again ain't gonna cut it, and I really worry about him driving...but he's a proud man who loves his independence, and he don't wanna hear that sh*t.

    Not many of that generation left...


    Parent

    Ear plugs (none / 0) (#63)
    by sj on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:22:46 PM EST
    My brother works nights and has slept with earplugs for years.  Apparently they are quite useful.

    Parent
    Really sad (5.00 / 3) (#66)
    by sj on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:31:58 PM EST
    and very alarming (via Sideshow)

    Occupy Student Debt

    Indentured servitude, indeed (h/t MT)

    something i read there that never occurred to me (5.00 / 3) (#73)
    by CST on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:42:45 PM EST
    before.

    "Further our generation will not be able to send their kids to college and certainly with the horrifying lessons we have learned in dealing with these private lending companies we won't want to."

    The next generation will be less educated than this one.

    Parent

    More than one kind of education... (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 03:20:16 PM EST
    they should in turn be street smarter, with more real world survival skills....like shoplifting:)

    And as Will Hunting advised, there is always the public library for the fancy book learnin'...until those are totally defunded anyways.

    Parent

    I know, right? (none / 0) (#75)
    by sj on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:59:45 PM EST
    And not just the next generation.  The younger side of this generation also.  
    I wish someone told me to not go to college in 2006
    What lesson do you think the younger siblings and cousins of these kids are learning?

    Parent
    Very sad stories indeed (none / 0) (#110)
    by Edger on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 06:00:02 PM EST
    Sometimes the best thing to do is just walk away and wait out the seven years or whatever it is till it's off credit bureau files...

    Parent
    I could be wrong (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by sj on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 06:21:50 PM EST
    But I don't think it works that way with student loans.  To be clear, that is the impression I have received as I read their stories.  Went looking for clarification just now and didn't find anything definitive.

    Parent
    nope (5.00 / 4) (#116)
    by nycstray on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 06:31:35 PM EST
    ya can't walk away. they'll even take it from your tax returns and ssi  . . .

    Parent
    You know (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by Edger on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 06:41:24 PM EST
    if I hadn't already left I would leave the country now.

    Parent
    There's very little holding me here (5.00 / 2) (#119)
    by nycstray on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 06:48:44 PM EST
    if one of those crazies on the right gets to the WH, I'm prob a goner :)

    Parent
    In my opinion (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by Edger on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 06:50:38 PM EST
    one of those crazies on the right is in the WH now.

    Parent
    Ah yes...why am I not surprised, edger (none / 0) (#127)
    by christinep on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 08:30:51 PM EST
    Now I know (none / 0) (#132)
    by CoralGables on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 08:49:28 PM EST
    you expected no improvement :)

    Parent
    I don't know either.... (none / 0) (#115)
    by Edger on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 06:28:51 PM EST
    I assumed so - that they are like any other debt - but I could be wrong. Let me know if you find any info on it, would you?

    Parent
    Eagles (none / 0) (#4)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 10:30:32 AM EST
    I used to like them no so long ago, but the Dream Team non-sense helped me turn on them.

    So last night was a real treat, and hearing those phone calls about Andy Reid, who I still admire, was so funny.  Philly fans have absolutely no... class, but they are funny as hell when they want someones head on a stick.

    And what up with McNabb, he's looked dejected and having Kurt Warner give the on air 'old timer come back' speech seemed in really bad taste, like McNabb wants to hear that he has a sliver of a chance to make a come back.  I think the guy got some a lot of solid football left in him.

    Texans play the Falcons at home with the rookie 3rd string QB, here's to hoping for a Cinderella story.

    And the Packers play the Gmen in NY.  Really wish NY would have won last week, now they are going to be hungry.

    Whatever (none / 0) (#11)
    by lilburro on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 11:07:53 AM EST
    I know you're from Texas.  You're not a Philly fan!  What happened to Schaub?

    Parent
    Matt Schaub and Matt Leinart Out for the Season (none / 0) (#15)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 11:27:45 AM EST
    T.J. Yates in, Jake Delhomme his back-up, and the tight end Own Danie at #3.

    The good News is Johnson came back last week and he's not hard to throw to.

    Schaub has a lisfranc injury that he got in a QB sneak, and I have no idea what it is.  It happened during the game but it wasn't one of those replay a million time injuries, he finished the game.

    First year I have thought the Texans could be a contender, too bad I am from WI and know the Pack will crush them if they were both to sneak into the Super Bowl at the same time.  I will always bleed green.

