Sunday Night Open Thread: Homeland's Back

The new season of Homeland begins now with a 1 hour and 45 minute episode.

Here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Joe Biden and his Apology to Turkey | More Road Closures for Joe Biden >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Breaking News (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:50:07 AM EST
    Sepreme Court says no same sex marriage cases this term.  So, according to Pete Williams, 11 more states now allow same sex marriage.  Which has implications for other states in the same districts.

    Very big news.

    Here's (none / 0) (#33)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:53:02 AM EST
    a link

    There will probably be many shortly.


    This is great news (5.00 / 3) (#41)
    by KeysDan on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 09:33:40 AM EST
    for marriage equality.  Now, thirty states plus D.C., since the rejection of the petitions lifts the stays in those cases. Interesting dynamics in play.  By neither accepting nor rejecting the appeals last Monday, just not acting, the Supreme Court seemed to be resurrecting what the Catholic Church ditched--limbo.

     But, by rejecting the petitions, stays that remained in effect pending petitions for writ of certiorari are terminated.   Four votes are needed to accept, so all of the Justices agreed to let it percolate (no conflicts between circuits right now) or they could not get the necessary votes. Speculation on my part, but they might have been able to get Scalia, Thomas and Alito, only, for acceptance of a petition.  The Court still may have to decide nationwide, but after this percolation, the coffee is likely to have been brewed.


    It's 7 states (none / 0) (#40)
    by jbindc on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 09:27:17 AM EST
    right now and other states possibly to follow:

    This means that the lower-court decisions striking down bans in Indiana, Wisconsin, Utah, Oklahoma, and Virginia should go into effect shortly, clearing the way for same-sex marriages in those states and any other state with similar bans in those circuits.

    Correction (none / 0) (#42)
    by jbindc on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 09:36:26 AM EST
    There were 7 petitions that were all turned down.

    That's right (none / 0) (#45)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 09:40:43 AM EST
    Wiliams may have been including states like mine where a lower court has struck down the ban, that decision has been stayed but were not included specifically today.

    Williams just explained this (none / 0) (#53)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:06:10 AM EST
    the number of states impacted now is 5.  There are 6 more in those same districts that have had the bans stuck down.
    Like AR

    In the same circuits (not "districts") (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by Peter G on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 12:22:44 PM EST
    but basically correct.  The other states that are  bound by the precedents confirmed by today's denials, but which do not so far have court orders or Attorney General decisions of their own, I believe, are West Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina (!).

    Thanks PG (none / 0) (#70)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 12:35:03 PM EST

    WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court refused to get involved in the national debate over same-sex marriage Monday, leaving intact lower court rulings that will legalize the practice in 11 additional states.

    The unexpected decision by the justices, announced without further explanation, immediately affects five states in which federal appeals courts had struck down bans against gay marriage: Virginia, Indiana, Wisconsin, Oklahoma and Utah.

    It also will bring along six other states located in the judicial circuits overseen by those appellate courts: North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia, Colorado, Kansas and Wyoming. Lower court judges in those states must abide by their appeals court rulings.

    So I assumed AR was in there, it is not.  I will have to investigate why.  The ban was struck down here and then stayed.  


    Wiki Arkansas ????? (none / 0) (#72)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 12:46:47 PM EST
    Same-sex marriage in Arkansas was briefly legal for a period beginning on May 9, 2014, as the result of a ruling by Sixth Judicial Circuit Judge Chris Piazza, striking down the state's constitutional and legislative ban on same-sex marriage as violating the Constitution of the United States.[1] After approximately 450 same-sex couples received marriage licenses in several Arkansas counties, the Arkansas Supreme Court suspended Judge Piazza's ruling on May 16, 2014 and enforced a stay while the decision is appealed by Arkansas's Democratic Attorney General Dustin McDaniel.[2]

    Following Judge Piazza's initial ruling, county clerks were prohibited by state law from issuing licenses to same-sex couples, largely preventing such marriages from taking place in the state.[3] However, Judge Piazza then subsequently expanded his ruling striking down a constitutional ban to also include the statutory prohibition on clerks issuing same-sex marriage licenses.[4] Piazza's ruling, now suspended by the state Supreme Court, which effectively legalised same-sex marriage in the state of Arkansas, is being appealed by Democratic Attorney General Dustin McDaniel.

    The first marriage license for a same-sex couple was issued May 10, 2014, in Carroll County.[5] Piazza's ruling will be appealed by the state of Arkansas, represented by Democratic Attorney General Dustin McDaniel. Since McDaniel's office has requested a judicial stay, same-sex marriage has only been performed in a few counties.[6] But the Arkansas Supreme Court refused to issue the stay.[7] Judge Chris Piazza declared that the 1997 statutory ban (Act 144) and the 2004 constitutional ban (Amendment 3) violate the Federal constitution.[8]

    Why is AR not on anyone's list?


    The five states whose appeals won't be heard are Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin and Indiana. The order could also affect bans in West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Kansas, Colorado, and Wyoming in coming weeks.

    Arkansas is not yet affected because (5.00 / 1) (#132)
    by Peter G on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 05:33:21 PM EST
    it is jurisdictionally located within the Eighth (federal) Circuit, which has not yet ruled on SSM. (Do not be confused by the irrelevant reference to the "Sixth Circuit" (of the Arkansas state courts).  The federal court Circuits whose decisions were made final by today's denials of review are the Fourth, Seventh and Tenth.  I left out the other states in the Tenth Circuit in my earlier comment; hence, the new clip's correct inclusion of Kansas, Colorado and Wyoming, which are subject to Tenth Circuit precedent.

    Thanks again (none / 0) (#135)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 06:11:26 PM EST
    so is there any good news in this for my state in anything like the short run?

    If the Supreme Court is being logical -- (5.00 / 3) (#141)
    by Peter G on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 07:48:41 PM EST
    which is sort of a big "if" -- they are sending a pretty strong signal to the remaining jurisdictions that there is no S.Ct. majority sufficient to stand in the way of this fast-moving train.
        In Arkansas, atypically, the state court challenge is farther advanced than the case in federal court. Briefs are in the process of being filed before the state Supreme Court.  So, less than a year, I would say, but nothing imminent.  The rest of the Eighth Circuit (i.e., N.D., S.D., Neb. and Mo.) is similarly behind most of the country, with challenges pending in the trial level federal courts, and no appeals yet that could potentially set a precedent.

    Thanks Peter (none / 0) (#142)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:05:30 PM EST
    So (none / 0) (#170)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 10:14:34 AM EST
    from what I read, the 9th circuit is next and then the 6th.  Us.

    Yes, although there's no saying for sure (none / 0) (#171)
    by Peter G on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 10:25:43 AM EST
    which of those federal Circuits will rule first. Nor can we say for sure which way they will rule, at least as far as the Sixth is concerned.  Getting back to the topic of Arkansas (and the rest of the lagging Eighth Circuit), there was an interesting post yesterday at Balkanization pointing out that arguably the Eighth Circuit already ruled (adversely) on marriage equality in 2006, setting binding precedent on the federal courts in that region. Others would argue, however, that pre-Windsor precedent is not longer binding. The situation is far from simple, legally speaking.

    And here goes the next one - the Ninth Circuit (5.00 / 1) (#182)
    by Peter G on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 04:11:31 PM EST
    today, Tuesday. Idaho & Nevada fall.  Hence, Arizona, Hawaii and Alaska, too (all of which are subject to the same Circuit precedent). Waiting for the Supreme Court, they were, I suppose.  Per "How Appealing."

    Ted Cruz (none / 0) (#183)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 04:19:00 PM EST
    is probably on a morphine drip someplace.

    Pretenders like him? (none / 0) (#189)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 10:00:08 PM EST
    I can't believe he really cares any deeper than throwing red meat to his howling pack of donors.  He is somewhere pretending to need to be on a drip.

    His father is a RW Christian nutcase (none / 0) (#191)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 10:27:35 PM EST
    so I wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't a bit ticked off.  The most successful RW grifters believe their own stuff a little bit, it makes selling it to the marks(I'm sorry, "values voters") a littler bit easier. In his case, he's having an Anacin moment.

