Saturday Open Thread

Our last open thread is full, so here's another one. All topics welcome.

< Saturday Morning ISIS Update | 9th Circuit Stays Execution Due To Drug Cocktail Secrecy >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    From this morning's (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by Angel on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 07:37:46 AM EST
    New York Times

    KIEV, Ukraine -- The Ukrainian government accused Russian-backed insurgents on Saturday of blocking recovery workers from the crash site of Malaysia Airlines 17, which was shot down by a missile on Thursday, and of trying to destroy evidence surrounding the attack.

    "The Russian-led terrorists are preventing access of the international community and foreign governments to the location where the Malaysia Airlines airplane crashed on July 17 and are obstructing the launch of an investigation," the government's statement said.

    The government said that it had information that 38 bodies were taken to the morgue in Donetsk, a regional capital that is a rebel stronghold.
    Continue reading the main story
    Related Coverage

    Bodies remained Friday at the site in eastern Ukraine. Armed rebels have prevented monitors from gaining full access to the area.

    We'll probably never get the truth of what happened.  

    Reports this morning (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 08:10:20 AM EST
    Of credit cards of victims being used locally since the crash.

    Wow. The disrespect for these people and their (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by Angel on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 08:18:21 AM EST
    families and loved ones is astounding.  

    Looters stole cash (none / 0) (#5)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 08:27:42 AM EST
    And since armed rebels (none / 0) (#6)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 08:36:37 AM EST
    Are preventing anyone from getting to the site it's not hard to imagine who did it.  It ain't local farmers.

    That is ghoulish (none / 0) (#12)
    by MKS on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 09:04:22 AM EST
    You just have to avert your eyes with something like that.

    All unsupported claims: (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Robot Porter on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 08:40:52 AM EST
    "... the government accused ..."

    "... the government said ..."

    "... the government said it had information that ..."

    It's amazing how provocative an article can seem without including a single verifiable fact.

    And look at this:

    At a news conference in Kiev on Saturday, Andriy Lysenko, a spokesman for Ukraine's national Defense and Security Council, said he could not provide information about the crash scene, because "terrorists" were blocking the government's access.

    So, one could assume, all of these claims are a way the government is using of avoiding providing information about the crash scene.


    I would love to hear why (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 09:00:49 AM EST
    You think the government would do that.  
    And at least two thing are verifiable.  Inspectors were shot at and told to leave the site.  And looting is happening.  Unless you think some passengers survived and are using their credit cards.

    Seriously?!? (none / 0) (#16)
    by Robot Porter on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 10:10:11 AM EST
    You see no way Ukraine can benefit from this?


    ::shakes head in dismay::


    I never said that (none / 0) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 10:14:11 AM EST
    I said why would they not be forthcoming if they could since everything points to them not being involved.  The area is not under their controll.  Do you not under stand that?  
    What are they supposed to say?

    Actually, I'd ask why ... (none / 0) (#22)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 10:57:27 AM EST
    ... you are under the assumption that the Ukrainian government IS behaving in the manner you've described, as though your cynicism renders it a fact.

    I'm not .... (5.00 / 3) (#26)
    by Robot Porter on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 11:10:06 AM EST
    I'm just pointing out the article is all claims, no facts.

    That's the important point.

    Because people are treating it as if the claims are facts.

    Also NYT includes this:

    Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, which was shot down by a missile on Thursday

    That's not a verified fact.

    When it comes to matters of war and peace, you have to push the propaganda aside and look for the facts.

    Too many wars have been started or expanded based on hyped-up incidents just like this one.


    It would be.... (none / 0) (#119)
    by unitron on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 07:54:44 AM EST
    ...an incredible co-incidence if something other than a ground to air missile caused the plane to come apart in mid-air in that particular location where the separatists have been downing Ukrainian transport planes recently.

    But just for the sake of discussion, let's say that the Ukraine was responsible, out to frame the rebels and the Russians.

    Wouldn't that still have required a missile?


    Irrelevant. (none / 0) (#135)
    by Robot Porter on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 10:30:33 AM EST
    Newspapers are not supposed to make definitive statements without clear, demonstrable supporting evidence.

    That's the point. We don't care about this point. We might as well just forget about journalism entirely.

    All we know right now is a plane crashed in Ukraine. Everything else is a conspiracy theory.


    Must (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 01:30:33 PM EST
    Must find news source (stupid iPad) (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 01:32:48 PM EST
    I'm watching (none / 0) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 11:13:49 AM EST
    The Wasp Woman

    Yes, this is a war zone, (5.00 / 3) (#24)
    by KeysDan on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 11:07:08 AM EST
    and it should not be surprising if  this tragedy was subject to the axion "never let a crisis go to waste."   Although this tragedy occurred only a few days ago, in the steppes of the Ukraine, the McCains and Lindseys of the world believe they have the uncanny ability to match the fingerprints on the fuselage to Putin.  Who needs forensics.  And, who cares of consequences.

    The US need not start bombing (militarily or economically) something or someone today.  Perhaps, we can wait a bit. Maybe, tomorrow. This was a Malaysian carrier that departed from the Netherlands destined for Malaysia, flying over European airspace.  Prime Minister Rutte of the Netherlands, yesterday, was not yet convinced of anything: "it seems MH17 was shot down, but we have no exact information on what caused the disaster,: he said--trying to maneuver for space between Russia and his country's business interests.

     Malaysia might have followed China Airlines (Taiwan) and avoided flying over all of Ukraine since April 6, or, Korean Airlines and Asiana Airlines that have not flown through Ukrainian air space since March 3. It seems irresponsible to restrict altitude to 32,000 feet and think the flight would be safe at 33,000 feet.  But, there is fuel to think about, after all.

    Putin has made a big mistake in Ukraine, deceiving himself after the ease of Crimea.  But, he has a tiger by the tail in eastern Ukraine.  Propaganda is a part of the armamentarium of war and he is on the defensive end of that battle as a result of this tragedy--by Novo Russian rebels with Russian supplied/trained missiles or even Russian missiles obtained by others or by other means.


    I think we know what happened and (none / 0) (#8)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 08:46:44 AM EST
    who is responsible.


    And they will do it again until stopped by effective pressure.


    "Effective pressure" (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Yman on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 08:53:58 AM EST
    What does that mean, specifically?

    Maybe (5.00 / 3) (#10)
    by MKS on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 08:56:31 AM EST
    But before you start a war with Russia, let's get some more evidence, okay?

    I know you believe the invasion of Iraq was a good idea because everyone just knew Saddam Hussein had WMD.   But look how that turned out.

    I doubt the Russians were directly involved in shooting down the airliner.   There is no upside to Russia in doing something like that, and I am assuming they are more competent than to make the mistake the militia made.

    But maybe the Russians were more involved than just supplying the missiles.  And, that is problem enough--just supplying the weaponry.

    But, let's not do a Cheney/Bush/Rumsfeld knee- jerk response with Russia.  It is one thing to do the cowboy thing with Iraq.  With Russia, there is more at stake.  But then again you guys have been pining away for a war with Russia/Soviet Union for decades.  


    The Russians (none / 0) (#13)
    by NYShooter on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 09:23:30 AM EST
    supplied the missiles & launchers.

    They had just begun training. Estimates on length of time required to gain proficiency......2 to 6 months.

    It seems the militants had gotten as far as locating where the "fire" button was.


    Iraq turned out well (none / 0) (#18)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 10:42:00 AM EST
    until Obama decided he didn't want to follow through.

    What Russia wants is the Ukraine back, just as if we  had lost a war and FL was no longer ours.

