home

Wednesday Night Open Thread

I do not know where everyone is and I have no idea what is going on in the world. So fill me in. This is an Open Thread.

I like this quote from our friend Markos:

“I’m positioning myself, at DailyKos, which isn’t the broader netroots, to not be carrying water for anybody,” he said. “We’ll work to keep our party honest. We’re not going to pretend that just because he’s Barack Obama, his actions aren’t sometimes problematic. But that doesn’t mean we’re abandoning him or that we won’t vote for him. That’s ludicrous.”

< When Is a Snitch Believable? | Bush Threatens Veto of Intelligence Budget: Too Much Oversight >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    I think Obama's going to win 52-43 in Nov. (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Pegasus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:28:11 PM EST
    Bring it.  :)

    You mean win the vote? (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by Dadler on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:55:19 PM EST
    Or win the election?

    Big difference these days.

    Since the last two presidential elections were utterly fruadulent, and since our voting equipment is entirely insecure and hackable, with no paper trail to follow, I think any of us making any predictions about anything related to this election is a bit, um, premature.  I do think the only way Obama loses is through fraud and/or staggering incompetence and cowardice.  And it's the fraud I worry about far more.  Because we now have a solid track record of fraudulent elections.  

    Parent

    NY: 50 Percent of Sequoia Voting Machines Flawed (5.00 / 4) (#39)
    by Edger on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:11:25 PM EST
    July 14, 2008
    New York state is in the process of replacing its lever voting machines with new voting equipment, but the state revealed recently that it has found problems with 50 percent of the roughly 1,500 ImageCast optical-scan machines (shown in the video above) that Sequoia Voting Systems has delivered to the state so far -- machines that are slated to be used by dozens of counties in the state's September 9 primary and November 4 presidential election.
    ...
    New York doesn't have a choice about using the machines this year. The state was sued by the Department of Justice for failing to meet a federal deadline for having accessible voting machines in place. The Help America Vote Act passed in 2002 requires every voting precinct to provide at least one accessible voting machine for disabled voters by 2006. New York is just now getting the machines in place.
    ...
    After the testing is completed, a tamper-evident seal is placed on the machines and they're passed back to the vendor representative who is responsible for shipping off the machines to counties.

    This creates chain-of-custody concerns that Biamonte says are exacerbated by the fact that when he received his machines in Nassau County, a number of the tamper-evident seals on them were cracked.

    "How do we know this wasn't tampered with?" he said.



    Parent
    I was so upset to see that. (5.00 / 3) (#44)
    by madamab on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:14:15 PM EST
    Hillary and Chuck Schumer have been fighting this tooth and nail, but they managed to get those d&mn machines in NY anyway.

    We need massive turnout to counteract the election fraud. It's the only way we beat Rove's "The Math" in 2006.

    Parent

    I thought they were only using the (none / 0) (#52)
    by nycstray on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:22:03 PM EST
    old machines? Or is that just in NYC?

    Parent
    In Yonkers (none / 0) (#54)
    by madamab on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:23:30 PM EST
    it's the old machines too, but they've managed to sneak the Sequoias into other areas, apparently. Check out the story Edger linked to.

    Parent
    Are they nuts?! (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by nycstray on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:40:23 PM EST
    Other machines had dead batteries or batteries that wouldn't hold a two-hour charge, as they were required to do.

    I hope like heck they aren't relying on batteries . . . . Gawd, the machines sound like one big freakin' nightmare. Isn't there some other way they could accommodate handicap voters until they sort this mess out? Broken machines doesn't sound like a solution.

    Parent

    SSan Diego County Registrar of Voters= (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:35:56 PM EST
    former Diebold exec.  Thank God for Deborah Bowen.

    Parent
    I would never vote for McCain, but do not believe (none / 0) (#27)
    by magnetics on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:01:56 PM EST
    an Obama presidency would do the country much good.  It's the experience thing, and the willingness to trim his sails on things like  FISA, and the stated admiration of R. Reagan and the fact that Cass Sunstein considers him to be  a brilliant Constitutional thinker.  Sunstein, whatever his scholarly credentials, is still too much a winger for me to like his picks.

    If Obama picks Hillary for VP, he has my vote; not otherwise.

    Just sayin'.

    Parent

    I think it's way too late for that, Markos. (5.00 / 8) (#3)
    by OrangeFur on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:36:58 PM EST
    Or maybe pounding Hillary Clinton day in and day out was more anti-Clinton than pro-Obama?