    Parent

    s/b Owen Daniel (none / 0) (#17)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 11:29:42 AM EST
    Lisfranc injury (none / 0) (#23)
    by rdandrea on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:27:38 PM EST
    I need to rock out a little (none / 0) (#5)
    by Dadler on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 10:40:04 AM EST
    And check out the Mick Jagger impersonation... (none / 0) (#6)
    by Dadler on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 10:41:49 AM EST
    ...by the singer of The Hives.  Priceless.

    Parent
    And some 18 year old Lenny Kravitz (none / 0) (#7)
    by Dadler on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 10:55:55 AM EST
    Wanna see all of these (none / 0) (#10)
    by sj on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 11:05:27 AM EST
    work computer has no sound.

    Parent
    Then one more to look forward to (none / 0) (#18)
    by Dadler on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 11:35:15 AM EST
    Monetizing freedom and democracy (none / 0) (#37)
    by Edger on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:56:17 PM EST
    or, how to make a buck off of Occupy.

    Following demonstrations earlier this year which drew up to 100,000 people to the Wisconsin Capitol, Republican Gov. Scott Walker has proposed new policies that would require future protesters to pay in advance to stage an event, at a cost of $50 per hour, per Capitol Police officer.

    Police may also require a liability insurance or a bond, according to The Milwaukee Journal Sentinal.

    Demonstrators will also be on the hook for any damage and cleanup following protests. Walker's administration had claimed that the pro-union protests earlier this year had costs as much as $7.5 million, but later admitted that the actual costs were far less.

    Under the new policy, permits will be required for groups of four or more people who want to do any activity inside the Capitol. Groups of 100 or more gathering outside the Capitol must also apply for a permit 72 hours in advance. Police will have some leeway if unforeseen events lead to spontaneous gatherings.

    -- Walker intends to charge citizens fee to protest

    Take a check? Or maybe Anonymous could come up with Walker's Visa Card number? ;-)

    Permits will be required for groups of four or more people who want to do any activity inside the Capitol? It's going to get expensive for Walker's party members to come to work I guess...

    Hmmm...I don't remember any of the OWS (5.00 / 5) (#43)
    by ruffian on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 01:26:14 PM EST
    groups asking for the services of the police.

    Parent
    I suppose OWS protesters (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by Edger on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 01:31:50 PM EST
    could sell ad space to local credit unions and to anti-walker political campaigns on tent flaps, banners, posters, sandwich boards, flyer handouts, websites, etc. to help raise the money?

    ;-)

    Parent

    It would be great if OWS (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by KeysDan on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:05:26 PM EST
    could bottle and sell the courage and determination of the former Marine and Iraq war veteran, Scott Olsen. Heck, we could buy a warehouse full and give it, gratis, to our elected leaders.  Or, by force feeding.

    Scott, who suffered a serious head injury from a projectile during the Oakland protests was interviewed last night by Rachael Maddow (and, by Big Ed Schultz). While his speech is still halting and sometimes garbled, other brain centers, fortunately, do not appear to be affected (and, if they were, his IQ dropped from the previous 200 to 199).  A very impressive American.

    Parent

    LOL... (5.00 / 4) (#49)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 01:47:58 PM EST
    Can ya get a discount on the protection of all ten amendments of the Bill of Rights or is it strictly priced a la carte?

    Parent
    $10 per spritz of pepper spray (5.00 / 2) (#56)
    by ruffian on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:08:31 PM EST
    Latest advice is to dress like lobbyists (5.00 / 3) (#77)
    by Towanda on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 03:00:52 PM EST
    in groups of four or more, and no one will stop you.  With Walker, lobbyists already Occupy the State Capitol in sizeable numbers.

    Unfortunately, not enough of his lobbyist friends showed up early this morning for the lighting of the Capitol's Christmas tree (officially that, as Walker ordered an end to the ecumenical official use of "holiday tree" since 1985), an event that usually takes place at noon to huge crowds.  But he did not dare to abide by the noontime lighting tradition, since the Solidary Singers are now in their 200th-and-some day of Occupying Every Lunchtime for concerts of recall songs.  

    So at noon, when folks from the town up north from whence the tree came finally could get to the Capitol, the audience was only a couple of dozen.  (The great Populist legislator Bob Jauch from that area denounced Walker for altering the traditional timing.  Walker's weaselly mouthpiece came up with a hoot of an excuse again.)