    And Montana (none / 0) (#188)
    by Peter G on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 07:53:37 PM EST
    Montana is also in the Ninth Circuit.

    I have also seen (none / 0) (#172)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 10:32:21 AM EST
    what I hope is wild eyed speculation that the "4" are leaving their options open in the hope that a republican might be elected in 2016 and tip the scales back in their favor.

    This seems far fetched?  But then not. Would they really consider un-marrying 10s of thousands of people?  My heart says no.  My brain says yes.


    "no ... Supreme Court majority" (none / 0) (#178)
    by christinep on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 12:29:23 PM EST
    I also think that yesterday's S Ct non-decision decision may reflect several realities that are non-judicial as well as one important realization that a majority from the present composition could not be reached.  Regarding S Ct alliances, my guess is that Roberts and/or Anthony sat in the middle. Thoughts?

    The current thinking seems to be (none / 0) (#184)
    by jbindc on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 04:44:40 PM EST
    that since there was no conflict among the circuits, the liberals were "keeping their powder dry" (because it's better to keep quiet when things are going your way), and the conservatives are waiting on one of the remaining circuits to have a ruling upholding the bans (and of course, hoping for a Republican in the White House in 2017 who can appoint another conservative justice, assuming the four conservatives hang on as well).

    More (none / 0) (#185)
    by jbindc on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 04:48:45 PM EST

    There's a lot of speculation, but we don't know for sure why at least six Justices of the Supreme Court refused to hear the marriage cases from Virginia, Utah, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, and Indiana. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's remarks at the University of Minnesota Law School last month suggested that until there's a circuit split, the Justices may believe there's no urgency" for the Court to consider the matter. The upshot is that, according to UCLA's Williams Institute, over the next three years there are likely to be 45,000 same-sex marriages in the eleven states covered by the three circuits whose pro-SSM decisions were allowed to stand. This will increase the number of same-sex marriages in the U.S. by almost fifty percent.

    Adding (none / 0) (#73)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 12:49:00 PM EST
    the Dem AG has said he will not defend the law.

    Actually (none / 0) (#74)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 12:54:05 PM EST
    i think what he said was he would defend it but he thought it was wrong.  Which would probably be very different things legally.
    So, it's up to the AG then?   If so I can see why today's news might influence his decision.

    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by jbindc on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 12:30:59 PM EST
    Lyle, as always, explains it so well.

    First, as a direct result of Monday's action, same-sex marriages can occur when existing lower-court rulings against state bans go into effect in Virginia in the Fourth Circuit, Indiana and Wisconsin in the Seventh Circuit, and Oklahoma and Utah in the Tenth Circuit.

    Second, such marriages can occur when the court of appeals rulings are implemented in federal district courts in three more states in the Fourth Circuit (North and South Carolina and West Virginia) and in three more states in the Tenth Circuit (Colorado, Kansas, and Wyoming).  The other states in the three circuits where bans have been struck down had already permitted same-sex marriage, under new laws or court rulings (Illinois, Maryland, and New Mexico, which have been counted among the nineteen states in that category).

    Third, four other circuits -- the Fifth, Sixth, Ninth, and Eleventh -- are currently considering the constitutionality of same-sex marriages.  Of those, the Ninth Circuit -- which had earlier struck down California's famous "Proposition 8″ ban and uses a very rigorous test of laws against gay equality -- is considered most likely to strike down state bans.  If that happens, it would add five more states to the marriages-allowed column (Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Montana, and Nevada), which would bring the national total to thirty-five.

    The reaction in those four circuits could depend upon how they interpret what the Supreme Court did on Monday.

    If the Court is not likely to uphold any state ban, either on same-sex marriage in the first place or recognition of existing such marriage, lower courts may see good reason to fall in line.  The Court's actions, however, do not set any precedent, so lower courts are technically free to go ahead and decide as they otherwise would.

    Donated aid is quarantined -- (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 01:03:54 PM EST
    Donated Ebola aid sits unopened on Sierra Leone dock for weeks

    The container is filled with protective gowns, gloves, stretchers, mattresses and other medical supplies that are in short supply in the epidemic-stricken country ..

    The shipper agreed to send the container before receiving a $6,500 payment, which has so far not been made, despite the fact that the country has received $40 million in international donations.

    "Instead, top government officials argued over the fee ...

    "It appears all they are interested in is cash donations...."

    As a result of the problem with the first container, three additional containers are still sitting in the U.S....

    But ... But ... But ... Tom Frieden at the CDC said ...

    Oh Never mind --

    Nurse in Spain contracts Ebola (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by Angel on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 02:48:50 PM EST
    Alrighty then (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by jbindc on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 04:44:54 PM EST
    I guess I can blame my parents for not giving me a "positive experience" as to why I currently co-habitate with the BF, at least according to this Polish bishop. (I thought it was because we spend lots of time together and here in DC it's very expensive to maintain two households, but what do I know?)

    But my favorite part:

    Meanwhile, Archbishop Gadecki warned that encouraging boys to clean up after themselves so as to subvert gender stereotypes could have dangerous consequences.

    "Some parents like to teach boys that they should clean up after themselves, and not wait until girls do it for them."

    The archbishop suggested that such leanings should be treated with caution, because "parents often do not realise" that same-sex partnerships are also championed under the banner of "overcoming stereotypes."

    It's people like this that give the Catholic Church a bad name.

    not sure (5.00 / 4) (#129)
    by CST on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 05:08:44 PM EST
    whether to laugh or cry at that.

    In the name of everything holy - I wish more parents taught subversive gender stereotypes.


    Oy! (5.00 / 3) (#130)
    by Zorba on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 05:10:18 PM EST
    So.......encourage your boys to be slobs and expect girls to clean up their messes or you might be encouraging them to become gay?  What???
    Funny, we taught both our daughter and our son how to cook, clean, do laundry, use tools, work on cars, grow a garden, sew, drive a tractor, and do any number of other things.
    Guess we were bad parents.  Or something.

    Here is what my Aunt Frances (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by christinep on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 07:01:54 PM EST
    would have said: He's Polish.  Now ... please understand that my Aunt Frances was a good 100% Polish ... and, as such, she was a strong Catholic (Eucharistic minister, chairperson of her parish sodality, weekly volunteer for the Thursday-night pirogie-making sessions at her Polish Catholic Church.) Heck, I remember when visiting her back in PA that the parish priest would be at her house and we all played pinochle together (not being afraid to imbibe a bit of scotch.)  I also remember that this strong woman--whose mother immigrated from Poland through Ellis Island at 16 and who went on to mother a future professor son and teacher daughter--led a wildcat strike in a shirt-factory in PA when women were paid less than men and always reminded us to stand up for ourselves.  Regarding the latter: Serving as the sacristan who cleaned the altar, she got into a difference-of-opinion with the priest when she told him that the Church ought to be paying all the women who gave so much time to help out. (As I recall, he ultimately agreed.)

    The point:  My Polish side of the family is well represented by my late Aunt Frances, who told us more than once that the old Polish priests often stubbornly clung to the very old ways.  She usually had some choice words for those attitudes ... especially in areas of family life, where she believed a bit of real-life experience in adult relationships would help them.  

    BTW, her funeral in PA some years back was concelebrated by two priests who testified to their high regard for her.  I'd bet Pope Francis would admire that spunk as well.


    It occurs to me (none / 0) (#173)
    by sj on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 11:15:24 AM EST
    that you might enjoy this book. It's out of print now, but I see that it is at last available on the kindle and nook.

    Thank you very much, sj for the suggestion (none / 0) (#179)
    by christinep on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 12:38:56 PM EST
    I will definitely plan to read it in the months ahead.  The warmth that the summary conveys would seem to fit a private, reflective read during a Colorado winter.  

    You aren't (none / 0) (#133)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 05:42:53 PM EST
    kidding about the bad name thing. However the good news tends to be that the new pope is not concerned with this nonsense and this guy will probably never get a promotion.

    This sounds like parenting advice out of the 1950's.