    Such a dishonest statement--not you--him. (5.00 / 11) (#6)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:44:03 PM EST
    Well said n/t (5.00 / 3) (#21)
    by bridget on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:57:50 PM EST
    So now Kos has to be "fair" (5.00 / 0) (#152)
    by lambertstrether on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 09:36:59 AM EST
    ... to Hillary supporters after all?

    Feh. The next time Kos gets a spike for fostering a mob mentality, he will. In fact, he has to -- it's his business model.

    Parent

    Of course it was. (2.00 / 0) (#9)
    by Pegasus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:46:37 PM EST
    Anti-Clintonism has been a theme, ever since Bill pioneered triangulation.  Not fair to Hillary, but it is what it is.

    Parent
    I don't think triangulation (5.00 / 7) (#14)
    by madamab on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:51:06 PM EST
    is why Markos hates the Clintons.

    After all, isn't that what Obama's been doing these past few weeks? Markos doesn't seem to hate him because of it.

    Parent

    Hey, he didn't make that max donation. (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:52:20 PM EST
    Isn't that sufficient?

    Parent
    I think it's exacly why, (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Pegasus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:56:39 PM EST
    many on the left, including Markos, hate the Clintons.  

    Obama's a johnny come lately to triangulation and was the only real anti-Clinton alternative, so it hasn't really caught up with him yet.

    Parent

    I think it's a convenient excuse. (5.00 / 7) (#29)
    by madamab on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:02:09 PM EST
    I don't buy it for a second. I think it's elitism that makes Markos hate the Clintons, and jealousy. If he cared to look at Clinton's votes as a Senator, she has voted more progressively than Obama.

    You can look it up quite easily at Progressivepunch.org, which is a non-partisan organization doing simple mathematical comparisons.

    You would think a blogger of Markos' stature would base his disdain of Hillary on something other than some vague notion of "triangulation," but you would be wrong.

    Parent

    Markos is not on the left, at ALL. (5.00 / 3) (#33)
    by MarkL on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:03:50 PM EST
    He doesn't even profess to be on the left.
    He is a power-hungry pragmatist who supports all  Democrats except Clintons, the latter a throwback to his Reagan days.

    Parent
    completely and demonstrably wrong (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by A DC Wonk on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 12:11:45 AM EST

    He is a power-hungry pragmatist who supports all  Democrats except Clintons

    Not true at all.  He even puts lists up of Dems who he wants to see challenged in 2010's primaries.

    Parent

    Pimaried with people (5.00 / 0) (#127)
    by Edgar08 on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 02:38:01 AM EST
    Who ALWAYS end up behaving the same way politically, so so much for that pathetic little movement.


    Parent
    They hate the Clintons (5.00 / 0) (#123)
    by Edgar08 on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 02:00:21 AM EST
    Because the Clintons were successful and they need to destroy that which came before them and was successful in order for them to be successful.

    It's complete and utter immaturity.

    Did Steve Young feel the need to character assassinate Joe Montana???

    Parent

    Obama is only. . . (4.87 / 8) (#30)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:02:50 PM EST
    a "johnny come lately" to triangulation to the extent that he's a johnny come lately to politics.

    The Lizza article makes clear the extent to which he observed, respected, and coopted Clinton's methods during the 1990s.  Obama is an absolute master.

    I personally don't consider "triangulation" (and it's attendant concepts compromise and negotiation) the poisonous treachery that the morally pure (like Markos) do.  But then again, I don't believe there's a huge liberal majority out there waiting to follow whoever is willing to espouse a pure hyper-progressivism.  For liberals, triangulation is the way (or one important way) to results.

    Parent

    I cannot tell you (5.00 / 3) (#50)
    by madamab on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:20:21 PM EST
    how much I agree with this.

    We lefty pinko Commies are in the minority, and that's okay. I wish we had proportional representation in this country so that we could have a larger voice in the government; but the vast majority of Americans, while agreeing on many liberal concepts, are NOT as lefty as I am.

    At least I'm smart enough to know that. Sometimes I wonder about some of the other folks on the Net.

    Parent

    I've been watching him (5.00 / 2) (#58)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:25:50 PM EST
    do the triangulating thing since like 2006.

    And I'll be honest, I don't think he's that good at it...at least not to be considered a "master" of it.

    It's the difference between basic hand stitching and pro hand stitches.