    Anyway, back to the advice as to dressing like lobbyists, there also are other plans afoot. . . .  No! scratch that! there are no plans for anything on the day that the enforcement of the new permit-and-cleanup-costs rules, no plans at all -- because then a permit would be required.  So there is a Facebook page not announcing a not-event for people to entirely and spontaneously find themselves at the Capitol with not-shirts against Walker, carrying not-signs against Walker, etc.  The comments are hilarious among all of the people not-signing up to not-plan to be there for the not-event.

    I think that I may have to head home to be not-there to Occupy the State Capitol, too -- spontaneously, of course.  Or not.  Whichever.

    Parent

    Walker is (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by Edger on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 03:13:29 PM EST
    NOT going to know what hit him when the floor suddenly drops away under his feet. ;-)

    Parent
    "Women for Cain" (none / 0) (#52)
    by Anne on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:01:26 PM EST
    Herman Cain's latest campaign strategy, via David Dayen:

    So it's nice to see he's taking the classy way out by putting together a Women for Cain website designed to basically hurl unsubstantiated accusations and slander at his accusers.

    Wait, did I say classy? I meant something else.

    First of all, the "Women for Cain" pictured on the site are from a stock photo. Next, the site includes "testimonials" from (Cain staffers) women supporters like this:

    "Dear Mrs. Cain Don't pay attention to these pathetic husbandless women who are jealous of women like you in happy long-term marriages. These vindictive women can't find a husband or keep one. They are like stalkers who try to latch on to any man who shows a bit of kindness or attention to them. When these unstable women come out of the woodwork to make accusations about Herman just say, "Honey, get a life, I believe my husband." We want you to be our First Lady Mrs. Cain!"

    There's also an article on Herman Cain's official Presidential campaign website comparing Ginger White to the accuser in the Duke lacrosse story:

    Another thing that hasn't been mentioned. How old are White's children? She had a 13 year affair but was she busy having babies at the same time? Also this woman has a background more checkered than the woman who accused the Duke lacrosse team of rape. Remember how everyone jumped to the conclusion that her word was gospel, after all event the district attorney said the players were guilty. Today the accuser, who was proven to be certifiable, is in jail for stabbing her boyfriend to death as he slept. This is after she was in and out of jail for other offenses before the murder. Her background was paved with illegitimate children, battery, lies, prostitution, ad nauseum.

    I've seen Cain at least 4 or 5 times make an accusation while simultaneously saying that he didn't have any evidence to back it up. That's what this site is about. It's just a sounding board for slanders and smears against women who aren't political actors. And, Cain attaches his wife's name to this site, with her listed as the chair of "Women for Cain." So he appropriates his wife's name on the same day he's meeting with her to go over how he kept from her for 13 years a relationship with a women that at the least involved secret financial support.

    Oy.  ::rolling eyes::

    Mrs. Cain must just be so proud to be associated with this new website.  

    Well, Cain is a goner. (5.00 / 0) (#67)
    by KeysDan on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:34:09 PM EST
    And, Newton Gingrich will, quixotically, be the beneficiary of Herman's misadventures.  And, with FOX News, apparently, providing the wind behind Newton's sails, he and his wife, Tiffany, may be on their way to the general election.  We would then have something old; the only remaining question is a running mate: something new (Rubio?) or something blue (David Vitter?).    

    Parent
    Well Anne (none / 0) (#89)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 03:46:48 PM EST
    ...for all we know these are liberals or kids messing around hoping to keep Cain in the game, or just bored.  Shameful either way, but anonymous is anonymous.

    What really bothers me is the reflexive Cain comeback that the women... can't remember the phrasing, but basically saying they weren't well mentally; unstable, that's the word he keeps using.  Apparently any women Herman Cane 'helps' is one step from the looney bin.  But he used the exact same language, which to me is the real shame.  They are all hysterical...  that alone should have had him packing his bags.

    It's interesting that he acknowledged helping the last one and trying the same unstable schtick.  The thing that I keep noticing is republican don't care, and it's messing my head up, Limbaugh defending a black man that without a doubt can be traced multiple women.  The party has become so corrupt and devote of any meaningful leadership that the best they have to offer is seriously Cain and Newt.  

    Parent

    It's a Cain website, Scott, not something (5.00 / 0) (#121)
    by Anne on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 07:05:14 PM EST
    dreamed up by bad little liberal loony women.