    Go Cardinals (5.00 / 1) (#155)
    by MO Blue on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:23:32 PM EST
    Cardinals defeated the Dodgers 3 to 1 tonight. That puts them ahead 2 games to 1 in the series.

    Has Ephram (none / 0) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Oct 05, 2014 at 08:12:27 PM EST
    From the Strain always been in Homeland?  I just spotted him sans wig.  

    If anyone cares (none / 0) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Oct 05, 2014 at 08:43:05 PM EST
    Corey Stoll is new to season 4.  Apparently.

    Not I. (none / 0) (#6)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 05, 2014 at 10:22:07 PM EST
    if you don't care, there's no need (none / 0) (#12)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 02:47:42 AM EST
    to comment. Comments are for when you have something to say.

    I do care when the open threads are devoted (none / 0) (#24)
    by oculus on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:35:00 AM EST
    to discussing TV and Internet series.

    We know (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:36:07 AM EST
    Would you like to know if we care?

    Put another way (none / 0) (#26)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:38:18 AM EST
    there are now three open threads on the front page with comment space.  If that's not enough maybe you should start a "no tv" blog.

    Anyone see this? (none / 0) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 07:46:29 AM EST
    i don't want to say anything to spoil it.  

    Ruffian? (none / 0) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:39:58 AM EST
    interested in your Corey sans wig impression.

    Just watched it... (none / 0) (#152)
    by ruffian on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:13:08 PM EST
    I am used to Corey sans wig...that is how I knew him in House of Cards!  The wig in The Strain was icky!!!  Of course it was not the ickiest thing in that show, even in the only one episode I saw.

    Good opening episodes, though I was hoping Carrie's sister would smack her when she did her put-upon 14yr old routine.

    Those did look like pharmaceuticals of some type in the kid's bag...maybe he is in the black market?

    I still love Peter.

    The dialog seems sharper than I remember it. Should be a good season!


    Funny (none / 0) (#164)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 08:07:43 AM EST
    when I saw him I went to IMDB to check it out.  I though, ip that's odd, why is he only listed for one episode?

    OH! That's why.

    I fear the pharmaceuticals have a more sinister purpose?

    Peter is great and I love his big new girlfriend.


    I have a question (none / 0) (#46)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 10:21:33 AM EST
    for perhaps a bigger fan than me-

    Are we supposed to know what was in the kids gym bag?  That looked like injectable medicine?

    I thought it was great actually. I loved the Carrie/baby scenes.  Amazing.


    The scene with baby Brody was really (none / 0) (#82)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 01:11:31 PM EST
    Disturbing.  I like the direction they went this season. I predict that all of us deeply discouraged with how last season finished will return as an audience.

    Looking forward to watching it tonight (none / 0) (#88)
    by ruffian on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 01:43:26 PM EST
    Was too wiped out from fence-washing yesterday to stay up late. First cool day I had to catch up on that task, but gees, it broke me!

    I hear ya (none / 0) (#93)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 02:06:34 PM EST
    Yesterday was gorgeous.  The dog's agree too, they played outside all day and they played hard, like little kids.

    Boardwalk Empire (none / 0) (#131)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 05:30:09 PM EST
    am I the only one who loves awkward dinner parties?

    No, you are not. I am a huge fan of the (none / 0) (#153)
    by ruffian on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:17:48 PM EST
    awkward dinner party. That one was great. The Van Alden-Eli pairing is inspired.  And of course the other one that was broken up by gunfire. I fear Nucky is not making it out of this series alive. How about that young actor playing young Nucky now, fake teeth and all? He really has all of the Steve Buscemi mannerisms down pat too.

    See also: Jesse has dinner at the White's, Season 5, Breaking Bad.


    Yes yes yes and yes (none / 0) (#165)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 08:12:18 AM EST
    Michael Shannon is great.  Have you ever seen "Bug".
    He and Ashley Judd in their best rolls as a couple of odd ducks who hold up in a cheesy hotel room and take a crazy paranoid trip into the heart of darkness.

    Definitely worth the time.


    Not that I remember Capt (none / 0) (#81)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 01:07:04 PM EST
    It has been awhile since last season though.  I watched the final episode from last season a few days ago, just to return to the story.  But no others.

    I could not understand the IMDB (none / 0) (#84)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 01:17:26 PM EST
    listing.  I will say no more currently in case some one still needs some quality time with the DVR.

    The baby scenes were, wow.
    Think for a moment the challenge of creating a character who is sympathetic enough to be the path into a story and who at the same time is just crazy enough to make those bath scenes excruciating to watch.


    Making the CIA look bat$hit (none / 0) (#85)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 01:23:47 PM EST
    Maybe they are.  Maybe if you weren't when you got there you will be when they are done with you.

    Can you imagine what it must be like married to someone in the CIA?  Intimacy challenged


    Batsh!t (none / 0) (#87)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 01:30:40 PM EST
    but still morally superior to the government forces controlling it.

    I get the impression (none / 0) (#92)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 02:05:01 PM EST
    At least according to Homeland, that the CIA has a lot of individuals doing independent projects.  Or maybe they did, before the Obama administration.

    The Homeland created story has elements that really happened.  A station chief did have his cover blown on Pakistan television.  He wasn't killed, just had to go home.  And they hit what was discovered to really be a wedding, I believe it was at the beginning of the Obama administration.  And the Haqqani family and network are who they hunt for in the tribal areas.


    Yes! That was very hard...and then to actually (none / 0) (#154)
    by ruffian on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:22:13 PM EST
    really go there with it. Wow. All I could think was 'omg, she is water boarding that baby'.

    Someone please tell me the real CIA station chiefs are nothing like that loon Carrie. Please?


    Then the last shot (none / 0) (#166)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 08:14:17 AM EST
    sitting alone in the plane

    I'm ok.  I'm ok.  I'm ok.


    Yes, that was very sad (none / 0) (#174)
    by ruffian on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 11:46:01 AM EST
    Why the people that supposedly
     a) love her and
     b) love their country

    ever let her out of a padded room remains the biggest mystery on the show.


    Sunday night is the best TV night (none / 0) (#2)
    by ZtoA on Sun Oct 05, 2014 at 08:25:14 PM EST
    But I can never watch - always have dinner with family and spend the evening chatting. I thank my lucky stars for amazon prime and netflix.

    I'm continuing to watch Grimm on my laptop. What a great show!! I know most of these stories well and have read several translations and at least a couple of analytical writings on them. Grimm departs from the tales, but in amazingly creative ways, creating new levels of interest.

    Besides, it is filmed in PDX and I know lots of these places. Know some of the local crew talent who work on Grimm too.

    I am honored to live in a city with such a great Grimm cop looking out for all of us "normals" and a great, nice, Blutbot and some other Wesen.

    Yes ZtoA is is fun for me to watch (none / 0) (#4)
    by fishcamp on Sun Oct 05, 2014 at 09:28:10 PM EST
    Portlandia but I hardly recognize the places any more.  

    I'm sure lots of the places have changed (none / 0) (#9)
    by ZtoA on Sun Oct 05, 2014 at 11:11:11 PM EST
    over the years. I've been here 'only' 25 years and so much has changed in that short time. The Pearl district is completely revamped.  In Grimm the new arts building is often a part of a scene. Hey! there's "my" gallery !! In Portlandia (I've watched it so many times I have it memorized and still love watching a bit on my phone to relax me just before sleep) so many of the characters are familiar.

    Do you recognize the kinds of characters from Portlandia from your memories of PDX? I find this city to be a gentle, somewhat odd, super 'progressive', great art (especially painting) city. As far as painting goes Portland is, IMO the absolute best in the country.

    Other cities rule for photography (tho 'we' as in pdx, are good too) prints, performance and installation and "new media". Seattle still has a "glass hangover".  But painting, as an "out" and "not cool" form of art is portland. The city attracts counter-culture artists (painters) from all over. We (artists) are also very friendly with each other, come to each others' openings, support each other and don't do cliques. There are no "art stars" who make bloated amounts of $$, partly because to show here the prices have to be Portland prices or a living artist will get sort of laughed at. When I go to other cities - LA, Chicago, NYC - the painters are never as good as PDX painters.