    Understandable and acceptable IF you are a fan of Putin.

    Effective would be all of Europe joining in the pressure.

    BTW - We were at war for decades with the Soviets.

    Just ask the people who died fighting it.


    It was called a Cold War (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by MKS on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 11:07:37 AM EST
    for reason, Jim.

    You really want to be at war, don't you?  We need to be at war all over the place.  It is how so many conservatives define their lives, get meaning in their lives--to be at war with an external villain.  They really need that from an existential standpoint.

    Iraq was always a mess and it was going to revert to form sooner or later.....


    Vietnam was cold? Korea was cold? (none / 0) (#30)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 11:18:29 AM EST
    And again you confuse defending the country with being conservative. Which is why I make a difference between being socially liberal and the "Progressives of the Left."

    I can think of many Democrats who were staunch supporters of our opposition to the Soviets. It took the Left to turn the Democratic Party into a haven for:

    Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accept the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay-and claims a halo for his dishonesty."

    ― Robert Heinlein

    We did not fight against (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by MKS on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 11:25:13 AM EST
    Soviet troops in either conflict.
    That is why it was called a Cold War vis-à-vis the Soviets....

    You want to start a shooting war with Russia--just because....

    You believe we should start a war whenever "Christians" are at risk.

    Good grief.  Even Bill Kristol would not go that far.  You and Sarah Palin.  Two peas in a pod.


    Thank GA for making my point (none / 0) (#47)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 12:37:43 PM EST
    Vietnam was a proxy war. Korea was a proxy war. All kinds of little flare ups, such as Iran in the 50's, were proxy wars.

    And the people who died are just as dead as if they were killed by Soviet troops.

    Please don't try and rewrite history while those of us who lived through it are still around.


    Iran in the 50s (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by MKS on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:08:45 PM EST
    You raise that as an example?  

    You do know we took out the Iranian government and installed the Shah as dictator?  

    Killed by Soviet Troops.  No they weren't.  NVA were not puppets of the Soviets....To them it was a nationalistic war--to get rid of Imperial Frence and Imperial U.S. forces...This is why that conflict was continually misjudged by us.

    I doubt you fought in Vietnam or Korea.....but steal the honor of others if you must.


    What you said, Jim, (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by lentinel on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 08:48:00 PM EST
    was that we were at war with the '"Soviets".

    Korea and Vietnam are not the "Soviets".


    The subject was the Cold War (none / 0) (#148)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 02:33:00 PM EST
    and the proxy wars inside of it.

    Vietnam - Korea


    Vietnam (none / 0) (#38)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 12:04:23 PM EST
    was a proxy war, Jim.

    Okay. You want a war. Would you be willing to reinstate the draft to supply the massive number of ground troups it would require for a war with Russia?


    I don't see us fighting a massive ground war (none / 0) (#49)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 12:41:17 PM EST
    unless we let ourselves get so weak Putin decides he can invade Europe and take back all the satellites the USSR lost..

    But we're trending that way.

    And yes, I have commented several times I am in favor of Universal Military Service between high school and college for two years.


    What a coincidence (none / 0) (#78)
    by Yman on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 02:03:20 PM EST
    And yes, I have commented several times I am in favor of Universal Military Service between high school and college for two years.

    I'm in favor of mandatory combat service for all the retired, armchair warriors.

    In a real war ...


    You are dodging the (none / 0) (#82)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 03:03:09 PM EST
    question but I'm not surprised.

    No, it would take a massive ground war. You saw what happened when Bush tried to Iraq on the cheap did you not? We would probably need a large draft close to what happened in WWII or Vietnam to do what you want to do.

    But nobody wants to fight a war like that. Iraq destroyed our faith in any ability to fight a war. And after Bush lied so much who is going to believe anything the GOP says?


    Don't egg Jim on (none / 0) (#57)
    by MKS on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:10:36 PM EST
    Yes, he very, very much wants a ground war with Russia.

    He would be in heaven.....

    Fortunately, few other share this delusional madness.


    True. Most of todays Napoleons and Hitlers (none / 0) (#127)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 09:10:56 AM EST
    live in locked wards.

    I actually don't see the Vietnam (none / 0) (#73)
    by MKS on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:47:56 PM EST
    War as a proxy war.  It was primarily a war of nationalistic liberation from the standpoint of the Vietnamese.   They may have accepted help from whomever, but they were primarily motivated by their own desire to get us and the French out.

    The proxy war/domino theory prism through which we saw the Vietnam War really  hurt our ability to understand what was going on.


    Speaking of countries.... (1.00 / 2) (#90)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 03:19:06 PM EST
    There was this country called South Vietnam.

    And the French were out.

    But you take the side of the communists.

    Well, that tells us where your heart is.


    Of course the French were (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by MKS on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 07:24:38 PM EST
    out....but we were not.

    So, did that make you happy to call me a communist?

    If you do not see things through the eyes of others you will always perish in stupidity.


    When you persist in distorting the facts (none / 0) (#147)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 02:31:37 PM EST
    I will persist in questioning why.

    North Vietnam attacked the South.

    That is not nationalism. That's called attacking your neighbor.


    Actually it's called... (none / 0) (#150)
    by unitron on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 02:52:19 PM EST
    ...liberating the top half of your country from colonial imperialist occupiers and then liberating the bottom half from the collaborators.

    At least I'm sure that's how they saw it.


    And how did South Vietnam see it?? (1.00 / 3) (#176)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 09:17:25 PM EST
    Perhaps we can ask all those South Vietnamese who died in attacks... who died in the re education camps...who died in the boats as they tried to flee..

    Did they have the right to choose the type of government they wanted??? Ohhhhh, I see. Only communists get to say and get what they want.



    You don't get it (5.00 / 4) (#180)
    by MKS on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 11:08:29 PM EST
    South Vietnam was a democracy?

    The proof was how hard they fought.   ARVN ran.  NVA and Viet Cong never, ever gave up.

    Jim, just go away.  Most everyone here came to conclusions about the Vietnam war decades ago.

    You are just spouting red-baiting nonsense.  This is a left leaning site.  So to recite the tired, old arguments without adding anything new is stupid and annoying.

    And, because you add nothing new, you are not going to persuade any lurkers.  

    Just take your Southern fried perspective somehwere else where it will be appreciated.


    The Viet Cong never gave up because they (1.00 / 3) (#197)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 09:52:43 AM EST
    were supported by and were mostly North Vietnam.

    That is a well understood fact.

    The South was a legitimate government and certainly more democratic than the North.

    And if your defense is that I am "red baiting" and that every one knew "decades ago" then you have no defense and are uncomfortable because you are starting to realize the buckets of blood, American military, Vietnamese and other SE Asians that the Left is responsible for.

    Here. Read what Bui Tin said in this WSJ interview.

    Question: How did Hanoi intend to defeat the Americans?

    Answer: By fighting a long war which would break their will to help South Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh said,
    "We don't need to win military victories, we only need to hit them until they give up and get out."

    Q: Was the American antiwar movement important to Hanoi's victory?

    A:  It was essential to our strategy.  Support of the war from our rear was completely secure  while the American rear was vulnerable.  Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9 a.m.  to follow the growth of the American antiwar movement.  Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda, and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence  that we should hold on  in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and that she would struggle along with us.

    Q: Did the Politburo pay attention to these visits?

    A: Keenly.


     Bui Tin, a former colonel in the North Vietnamese army, answers these questions in the following excerpts from an interview conducted by Stephen Young,  a Minnesota attorney and human-rights activist  [in The Wall Street Journal, 3 August 1995]. Bui Tin, who served on the general staff of North Vietnam's army, received the unconditional surrender of South Vietnam on April 30, 1975.