    Parent
    I Meant the Commenter (none / 0) (#171)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Dec 05, 2011 at 09:33:14 AM EST
    Commenters (none / 0) (#172)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Dec 05, 2011 at 09:34:49 AM EST
    Rasmussen Polls over the last (none / 0) (#60)
    by MKS on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:17:14 PM EST
    two days show Gingrich beating Obama by 2, but Obama beating Romney by 2.

    Setting aside the problems with Rasmussen "polls," this is all the permission the Republicans needed to vote for Gingrich.  So much for Romney's electability argument.  The pollster Republicans worship just said Gingrich is the more electable candidate.

    It could really be Newt.  

    The polls are saying that, and it's just a month away from the Iowa Caucuses.

    Two more weeks of Newt at the top, and he might just stay there.....One would think the polls will freeze over the Holidays....Not much time for Willard to come back.  

    The best way (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by CoralGables on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:35:36 PM EST
    to evaluate these polls and something RCP should seriously consider doing is, throw out the high, the low, and Rasmussen...then average the rest.

    But I agree, a couple weeks back I said Newt would be one of the last two standing with the GOP. Now I'll go further and say Newt will be the last one standing for the GOP. He will benefit from the demise of the Godfather, and Romney will continue running in place the rest of the way.

    Parent

    It is looking like that (none / 0) (#70)
    by MKS on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:41:07 PM EST
    But you have to stand back and wonder if the Republicans are really that nuts.......

    Wonder what Huckabee is thinking right now.

    Parent

    The institutional part of ... (5.00 / 3) (#80)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 03:16:27 PM EST
    the Republican Party is sitting this election out.  And this is the results we get.  A second tier candidate (Romney) and a bunch of the 3rd, 4th and nth tiers stooges.

    All the smart players know the Republicans have already conceded this election. And it's not because they couldn't win.  It's because they don't want to win.

    Partly because Obama is already serving their agenda without them having to take blame.  But mainly because they believe the economy is gonna fall off a cliff in 2013 and not recover until late 2015.  

    Parent

    i'm betting your're right (none / 0) (#82)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 03:20:38 PM EST
    then again, didn't Bill Clinton slip himself into an underwhelming Democratic lineup at a time when George H. W. Bush looked unbeatable?

    Parent
    Very Different Scenario (5.00 / 2) (#86)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 03:41:15 PM EST
    Because, from a polling standpoint, Obama doesn't look unbeatable right now. Quite the contrary.  Which changes the election year narrative.

    And, in '92, Clinton did get the backing of institutional part of the Democratic Party.  He didn't have them at first but he won them over.

    And, finally, Bill Clinton is a political genius and he was at the height of his powers in the nineties.

    Parent

    aha - point taken (5.00 / 2) (#90)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 03:46:57 PM EST
    heart of your commment (my emphasis):

    All the smart players know the Republicans have already conceded this election. And it's not because they couldn't win. It's because they don't want to win.

    Parent

    Right ... (none / 0) (#93)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 04:03:14 PM EST
    but you need the institutional part of the party to win.  That's the fulcrum upon which this all turns.

    Parent
    Other possibility: The old GOP split is (none / 0) (#95)
    by christinep on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 04:10:01 PM EST
    getting harder & harder to tamp down. One of the fun games of recent months has everyone in DC & associated places playing "how about this comparison" when talking about President Obama. For a little variation, what about the comparison game for Repubs?

    The Goldwater GOP repeat keeps peeping through the haze of "debates" & other slapstick situations.

    Parent

    Not sure about this (none / 0) (#97)
    by MKS on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 04:17:47 PM EST
    I haven't seen anything from Republicans like this:

    All the smart players know the Republicans have already conceded this election. And it's not because they couldn't win.  It's because they don't want to win.


    Parent
    Check. (none / 0) (#98)
    by brodie on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 04:45:35 PM EST
    And who are all those first tier Repubs sitting this one out, apart from the sidelined Jebster (on accounta his dumb brother messing things up so recently).

    Also if the economy should go south in 2013 as some are predicting the Repub president will just blame it on the lame leadership of Obama.  Romney wouldn't hesitate to do so.

    Parent

    Jeb would be perfect for the GOP (none / 0) (#99)
    by MKS on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 04:53:57 PM EST
    Huckabee could win this thing....but he loved his new mansion in Florida too much....

    Everything I see, including the Congressiional GOP insistence that the extension of payroll tax cut be paid for, points to a desperate GOP desire to win this time.  As in Mitch McConnell's stated goal.....of making Obama a one term President.