    Fish, do you ever get back to PDX to visit? If so, let's meet for coffee maybe. "Doing" coffee is a thing here. Hipster men (and I suppose women, just don't notice them as much) are everywhere here. NOT in LA tho. Different style there.


    No, unfortunately I don't go (none / 0) (#17)
    by fishcamp on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 07:42:38 AM EST
    back to Portland any more since my parents have passed away.  I left in 1960 when I graduated from Portland State and very little of the art you speak of was evident then.  The only freeway was the Banfield express so I'm way out of the loop.  When my mother was still alive she lived in Salem so I would just grab a car and drive away.  I do have a sister in Salem but she likes to visit here in the Florida keys.  If I do ever return I would love to have a "cuppa" with you and if you come this way we can have a boat drink.

    Count me in for that coffee meet-up. (5.00 / 2) (#62)
    by caseyOR on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:33:39 AM EST
    Hopefully, I will be back in my beloved Portland by the time fishcamp gets himself out of the Keys and into the Pac NW.

    so you left in 1960 (none / 0) (#65)
    by ZtoA on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:55:37 AM EST
    In 1961 Arlene Schnitzer started Portland's first contemporary art gallery - the Fountain Gallery. The NW was just starting to establish that it existed in it's own right in the contemporary art world. That gallery closed before I moved to PDX in 1989 but it is legend here.

    Woodside/Braseth gallery did the same thing in Seattle.

    Growth was steady since then and in the last 10-15 years the arts in the NW have simply exploded. In the 70s Chihuly established Pilchuck in Seattle which is as "on the map" for glass as Lino Tagliapietra and other venetian glass master artists.

    It used to be that NW artists had NYC envy. But in the last couple of years I've had several artist acquaintances in NYC say that they actually wish they lived in PDX. NYC is at the top of the art food chain (used to be so exclusively but now several other cities are contenders) and they feel stuck - cannot lower their prices to be able to show here.

    Fish, you sure made a big leap (do fish leap?) to Fla. Sounds pretty great too.


    ZtoA, I did make a 40 year stop in Aspen... (none / 0) (#79)
    by fishcamp on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 01:06:06 PM EST
    before moving to the keys for fishing and warmth.  

    Oh I see, (none / 0) (#122)
    by ZtoA on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 04:07:14 PM EST
    puddle jumping east.

    PBS science correspondent... (none / 0) (#5)
    by desertswine on Sun Oct 05, 2014 at 09:58:54 PM EST
    slams Fox "News" ebola coverage as an embarrassment.  And it is.

    And then (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by lentinel on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 04:14:40 AM EST
    there's PBS's promotion of the war in Iraq, and the war in Iraq...

    I loved the (none / 0) (#37)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 09:14:30 AM EST
    last 2 minutes of that report with Dr Besser watching the healthcare workers picking up what they thought to be a dead Ebola body who turned out to be alive.

    And what do they do??? They put him right back on the street.

    It kind of made Miles choke on his words.


    Maybe (none / 0) (#38)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 09:15:40 AM EST
    he was a Zombie

    A zombie laying down on the job (none / 0) (#49)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 10:59:02 AM EST
    Of course they do sleep during the day since they work the night shift.

    Have any of you read "Gone Girl" (none / 0) (#7)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 05, 2014 at 10:43:31 PM EST
    and also seen the movie?  Assuming a person has read the book (well, listened to it) and does not care for Ben Affleck, do you recommend seeing the movie?

    Everything I have read about the movie (none / 0) (#20)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:08:28 AM EST
    has been good.  I don't "care" for Affleck but that is not a criteria I generally use for deciding on potential viewing.  I will see it.

    I thought Argo (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:10:33 AM EST
    was excellent

    Have you read the book? (none / 0) (#29)
    by oculus on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:43:05 AM EST
    Have not (none / 0) (#30)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:44:31 AM EST
    but I know the story

    Have you read: (none / 0) (#34)
    by oculus on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:54:24 AM EST
    "How to Talk About Books You Haven't Read?"

    Why would I want to do that? (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 09:01:39 AM EST
    synopses of movies (none / 0) (#36)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 09:11:18 AM EST
    are always available on line.  I often read them.  I have no problem with spoilers.

    Sometimes it is interesting to read the book and (none / 0) (#107)
    by oculus on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:25:24 PM EST
    then compare the movie to the book which is what I kept trying to do in the most recent John le Carre. But it turns out I dan pd not read that book.

    I usually end up seeing (5.00 / 2) (#113)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:35:14 PM EST
    the movie first.  Not really a plan.  But that is often the order.

    A good example is the Thomas Harris Hannibal books.  I made it a point to see the films first.  Which I liked and in some cases loved.  But the books were always orders of magnitude better.  Especially the last one.  Old, so hopefully not spoiling for anyone but the different ending in the last book and movie were major.  In the movie most everyone knows what happened. Hannibal cuts his hand off to escape and feeds brains to the cute kid on the plane.
    But in the book Clarise and Hannibal go off into the sunset together.  You can't get any more different than that.  That ending changes everything that had gone before.  I have had arguments long into the night about that ending.


    I'm much more of a reader than I am (none / 0) (#110)
    by Anne on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:30:20 PM EST
    a movie-goer, and I'm almost always disappointed in the movie if I've read the book (Julie and Julia wasn't bad in terms of book v. movie, though).

    I think it's because when I read, it's my imagination at work, and when I watch a movie, I'm watching someone else's.


    I tend to view (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by sj on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 04:22:10 PM EST
    Movies and books as two different art forms and try not to compare one to the other. I think that way when it comes to live vs. recorded music, also.

    Having climbed that artsy-f@rtsy high horse, I should add that reading the book first will always provide context for the movie version -- if I happen to read it first.


    That too (none / 0) (#114)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:35:58 PM EST
    "The Bridges of Madison County." (none / 0) (#119)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:51:35 PM EST
    Now, there was one instance where Clint Eastwood's 1996 film was actually much better than Robert James Waller's original book, which I found to be the literary equivalent of a 1-lb. block of Velveeta. Eastwood stripped away all of Waller's weepy and overwrought claptrap to find at its heart an otherwise simple and elegant love story.

    Love Story? (none / 0) (#123)
    by CoralGables on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 04:09:11 PM EST
    is that what we call it now when someone gets laid on the kitchen table by the first person to come down the street, when their spouse takes the kids out of town for the weekend?

    Clint Eastwood shouldn't have taken (none / 0) (#125)
    by oculus on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 04:23:19 PM EST
    his shirt off.

    You make it sound like ... (none / 0) (#127)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 04:28:09 PM EST
    ... it was "Looking for Mr. Goodbar." Yes, it was a love story.

    Not close to "Goodbar" (none / 0) (#151)
    by CoralGables on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:08:00 PM EST
    In "Looking for Mr. Goodbar" the character was single.

    Well, when you put it THAT way... (none / 0) (#156)
    by ruffian on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:24:32 PM EST
    The movie is terrific. (none / 0) (#44)
    by Green26 on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 09:39:42 AM EST
    Affleck is good in it. My wife had read the book, but still enjoyed the movie very much. I would highly recommend the movie.

    No, I don't recommend it. (none / 0) (#47)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 10:42:21 AM EST
    We saw "Gone Girl" yesterday. The first half was engrossing, but then the so-called plot twist was so laughably far-fetched and contrived as to render the rest of the film completely unbelievable from my standpoint. Then the ending -- which unfolded over at least 20 minutes (the film is about 2.5 hours long) -- led to a decision on Ben Affleck's character's part that was so mind-numbingly silly and counterintuitive as to leave both The Spouse and I to ask each other afterward, "Then what was the whole point?"

    I'm willing to suspend my disbelief in a movie theater, as long as my intelligence isn't insulted. The closest cinematic analogy I can offer is "Basic Instinct," another stylish and widely praised film with good actors and otherwise crisp dialogue that went so off-the-rails in terms of plot that it also left a very bad taste in my mouth. So, two big thumbs down from us. Save yourself $8 to $10 and watch it on Netflix six months hence.