    Catch a clue, MKS. Millions died because of the support the Left gave the communists.


    Millions died because of the protests? (5.00 / 5) (#202)
    by jondee on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 11:31:11 AM EST
    That idea is so obtuse and or intellectually dishonest as to rival the product of a developmentally challenged mentality.

    It suggests A) that the "millions dead" had nothing to do with American Cold War hawks and,
    B) That said Cold War hawk's first priority was always preserving human life.

    What this is really all about is the bitterness of people like Jim over the blow to their jingoist, tribal narcissism that the sixties in general and outcome of the Vietnam War in particular represents. Not much more to it than that.


    A new low. (5.00 / 4) (#115)
    by lentinel on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 06:41:32 AM EST
    Red-baiting in the 21st century.



    Actually, Jim, we could have stayed home, (5.00 / 2) (#128)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 09:19:42 AM EST
    allowed the Vietnamese political process to proceed.  Communism would have sputtered along like it always does, evolving like it has almost everywhere else into a market economy controlled by the rich, regulated by a thicket of rules designed by and skewing all in favor of those who owned and ran the country.  In other words, an end not much different from America's.

    Did I mis-remember that Pres. (5.00 / 3) (#102)
    by oculus on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 07:22:54 PM EST
    George W. Bush set the date for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq?

    S.o.F.A. (none / 0) (#129)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 09:27:41 AM EST
    Do our couch warriors deny Saint George his rightful legacy?

    Oh, really?? (none / 0) (#149)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 02:43:59 PM EST
    President Obama surprised a few people during a news conference Thursday by claiming that the 2011 decision to withdraw all U.S. forces from Iraq, a politically popular move on the eve of an election year, was made entirely by his Iraqi counterpart. The implication ran counter to a number of claims that Obama has made in the past, most notably during a tight campaign season two years ago, when he suggested that it was his decision to leave Iraq and end an unpopular war.


    "With regards to Iraq, you and I agreed, I believe, that there should be a status of forces agreement," Romney told Obama as the two convened on the Lynn University campus in Boca Raton, Fla., that October evening. "That's not true," Obama interjected. "Oh, you didn't want a status of forces agreement?" Romney asked as an argument ensued. "No," Obama said. "What I would not have done is left 10,000 troops in Iraq that would tie us down. That certainly would not help us in the Middle East."

    Washington Post


    Yes - really (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by Yman on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 02:56:49 PM EST
    You keep trying that same quote from Obama - where he says he would not have left 10,000 troops in Iraq - as evidence that he signed the SOFA setting the timetable and mandating US withdrawal from Iraq.

    He didn't.  Your boy GW did.  (Nice photo)


    You can run, but you can't hide, Jim.


    Obama was elected to fix things (1.00 / 2) (#154)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 04:40:43 PM EST
    He didn't.

    He hasn't.

    He won't.

    He can't.

    He doesn't know how.

    He said what he said.

    Iraq is in a mess.

    Isn't that water bucket getting heavy??


    "Fix things"? (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by Yman on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 05:29:46 PM EST
    You mean all the things your boy GW screwed up?

    Like Iraq and the SOFA?



    Thanks (5.00 / 3) (#163)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 06:26:48 PM EST
    for reminding us Jim that the average Bush voter never got past the maturity of a 13 year old boy. The cult you are a member of must be very interesting.

    I just love it when you and Yman admit (1.00 / 1) (#175)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 09:13:54 PM EST
    that I am right by going to the personal insults.

    Obama admits he wouldn't leave troops and Yman starts his parsing game...



    You are leveling insults all the time (5.00 / 3) (#182)
    by MKS on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 11:12:15 PM EST
    It is not my blog, but I would have sent you packing a long time ago.

    Your trolling just clogs up the blog.


    Facts and truth ... (none / 0) (#178)
    by Yman on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 09:57:44 PM EST
    ... aren't "parsing", Jim.  It must be a bit disorienting when you're used to pushing right-wing fairy tales, but your boy GW Bush was the one who signed the SOFA and set the timetable for withdrawal from Iraq.

    Guess he finally agreed with the vast majority of the American people that Iraq was a mistake and we needed to get out.


    Does that pass for analysis and (none / 0) (#181)
    by MKS on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 11:10:55 PM EST
    discussion where you come from?

    Just slogans.....


    Are you nuts? (5.00 / 3) (#109)
    by lentinel on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 08:42:47 PM EST
    Iraq "turned out well"?

    Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed.

    5000 American soldiers killed.
    32,000 American soldiers wounded.

    Two TRILLION dollars spent.
    And counting.

    Yeah. It turned out great...


    You know, (none / 0) (#20)
    by NYShooter on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 10:52:48 AM EST
    it would almost be worth losing a war if the result would be getting rid of Florida.

    Of, course, that's just my opinion.


    Don't worry. (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 12:07:22 PM EST
    The south is becoming less and less relevant as every election happens. Or should I say neoconfederates like Jim are becoming less and less relevant. They are going to be outnumbered shortly even here in Georgia. I have to tell you they are SWEATING bullets over that one down here. The divide and conquer strategy and culture war junk has already lost it's salience in the rest of the country and it's going down the drain here too.

    BTW, did you see this? (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by NYShooter on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 12:40:14 PM EST
    "More than 100 current and former Republican officials endorsed Democratic state Rep. Paul Davis's bid to unseat Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback (R) ..."..........LINK

    The best part of this good news is....that Brownback is not an outlier; he's typical of so many weirder than weird Republican Governors. And, if his destruction of Kansas's economy, financial standing, education system, etc. is played correctly by the D's, a lot of dominoes may just be falling this Fall.


    I agree it is interesting (none / 0) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 12:53:08 PM EST
    Will be more interesting to see if it works.  In the land of Koch.

    No (none / 0) (#83)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 03:05:02 PM EST
    I did not but it's not surprising. As the GOP gets more radical fundamentalist Christian reconstructionism, more and more people are going to be running the other way.

    Hey, this too from (none / 0) (#196)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 09:45:23 AM EST
    Culture War (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by MKS on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:13:44 PM EST
    issues help Democrats.....

    The Republicans lost the cultural wars....Women are in the workplace to stay--I think that is the number one change that conservatives never came to grips with.   They are still living in a Madmen world.

    Marriage equality and the end of DADT will erode and eviscerate the religious conservatives.....They still live on in the South but will be overcome.....It is only a matter of time.


    Madmen (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 03:11:57 PM EST
    really kind of made me see what they really want. Odd that a TV show really spelled it out. I mean I kind of had a general idea but did not understand the extent to women were opressed in the 50's until I watched that show.

    Well, the culture war helps rally their voters but turns everyone else off and there aren't enough aging evangelicals to win an election these days.


    The Evangelical Mega Chruch (none / 0) (#104)
    by MKS on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 07:28:20 PM EST
    did well to attract those fleeing old line Protestant Churches.

    But the mega churches don't have the same pull with the youth.   The youngins around here do not go to megachurches.....


    Yes (none / 0) (#113)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 09:12:29 PM EST
    the trend is away from the megachurch and back to the small neighborhood church that knew or knows the people in the neighborhood and is kind of like the sanctuary for the neighborhood.

    I also have read that financially this makes more sense especially in today's economy. Megachurches require very large budgets to keep going--higher electric bills and bigger debt.


    I think Florida can be redeemed (none / 0) (#33)
    by MKS on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 11:29:20 AM EST
    The rest of the South is not without hope but will take a awhile as the newer generations continue to gain influence.