    The GOP establishment may ultimately reconcile itself to a loss, but they are certainly not there yet.  And I am still waiting for another establishment effort to push Mitt across the finish line.  That effort, when combined with a Newt screw-up, could do it.  If I had to bet, I still say it will be Mitt even though all the current evidence points to Newt.

    Parent

    The thing (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 07:21:45 PM EST
    about Newt is that if he's nominated he will have a massive flame out before the election I guarantee it. Newt is not self disciplined enough to make it over the finish line in an election.

    Parent
    I could be mistaken (none / 0) (#124)
    by CoralGables on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 07:38:21 PM EST
    but I believe he has been the winner in 9 different elections.

    Parent
    He was (none / 0) (#128)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 08:34:32 PM EST
    my rep and never had a serious challenge.

    Parent
    What???? (none / 0) (#106)
    by Zorba on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 05:27:25 PM EST
    You mean you're not waiting for Chelsea Clinton to take up the political mantel?  Amy Carter?  Heck, Lynda Bird Johnson Robb?

    Parent
    The GOP wants to win... (none / 0) (#108)
    by christinep on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 05:37:19 PM EST
    They may be dumb, but they are not stupid (maybe.)
    Seriously, MKS: I agree.  No political party plays the "maybe next time...in x years, it will be better...my fortune-teller (aka economist) thinks that there is a 61% chance that the economy could take another downturn in 2 years...blah, blah.

    Think BTD's "pols will be pols." They will be, and are. That means: Press your advantage when you can...don't bet on the distant future (Note: "distant" meaning anything some months down the road.) The real biggie pols don't gamble away an opportunity, because it usually does not reappear & too many factors always intervene.

    As to whether the Repubs are being "dumb" or "stupid", who knows yet. They evidence being good at making the best of soame bad situations (the "just say no routine); and, the also overreach. This past year; Gingrich after 1994, lots of for instances. Today: How far the party will go with their split, that's the question.

    Parent

    You know what? (none / 0) (#112)
    by sj on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 06:11:33 PM EST
    "Republican" doesn't scare me nearly as much as "Oligarch".  

    So my trying to decided if the R's being "dumb" or "stupid" or "brilliant" or "sly" or "underhanded"  strikes me as an exercise in futility.  Or at best non-essential. Don't get me wrong.  I still do it.  I'm not above all that.  But now I also do it with Dem leadership.  

    I do this knowing that assigning an adjective is for sport.  Trying to discern motive or next step is survival.

    Parent

    In my private moments, I do that assessment (5.00 / 2) (#113)
    by christinep on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 06:19:48 PM EST
    with the Dems as well.

    Parent
    The focus has been so much (none / 0) (#139)
    by MKS on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 12:50:46 AM EST
    on the economy, it is easy to forget the havoc the Republicans can do on issues of war and peace.

    To say the Republicans are the same as Obama on foreign policy is just plain wrong.....

    How easy it is to forget how Bush was elected in 2000 and then created such death with the war in Iraq......

    A President McCain would have already bombed Iran and put ground troops in Libya where they would still be serving.

    And McCain would have scuttled the pull out from Iraq.   Is there any doubt about this....

    Parent

    Show me (none / 0) (#142)
    by sj on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 02:25:25 AM EST
    where I said that the Republicans are the same as Obama on foreign policy.  

    Parent
    Que Bueno! (none / 0) (#143)
    by MKS on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 03:09:31 AM EST
    We don't have to worry about that, then.

    Parent
    Nope (none / 0) (#165)
    by sj on Sun Dec 04, 2011 at 04:18:46 AM EST
    You are clearly invested in tracking me.....

    Thank you for your concern.....

    Parent

    I wonder what the GOP honchos (none / 0) (#78)
    by lilburro on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 03:04:20 PM EST
    are going to do in response to this..."Winter of Newt."  Would they force him to bow out?

    Gingrich only just opened a campaign office in Iowa (I don't think he has a lot of money).  

    Parent

    Well, for a start, (none / 0) (#83)
    by Zorba on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 03:36:48 PM EST
    if he needs money, he could hock Callista's $500,000 Tiffany's jewelry.  

    Parent
    They are (none / 0) (#96)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 04:17:28 PM EST
    going to do nothing because Newt appears to be putting his whole "win" strategy on SC and there's going to be primaries before SC happens. I wouldn't be surprised to see a different Republican winning a different primary for a while.

    Parent
    Go back and look at the polls in (none / 0) (#100)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 05:09:15 PM EST
    12/1/08 and Obama was in third...