    Donald (none / 0) (#48)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 10:54:09 AM EST
    How can you malign the movie that is responsible for the description "bunny boiler"



    omg (none / 0) (#80)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 01:06:44 PM EST
    Bunny Boiler is from Fatal Attraction.

    No excuses.  I grovel in mortification.


    LOL! (none / 0) (#89)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 01:45:37 PM EST
    I didn't like "Fatal Attraction," either. Naughty boy meets bad, bad girl, and is saved by Mommy-figure. The over-the-top performance by Glenn Close -- "I will not be ignored!" -- is worth watching for its camp sensibility but overall, I found that film itself to be grossly overrated.

    Did you read the book? (none / 0) (#51)
    by Anne on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:00:03 AM EST
    I can see where, if you hadn't read the book, the translation of the plot of the book could suffer in movie form.

    I just finished the book last week, and have to say that I wasn't that crazy about how it ended, but overall, I thought it was good.  It sounds like the movie's ending was true to the book's - and that may be because Gillian Flynn also wrote the screenplay.  Makes me think the movie is true to the book, but again - some elements of books don't translate well to movies, especially books where a lot of what is going on is happening in someone's thoughts.

    Twists and turns, and a lot of moments of thinking you know what's going on and then finding out you don't.  As Affleck said about it on Jimmy Fallon the other night, there's a point where you realize you don't like either of the main characters all that much.  I would amend that to say there's a point where you realize you may not like ANY of the characters very much, and yet you have been drawn into a relationship that works and doesn't work and isn't even what either of the characters think it is at any point along the way.

    Not sure that translates well to the big screen, but we'll see.


    No, I didn't read the book. (none / 0) (#94)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 02:17:30 PM EST
    My mother did, and she thought it was weird and creepy, and so she declined to see the movie with us. I have no way of knowing how different the book is from the film, but after seeing the film, I've really no desire to read it.

    Ironically, I thought the best performances in the film were in two supporting roles -- Carrie Coons as Nick Dunne's enabling but increasingly exasperated twin sister Margo, and Tyler Perry (!!!) as Tanner Bolt, Dunne's confident, Johnny-Cochran-like defense counsel. But the talents of Patrick Fugit and Kim Dickens were mostly wasted in their two-dimensional and entirely predictable roles as the police detectives investigating Amy's disappearance.

    Neil Patrick Harris did a decent job as Amy Dunne's old high school flame, and Rosamund Pike gave it her best shot as Amy. But as the film progressed, I thought Amy's motivations became so increasingly far-fetched as to be unbelievable, thus rendering Pike's task a rather thankless one.

    As for Ben Affleck (Nick Dunne), I'd really like to see him spend more time in the future behind the camera, where I think his talent really lies, than in front of it. Now, I don't think he's a bad actor by any means. But that said, I find him not unlike fellow actor-director Clint Eastwood, in that whenever he's onscreen, I'm quite conscious that I'm watching Ben Affleck playing variations of himself.



    Donald, had you already read the book? (none / 0) (#52)
    by ruffian on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:01:07 AM EST
    The plot twist int he middle will be no surprise, but I heard the ending of the movie was different than the book. Just wondering if you can compare the two, without giving too much away for those that have not seen or read.

    No one i know liked the ending of the book.


    It was the plot twist itself ... (none / 0) (#99)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 02:50:01 PM EST
    ... that killed the film for me. There I was, thinking that I'm watching a noir-ish mystery / thriller, only to jarringly discover otherwise. I mean, why would someone who was so smart go through all that considerable trouble, rather than simply walk away? At that point, the movie just became silly, and nothing the main characters did afterward was even remotely believable to me.

    One of the reviews I read said that (none / 0) (#186)
    by ruffian on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 06:51:29 PM EST
    There was not enough 'Amy' in the movie, and that the plot twist without more of Amy's voice was harder to buy than in the book. The movie apparently left out a lot of her more troubled past.

    It has been a while since I listened to the book, but I don't remember wanting to throw my device across the room until the very end. Even so, I enjoyed the ride and will see the movie when I get a chance.


    Very long audio book. I can't (none / 0) (#187)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 07:26:39 PM EST
    imagine actually reading it. Life is too short.

    I realized the other day that one of (none / 0) (#190)
    by Anne on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 10:26:31 PM EST
    the nice things about an e-reader is that you don't get daunted by the thickness of the actual book.  I can see on my Nook that I'm on page 72 of 485, but what I'm holding in my hand is maybe an inch thick, not 3 - so I'm not thinking, "oh, I'll never get through this thing!"  I just read until it ends.

    On the other hand, paging back to check on something I read earlier is weirder and more cumbersome than trying to find it on the Nook.  And I do like the feel of real paper - it's why I prefer my newspaper in paper form - and weirdly, when I'm really into a book I'm reading off the Nook, I occasionally find myself trying to turn the "page," and remembering I can't do that!

    The Nook is great for vacations - not having to lug around a bag of books for a week is kinda nice.  


    Good Point (none / 0) (#55)
    by Slado on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:13:02 AM EST
    Nothing is more annoying to me then a great book or movie that doesn't end well.

    For me personally it wipes out much of the good that came before it.

    It's why the Soprano's went down a peg for me and why Frasier did as well.   Those are TV series and harder to end but you get the point.

    Sometimes when I'm reading a great book and I approach the end I get worried that the author isn't working toward a satisfying ending.   Sometimes I'm presently surprised but often I'm let down.

    I do not appreciate open ended finishes that supposedly lead the reader to wonder and speculate on their own and I especially hate ham handed finishes were its obvious the writer wrote themselves into a corner.


    A few years back (none / 0) (#60)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:32:19 AM EST
    i read "the ruins" the same time as a coworker and I remember saying before the end "I hate all these people, I hope they all die"
    Which, of course, in the book they did.  Which was actually fine, obviously, by me.  But I remember telling him it would never be made into a Hollywood movie like that.  Sure enough, in the film version one survives.

    Great book btw.  The same guy who wrote "a simple plan".  
    Meh movie.  IMO.


    The ending wasn't ham-handed. (none / 0) (#96)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 02:36:12 PM EST
    Rather, it was overly drawn out to the point of laborious. And given that Affleck's character Nick Dunne had to endure the equivalent of "Mr. Toad's Wild Ride" for the previous two hours, I found the film's climax to be both inexplicable and ludicrous. I don't want to spoil the film for people who haven't seen it, so I won't go any further than to say that if you do see it, I think you'll quickly get what I mean.

    Only having read the book, I can tell you (none / 0) (#100)
    by Anne on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 02:50:57 PM EST
    that, after the intricate plot-lines of the previous 400+ pages, and the extensive journey through the minds of the main characters, the ending was unsatisfyingly simple - and yet missing an actual ending - as if the author was as sick of Nick and Amy at that point as the reader and just wanted to move on to something else.  There was a way she could have ended it that would maybe have been both simple and satisfying, but I won't offer that option so as not to spoil it for those who didn't read the book.

    Endings like that leave me feeling kind of cheated.  But I still am curious about the movie - probably will wait to see it once it hits satellite.


    I had the same reaction to the ending of (none / 0) (#103)
    by oculus on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:21:11 PM EST
    "The Goldfinch."

    Let me offer that option for you. (none / 0) (#111)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:31:35 PM EST
    I haven't yet (none / 0) (#77)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 01:02:18 PM EST
    The trailer looks very good.  

    This is one movie that ... (none / 0) (#95)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 02:21:15 PM EST
    ... bears increasingly little resemblance to its trailer as it goes along.

    Thank you for the heads up (none / 0) (#102)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:15:57 PM EST
    I can watch it during next year's hot summer Netflix.  Sounds like reading this story was a better experience.  I spend my time reading nonfiction these days.  And I should read some fiction, but then someone puts something nonfiction that I must have.

    For the record (none / 0) (#104)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:21:18 PM EST
    it is 87 and 92% on Rotten Tomatoes with about  200 reviews.  I would see it just because Fincher directed it.  He is one of my favorites.

