home

Saturday College Football Open Thread

Today's picks (2 units unless otherwise indicated): Georgia Tech +14 over Georgia, Mississippi State +1 over Mississippi, Virginia +10 over Virginia Tech, Stanford -2 over UCLA, Tulsa -5 over SMU, Oklahoma State +7 over Oklahoma, Vanderbilt -12 over Wake Forest, South Carolina +4 over Clemson, Oregon -10 over Oregon State (7 units), Pittsburgh -2 over Rutgers, Texas Tech +3 over Baylor, Penn State -3 over Wisconsin, Ohio State -3 over Michigan (3 units), Connecticut +12 over Louisville, USC +6 over Notre Dame (3 units), San Jose State (+5) over La Tech (3 units.)

In the only game that matters, Florida (+7) over FSU. Go Gators!

Open Thread.

< Viktor Bout Describes Life at USP Marion | R.I.P. Hector "Macho" Camacho >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    How bout them Gators!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 06:06:16 PM EST


    You alma mater is at USF tonight, BTD (none / 0) (#1)
    by Dadler on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 10:17:17 AM EST
    And you know you're a degenerate gym rat when you're spending your Saturday night in glorious San Francisco in the sweaty and squeaky confines of War Memorial Gymnasium on the campus of the Univ of SF, taking in the Dons vs. the Lions. (LINK) Columbia actually looks good this year, and since I don't really like USF head coach Rex Walters all that much (hothead who actually trolls the USF athletics message board), I will be pulling for Columbia. Dadler Jr. will be there taking in players from his future alma mater, with any luck.  Knock on hardwood floor. Peace.

    YOUR alma mater, sheesh, proofread (none / 0) (#2)
    by Dadler on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 10:17:40 AM EST
    Sigh

    Parent
    Go Ducks... (none / 0) (#4)
    by fishcamp on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 11:29:12 AM EST
    Let's play (none / 0) (#3)
    by MO Blue on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 11:17:53 AM EST
    Name that politician

    I'm trying to remember if we've had this conversation. What I've said to them is that I believe that God created the universe and that the six days in the Bible may not be six days as we understand it -- it may not be 24-hour days. And that's what I believe. I know there's always a debate between those who read the Bible literally and those who don't, and that I think is a legitimate debate within the Christian community of which I'm a part. You know, my belief is that the story the Bible tells about God creating this magnificent Earth on which we live, that that is essentially true, that is fundamentally true. Now, whether it happened exactly as we might understand it reading the text of the Bible? That, you know, I don't presume to know.

    Hint: It is not Senator Marco Rubio

    How'd your favorite President answer it? (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 03:20:40 PM EST
    Zorba's reply pretty much covers (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by MO Blue on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 03:52:20 PM EST
    my answer. We have yet to elect my favorite president. Maybe one day.

    I have however long believed that we do ourselves and our country a disservice to ridicule the stated positions of members of one political party while accepting the same exact position from politicians in the party of our choice.

    If Marco Rubio's statement on the subject was anti-science and showed a willingness to accept the creationist version, then IMO Obama's statement followed the same path.    

    Parent

    Who ridiculed what? (none / 0) (#12)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 03:59:50 PM EST
    I didn;t. Politics is stupid.

    Frankly, I took your comment to be ridiculing Obama.

    Parent

    Maybe you have not ridiculed Rubio (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by MO Blue on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 04:30:59 PM EST
    but pundits throughout the blogospher have rushed to shame Marco Rubio for casting doubt on the Earth's age.

    I personally think the criticism is warranted. I also think that if Rubio is to be taken to task for casting doubt on the Earth's age, Obama deserves the same critique.

    There is a concerted effort to have this crap taught in the schools. Politicians whether they are Rubio or Obama giving it even token validity should IMO be ridiculed.  

    Parent

    Obama did not cast doubt on the Earth's (none / 0) (#20)
    by MKS on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 06:06:53 PM EST
    age.  He said he did not believe the earth was created in six days.

    Parent
    That is not what he said (none / 0) (#26)
    by MO Blue on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 07:19:41 PM EST
    He said that "the six days in the Bible may not be six days as we understand it -- it may not be 24-hour days."
    ...
    "Now, whether it happened exactly as we might understand it reading the text of the Bible? That, you know, I don't presume to know."

    Basically he said maybe it did and maybe it didn't, it was a legitimate debate and he didn't presume to know the answer.  

    Parent

    You cut out the key phrase (none / 0) (#33)
    by MKS on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 09:03:29 PM EST
    That was quite a case of selectively editing.