    It could be anybody.

    My money is own Romney.

    Parent

    I still think so (none / 0) (#103)
    by MKS on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 05:19:00 PM EST
    Republicans do want to win....

    If they nominate Newt, it will be hard for them to ever speak with any credibility on issues of character and family values.

    Parent

    I think so too, Jim (none / 0) (#104)
    by Zorba on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 05:20:38 PM EST
    Romney has been playing a "waiting game," trying to stay somewhat above the fray, and meanwhile accumulating a lot of money.  Clearly, Romney is the one that the Obama people have always been most worried about facing.  Say what you want about them (and I can't say much that is good), nobody has accused them of being stupid politically when it comes to running a campaign.

    PS  Although, anything and everything can always happen in electoral politics, so I wouldn't be in any huge rush to put actual money down on Romney getting the nomination, betting man that I know you are.

    Parent

    have you (none / 0) (#129)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 08:35:50 PM EST
    changed your mind about Romney then? You said he was the only Republican that couldn't beat Obama at one time.

    Parent
    He fights hard for Newt...... (none / 0) (#140)
    by MKS on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 12:54:37 AM EST
    This means the Newtmentum may be real.....

    Parent
    Newt has pulled ahead (none / 0) (#149)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 09:06:07 AM EST
    of Romney and the latest Rasmussen polls show him beating Obama.

    So the Demos and their water carriers, the MSM, will now attempt to destroy Newt, just as they did Pallin in 2008. And in this election, Bachmann and Cain are the latest victims.

    Parent

    Cain (none / 0) (#151)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 09:50:21 AM EST
    destroyed himself just like Newt will. The things that Newt has said and done will come back to bite him. Newt is his own worst enemy.

    Parent
    Rasmussen (none / 0) (#152)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 09:51:33 AM EST
    has the most unreliable polls early in the cycle. he goes back and "adjusts" them so that they fall in line closer to the end.

    Parent
    Gingrich will damage himself (none / 0) (#154)
    by Yman on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 10:31:08 AM EST
    Whenever he opens his mouth and tries to speak extemporaneously, he manages to shoot himself in the foot.  Maybe if his campaign can keep him on a short leash - not likely given his ego.

    BTW - The Rasmussen poll is an outlier.  If you look at all the polls, Obama is ahead of Gingrich 48.7% to 43%.  Obama is only leading Romney by less than 1%.

    I know you wouldn't want to mislead anyone.

    LOL!

    Parent

    I like Rasmussen because (none / 0) (#155)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 01:17:06 PM EST
    he polls only registered voters who intend to vote.

    The others are a poll of those who may or may not be interested and/or paid attention.

    Parent

    Rasmussen has his own "unique" ... (none / 0) (#157)
    by Yman on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 02:31:32 PM EST
    ... methodology for determining "likely" voters, which explains his horrible record in polling.  Of course, as the election nears, his poll falls in line with the others.

    Parent
    Man, President Newt just rolls right off (none / 0) (#72)
    by tigercourse on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 02:42:33 PM EST
    the tongue doesn't it?

    Parent
    Who are they polling??? (none / 0) (#76)
    by lilburro on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 03:00:13 PM EST
    This is hysterical:

    Gingrich beating Obama by 2, but Obama beating Romney by 2.

    I hope Gingrich is nominated, because that man cannot get elected.  Scratch below the surface of that guy and it's over.  And don't say, "oh, you can scratch under the surface of Obama and get the same"  - no, you cannot.  His ideas, governing philosophy, and personal life are going to sink that ship.  To say nothing of Tiffany credit lines.

    My favorite Gingrich quote:

    "It doesn't matter what I do," he answered. "People need to hear what I have to say. There's no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn't matter what I live."

    The GOP in a nutshell.

    Parent

    My favorite quote about Newt (5.00 / 4) (#137)
    by ruffian on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 10:12:58 PM EST
    I think Charlie Pierce said it - Newt is what stupid people think smart people sound like.

    Parent
    Ha ha ha. (none / 0) (#146)
    by Dr Molly on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 07:55:17 AM EST
    That quote is so perfect.

    Parent
    Ah yes, the old Conservatives (none / 0) (#148)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 08:39:17 AM EST
    are stupid trick.

    I wonder if Charlie would like to compare resumes with Newt?

    Parent

    Maybe if Charlie ... (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by Yman on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 10:13:43 AM EST
    ... was running for President.