    They can have FL (none / 0) (#40)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 12:12:52 PM EST
    Only if they take TX

    Heh, not so fast (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by MKS on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:17:01 PM EST
    Austin is very hip....and where all kinds of progressive NGOs are located.....Human rights organizations....Live music that is fantastic.....

    Deep blue El Paso is a wonderful place to me, but not necessarily loved by all....

    But what about Arkansas....I was going to write that we should just let the South secede again, but I remembered that would leave you marooned in the new Confederacy.


    Honestly (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:45:35 PM EST
    If we could get rid of the south I would find a way to move.  I have no problem saying this since I know it will never happen.

    A caravan (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 02:05:35 PM EST
    All heading out together :)

    That's the team spirit! (none / 0) (#75)
    by MKS on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:50:09 PM EST
    Take one for the team

    Everyone stops talking about it (none / 0) (#66)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:28:39 PM EST
    Around me when I remind them I'm outta here then, the whole military is and I kind of have to go where they go.  We belong to the Union Army :).

    Why don't the secessionists initially have a grasp of that fact?  That if you leave the Union, the Union takes all its gear with it? It isn't as if these Bible Belt red states can write my husband a paycheck either without Obama sending them some Government Welfare.....sigh


    You mean to say they have not quite (none / 0) (#97)
    by ruffian on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 06:11:32 PM EST
    thought this thing through?

    That's me you're talking about! (none / 0) (#92)
    by Angel on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 03:32:40 PM EST
    Austin is my hometown, proud to report we are not the 'typical' Texan.

    c'mon man,,, (none / 0) (#87)
    by fishcamp on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 03:15:50 PM EST
    Well, this is interesting... (none / 0) (#120)
    by unitron on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 08:15:30 AM EST
    I'm actually in agreement with you to a certain extent.

    The Cold War was still a war, and there were casualties as we tried to contain Soviet expansion.

    Not that we always did it as intelligently as I would have liked.

    And people who sign up and get killed in training, which cannot be made totally safe, are just a dead as if they'd been killed in combat, and besides, when you join up, you put the decision of whether you get sent to war in someone else's hands anyway.


     "Iraq turned out well...until Obama decided he didn't want to follow through."

    Seriously?  Turned out well?

    And what, exactly, would a proper follow-through have been, and would it have let us withdraw all of our troops any time before, say, 2025?


    I do not think (none / 0) (#122)
    by Politalkix on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 08:36:50 AM EST
    Jim would like to ever withdraw troops (or atleast till there is oil in the ground in Iraq). He has even talked about putting Viceroys in charge in Iraq.

    At times while interacting with Jim, I get the feeling that we are communicating with the ghost of a person who was buried in the American South, during the colonial era.


    The Viceroy thing wasn't a joke... (5.00 / 2) (#124)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 08:51:39 AM EST
    L. Paul Bremer, when given full run of Iraq by Bozo-in-Chief Bush, wanted his title to be Viceroy.

    Boy, talk about (5.00 / 3) (#130)
    by NYShooter on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 09:35:57 AM EST
    one of the worst appointments in American history, from dismantling the bureaucracy (that had been, successfully, running the country,) to guaranteeing the societal chaos that ensued by disbanding the military. Great idea, that. Take half a million trained men that could have provided for law & order, strip them of their jobs, paychecks, and, dignity, saying, "see ya, Boys, don't need ya." What could possibly go wrong?

    I'd give anything to have been able to be wired into that idiot "Viceroy's" brain as he stood by his palace window, looking out at "his vanquished City," the throngs of marauding, now, unemployed men & boys, running rampant, looting, stealing, destroying everything in sight. I can't even imagine the value of the thousands of pieces of priceless antiquity that the country lost in just a few days.

    Was I imagining, or, did someone here say a day, or, so, ago, "things worked out well in Iraq?"


    Sad times (none / 0) (#193)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 09:29:12 AM EST
    Whenever I reflect on all that, I am engulfed in sadness.

    How much contact... (none / 0) (#123)
    by unitron on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 08:44:54 AM EST
    ...with the military have you had over the course of your life?

    3 years, combat (none / 0) (#177)
    by NYShooter on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 09:56:47 PM EST
     6 altogether. Why?

    I was asking... (none / 0) (#188)
    by unitron on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 07:08:50 AM EST
    ... Politalkix

    MKS: The fact that Russia (none / 0) (#152)
    by christinep on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 03:26:03 PM EST
    may have been involved via supplying arms/rockets and political support to the separatists prior to the international incident does not translate to war.  In Bush/Cheney World--as we know--it would take a lot less "evidence" to get to the war level.

    What is involved now is a marshaling of available evidence--including circumstance & opportunity--to satisfy the world community, generally, about the genesis of the missile-firing.  Although we all may be justifiably conditioned by the Bush-World approach, I think President Obama's response to various international crises has been quite measured to date (even in the face of usual goading from McCain/Graham or WashPo newspaper types in the past.)  

    Judging from Obama's demonstration of extricating us from two longstanding wars as well as his tendency toward diplomatic-oriented responses to a series of international knots, I would say that it is highly unlikely that the WH would move toward any form of armed conflict with Russia.  Tough diplomacy is another matter. What we appear to be witnessing is a diplomatic encirclement whereby Russia is pushed/maneuvered into a diplomatic and economic isolation from those European and other interests so essential to Putin maintaining the power that he has.  IMO--considering economic $$$-- Germany's Angela Merkel (and, perhaps, France also) would be essential components in getting Putin to stand down from further encroachment.


    On that, we agree. (none / 0) (#34)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 11:29:43 AM EST
    Russia has been the catalyst behind the attempt to destabilize and dismember Ukraine, and would be the primary beneficiary were that to be accomplished:

    Los Angeles Times | July 19, 201
    Ukraine says multiple Buk missile systems moved to Russia - "Three Buk missile systems made their way from eastern Ukraine across the border into Russia on Friday, according to Ukrainian officials, including one lacking the missile they believe brought down a Malaysia Airlines jet the day before. [...] The announcement came a day after a government advisor posted a video purportedly showing a single Buk system, with at least one missile missing, making the trip to Russia on a road in eastern Ukraine. The new disclosure suggests that the Russian government supplied multiple anti-aircraft systems to the separatists, which [Vitaly Nayda, Ukraine's counterintelligence chief,] said were also used to bring down two Ukrainian military transport planes earlier in the week. The systems crossed the border at 2 a.m. and 4 a.m. Friday, Nayda said. If the Ukrainian government claims are confirmed, it would serve as strong evidence that Russia provided help to separatists to shoot down planes in eastern Ukraine."

    Forceful steps can and should be undertaken at this point to put the screws to President Putin, by isolating Russia both diplomatically and economically from the world community.

    Despite that country's vast size and large population, the Russian economy remains small, unbalanced and inefficient, with a GDP that's only about 10-15% that of the United States. The demise of the Soviet Union left the former Soviet industrial base mostly residing outside Russia proper; the Russian manufacturing base constitutes less than 15% of all economic activity, and that country's exports are almost wholly raw materials.



    So far they have tried (none / 0) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 12:01:41 PM EST
    To target sanctions so that they effect the rich and powerful.  They have , so far, avoided hurting the people as much as possible.   That may have to change.

    Good omen for the economy (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by Politalkix on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 07:52:28 AM EST

    Change is occurring for the good. The industrial giant GE is once again focusing on manufacturing things instead of achieving growth through its financial sector.

    I'm all for it (none / 0) (#21)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 10:56:06 AM EST
    but the linked article doesn't use the magical phrase.... "inside the US."