    87 and 92%, huh? (none / 0) (#121)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 04:06:04 PM EST
    Well, there's no accounting for personal taste. I also think that David Fincher is a great director -- I absolutely loved "Seven" and "Zodiac" -- but in my estimation, "Gone Girl" was not one of his better efforts. It's like he binge-watched an entire Paul Verhoeven retrospective in one sitting, prior to taking this one on.

    Oh, well, every good director has an occasional misfire ...


    I had actually started the book ages ago, (none / 0) (#105)
    by Anne on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:21:39 PM EST
    and for whatever reason, it just didn't hold my interest at the time.  After my daughter read it, and couldn't stop talking about it, I thought I'd give it another try - and this time, I got completely sucked in.

    It's not a book that's going to change your life, but it's not mindless, either.  


    I wish I had time to (none / 0) (#106)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:23:04 PM EST
    read I've still got three books on my nook one from last summer that I need to finish.

    LOL - I probably have three or four (none / 0) (#108)
    by Anne on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:27:09 PM EST
    on mine that are in various stages of being read.  But that's kind of the beauty part - when you are in the mood, or have the time, they're right there.

    I got a new Nook Glowlight for my birthday and gave the old one to one of my daughters.  You can have up to four of them on the same account, so every book I buy is also available to her.

    Have you checked out Bookbub?  I've gotten some really cheap - even free - books for my Nook through them.  I feel less guilty about spending money on books when I could get them from the library for free!


    No (none / 0) (#117)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:43:27 PM EST
    but I have heard about it from several people but again, when you have three books that you have paid for and haven't read, it's kind of hard to get motivated to go there :)

    I recently found BookBub too (none / 0) (#159)
    by ruffian on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:33:09 PM EST
    and have gotten some great deals. A real find!

    It is easier to ignore (none / 0) (#116)
    by oculus on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:42:31 PM EST
    a downloaded ebook. Examples on my mini:  Moby Dick and Don Quixote.

    Not for me. (none / 0) (#118)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:44:20 PM EST
    I have a book or two that are hard backs and paperbacks that I still have not read. I guess they'll be there in 15 years when I retire. LOL

    Byes. That is a huge stack. (none / 0) (#120)
    by oculus on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:52:40 PM EST
    I would never read them (none / 0) (#144)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:36:31 PM EST
    I still must buy the tree killing book.  I can do audio books when driving. If I am home though and I start to clean house listening to an audio book I will stop hearing it in the middle of some chores.  Music is different though.

    I can relate to the term (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by ZtoA on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 10:01:46 PM EST
    "tree killing book" being from the forested NW. I read all of my news and long articles online on my laptop. I have the perfect glasses to use for that.

    But I have a love/hate relationship to newspapers. I'll subscribe online, but not to the paper ones which I seem to hate the feel of. I do, however love the way they look. The design is so cool. I have a book of NYT front pages from the last 100 years and like seeing how the visual design has changed over the years.


    A book in my hands and a cup of tea (none / 0) (#168)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 09:52:15 AM EST
    That is embedded in my programming.  It is also almost the only time I drink hot tea.  When I was a kid my cousins used to swap books with me in late grade school, and they all drank hot tea.  Very ritualistic about their tea, the making of it, water a perfect temp, fighting over bags of different flavors. They marked me :). Hot tea is required for engrossing reading.

    There is a tactile element (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 10:07:46 AM EST
    of reading a book that a tablet can never have.  For me.  I really hope some synthetic material can be substituted for paper that will at least preserve that experience.  If not the smell.  Nothing smells like a book.

    Yes! I am not normally one to wax nostagic (5.00 / 2) (#175)
    by ruffian on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 11:49:07 AM EST
    since I do love the convenience of audiobooks and ebooks, but last night I cracked open an old book and wham! That smell and feel just hit me and it was wonderful. Nothing comes close for relaxing before bedtime.

    I'm finally starting to have the time to (none / 0) (#8)
    by ZtoA on Sun Oct 05, 2014 at 10:52:32 PM EST
    catch up on earlier threads this week. Anne, I just replied to you on last friday night open thread.

    and some were deleted (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 02:44:54 AM EST
    as just insults to each other.

    Good call J (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by ZtoA on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 10:59:09 AM EST
    I don't mind my comments being deleted when they are insulting to others.  

    But if some commenter starts to bully me or drive me off, I will fight back.


    Please note Anne has replied to (none / 0) (#10)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 05, 2014 at 11:20:14 PM EST
    your reply to her.

    Translation: (2.67 / 3) (#16)
    by Anne on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 07:03:25 AM EST
    "Definite trouble potential and I want a front-row seat."

    You really don't have anything to say, do you?  Or apparently much to do.


    Whatever happened to freedom of speech? (5.00 / 2) (#75)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 01:00:36 PM EST
    Anne is free to speak. Me too. (none / 0) (#150)
    by oculus on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:07:55 PM EST
    Congrats (none / 0) (#13)
    by lentinel on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 04:11:37 AM EST
    to Anne and others rooting for a Baltimore victory.

    Hey, thanks, lentinel! (none / 0) (#15)
    by Anne on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 06:34:43 AM EST
    What a ride it's been so far - honestly, I'm not sure anyone got any work done in the office on Friday - what a comeback win!

    Bit of a nail-biter yesterday, but the Orioles did what they've been doing all along, buck made a gutsy decision to put the go-ahead run on base, and the rest, as they say, is history.

    And now, thanks to the Royals' sweep of the Angels, we have home field advantage in the ALCS, and now we just have to wait until Friday for Game 1.


    Perhaps we will have an (none / 0) (#56)
    by nycstray on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:17:01 AM EST
    orange and black series this year?

    I was thinking that the other day, when (none / 0) (#63)
    by Anne on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:37:10 AM EST
    I realized that orange and black on the baseball diamond says "Orioles" to me, and if we should be lucky to get to the Series, and the SF Giants do, too, all that orange and black on both sides may get a little confusing for fans of either team.

    I'll take the confusion, though!

    I was crazy enough to stay up til the end of the Giants/Nationals 18-inning marathon the other night...lordy.  Those kinds of games can take a toll on players, especially the Nats, who really needed to win that game to avoid going into SF down two games.


    I was at a wedding during the marathon (none / 0) (#66)
    by nycstray on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 12:22:28 PM EST
    I left for my house right when the game started and all through the wedding/reception kept getting updates on the sly from the guys (they were not paying attention to the toasts during the 16th inning, lol!~)

    October IS Orange and Black month 'round here, ya know? ;) I think it would be fun :D


    I was at a wedding during game six (none / 0) (#76)
    by oculus on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 01:01:07 PM EST
    of the Gisnts/Angels WS. Lots of border patrol there as the groom was in the Border Patrol. One of them had a radio in his jacket pocket and a wire to his ear. He was our go-to guy.

    Now THAT was a classic WS game. (none / 0) (#101)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:14:01 PM EST
    Who would've ever predicted that the Giants' vaunted bullpen -- which had been so overpowering throughout the 2002 regular season and postseason up to that point -- would suffer a catastrophic meltdown and blow a 5-0 lead, only a few outs away from winning a world championship?

    Angels fans love to credit their fabled "Rally Monkey" for the team's storied comeback, tongue-in-cheek of course. But in obvious retrospect, it's clear that San Francisco manager Dusty Baker pulled starting pitcher Russ Ortiz too early and turned to his closers one too many times. There was simply no gas left in the bullpen's tank, and Anaheim's bats unloaded on them.



    Slado (none / 0) (#19)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:05:47 AM EST
    I liked the strain finale a lot.  Great sequence with the Old Ones.  The addition to the new wrinkle of the good(?) vampires is a great way to put some anticipation into season two.
    I loved-
    "If we wake them up we will have to feed them.  And you wouldn't like that"

    Agreed (none / 0) (#58)
    by Slado on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:21:26 AM EST
    Also keep in mind there is no such thing as "good" vampire in this series.  

    "The Master" has gone off the rails from the centuries old agreement between the originals and human beings.  Not an arrangement made consciously by humans mind you but an arrangement with society as a whole and ultimately the ultimate master, God.