    Parent

    I guess I'm more. . . (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by LarryInNYC on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 06:24:52 AM EST
    impressed with his ability than you are.  But can we agree, if not on "master", then "devotee"?

    Parent
    devotee? (5.00 / 0) (#137)
    by kredwyn on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 08:28:48 AM EST
    more like wannabe.

    Parent
    lol@morally pure(like Markos)n/t (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by bridget on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:32:18 PM EST
    Do you plan to critique Markos's (none / 0) (#67)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:39:29 PM EST
    newfound commitment to constructively criticize Sen. Obama?  

    Parent
    Another example of BAD History. (5.00 / 4) (#109)
    by bridget on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:58:22 PM EST
    This is the kind of stuff people without any sense of history learned from blogs like dkos. They believed every word their masters told them and then spread out and repeated any ringwing talking point co-opted by the socalled "progressive." The nastier the better.

     Anti-Clintonism actually started for the simplest reason in the world. Bill Clinton won the election and the GOP couldn't handle it. By the time Bill Clinton took the oath of office Anti-Clintonism was in full swing. As usual, the liberal press supported the GOP in this endeavor by repeating their rightwing talking points. Just as they have in every election since and before (see DailyHowler archives).  

    Anti-Clintonism was regularly used as the springboard for press and pundit careers on TV, paper, and blogs.
    During the 90s Lots of press pundit careers were made on TV and in paper with Clinton bashing (e.g. Coulter of the 90s, Arianna Huffington). On the net bloggers put themselves on the map with Anti-Clinton gobbledigook (i.e. Moulitsas) and newbies ate it up.

     "Triangulation" is just one of the talking points the Clinton trashers on the net copied from the rightwingers and they used it when they could think of nothing else to throw at the Clintons. So it quickly turned into some sort of rallying cry of the netroots - acting if it was the devil's act. Why does the netroot hate Clinton? Easy. Triangulation. It really was pathetic.

     Most posters didn't have a clue what 90s triangulation actually meant and they still don't it seems .... but they learned to spell it. Look, I can do it to: T-r-i-a-n-g-u .....

    The real world people could care less about this latest stuff on the net and continued to respect and like both Hillary and Bill Clinton. But by 2006 the blogs were packed with Clinton hate, lies, innuendos AND propaganda for anyone but "the Clintons." The village ate it up, too, and bloggers and media, esp, cable, aligned happily to  pick and elect their fav. candidate.

     Bill Somerby wrote the book about something no liberal press pundit wants to admit, namely how the liberal pundits helped the Republicans beat Al Gore in 2000 by repeating GOP  posts 24/7. Even he had to admit that no democratic candiate was more severely trashed and maligned during any election by the press (and liberal bloggers) than Hillary Clinton was during the Dem primaries.  

    Parent

    Anti-Clintonism (5.00 / 0) (#134)
    by Carolyn in Baltimore on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 07:54:05 AM EST
    wasn't just the GOP. THe Dems also - he was not beltway or elite - he was Bubba. And smart and wonky and liberal under the pragmatism. And Hillary was also an accomplished and different first lady. They both got scholarships to the elite schools others had to legacy into.

    Clinton started triangulating when faced w/ the Contract on America ad had to accomplish something.

    That is not today's need. We need a fighter who is a pragmatist, not a compromiser who is a pragmatist.

    Parent

    My anti-clintonism is an extension.... (5.00 / 3) (#157)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 10:46:38 AM EST
    of my anti-democratism...and my anti-republicanism for that matter.

    The Democrats and Republicans (including the Clintons) generally suck on the issues that matter to me...drug war, prison population, civil liberties, foreign policy.

    There are legit reasons not to like the Clinton brand....they are corporate, they are establishment, and they trusted stewards of the military industrial complex, just like 99% of both parties.

    Parent

    True but (none / 0) (#159)
    by Carolyn in Baltimore on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 10:57:17 AM EST
    we have limited choices in getting people into positions of power. While the Clintons have embraced corporatism they have also stayed relatively true to their values and walk the tightrope pretty well.
    I do trust them not to make things worse and to try to make things better for people.

    My comment was to add to why the Clintons were brought down, even by their own party. And it is that Bill is Bubba and Hillary is uppity.