    And the picture comes from France.


    Inside the US (none / 0) (#29)
    by Politalkix on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 11:18:24 AM EST
    GE and other manufacturers are focusing on manufacturing inside the US since BHO became the President.



    Even a quick google search for this week, brings up many items of interest. Here are some examples link link

    In February 2011, for instance, in the middle of a breakfast with the titans of Silicon Valley, President Obama declined to offer the kind of adulation to which these warrior gods of the C-suite have become accustomed. Instead, he interrupted Steve Jobs, the legendary CEO of Apple, and asked what it would take to make iPhones in the United States.

    "Those jobs are gone," Jobs is said to have snapped back, like a professor to a student who hadn't done his homework, "And they're not coming back."

    Sadly, Steve Jobs himself is now gone, but it turns out that some of the manufacturing jobs that were systematically shipped overseas for several decades--in the process, devastating US manufacturing and the US economy--are now coming back to America. Admittedly, the return flow is still a trickle, compared to the flood of industries that have been abandoned to other countries. What took decades to lose can't be rebuilt overnight. But the signs are undeniable. US manufacturing is making something of a comeback.


    Let me know when you have some (none / 0) (#31)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 11:21:41 AM EST
    facts instead of a love song to Obama.

    BTW 2/2011 is 3 years and 5 months ago and the work for participation rate is at the Jimmy Carter, another disaster of a President, level.


    Jim Jim Jim (none / 0) (#35)
    by Politalkix on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 11:29:50 AM EST
    The worker participation level has come down to a slightly lower level because boomers are retiring. Shame on you Jim for expecting boomers to keep working till their deaths while you sit on your b*m all day and enjoy the benefits of Medicare (another Democratic achievement).

    If we open up immigration, the labor participation rate will increase because younger workers can replace ageing boomers in the workforce.


    I also enjoy Medicare Part D (1.00 / 2) (#155)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 04:47:41 PM EST
    Opposed by the Democrats. Passed by Bush.


    And I am trying to save some money to cover:

    the increases in my Medicare Advantage plan (Thank you Obama)

    the increases in my utility bill (Thank you Obama)

    the increases in my gasoline bill (Thank you Obama)



    I hate to tell you . . . (5.00 / 2) (#162)
    by nycstray on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 05:46:46 PM EST
    it will never be 1980 again, so you can forget about those gas prices.

    You might want to pay closer attention the the workings of your utility company. Around here they are trying to pass off the costs of the SB explosion and fire onto us. Same thing happened when I lived in NY. Any incident where the responsibility rests on them, they pass off to us. Every time I figure out a way to get my bill down, they find a way to jack it . . .


    Well, since Obama's EPA is shutting down (1.00 / 2) (#165)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 07:13:17 PM EST
    the coal industry for the fake man made global warming issue you can get ready to see your electric bill double.

    Solar, baby, solar (5.00 / 2) (#168)
    by nycstray on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 07:50:52 PM EST
    Get with the program, dude, even my 78yo mom has gone solar :)

    heh (1.00 / 1) (#174)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 09:08:27 PM EST
    Works great from 9 to 5



    So sad you don't understand. (5.00 / 2) (#186)
    by nycstray on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 01:45:28 AM EST
    Actually NY, I do understand and I (1.00 / 1) (#200)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 10:41:00 AM EST
    am all for conservation and "green" solutions.

    When they work.

    When I retired we moved away from Denver snows and purchased a home that needed some rehab. Everything we did was focused on energy saving. From extra insulation in the attic to double pane windows to the most energy efficient appliances available.

    Best I can tell I'll break even on the investment after about 18 years. That assumes no increases in rates.

    I looked at wind and solar supplemental power. Way too expensive at that time.

    The installing of residential solar systems in which the home owner sells electricity back to the local utility has become highly touted. I recently went back to do some research and called Austin Electric. To summarize, a 5KWH system installed is about $16,000. AE will rebate other ratepayers, and taxpayers, money to the tune of $6.000 to the home owner.

    So the investment is $10,000. AE will purchase power from the homeowner at their standard rates. This amounts to about $50.00 a month. Pay back is in about 16 years.

    That assumes no repairs out of warranty, no reduction of output as the unit ages and no increase in your homeowner's insurance.

    Few people can afford to spend $10,000 to save $50.00 a month.

    BTW - The end of life of the system is estimated to be 20 years. That means you start over with a new system.

    Many people think of this as also providing emergency power when the utility's local grid goes down. That is not true. Since the unit is actually feeding power into the grid it must be shut down to protect the workers who will be working on the grid.

    From a societal view this does nothing. The local utility, and the distribution companies, still must be able to provide power at night as the units will be down. So there is no savings. Worse, since what we have is a duplication, the impact on the environment is double.

    And none of this considers that the local utility's cash flow is reduced. At some point it will have to increase rates for everyone or else go out of business. Or worse, neglect upgrades and maintenance.

    Large solar "farms" suffer from the same problem. There is no practical way to save the power produced during the day for use at night so the company must produce the same amount from coal, oil, gas,nuclear. That means a duplication.

    While it can be argued that the reduction in output of CO2 from the carbon fueled plants justifies the cost of solar, I have seen no studies that proves that. As you think about it remember that solar farms require hundreds of acres of land and that the release of CO2 while the land is prepared and production of the panels is huge. Plus, we have the loss of trees and other CO2 absorbing plants, etc.

    So yes, NY, I have considered it and my careful look see has found it wanting.

    I wish that wasn't true, but it is. Will future improvements change things? Perhaps. But as the government is subsidizing current solutions the driver for new solutions is greatly reduced.


    Already to serious for a Saturday (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 09:35:04 AM EST
    Last night I was watching Ancient Aliens,  yes I am comfortable enough with myself that I am no afraid to admit that I sometimes watch Ancient Aliens.  I actually love it.  It is a hoot.  I especially love the guy with the Don King haircut.  With that do the guy has to be in on the joke, anyway ....

    Last night I am watching and WOW there is my friend Terrence.  One of my best and oldest friends in the effects business, he has hired me multiple times in multiple places, and there is Tman explaining why Leonardo was influenced by aliens.  I then gave him a really hard time on Facebook.  Until he promised to get me an autographed pic of the hair guy.

    you can see the whole episode here

    Terrence appears at about 27 minutes in.

    One funny bit of trivia.  Tman is a very well known person in the CG world.  He has a lot of impressive things in his resume but the one thing he will probably always be most famous for is inventing the CG process that Trey Parker and Matt Stone used to bring South Park to TV.  See the original episode of South Park - the one that got the the TV contract - was done with paper cut outs.  Not possible for a TV show.  So Terrence showed them how to do it with computers.   And as a reward for that Terrence - of Terrence and Phillip - is named after him.

    You are getting an autograph pic (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:05:52 PM EST
    Of the hair guy, no fair!  I can't believe I know who you are talking about when you mention the hair guy.  There is a kind shame in coming to grips with that.  I do not watch Ancient Aliens but Josh and his nerd friends do.  Conspiracy Keanu has a lot on Ancient Aliens that I must daily be subjected to.

    Puma (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:20:40 PM EST
    Watched this morning to start my day (none / 0) (#61)
    by ZtoA on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:18:34 PM EST
    and that was entertaining!! I know it's all BS and that made it funnier. Loved the hair guy too.

    The angel they keep pointed out as the one Leonardo painted in Verrocchio's work is not the one they keep showing of a paining entirely by Leonardo, so that was amusing. And Leonardo never used pigments that were not lead-based for the whites and some other pigments. He did use calcium carbonate (chalk) for some under-painting but never for his main whites, so that was false. The bit about seeing aliens in his work was as hysterical as hearing someone is dead from running a recording backwards. Maybe the best was using modern technology they could see the angel in his annunciation disappear. Must have been photoshop.  