    Parent
    Correction (5.00 / 1) (#168)
    by NYShooter on Sun Dec 04, 2011 at 09:57:52 PM EST
    "......the old Conservatives are stupid......."

    **************

    The new Conservatives are stupid too.


    Parent

    No. That is not a Gringrich quote. (none / 0) (#102)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 05:17:58 PM EST
    That is a quote from his ex-wife supposedly quoting him in article that is quoting her.

    Now that we have establish that fact, let me say that I have never, never, never heard of an ex-wife saying things that were not true.

    Not once. Nada. Zip. Zero.

    And I have never, never, never heard of an author in an article make an error, shall we say, in quoting a "source."

    I mean not even once.

    Parent

    No, he didn't (none / 0) (#126)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 07:58:16 PM EST
    serve her with divorce papers while she was in the hospital. See his daughter's comments. But don't believe her, I mean she was only actually there and it was her mother.

    Snapshot: He took their daughter to see her mother and he and his wife got into an argument. I mean I have never heard of a man and wife getting into a argument.

    Now, the second charge is that he refused to pay alimony and child support, not just child support. Not good. But based on the other inaccuracies I would like to see further information.

    Perhaps that can be lumped together with info about Obama's relationship with Bill Ayers....

    Oh, wait. I forgot. The self admitted terrorist was just one of the guys in the neighborhood.

    BTW - Regarding all those dumb Repubs (in 4) who didn't know HI was a state.  Can we just guess and be right that all the super smart Demos did?

    lol

    Good night. Enjoy Jacksonville.

    Parent

    There are (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 08:37:03 PM EST
    court records about Newt refusing to pay child support because his wife had to take him to court to get him to pay.

    Parent
    Then show me the link (1.00 / 1) (#147)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 08:37:49 AM EST
    A credible source. Not "Think Progress," etc.

    I just want the total picture.

    Parent

    Here (none / 0) (#150)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 09:20:14 AM EST
    is a NY Times article on Newt's sordid history. Of course, this only covers about the first 20 years and none of the radical nutso crap he's been peddling since then.
    Link

    I've decided that the GOP really doesn't want to win in '12 if they want to nominate Newt.

    Parent

    Okay, now let is look at the article (none / 0) (#156)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 01:40:41 PM EST
    that you have provided.

    From page 6

    Mr. Gingrich was supposed to pay $150 a month for each of his daughters and $400 in alimony to his ex-wife, the same amount he had allotted himself for "food/dry cleaning, etc." But a few months later, Jackie Gingrich filed court papers saying he had not provided reasonable support for her living expenses and that some of her accounts were "two or three months past due." Some of her friends took up an informal collection on her behalf. The court raised the child support to $200 a month a daughter and $1,000 in alimony.

    Note that the article does not say he was not paying what the court had ordered. It says that his ex-wife felt that the amount was not reasonable.

    Again, I have never, never, never heard of an ex-wife saying that the alimony and child support is not enough.

    Now, on the issue of the hospital visit, divorce papers, etc. The article says:

    (Page 7 of 8)
    Correction Appended

    In 1992, his Democratic opponent, Tony Center, ran a television advertisement against Mr. Gingrich that said -- erroneously -- that Mr. Gingrich "delivered divorce papers to his wife the day after her cancer operation." It went on to say that Mr. Gingrich had "left his wife and child penniless" while using a Lincoln Continental limousine and driver as one of the perks of his position as minority whip.

    I have also never, never, never before heard of an attack ad in a political race in which the ad lied.

    Newt is many things. But dumb? No. Can he beat Obama? I don't know. But unlike McCain he won't hesitate to call Obama to task on his past and his failures.

    Parent

    You obviously (5.00 / 2) (#160)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Dec 03, 2011 at 06:22:37 PM EST
    missed the part of the article when he went to talk to his wife in the hospital with cancer to TALK about a divorce and wanted a divorce because she wasn't "first lady material". Sure Gingrich can scream about Obama but you are forgetting all the things that Gingrich has said that will give Obama reams of material to work with.

    Gingrich was stupid enough to imply that Bill Clinton caused Susan Smith to murder her own children but Susan Smith's family was Republican and  her Christian Coalition stepfather had been molesting her for years.

    It's not hard to see how Gingrich's continual incredibly stupid statements and verbal diarrhea can turn him into mincemeat.

    Parent

    Well, let us look (none / 0) (#166)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Dec 04, 2011 at 09:46:59 AM EST
    We have shown that the claim re child support was not proven and that he didn't deliver divorce papers.