    Just after he says, "it may not be 24-hour days...." which you do quote, he said, "And that's what I believe," which you do not quote.

    Strange that Obama's re-election has triggered an attack from the Left.  After the 2008 Primary, and the 2008 General, and now the 2012 General, we still have this phenomenon.  Obama won re-election, so one would think it would be the next election that would be of interest to political junkies.....especially since Hillary has a good chance.

    But instead we re-live all the bitterness.....Total waste of energy.

    Parent

    Not real sure what Hillary (none / 0) (#35)
    by MO Blue on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 09:29:59 PM EST
    has to do with any of this.

    My position is pretty much the same as it always has been and it has everything to do with Obama and absolutely nothing to do with Hillary.

    Obama IMO validates and legitimizes Republican positions with his rhetoric and his policies. He has accomplished what even G.W. Bush was unable to do and has taken executive power farther than Bush would have even dared. I am more interested in how much damage Obama will do during the upcoming four years than the next election. How many more rights will we lose? How many more American citizens will be killed without any judicial process? How many more domestic programs will be cut and will there be anything of value left of the safety net programs after Obama is done with negotiating his "Grand Bargain?" How much more will ordinary citizens have to give up so that Obama can lower tax rates under the guise of tax reform.

    You can waste your energy being a perpetual cheerleader for Obama. I think I will spend my energy trying to make people aware that they need to take action to protect the things that they need to survive.

    Parent

    If you want to pressure Obama from (none / 0) (#36)
    by MKS on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 09:34:24 PM EST
    the Left, more power to you.

    It was your rearward glance that I was referring to.

    Parent

    The problem of crying wolf (none / 0) (#40)
    by Politalkix on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 10:34:33 PM EST
    too many times is that nobody listens when a wolf actually comes.

    You have asked "How many more American citizens will be killed without any judicial process"

    How many American citizens has Obama killed in 4 years without judicial process? You sound like the crazy woman in the Romney rally who said that she could not leave her house because she feared drones targetting her. This administration does not even have a Waco or Ruby Ridge type operation in its hands. Making Anwar Al-Awlaki sound like an average US citizen does not seem right to me.

    You have asked "many more domestic programs will be cut and will there be anything of value left of the safety net programs after Obama is done with negotiating his "Grand Bargain"

    How many domestic programs has Obama cut so far in 4 years? Just look at what is happening in Europe and explain to me why we never had austerity but stimulus without cuts to social programs when Obama is so hell bent in destroying the safety net.

    I honestly think that the President and the Democrats will fight hard to increase tax rates for the rich and will keep social security away from the table during negotiations. They will fight to expand Medicaid and help set up Obamacare choices which will help a lot of people without health insurance. The President will likely call the Republican bluff on defense and medicare cuts. At the end no deal will be reached just like before. The Bush tax cuts will automatically expire. Democrats will be happy that no cuts to social programs were made, Boehner will be happy that he can still blame the President for not cutting spending and raising taxes.

    Parent

    How many Americans has Obama ordered (none / 0) (#42)
    by MO Blue on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 11:30:15 PM EST
    killed without judicial process?

    At last count two that are documented.

    Examples of the President fighting hard to protect domestic and safety net programs:

    Nobody disputes that, except for the revenue part, the administration and Boehner had agreement over virtually everything else. And it was a deal that, like Obama's previous offers, was strikingly tilted towards Republican priorities. Among the provisions Obama to which Obama had said yes, according to a senior administration official, were the following:

    Medicare: Raising the eligibility age, imposing higher premiums for upper income beneficiaries, changing the cost-sharing structure, and shifting Medigap insurance in ways that would likely reduce first-dollar coverage. This was to generate about $250 billion in ten-year savings. This was virtually identical to what Boehner offered.

    Medicaid: Significant reductions in the federal contribution along with changes in taxes on providers, resulting in lower spending that would likely curb eligibility or benefits. This was to yield about $110 billion in savings. Boehner had sought more: About $140 billion. But that's the kind of gap ongoing negotiation could close.

    Social Security: Changing the formula for calculating cost-of-living increases in order to reduce future payouts. The idea was to close the long-term solvency gap by one-third, although it likely would have taken more than just this one reform to produce enough savings for that.

    Discretionary spending: A cut in discretionary spending equal to $1.2 trillion over ten years, some of some of them coming in fiscal year 2012. The remaining differences here, over the timing of such cuts, were tiny.

    The two sides had also agreed upon a basic structure for the deal. The agreement was to specify the discretionary cuts and implement them right away.