    The thing goes on and on with ridiculous BS with such earnestness
    and good music, nice production and serious commenters. Loved the whole thing!


    Terrence (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:24:30 PM EST
    Is a vary serious guy.  Of all the people I know in the effects industry he is probably the most serious and grounded. he has written a couple of books

    So to see him doing this was just great.  He is sort of the last person I expected.  He says it paid very well.


    And when they called him (none / 0) (#68)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:33:07 PM EST
    A, what did they call him? A CG Researcher? That part was true.   He just doesn't research how Leonardo was influenced by aliens.  Generally.

    HAHA since you know (none / 0) (#74)
    by ZtoA on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:49:25 PM EST
    the hair guy I have a couple questions. Does his hair always look like that? If not do you think 1) he just witnessed or 2) actually is an ancient alien?

    No (none / 0) (#76)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:58:04 PM EST
    I actually don't know him.   I don't even know his name.   And no sometimes he looks way better than that.   Check out this google image search for "ancient aliens hair guy

    Last night I woke up from my pre-bedtime nap (none / 0) (#98)
    by ruffian on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 06:14:15 PM EST
    around midnight to find a rerun of the first episode of 'The Strain' just starting. So I watch dup tip the point of the old pawnshop guy feeding his pet heart in a jar....ICK!

    Not sure I can take this ride with you Capt.


    Can't even blame iPad typing (none / 0) (#99)
    by ruffian on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 06:15:13 PM EST
    watch dup tip = watched up to

    Ha (none / 0) (#100)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 06:19:41 PM EST
    Not a great thing to wake up to.  

    I kinda knew it wasn't going to be for everyone.  


    I'm bettin (none / 0) (#101)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 06:21:42 PM EST
    That was his wife.  Or some such.

    I'll never know! (none / 0) (#108)
    by ruffian on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 07:46:51 PM EST
    I didn't  catch that Corey Stoll is the lead.  As i was watching I was thinking whoever it was is really good, but I did not recognize him.  Then I just saw a funny piece on previously.tv about his wig!

    I hate you 4 the wig thing (none / 0) (#142)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 01:16:47 PM EST
    I somehow missed that on previouslyTV

    Which is actually interesting because (none / 0) (#143)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 01:20:06 PM EST
    The vampires are bald

    I can't stop seeing (none / 0) (#179)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 10:14:05 PM EST
    The hairpiece

    Sorry! (none / 0) (#185)
    by ruffian on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 11:40:37 PM EST
    Getting a gander at it might be the only thing that would make me watch that show again, at least for a few minutes.

    Now that people are starting to turn (none / 0) (#190)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 08:54:10 AM EST
    The first thing that happens is that their hair starts falling out in clumps.

    Is this a plan?


    My husband will love it (none / 0) (#199)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 10:04:32 AM EST

    I love it (none / 0) (#201)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 11:01:29 AM EST
    Hairpiece and all

    What you're doing is claiming ... (5.00 / 2) (#77)
    by Yman on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 02:01:21 PM EST
    ... that the "Cold War" was an actual war during which you "served 10 years in naval aviation".

    Yep - trying to "steal honor" is a perfect description of it.

    Your disrespect for those who died (1.00 / 2) (#88)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 03:16:35 PM EST
    during the Cold War just demonstrates how much you hate the military.

    I have a great deal of respect ... (5.00 / 2) (#95)
    by Yman on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 04:12:15 PM EST
    ... for them.

    None for poseurs, though.


    You call me a "sick puppy" (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by MKS on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 07:31:59 PM EST

    No one here likes or respects you.  You add nothing....  

    that comment was deleted (none / 0) (#183)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 11:30:16 PM EST
    Oh my goodness (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 09:03:47 PM EST

    The voice actor behind Grand Theft Auto 5's Lamar Davis is starring in a new live-action comedy series, Black Jesus, on Adult Swim, the network announced today.

    Gerald "Slink" Johnson plays the role of the eponymous prophet in Black Jesus. The show is set in present-day Compton, California, with Black Jesus looking to "spread love and kindness throughout the neighborhood with the help of his small but loyal group of downtrodden followers," according to a press release. Black Jesus, which is executive-produced by The Boondocks creator Aaron McGruder, also features Charlie Murphy (The Chappelle Show), John Witherspoon (Friday) and Kali Hawk (New Girl).

    In Grand Theft Auto 5, Johnson voiced Lamar Davis, the gullible and incorrigible but ultimately lovable best friend of Franklin Clinton, one of the game's three protagonists. You may be interested in this supercut of Lamar's best lines. Grand Theft Auto 5 was released last September on PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360, and is scheduled to be available this fall on PlayStation 4, Windows PC and Xbox One.

    Ten episodes of Black Jesus have been produced. The half-hour series will premiere at 11 p.m. ET on Aug. 7. For a first look, check out the trailer above.

    Better (none / 0) (#112)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 09:09:20 PM EST
    Busting up the Alabama Moonshiners (5.00 / 2) (#117)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 07:26:40 AM EST
    I love how a person in this article claims moonshine is a gateway crime...leads to guns and drugs.

    Hey, I thought guns were great?  Since when did they become a bad thing in Bammer?

    Anybody else watching Tyrant? (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 10:16:05 AM EST
    I remember that the pilot didn't impress many, but the series has become compelling to me.  I left it in the DVR recording schedule, just watched the last episode. They have taken several historical events and atrocities and interwoven them into the story.

    Was just watching a promo (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 10:52:40 AM EST
    For Outlander.  It looks good.  Men in kilts!

    Aug 9


    Speaking of kilts (none / 0) (#138)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 11:55:08 AM EST
    They are making some sort of entry into American life perhaps?  I told my husband I wanted him to show Ghost for me in a kilt.  It would be a riot, how could you miss those two?

    He says during this long distance discussion that he's hanging with guys that know kilts? Who knows kilts outside of Scotland?  But there are kilts called sport kilts that some guys he serves with in Korea are wearing during their weekend PT and just hanging out.  And they did find him a couple of dress kilts to pick from.  Only $300 each ; p


    It works for me (none / 0) (#139)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 11:57:08 AM EST
    I have (none / 0) (#134)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 10:20:54 AM EST
    I thought it started a little slow.  But mostly like it.  The story line about the gay son is getting interesting.  Finally.

    I'm still watching it too (none / 0) (#157)
    by ruffian on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 05:16:26 PM EST
    It is a little on the unbelievable side, but interesting.

    That actor that plays the president brother is a little over the top scenery chewing, but that is my only major critique. I like the lead actor.


    I liked how the President bro (none / 0) (#169)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 08:15:46 PM EST
    Approached his sexual...ahem....difficulties, exactly dudesque.  He seems sinister as hell, like many of the sons of ME dictators have been.  But he listens to his brother's advice, at least tries, that intrigues the hell out of me.

    Assad went to school in the West and thought he was going to become an Ophthalmologist (just like Rand Paul), he had no plans of leading Syria.  I can't remember what happened that lead him instead to being Syria's leader, I mean I could google it and act all cool and knowing...but that's just boring :)  I'm good with going with what I remember.

    Then you have the gassing 20 yrs ago of citizens, Saddam gassed the Kurds about 25 yrs ago.  Who else gassed their own citizens in that time frame?

    A father cannot feed his children and sets himself on fire in "the square" and kicks off a growing protest containing a lot of young people who are fearless...Egypt.