    Now you want to fall back on this:

    Once there, according to friends who knew them both, he began talking about the terms of the divorce.

    According to his daughter, who was their, he had taken her to the hospital to see her mother and an argument started. In an interview Newt as admitted to that and said that he should not have argued with his wife.

    Wow. You think that makes him unelectable??

    Of course not. And as the lies are exposed the people spreading them will be seen as just partisan politicians and party hacks.

    BTW - I see that you make another claim without a link.

    Parent

    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#167)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Dec 04, 2011 at 01:54:08 PM EST
    his ex-wife had to apply for charity to pay her bills because Gingrich was such a cretin and that's why she said he wasn't paying enough. It seems to me if you are having to rely on charity then you have a legitimate complaint about the money you are being paid.

    The whole sordid tale of Gingrich's cretinous life pretty much makes him unelectable. Of course, I wouldn't expect this to change the minds of the idiots who make up Republican primary voters.
    link

    That one has a bunch of goodies from Gingrich. It's always someone else's fault. If Bill Clinton is president then it's his fault, if George W. Bush is president then it's the fault of the media or some "elites". But if you point out Gingrich's rhetoric prior to the OKC bombing, he says that his crazed rantings had nothing to do with it. Good grief what a creep!

    And in case you have forgotten, Bill Clinton ran against the cretinous Gingrich back in 96 making him Bob Dole's running mate so he would be easy to beat. Lather, rinse and repeat what Carville and Begala did to him back in the 90's and he'll turn into roadkill so fast it will make your head spin.

    Parent

    Let me understand (none / 0) (#169)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Dec 04, 2011 at 10:12:48 PM EST
     
    It seems to me if you are having to rely on charity then you have a legitimate complaint about the money you are being paid.

    So the fact is that he was paying the court ordered amount.

    You need to get a grasp on two things.

    When you divorce someone they may well decide that they owe you only what the court says.

    That's why we have courts.

    Parent

    Yes (none / 0) (#173)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Dec 05, 2011 at 09:52:06 AM EST
    and that's why she went back to court. Don't you think she had a legitimate complaint if she was having to rely on charity? Perhaps Gingrich also falsified the information that he gave to the court or the court was going on old information.

    Parent
    Yes, she had the right to return to court. (none / 0) (#174)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 05, 2011 at 09:26:27 PM EST
    Was having to rely on charity a "legitimate" cause?

    No. They were divorced.

    And please. Gingrich was lying????? Is that the best you can do?

    Parent

    Gingrich (none / 0) (#176)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Dec 06, 2011 at 08:27:05 AM EST
    is a skank and a grifter. Look at his record. It sure wouldn't be hard to assume that he was shorting his wife. Look how he's treated both of his previous wives.

    Parent
    Huntsman & Newt one on one debate (none / 0) (#109)
    by loveed on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 05:52:04 PM EST
     I think Newt want Huntsman to be the nominee. In a couple of the debates Newt refered questions about China to Huntsman. Why is Newt doing this? Maybe Newt knows he cannot win, and Huntsman is the best choice. Plus it a big pay cut(LOL).
     This is a big deal for Huntsman. With Newt raise in the pollls, Huntsman will finally get a lot of national exsposure.
     I think this is great. Huntsman one on one with Newt. Huntsman refused to participate in the Trump debate in Iowa.
     

    It is a big deal for Huntsman (none / 0) (#111)
    by christinep on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 06:07:44 PM EST
    If he can go toe-to-toe & come out as a "holding his own" against the self-proclaimed great debater, Newtie, so much the better for your candidate.  

    Yet...the situation is problematic. Speaking honestly, I don't see how the GOP--in its present far-right state--could accept Huntsman. Huntsman is too moderate for them; and, his service for Obama in China is the pill to hard to swallow...this time. A good friend of mine, Susan, believes that Huntsman is making the run now while maintaining a degree of integrity (different from the others courting of the far right) to establish his national credentials for the future when, it is assumed, that the infection-like tea party trap will have been purged from the GOP (and they will be more open to their more traditionally moderate stream.)

    Parent

    Huntsman will be done (none / 0) (#125)
    by CoralGables on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 07:42:57 PM EST
    after New Hampshire.

    He's already skipping the Iowa debate. He's going to be a one state wonder. His big hit will be a third place finish in NH at best, and probably fourth, and then he'll call it a day.

    Parent

    Agree. (none / 0) (#131)
    by christinep on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 08:40:00 PM EST