    WASHINGTON -- Less than two months after signing tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans into law, President Barack Obama proposed a spending plan to Congress that cuts funding to programs that assist the working poor, help the needy heat their homes, and expand access to graduate-level education, undermining the kind of community-based organizations that helped Obama launch his political career in Chicago.

    Obama's new budget puts forward a plan to achieve $1.1 trillion in deficit reductions over the next decade, according to an administration official who spoke to the Associated Press on condition of anonymity in advance of the formal release of the budget.

    Those reductions -- averaging just over $100 billion each year -- are achieved mainly by squeezing social programs.

    Or how about Obama undercutting his own party's efforts to prevent cuts to domestic programs.

    In a precursor to the debate to come, House and Senate Democrats on Wednesday questioned the wisdom of a House GOP proposal to cut about $58 billion in nonsecurity discretionary spending from President Obama's fiscal 2011 budget, saying that the cuts would fall disproportionately on the most-vulnerable citizens.

    But their message was undercut a bit by news that Obama would, for his fiscal 2012 budget, propose cutting several billion dollars from the government's energy-assistance fund for the poor, the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program. Under the president's proposed spending plan for the next fiscal year, funding for LIHEAP would drop by about $2.5 billion from an authorized 2009 total of $5.1 billion.


    IMO you sound like a ignoramus hiding his head in the sand who will approve or justify any and all actions that Obama makes regardless of what they are.

    Parent
    No deal was made (none / 0) (#44)
    by Politalkix on Sun Nov 25, 2012 at 01:19:42 AM EST
    Till a deal is made, everything is rumor. You seem like a concern troll who has raised fear mongering into an art form.
    There are many articles that dispute even the selective snippets that you keep posting from time to time to play your game.


    Parent
    Nope not rumor (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by MO Blue on Sun Nov 25, 2012 at 07:38:13 AM EST
    Memos of the proposed Grand Bargain where Obama was willing to cut domestic and safety net programs have been out on the internet for everyone to see. Obama's budget proposals were not rumors either. Obama is once again on record wanting his $4 trillion Grand Bargain.

    You substitute name calling for legitimate debate. A Republian technique you have down pat and you sound exactly like Bush's 39%ers who would try and justify any of his action.  You pretend that things you don't want to acknowledge don't exist. Does that make you a dupe or an accomplice?

    BTW, you are now free to type your misinformation to your hearts content since I will not interact with you further.

    Parent

    Another viewpoint (none / 0) (#38)
    by MO Blue on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 10:04:32 PM EST
    From Darksyde

    See, Rubio's not an historian but he can tell you what recorded history says,]; he's also not a scientist so he can't tell you what science says! Well, he obviously doesn't possess the faintest shred of intellectual honesty or logic if he doesn't think he just hopelessly contradicted himself. And BTW, before we get all pious and preachy ourselves, this craziness--or convenient vagueness if you will--on basic established science has worked its way into some Democratic responses to the same question.

    Just in case you are wondering Darksyde's link goes to the Obama quote.

    Numerous other headlines of Obama and Rubio same on creationism - Obama and Rubio on same page etc.

    Parent

    Baloney (none / 0) (#41)
    by MKS on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 11:07:01 PM EST
    Show me where Obama says Creationism should be taught in public schools.

    Parent
    I did not take (none / 0) (#13)
    by Zorba on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 04:23:42 PM EST
    MOBlue's comment as ridiculing Obama so much as pointing out the fact that the Democratic Party has moved ever farther to the right.  As has the entire country.  Unfortunately.

    Parent
    The Democratic Party has not (none / 0) (#34)
    by MKS on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 09:05:35 PM EST
    moved to the Right on evolution, science, or the teaching of Intelligent Design or Creationism.....

    It was just a gratuitous shot at Obama.

    Parent

    Does it matter? (none / 0) (#15)
    by MO Blue on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 04:42:52 PM EST
    Coming back to the age of the earth: Does it matter? No, says Mr. Rubio, pronouncing it "a dispute amongst theologians" -- what about the geologists? -- that has "has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States." But he couldn't be more wrong.

    We are, after all, living in an era when science plays a crucial economic role. How are we going to search effectively for natural resources if schools trying to teach modern geology must give equal time to claims that the world is only 6.000 years old? How are we going to stay competitive in biotechnology if biology classes avoid any material that might offend creationists? The Shrill One



    Parent
    Don't know about (none / 0) (#10)
    by Zorba on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 03:36:44 PM EST
    MOBlue's favorite President, but for myself, I have never had a favorite President in my entire voting life, and I am 64 years old.  But then, I am so far to the left of most people in this country, I have never felt that I am representative of even the most liberal voters.  It is what it is, at least of me.