    Don't woryy, we won't get biblical or anything but you must know that these original beings originate from the start of time and the start of mankinds relationship with the supernatural or God.

    Anyway, they have selfish and evil motives but they bring a balance to life for mankind and this disruption by the Master is bad for buisness if you will.

    You will learn to love "Quinlan" who is the guy beating up Gus so he can meet the other original Vampires.    He has an awesome back story and I'm excited to learn about it.   It's very, very old so it will be interesting to see if they can show it since it can't be shot in NYC.   The good job they did regarding the old man's back story has me hopeful that it will be well done.

    Next years season is going to have to step it up production wise because they won't be able to use NYC exclusively and will have to up the sets and production value.

    I thought the special effects of the Master escaping were excellent and the make up for the original vampires and Quinlan were also well done.   I'm willing to overlook the face of the Master now.

    Excellent end to the season and per my post in a previous thread a great ending trumps any faults along the way as opposed to a great season ending poorly.

    I am enjoying the small differences in plot which I'll be happy to explain without spoilers if you want.  They are well done and to my point of view improvements that the author probably wanted to make after finishing the book.  

    I will end by saying it will get much worse before it gets better but you already knew that.


    *excellent* (none / 0) (#61)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:33:15 AM EST
    That explains it (none / 0) (#22)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:19:59 AM EST
    cdc.gov on Ebola

    "Ebola virus is detected in blood only after the onset of symptoms, usually fever. It may take up to 3 days after symptoms appear for the virus to reach detectable levels. Virus is generally detectable by real-time RT-PCR from 3-10 days after symptoms appear."

    "Specimens ideally should be taken when a symptomatic patient reports to a healthcare facility and is suspected of having an Ebola exposure. However, if the onset of symptoms is (less than) 3 days, a later specimen may be needed to completely rule-out Ebola virus, if the first specimen tests negative."

    Have you seen (none / 0) (#23)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:24:12 AM EST
    this video?
    You may find him a kindred spirit

    Now that is panic -- (none / 0) (#27)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:38:52 AM EST
    a vaccine for a disease that the CDC says can be contained and treated and wiped out by just good clinical practices -- and avoidance of bushmeat.

    But that is what the CDC is talking about rather than developing the ZMapp cure.


    So (none / 0) (#32)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:50:50 AM EST
    you are not on board with the Zombie thing?

    I was really hoping for Zombies.


    Zombies??? (none / 0) (#39)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 09:19:38 AM EST
    I think you have to fly to West Africa for that -- atleast for now.

    3 days of contagion (none / 0) (#57)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:19:59 AM EST
    Here is what the CDC says about Ebola and has been corroborated by the Duncan case:

    Someone can contract Ebola virus on day 1 -- in Duncan's case on September 15th.

    2 to 21 days later [usually 7-9 days] the symptoms will begin but the virus still remains hidden in the blood from health professionals for another 3 days.

    Of course now that the carrier is symptomatic they are contagious and a danger to others, but there is still no way for a blood test to determine for sure if they have Ebola for another 3 days.

    That's why Duncan was released by the hospital on the 24th and came back in on the 26th -- the 3 day waiting period for it to show up in the blood.

    That's why Ebola is so dangerous. It's contagious for 3 days before anyone can even have a chance of identifying it.


    Panetta criticizes Obama - says he's lost his way (none / 0) (#43)
    by Green26 on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 09:36:55 AM EST
    "He said as well that by not pressing the Iraqi government to leave more U.S. troops in the country, he "created a vacuum in terms of the ability of that country to better protect itself, and it's out of that vacuum that ISIS began to breed,""

    "He said Obama has a "frustrating reticence to engage his opponents and rally support for his cause" and too frequently "relies on the logic of a law professor rather than the passion of a leader." Sometimes, he told USA Today's Susan Page, Obama "avoids the battle, complains, and misses opportunities."

    "Panetta, in the interview, said he thought Obama got "so discouraged by the process" that he retreats from a fight."

    Washington Post

    Guess everyone is (5.00 / 3) (#54)
    by KeysDan on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:09:03 AM EST
    entitled to change his mind, particularly, when pedaling his book.   Secretary of Defense Panetta, November 15, 2011.

    Two thoughts.... (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by lentinel on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 01:24:05 PM EST
    One is, as you say, Panetta is pedaling a book.
    He's getting a headline or two...
    He wouldn't get that by simply praising his former boss.
    Trash talk is good for business.

    But, secondly, when Panetta says that Obama has a

    "frustrating reticence to engage his opponents and rally support for his cause"

    he is making an unwarranted assumption, imo.
    That is, that Obama has some "cause" for which he is reticent to engage his opponents.
    After all this time, it seems apparent to me that he has no particular cause. He says some things sometimes that would appear to be cause-worthy, but then lets it dangle in the wind. So, maybe it's just a fleeting thought rather than a "cause".

    Example: John Oliver broadcast an interview with Obama - made around 2004 - in which he details the complete futility and failure of the embargo on Cuba. He also articulated that it harms the innocent. But that was obviously not a cause. Just a thought. A good one, but that's about it.

    Some would blame his failures to fight tooth and nail for things that we on the left - or some of us on the left - would like him to fight for - on those recalcitrant republicans... but I have long ago concluded that he just isn't that interested or passionate about following an agenda that is radically different than his predecessor.


    He has (5.00 / 4) (#91)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 02:02:10 PM EST
    one political cause and passion that I've seen and it's getting himself elected. I can't think of one issue that he gets passionate about when it comes to governing. The only time I have ever seen him passionate is when talking about Michele and his daughters.

    I guess (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by lentinel on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:32:00 PM EST
    you can call it "passionate", but it was really off the charts when he "joked" about sending predator drones to kill the Jonas Brothers if they "got any ideas" about Sasha and Malia...

    He adds that they'd "never see it coming".

    And the audience laughs appreciatively.


    "Not legitimate" (none / 0) (#97)
    by jbindc on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 02:45:46 PM EST
    Well (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 01:59:44 PM EST
    the people around here at TL have been pretty vocal in their agreement with paragraph number two. That is one problem many of us have had with him from the beginning.

    Yup. Just got sick of saying it (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by ruffian on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:31:18 PM EST
    so I stopped.  

    Of course, its just my opinion, but, (none / 0) (#134)
    by NYShooter on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 06:03:25 PM EST
    Panetta has always come across as a slippery lightweight to me. He showed the same loyalty, and respect for privacy, to Bill Clinton at the time that Clinton desperately needed friends.

    I'm not talking about policy things, or, things that the general public should know. I'm talking about things that could be discussed in private rather than in the media.

    Panetta and Joe Lieberman, two "friends" no President needs.


    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by sj on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 06:19:47 PM EST
    Agreeing with what you say about Panetta. Also agreeing with Ga6thDem.

    Oh, absolutely (none / 0) (#138)
    by NYShooter on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 06:26:42 PM EST
    I didn't at all mean to distract from Ga6thDem's comment. His observation is, pretty much, a give around here. And, "here," includes me.

    Its just that hearing (seeing, reading) Panetta's name elicits a visceral reaction from me (as does Lieberman's) that I just can't ignore.


    Great weather in the Keys (none / 0) (#59)
    by ragebot on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:25:20 AM EST
    This weekend was just super as a weak cold/cool front passed through.  Had to break out a light blanket to sleep under.  Looks like a great year for enjoyable weather here, and as an added bonus no hurricanes.

    Love living on my boat in the Keys.  Life is good.

    Ragebot I'm sure you know (none / 0) (#163)
    by fishcamp on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 05:49:04 AM EST
    about the extremely high tides this week.  At least this time they will be during the morning daylight hours so you can see what's going on with your anchors and lines.  We will also have a lunar eclipse of the "blood moon."  Very cool events and I do hope it is cooler and not rainy so we can see the eclipse.

    Isn't that lunar eclipse (none / 0) (#176)
    by ZtoA on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 11:57:46 AM EST
    "scheduled" for tomorrow the 8th? That would be so cool to see.