    One country experiencing everyone's challenges?


    Assad's older brother was the heir-apparent (none / 0) (#192)
    by caseyOR on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 09:24:09 AM EST
    in Syria, but he died in a automobile crash. Thus, the eye doctor was called back from his pleasant life in London to continue the family business as butchers of their people.

    Israeli artist's tribute (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by desertswine on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 11:46:41 AM EST
    to 4 Palestinian children killed on the beach while playing soccer is a rather haunting picture.

    The wonderful James Garner has died. (5.00 / 2) (#140)
    by caseyOR on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 12:08:05 PM EST
    He was 86. Died at his home in Brentwood, CA.

    Bret Maverick and Jim Rockford- two of the most entertaining TV characters of my growing up.

    And then there are the movies: The Americanization of Emily, Victor-Victoria, The Great Escape, and so many others.

    I loved the Rockford Files... (5.00 / 2) (#144)
    by desertswine on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 01:30:00 PM EST
    umpteen years ago, I never missed it.  Great cast and that Angel character was perfect.

    Maverick (5.00 / 3) (#153)
    by christinep on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 03:36:58 PM EST
    When we were little kids, Dad would drive us across town from east Denver to someplace Arvada for the Sunday Night Ritual of talk & watch at his oldest sister's house.  My sister & I together with a few nearby cousins would watch Maverick while the adults talked ... then, the adults joined in the snacking, watching.  

    Those Sunday nights were something.  Many thanks to James Garner and the tales of Maverick for making those fun times so memorable.


    The Amercianization of Emily (none / 0) (#156)
    by ruffian on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 05:13:15 PM EST
    Very underrated movie, co-starring Julie Andrews, in what is probably her best performance as a real, relatable human being. Maybe his too.

    Hard to pick a more universally appealing actor. Many years of great entertainment, as you said.


    They were both (none / 0) (#158)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 05:18:00 PM EST
    In Victor Victoria.  One of my favorite movies ever.

    If you were (none / 0) (#159)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 05:22:41 PM EST
    And Robert Preston's (none / 0) (#160)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 05:27:59 PM EST
    Living on kings and queens (none / 0) (#166)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 07:15:51 PM EST
    ...Maverick was his name..

    And always a good guy.


    Garner and the wonderful Gena Rowlands ... (none / 0) (#167)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 07:43:43 PM EST
    ... were the two actors who kept the 2004 romantic drama "The Notebook," which was otherwise awash in sentimentality, from drowning in saccharine and schmaltz. While he was long  one of Hollywood's most popular actors, his performances appeared so effortless that I've always thought him to be one of its most seriously underrated talents.

    And James Garner will always be Jim Rockford to me.


    Well, it's official (5.00 / 2) (#187)
    by nycstray on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 01:50:42 AM EST
    My 'baby' is THREE years old! And it's like 'someone' flipped a switch in her. She seems to have a better balance of butterfly brain vs brain cells :D

    Hope this link works . . . flickr seems to be different these days . . .

    Your link didn't work for me (none / 0) (#191)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 09:00:04 AM EST
    But I can relate.  My golden is in the terrible twos

    Well this would be hilarious... (none / 0) (#15)
    by desertswine on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 09:53:34 AM EST
    if it didn't get me so angry.  Hobby-Lobby family to open 800 million dollar bible museum in DC to promote their flim-flam religion.

    Frankly (5.00 / 3) (#41)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 12:13:26 PM EST
    this kind of stuff just makes Christians look like a bunch of freaks. You know, if they really wanted to spread the love of Christ to other Americans maybe they could put up housing with interest free loans for impoverished Americans. Maybe they could do a restauarnt like Bon Jovi did. Maybe they could provide food in a food bank but no, they have to spend millions on a museum that the people that the type of people that they think need to see it are never going to go to. The only people that are going to go to that stupid museum are other evangelicals.

    How many people does (1.00 / 1) (#46)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 12:33:49 PM EST
    Bon Jovi employ??

    How many of his employees have health insurance providing 16 contraception choices??

    Inquiring minds want to know.


    K......... (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 12:55:32 PM EST
    I'm sure (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:18:21 PM EST
    JBJ follows the laws and gives all his employees those options. He's not a fundamentalist control freak like the Green family is.

    GA, (1.00 / 1) (#70)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:35:23 PM EST
    I doubt he employees more than 50...

    And if 16 choices isn't enough then buy your own contraception.


    It's all about control (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 02:48:35 PM EST
    Jim and their freakish beliefs. There are people that those few are the only ones that work but Hobby Lobby apparently knows better by using junk science than the medical community or the scientific community. They are a buch of fundamentalist freaks no different than the fundamentalist freaks in other parts of the world.

    GA (1.00 / 1) (#85)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 03:13:08 PM EST
    Providing healthcare insurance with 16 choices of contraception is not a very effective control.

    You just defend it because of its name, "Obamacare."

    Is it junk science? If science was used to deny the other 16 meds then it would be worth arguing about. But it's not.

    Go find something else to complain about.


    Jim, the SC gave them the 'right' to deny (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by nycstray on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 03:45:13 PM EST
    any form of BC they wanted if they had a religious issue with it.

    Now, about that junk science . . . .


    Well (5.00 / 2) (#132)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 09:52:11 AM EST
    We know the "16 choices" talking point sunk in.

    Jim (none / 0) (#89)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 03:17:49 PM EST
    you are missing the point once again. They are calling those methods of birth control the same as abortion. That comes directly from the legitimate rape school of science. If you believe those are the same as having an abortion then you have to believe that Todd Akin was right when he said women can't get pregnant from being raped.

    And on top of that they buy the majority of their stuff from China and support these methods in their 401Ks. So any reasonable person would see that it's all about control of their employees. They also wanted the supreme court to muzzle doctors on even discussing birth control with their employees. They are a bunch of fundamentalist freaks but in all honesty I hope you keep apologizing for them. If you're okay with all that attitude just come out and say it. Say Todd Akin was right.


    You're strangely derogatory, Jim, to (none / 0) (#125)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 09:01:35 AM EST
    the small businesses that the Republican Party insists it's doing everything for.

    Ummmm (none / 0) (#42)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 12:16:58 PM EST
    Of course (none / 0) (#43)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 12:19:14 PM EST
    no surprises there for me.

    lol. That's priceless... (none / 0) (#114)
    by Mr Natural on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 09:35:25 PM EST
    "sorry, I can't heal you; you have a pre-existing condition..."

    Children who can't tell fact from fiction - (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 09:06:18 AM EST
    Researchers: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction

    i.e., raise 'em on b/s and they'll grow up nice 'n pliable.


    Your link did not work for me (none / 0) (#131)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 09:48:58 AM EST
    But I can't understand why this would be a surprise.  To anyone.

    Yeah (none / 0) (#194)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 09:30:12 AM EST
    A study of 66 kids total and they make definitive conclusions??

    Funny..I was raised in a house where we went to curch every Sunday and I went to Catechism through the 5th grade.  So did all of my large extended family. So did most of my friends (and yet, many, many of them have college degrees, and many of those have advanced degrees, so I think we all learned how to distinguish between fact and fiction).

    And right now, I can easily distinguish the fiction in the methodology of this study.

    What a bunch of hooey.


    Then there is my brother (5.00 / 2) (#195)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 09:33:53 AM EST
    Who has advanced degrees in education and administration who believes every word of the bible is literally true.

    You have a habit of comparing apples and oranges without understanding the difference.