    Parent
    Maybe one of these days - and I hope to (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Anne on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 04:49:40 PM EST
    live long enough to see it happen - some enlightened politician will think to answer all this did-or-didn't-God-create-the-universe stuff by saying something like, "what I think or believe about the who's, what's and why's of the creation of this world should matter less than what I think about how we are taking care of this world in which we live right now, and whether what we're doing now, or ten years from now, will ensure that generations from now, people will be able to look back and say that we did a good job.  However this universe came into being, we are its stewards, and we have a responsibility to ensure its health and repair and continued existence.  If you want to know my thoughts on that, I'll be happy to share them."

    Would that be so hard to say?  Must we keep falling into the trap of who is closer to God, or more devout while we ignore the things that are right here under our noses?

    I guess so; how sad is that?


    Parent

    Wrong Interpretation, Anne (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Politalkix on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 05:46:47 PM EST
    Actions speak, Anne! The President's policies has increased support towards teaching STEM subjects in schools and increased funding for science, engineering and technology research. He has appointed a real scientist as energy secy. He has reversed Bush era policies on stem cell research and on climate change issues. He is trying to make it easier for scientists and engineers to immigrate to the United States and has managed to bring back some of the engineering and manufacturing jobs that had left the country. He is already taking care of the country we live in, right now.
    His answer was not about who proclaiming who is closer to God but more about not hurting the sentiments of people who believe in religion and creating a needless political controversy. He is not clamoring to teach creationism in schools unlike Republicans. He is also passionate about sending more of our citizens to college to get a scietific and liberal education; he was called a "snob" in the Republian primaries for attempting to do so.


    Parent
    This (none / 0) (#18)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 05:54:20 PM EST
    This (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by MO Blue on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 06:11:48 PM EST
    Obama, speaking in the first White House press conference since his re-election, acknowledged his first term had made only limited progress on climate change. But he promised to remain personally engaged in getting Republicans and Democrats to agree on a course of action.
    ....
    It was also the first time Obama said he would take personal charge of climate change.

    The approach offers a marked difference from Obama's largely hands-off policy during his first term, when he left Democrats in Congress in charge of crafting a climate change bill. That effort ultimately collapsed in the Senate.
    ...
    However, the president also made clear that it would be hard to find areas of compromise, and that he would not be pushed by environmental allies into policies that did not have broad support. link

    BTW, the business community wanted the policy changed on stem cell research. Even Republicans such as Kit Bond voted to change the policy to satisfy "big business."

    Parent

    Sound like Rubio (none / 0) (#27)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 07:22:13 PM EST
    Not.

    Now you are being ridiculous.

    Parent

    Different argument entirely (none / 0) (#28)
    by MO Blue on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 07:45:47 PM EST
    There was no mention of Rubio in that post. It was merely debating Obama's accomplishments during his first term on climate change. By Obama's own words "he acknowledged his first term had made only limited progress on climate change." He took a very hands off approach.

    BTW, would stating the straw man you built by conflating the two arguments was ridiculous and not up to your usual debating style be against the sites stated rules. If so, please disregard.

    Parent

    That was your original argument! (none / 0) (#29)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 08:16:56 PM EST
    Anne in Comment #16 (none / 0) (#30)
    by MO Blue on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 08:42:47 PM EST
    changed the direction of the discussion from how the earth was formed to how we are taking care of the earth now.

    "what I think or believe about the who's, what's and why's of the creation of this world should matter less than what I think about how we are taking care of this world in which we live right now, and whether what we're doing now, or ten years from now, will ensure that generations from now, people will be able to look back and say that we did a good job.  

    Politalkix in comment #17 declared that [Obama]

    He is already taking care of the country we live in, right now.

    In comment #18, you appeared to agree with Politalkix's accessment.

    My comment #22 was part of the new discussion on how well Obama was taking care of the planet during his first term. Rubio was no longer part of the discussion. By his own admission, Obama

    "acknowledged his first term had made only limited progress on climate change."

    He largely maintained a hands-off policy during his first term for positive climate change regulations while promoting his policies on "clean coal" and opening up additional areas for off shore drilling which are not IMO in the best interest of the planet.

    Parent

    I wasn't looking to change the direction of (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by Anne on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 10:00:15 PM EST
    the discussion as much as I was wondering why it is that politicians feel so compelled, in a country that used to prize not just religious freedom but the distinction between matters of faith and matters of governance, to prove they are people of faith.  