    3:25AM - 4:25AM tonight. (none / 0) (#180)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 12:57:16 PM EST
    That is the early AM of the 8th.

    yep, about the time my cats (none / 0) (#181)
    by fishcamp on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 02:41:02 PM EST
    want both in and out at the same time so I may be seeing the lunar eclipse nekkidy peckidy...

    Still wondering if the Supremes will settle this (none / 0) (#64)
    by ragebot on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:48:57 AM EST

    Seems obvious there is, and will continue to be, a split in the lower courts.  If the issue is not settled does this mean in come states Obamacare tax credits will be granted and in other states tax credits will not be granted.

    As of now, there is no split among the courts (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Peter G on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 12:27:25 PM EST
    that are only one level below the Supreme Court (that is, the U.S. Courts of Appeals).  That's where a split matters to the Supremes. You are referring to a challenge to the federal exchange, based on an isolated wording error in the ACA.  No appellate court has issued a final ruling in favor of the challengers on that argument, so far.  And I very much doubt that any of them will.

    The full DC Court of Appeals (none / 0) (#71)
    by jbindc on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 12:36:19 PM EST
    Will probably hear the case next spring sometime, at least, according to this law firm's website.

    The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has vacated the 2-1 panel decision issued July 22, 2014, in Halbig v. Burwell, which struck down the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Rule providing for Affordable Care Act (ACA) premium tax credits to be available to lower income exchange customers, regardless of their state of residence.  The plaintiffs' brief is due October 3, 2014, and the government's opposing brief is due a month later on November 3, 2014, to precede oral arguments on December 17, 2014.  It is likely that the full D.C. Circuit would not render its opinion before mid- to late Spring 2015.  This has the effect of preserving the status quo with respect to the availability of premium tax credits, at least until the full D.C. Circuit renders its decision.

    Meanwhile, the plaintiffs have sought review by the Supreme Court of the United States in King v. Burwell, Halbig's sister case in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld that same IRS Rule.  The Clerk of the Supreme Court has granted the government an extension until October 3, 2014, to respond to the petition for certiorari.  The plaintiffs have urged the highest court render its decision as quickly as possible to resolve the circuit split.  If the Supreme Court accepts King for review before mid-January, it could issue a ruling in the current term, which is scheduled to end in late June 2015.

    The law firm linked to (none / 0) (#109)
    by ragebot on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:27:51 PM EST
    has filed a friend of the court brief in favor of continuing the IRS ruling, so probably favors dragging things out as long as possible.

    Other sites including VC have advanced the position that there probably will be a split and even without a split the SC could take the case.  Problem is the longer this remains unsettled the greater the mess of collecting IRS granted relief.

    As a rule the IRS has been tight fisted in granting relief.  If they are allowed to grant the benefits in this case it is probable other cases on other IRS relief will be brought.

    Most folks have the idea the IRS tries to get more money not give it away, and in this case it seems to be just the opposite.


    I wasn't (none / 0) (#115)
    by jbindc on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 03:38:02 PM EST
    worried about the political bent of the law firm - I just thought it was a good synopsis of what was going on.

    Taste of Africa (none / 0) (#83)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 01:16:26 PM EST
    Taste of Africa

    A Texas magazine has published a cover emblazoned with the words 'Taste Of Africa Comes To Dallas!' - just days before a Liberian man became America's first Ebola case in the state.

    Oh My --

    Africa is a vast continent ... (5.00 / 2) (#126)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 04:23:59 PM EST
    ... comprised of 58 very different countries, and Liberia occupies only a small corner in west Africa. I'd really like to think that most people are intelligent creatures who understand that, and can thus avoid conflating a local food festival celebrating that continent with a single viral infection.

    Or should we simply take The Daily Mail's silly analogy to its logical conclusion, and also judge the entirety of Texas on the basis of one very poorly managed ammonium nitrate fertilizer plant?



    Bushmeat (none / 0) (#145)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:59:05 PM EST
    Who knows???

    Maybe it was the recipe for West African Barbecued Bushmeat or that Liberian delicacy  Floating Bat Soup that pushed them over the edge.


    When we were in Africa, ... (5.00 / 2) (#147)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 10:17:07 PM EST
    ... we definitely tried the local fare. I ate kudu (a large antelope), gazelle, impala, ostrich and crocodile. The meat of the range animals tended to be very lean and not as tasty as beef, but it wasn't bad. I did like the crocodile.

    I've never been to west Africa, except for Morocco. I've been wanting to go, but for many years now the region has just been too unstable politically to chance it. We were visiting in Thailand many years ago when a military coup took place and got stuck there for two extra days before they re-opened Bangkok airport for foreigners to leave, and that cured me of going someplace where there's known to be unrest. We were lucky in that we went to Tunisia and Egypt in 1999, well before all the recent turmoil.



    There's bad taste, and, (none / 0) (#136)
    by NYShooter on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 06:14:01 PM EST
    then there's ignorance of a level that leaves one breathless:

    NFL's Jacksonville Jaguars apologize for Ebola prank by mascot

    Oct 6 (Reuters) - The National Football League's Jacksonville Jaguars apologized on Monday after their mascot used the Ebola epidemic to taunt fans of the Pittsburgh Steelers.

    The mascot, Jaxson DeVille, held up a handwritten sign to the crowd that read "TOWELS CARRY EBOLA" while carrying a yellow "Terrible Towel" in his right hand.


    I truly fear for our future.

    That make (none / 0) (#140)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 07:31:25 PM EST
    me cringe and I could very well see it happening in my area. Grrrr...

    While I'm not a Pats fan (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by nycstray on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 08:10:49 PM EST
    I have to give them credit for this. Interesting contrast of teams this weekend . . .

    Ah yes, the Patriots, who ... (none / 0) (#148)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 10:25:03 PM EST
    ... introduced Aaron Hernandez to the local community. How'd that turn out? That aside, that was a very nice gesture on the part of the Patriots' cheerleaders. When times are tough, just knowing that people are thinking of you does help.

    Hey captain howdy (none / 0) (#149)
    by ZtoA on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:02:03 PM EST
    I mentioned you in a comment from the friday open thread. It said:

    It would be great if captain howdy, who is the master of production knowledge and good movies and TV started watching Grimm and joined the Grimm Cave discussions (which I hope will pop up on TV open threads.

    I forgot to end the parenthesis. I'm drinking a glass of Crappola wine..... I mean Coppola wine (the cab, which is actually quite good). That's my excuse.

    And then, after that Howdy, (none / 0) (#157)
    by ruffian on Mon Oct 06, 2014 at 11:28:21 PM EST
    please take a look at what Masterpiece Mystery has done with the recording of Inspector Lewis. Seems they have gone to some high def digital process...and no one wants to see Inspector Lewis in that much detail. Only Benedict Cumberbatch can stand that. Please bring back the slightly blurry film and golden Oxford tone of the Morse years.  

    HA (none / 0) (#167)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 08:17:56 AM EST
    Grimm is on my list.  Can I have fun without starting at the beginning.  I am definitely going to need something to do until next year when all the good stuff comes back.

    Sad fact of high definition.  Sometimes you don't want to be that close.


    High def is one of the many reasons (none / 0) (#177)
    by ZtoA on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 12:01:31 PM EST
    I still have a TV from the 90s and also do not go to see movies on the big screen. They are just too much for me visually. When there is some close up I get really bothered. In real reality the noses are at least 10' tall, and the pores are the size of a fist. And the high def TVs look pixilated to me.

    Occulus, this looks so simple (none / 0) (#160)
    by ZtoA on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 02:47:09 AM EST
    these fingers, it looks so "easy". But the music is so great and transcendent.


    tho not my 100% fav recording (none / 0) (#161)
    by ZtoA on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 03:09:50 AM EST
     of this piece, but the fingers are good. It is not a bad recording tho, IMO.

    There is nothing - no recording ever - that can compare to hearing someone play this in real life !!

    Here's another. guitar.

     slow guitar

    common stupid laptop.... work properly.. WTF is wrong with you?...

    OK my computer will not work properly. but there's more if one googles couperin mysterious barracades.


    come on (none / 0) (#162)
    by ZtoA on Tue Oct 07, 2014 at 03:10:46 AM EST