    Parent

    Hey Bridge. Or can I call you Gidge, (none / 0) (#116)
    by WillBFair on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 12:27:39 AM EST
    if that's not too familiar?
    Great post. But can I ellaborate on one point? I saw triangulation as a flavor of bipartisanship, by adopting popular, and sensible, policies. To take just one example. Many folk on welfare actually could and should do some work. It wasn't fair that they should sit while the rest of us were busting our collective hump.
    Another example of the far left's hypocrisy. When the Clintons do it, it's triangulation. When St. Obama does it, it's bringing the country together.
    http://a-civilfe.blogspot.com

    Parent
    ITA WillBFair, adopting sensible policies and (5.00 / 2) (#120)
    by bridget on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 01:43:01 AM EST
    coming up with a completely new workable policy or policies as Bill Clinton did ... that works for me. Triangulation is not part Dem, part Rep, stirred, and then served however it comes out in the pot with a cherry on top ;-)

    thanks for your post - unfortunately the link didn't work for me

    and before I forget:
    sorry, just fabulous bridget, please ;-)) ... no gidge, no bridge lol

    Parent

    Sorry, Bridget, about the Gidge remar. But I'm old (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by WillBFair on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 09:50:36 AM EST
    enough to remember the Gidget movies. They should make a new one: Gidget Talks Sensible Politics In The Blogoshphere. LOL.

    Parent
    Was FDR triangulating (5.00 / 0) (#126)
    by Edgar08 on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 02:34:56 AM EST
    When he gave up on anti-lynching laws???

    Your Clinton hatred shines through.  

    Parent

    Triangulating means (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by tben on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 08:18:00 AM EST
    to activly embrace oppositional positions in a purely politico-tactical attempt to outflank the opposition. It is not the same as giving up on something that is out of reach, or too costly politically, and it is not the same as moving to the center.

    Triangulating is to positivly embrace opposition positions and make them your own, like Clinton on welfare reform - or his pronouncment about the "era of big government is over".

    Parent

    There is nothing to say (none / 0) (#141)
    by Edgar08 on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 08:41:58 AM EST
    Clinton didn't want to reduce the size of government.  That it was PART of his agenda.

    You are wrong to assume that he did that to outflank a political opponent.  He did that cause he thought it was wise.

    It appears to have worked as far as the economy is concerned too.  7 million people raised out of poverty.  Etc.

    It's like NAFTA.  Don't assume everyone in the world thinks it was a bad thing.

    As far as DOMA and DADT we know Clinton ran on civil rights and had to give up on some of his agenda because of political opposition.  It was simply out of reach at the time.

    So by your definition, Clinton didn't triangulate.

    You at least answered the question.  Giving up on a part of your agenda that is unattainable at the time DOES NOT qualify as triangulation.

    FDR did not.  I appreciate your answer.

    Parent

    According to you (none / 0) (#133)
    by Pegasus on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 07:16:00 AM EST
    there's nothing but anti-Clintonism in the world.  I'm actually generally pro-Clinton, FWIW.

    Parent
    I was asking you (none / 0) (#140)
    by Edgar08 on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 08:34:29 AM EST
    Think about the question.


    Parent
    You asked a question to which (none / 0) (#142)
    by Pegasus on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 08:42:06 AM EST
    you already knew the answer, so I didn't bother answering.  

    Then you told me I hate Clinton, because that's apparently a characteristic you ascribe to anyone with whom you disagree.  No thanks, I'd rather not play that game.

    Parent

    Because if you define it differently (1.00 / 1) (#144)
    by Edgar08 on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 08:44:38 AM EST
    For different politicians, then I think you single out Clinton based on a prejudicial hatred.


    Parent
    Your premise is wrong. (3.00 / 2) (#145)
    by Pegasus on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 08:49:11 AM EST
    Which is why I've been criticizing you for groundlessly thinking I hate the Clintons.

    I like the Clintons.  Bill played defense in the 90's because it was the right thing to do, in my mind.  It's no longer the right thing to do, and some on the left (not me) think it never was, so those people don't like Bill, and unfairly associate Hillary with what he did.

    But you're apparently quite unable to hear me saying that, because you're so convinced that I'm somebody who viscerally hates Clinton just because I supported Obama in the primary.  I guess in your world, everybody's motivated by hatred of somebody or other.  Sheesh.

    Parent

    So you're praising Bill? (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by Edgar08 on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 08:56:32 AM EST
    You said:

    Anti-Clintonism has been a theme, ever since Bill pioneered triangulation.  Not fair to Hillary, but it is what it is.