    And that was prompted by the discussion of why it's okay to disparage Marco Rubio and other Republicans for their comments about the creation of the universe, but not to hold the Democratic president in the same contempt for his own comments.

    Speaking for me only, I don't care what Obama or any other politician believes about how this universe came to be, or how long ago it happened; what I am concerned with is what politicians/elected representatives do to preserve and protect the world in which we are all living.

    I wasn't doing any more or any less than expressing what I would like to hear from these people when the media put them on the spot and ask them these ridiculous religious questions.

    Whether someone believes God or some other deity is responsible, or whether they believe in the Big Bang Theory and evolution doesn't matter as much as what they do where the environment and air and water quality and climate change are concerned.  

    For what it's worth, and in my opinion, there seems to be somewhat of a disconnect between being so gung-ho about fracking and "clean" coal and opening up more ocean to drilling - to name a few - and Politalkix's paean to Obama's stewardship of the environment.

    Parent

    For the most part I agree (none / 0) (#39)
    by MO Blue on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 10:27:37 PM EST
    with what you said before and what you are saying now. I too am very much concerned with the stewardship of the planet now and in the future.

    As long as creationism and intelligent design is not taught in the public schools or forced upon me, I don't much care what people chose to believe. Quite a few states have super majority Republican state governments and changes to the science programs etc. are IMO a real possibility. Rubio and Obama's statements giving token validation to this form of junk science is IMO harmful.  

    Parent

    You have likely missed (none / 0) (#43)
    by Politalkix on Sun Nov 25, 2012 at 12:48:13 AM EST
    how much this government is doing to promote battery technology, electric cars, solar and wind technology and pushing the auto industry to improve gas mileage. Otherwise you would not be making disparaging remarks about how bad BHO's stewardship of the environment has been.


    Parent
    Don't bother, Blue (none / 0) (#31)
    by NYShooter on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 08:55:57 PM EST
    you're heading into the realm of blogo-chipper-shredder land, and, before you know it, you'll be asking, "how, in the world, did we get here....from there?"

    Drop it, it's hopeless.  

    Parent

    Blogo-chipper-shredder land? (none / 0) (#32)
    by MO Blue on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 09:00:55 PM EST
    Now that does sound hopeless. ;o)

    Anyway I'm done with this and am off to give Military Tracy a link to a fun post on the War on Christmas.

    Parent

    Neither a scientist nor a (none / 0) (#5)
    by KeysDan on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 12:45:28 PM EST
    theologian, man.   Then Senator Barack Obama in a 2008 interview with Campbell Brown on CNN.    

    Parent
    Did he say anything about... (none / 0) (#21)
    by unitron on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 06:10:44 PM EST
    ...whether it was only 6 to 8 thousand years ago?

    Parent
    Go Gators!!!!!! (none / 0) (#6)
    by Amiss on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 12:59:48 PM EST
    n/t

    If the Gators win today (none / 0) (#7)
    by CoralGables on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 01:19:33 PM EST
    they will have beaten 4 teams currently in the top 12 in the BCS standings.

    Parent
    That would be awesome! (none / 0) (#8)
    by Amiss on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 02:39:44 PM EST
    But the are playing in Tallahassee. Jimbo has had lots of coaching experience under Bobby Bowden with a much improved team from last year.

    Parent
    UF 37 FSU-20 (none / 0) (#23)
    by Amiss on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 06:14:12 PM EST
    And how many other top ten teams did the Gators win against?

    Parent
    Go USC! (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 06:15:33 PM EST
    oops (none / 0) (#25)
    by Amiss on Sat Nov 24, 2012 at 06:48:57 PM EST
    Fsu scored last second.

    For fans of St. Steve (none / 0) (#46)
    by CoralGables on Sun Nov 25, 2012 at 08:25:59 AM EST
    Steve Spurrier pulled off an interesting accomplishment yesterday. He is the winningest Florida Gator football coach ever and after the South Carolina win over #11 Clemson, he is also the winningest South Carolina Gamecock football coach ever.

    BTD CFITP (none / 0) (#47)
    by CoralGables on Sun Nov 25, 2012 at 08:56:29 AM EST
    Another winning weekend for BTD as he pulled off a fantastic Saturday after an absolutely ugly Friday. That makes four consecutive winning weekends with a 7 unit play on the Ducks bringing him back to Even in the money column for the season while moving 20 games over .500

    BTD on the weekend: 14-11-1 (+12 units)
    On the Season: 136-116-9 (Even units)