    Not really (none / 0) (#198)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 09:58:12 AM EST
    The thesis of the paper in question states: "The results suggest that exposure to religious ideas has a powerful impact on children's differentiation between reality and fiction, not just for religious stories but also for fantastical stories."

    Now - I assume you and your brother were raised in the same household with the same religious upbringing.  So why are you two so very different?  If the thesis is true, then you two should be of similar thinking. Why are you different?  Could it be that other factors in life intervened?  Did your brother have some issues in his life that made him more religious (or, conversely, were there things in your life that made you less so)?  Seems to me you are the one comparing apples to oranges here - I'm taking the scientists at their word based on their thesis and calling bunk.

    Saying 66 5 and 6 year old kids who have religious upbringing and are exposed to religious stories will have a harder time delineating between fantasy and reality is silly.  It's too small a sample size, for one thing, to draw a broad conclusion about 7 billion people.


    Do you also oppose (none / 0) (#19)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 10:44:45 AM EST
    Muslims building mosques?? Did you oppose the WTC mosques?

    Honestly (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 11:03:08 AM EST
    Never have I seen anyone so proud of their unfailing ability to miss the point.

    It's sort of like asking a politician one question and they answer a different one.  Because that's what they want to talk about.


    Oh, he's just trolling. (5.00 / 3) (#36)
    by desertswine on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 11:36:17 AM EST
    So pointing out (none / 0) (#45)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 12:31:50 PM EST
    the hypocrisy of your position is trolling??




    What I said. (5.00 / 3) (#69)
    by desertswine on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:33:46 PM EST
    And the point was what?? (none / 0) (#27)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 11:11:03 AM EST
    That the HL owners should not be able to exercise their freedom of religion because part of the populace does't like or trust them??

    Guess what. Part of the US's population doesn't like or trust Muslims or their religion.

    Should that be the basis for forbidding Muslims from building a religious museum??


    The problem (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:21:42 PM EST
    is they are NOT following their religion. They are following the religion of legitimate rape. They follow the Todd Akin school of science. They are against abortion and the things that they did not want to provide have NOTHING to do with abortion. They have been lying and calling those birth control methods "abortion pills" when the only abortion pill is RU486. But as we all know by now, Evangelicals think it's okay to lie as long as they are "lying for Jesus".

    Yahoo! Hell yeah! (none / 0) (#189)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 21, 2014 at 08:21:21 AM EST
    Let's go photobomb.  I bet opportunities abound, but everyone is going to beat us to the low hanging fruit.  We are going to have to get creative around here.

    Yes (none / 0) (#50)
    by Politalkix on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 12:45:11 PM EST
    We need younger people. People are living longer and birth rates are declining. Our social contracts were built on the generational assumption that the young would support the old.

    Just look at regions which are thriving economically within the USA. There is one thing in common. Each of these regions have a heavy influx of immigrants.

    Don't worry (none / 0) (#52)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 12:53:42 PM EST
    we'll have lots of children to take care of at $1000 a day thanks to Obama's open border policy.

    And the only area that is thriving is the ND/SD oil fields and that is not a hot bed of immigration.


    Really? (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Politalkix on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:05:43 PM EST
    "And the only area that is thriving is the ND/SD oil fields and that is not a hot bed of immigration"

    Are you saying that Republicans are hoodwinking people when they present Texas as an economic success story? Houston, Dallas, San Antonio and Austin are teeming with immigrants.

    I may not even have to talk about silicon valley, New York city, the mid atlantic region, seattle, arlanta, etc to make your statements look bad.


    The point remains (none / 0) (#67)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:30:41 PM EST
    the economy sucks.

    Quit singing love songs to Obama....and I'll give you Texas, although that seems to be oil driven

    BTW - NYC is 7.4%.... CA is 7.4% and that's after the figures are fudged.


    And (none / 0) (#81)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 02:52:30 PM EST
    Georgia is 7.4% too. So what does that say about conservative economic policies? Georgia is 100% controlled by the GOP.

    And 99% of the new jobs in Texas are minimum wage jobs. So if you like high poverty and low paying jobs, Texas is the place for you.


    I think Atlanta is Demo (none / 0) (#86)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 03:14:12 PM EST
    what does that say about GA?

    All regions where people want to move (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by Politalkix on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 03:39:43 PM EST
    are Democratic regions. You may even want to check with Romney who built a mansion with car elevators in California or Perry who is thinking of retiring in California. link

    Ain't that the truth (none / 0) (#106)
    by MKS on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 07:36:19 PM EST
    They all complain about California but they all come here....

    If only the South would secede and take Jim with them.


    You keep (none / 0) (#91)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 03:20:58 PM EST
    moving the goal posts to apologize for the GOP. You're funny.

    The Atlanta unemployment rate is 7.2% LOWER than the entire state which is run by the GOP. So again, what does that say for the GOP????


    It is unfortunate (none / 0) (#107)
    by MKS on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 07:40:56 PM EST
    that you do not like and feel threatened by Latinos...

    But pretty standard reaction for many in the South.


    Yes, of course the French (none / 0) (#71)
    by MKS on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 01:37:36 PM EST
    were involved and I said that.

    Interesting that you say the CIA overthrow of the Iranian government in 1953 was a good thing.  That served as a template for other actions we took.

    Let me ask you this:  Do you think the CIA overthrow of the Guatemalan government in 1954 was also justified?


    Do you sometimes (none / 0) (#96)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 19, 2014 at 05:29:43 PM EST
    Supplied weapons. (none / 0) (#116)
    by lentinel on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 06:46:30 AM EST
    The USA is one of the most prolific supplier of weapons and weaponry to the world.

    It would be interesting if folks began to hold us responsible for the carnage inflicted by those weapons.

    Uh oh.

    So are the Russia and China (none / 0) (#118)
    by Politalkix on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 07:31:16 AM EST
    So are Russia, China, France, Germany, Italy, UK, Sweden and Norway.

    Any country that provided weapons to bring down a commercial aircraft with 298 people on board would have been roundly criticized. It is however really interesting to see how far you will go to be an apologist for Putin. Ofcoutse, it is not surprising. You barked up the same tree while being an apologist for Assad and Putin after Syria used chemical weapons.


    An apology (none / 0) (#121)
    by lentinel on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 08:26:00 AM EST
    for Putin?

    Are you insane?


    Woman stoned by IS (none / 0) (#141)
    by ZtoA on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 12:24:44 PM EST
    "Fighters from Al-Qaeda-breakaway group the Islamic State have stoned a woman to death for adultery, in the first such execution of its kind in rebel-held northern Syria.

    The stoning, first reported by the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and confirmed to Al Jazeera by two activists, took place in a public square Thursday evening in the town of Tabaqa, Raqqa province. Activists said the woman was tried in an Islamic sharia court, but that witnesses to her alleged offense were never identified and that the man involved was not charged with any crime.


    I wrote about this (none / 0) (#184)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 11:31:56 PM EST
    Maher on (none / 0) (#164)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 06:58:02 PM EST
    They are going to a fundraiser (none / 0) (#170)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 08:25:55 PM EST
    For Ted Cruz at the Bush Library on True Blood.

    Will Ted be there?.

    Eric and Pam (none / 0) (#171)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 08:40:53 PM EST
    Are dressing up like republicans

    BTW (none / 0) (#172)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 08:43:11 PM EST
    They are going there to kill a person responsible for vampire death camps from last season.  If you followed the show at all the is the fundamentalist Christian former wife of the Gov.

    Ok, the Yakuza (none / 0) (#173)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 09:00:24 PM EST
    Crash a Ted Cruz fundraiser at the Bush Library and start killing everyone.

    Tune in next week to see what happens next!