    You could have wrote:

    Anti-Clintonism has been a theme, ever since Bill pioneered triangulation.   I happen to think Bill was a great president for his time and have said so repeatedly to the anti-Clinton morons.

    That would have been more clear given what your clarification.

    I agree with you, by the way.

    For a minute there you sounded like the more passive aggressive Barack Obama when he said the sexist attacks on Hillary weren't fair to Hillary, but it is what it is, she's now too polarized to unite the country the way he can.


    Parent

    Whatever. (1.00 / 1) (#147)
    by Pegasus on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 09:00:21 AM EST
    I'm not obligated to go out of my way to keep oversensitive people from drawing incorrect conclusions.  If you can't step far enough out of your bias to read objectively, I'd appreciate if you'd just not respond to me, ever.

    Parent
    no (5.00 / 0) (#150)
    by Edgar08 on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 09:25:02 AM EST
    you're just obligated to speak clearly and say what you mean.

    Parent
    I said exactly what I meant. (none / 0) (#151)
    by Pegasus on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 09:36:22 AM EST
    What have I revised or retracted in this entire thread?

    You just assumed things into it that weren't there, betraying your own prejudice.  That is not my fault.

    Parent

    you clarified (none / 0) (#154)
    by Edgar08 on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 09:50:49 AM EST
    that the original  comment I responded to was indeed a compliment for bill and an indictment of people who chose to hate bill for simply and wisely choosing the right political strategy for his time.

    I'm sorry but that was not evident to me from the original comment I responded to.

    If other people were able to figure it out then I'll plea guilty on the accusation of over-sensitiveness.

    Parent

    If it wasn't evident, that's fine. (5.00 / 2) (#155)
    by Pegasus on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 09:55:47 AM EST
    But instead of asking for clarification, like any fair-minded person would do, you started immediately barking about how my "hatred for the Clintons was shining through" or some such BS.

    That's what bothers me here, and that's what shows your prejudice.  If somebody from outside the pro-Clinton primary clique doesn't go out of their way to spell out pro-Clintonism in their posts, you invariably assume anti-Clintonism and go on the attack.  It's unbecoming of you, at best.

    And yes, I'm singling you out.  Because you're among the worst offenders in this area, though you certainly aren't alone.

    Parent

    No (none / 0) (#143)
    by Edgar08 on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 08:43:46 AM EST
    I didn't already know the answer.

    The question exists so I have an idea of how you define triangulation.

    Parent

    I'm just getting here (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:58:01 PM EST
    I cooked dinner for the TL kid who was in 3 courts today.  He's learning fast that clients try to play their lawyers just like they do everyone else. He had very funny stories.

    It was 100 degrees today so for dinner we had big gin and tonics with Hendricks gin and lots of fresh lime. Then home cooked tacos, an arugula salad with strawberries and avocado and Twinkies for desert.

    I'm now exhausted.

    Did my Mom ever serve big G & Ts? (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:21:53 PM EST
    No.

    Parent
    Really? Mine did (none / 0) (#77)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:55:14 PM EST
    every night in the summer.

    Parent
    We did, too (none / 0) (#101)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:31:45 PM EST
    although not so often.  When we'd take little weekend trips in the summertime, my dad had a small case he always brought along with gin and tonic and lime, and often a small can of nuts, and we made a real ritual of having a G&T in the room at whatever inn or motel we were staying at before we went out for dinner.  One of my most favorite family memories.

    Parent
    Isn't it a waste of great gin (none / 0) (#83)
    by rilkefan on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:59:49 PM EST
    to put tonic and lime in it?  Not dissing the fine drink, just wondering about whether I can stick with Gordon's when I make it.

    Parent
    Never had Gordon's (none / 0) (#92)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:18:22 PM EST
    I used to drink it with Beefeater's when I was young, and then Tanqueray. Never liked Bombay, too much juniper or something. The TL kid introduced me to Hendricks last year and I really like it. I don't think the tonic blunts it, but I'm sure Gordon's would be just fine. (What really ruins it for me is Diet Tonic.) For some reason, I've always been able to tell the difference in alcohol brands.

    Parent
    G&T (none / 0) (#98)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:25:50 PM EST
    depends heavily on matching the right gin with the right tonic.  Some gins go with some tonics, some with others.  You can't mix, say, a Tanqueray with a fairly sweet tonic like Canada Dry.  OTOH, a very dry tonic like Schweppes (or the grotesque Polar tonic, ubiquitous in the NE) is awful with a sweeter gin like Gordon's.

    Personally, I prefer a sweeter G&T, like a Lime Rickey with a kick.  My favorite combo is Gilbey's gin with diet Canada Dry, which isn't as sweet as the non-diet.

    The only thing good about a long stretch of brutally hot weather is the excuse to break out the G&Ts!

    Parent

    Crab salad (none / 0) (#99)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:29:33 PM EST
    I keep a couple of containers of Maine crabmeat in the freezer for hot weather indulgence.  Finely chopped celery, onion, hard-boiled egg, mayo and crab, on a leaf of nice lettuce, with saltine crackers.  Avocado on the side if it's available.  Ahhhhhhh.

    G&Ts, crab salad and root beer floats with good vanilla ice cream are things I always reserve to have only as a reward for enduring really hot weather.

    Parent

    wow... (5.00 / 4) (#25)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:01:26 PM EST
    that statement...ummm...errr...

    huh?

    Were that he followed through all the time, no? (5.00 / 3) (#42)
    by andgarden on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:13:15 PM EST
    There have been times... (5.00 / 6) (#47)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:17:07 PM EST
    where I really wonder if we've got any sort of memory at all with regards to what what has been said...and if there's a whole "thing" wherein folks think that if we said it online, it doesn't count (but if someone else says something, it's written in stone and the world will end in 15 seconds).

    Parent
    It's Orwellian IMHO. (5.00 / 0) (#55)
    by madamab on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:24:41 PM EST
    "We have always been at war with East Asia."

    Parent
    Yes. (5.00 / 0) (#84)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:02:39 PM EST
    Isn't everything he's written ARCHIVED somewhere?

    I don't go to Kos so I don't know how it's set up.  But do diaries and comments disappear after some time?  Maybe he's confusing existence on the internet with the fact of having said something at all?

    Parent

    And the price is??? (5.00 / 6) (#35)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:07:00 PM EST
    "I'm positioning myself, at DailyKos, which isn't the broader netroots, to not be carrying water for anybody," he said. "We'll work to keep our party honest. We're not going to pretend that just because he's Barack Obama, his actions aren't sometimes problematic. But that doesn't mean we're abandoning him or that we won't vote for him. That's ludicrous."

    As he flips and flops to try and get support from the middle, his positions are changing almost daily.

    No problem. But everyone should understand where they are, what they are buying, what the price is and what the currency they are paying with is.

    I'm sorry but (5.00 / 5) (#46)
    by shoephone on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:16:53 PM EST
    Markos calling anyone or anything "ludicrous" is just... well, ludicrous.

    umm . . . (5.00 / 12) (#56)
    by nycstray on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:25:10 PM EST
    "We'll work to keep our party honest. . . . "

    this from the same guy that went off the deep end saying the Clinton campaign was darkening Obama's image in ads, among other things?!

    You mean like (5.00 / 6) (#60)
    by madamab on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:27:57 PM EST
    considering Matt Drudge a more reliable source than Hillary Clinton?

    Yeah, um...this is total nonsense, to put it kindly.

    Parent

    What happened to "reality-based"? (5.00 / 4) (#72)
    by Cream City on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:46:33 PM EST
    Looks like Markos is "refining" his past statements, too.  But many thousands witnessed the retreat from reality by Markos and his ilk.  

    You can't go home again, Markos.

    Parent

    Here's more nonsense, courtesy of (1.50 / 2) (#96)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:23:09 PM EST
    obama, who sometimes should just keep his trap buttoned up....

    link


    Parent

    Sen. Obama has gone to such great (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:25:38 PM EST
    lengths to distance himself from anything remotely assoc. w/Islam.  What a joker.

    Parent
    If only we could see the humor.... (1.50 / 2) (#100)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:30:48 PM EST
    seriously we should be afraid, very afraid.

    He must be polling badly with the muslims, so will make his half-hearted attempt to win a few back.

    Parent

    Oh, but apparently the Iraqis are (5.00 / 0) (#105)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:43:28 PM EST
    really looking forward to his upcoming visit.

    Parent
    And he has never (5.00 / 5) (#68)
    by Radiowalla on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:39:33 PM EST
    apologized for it.

    That was enough to send me packing!  

    I used to admire Markos for creating such an energetic forum for activism.  Now I just shake my head in dismay.  He lead the mob against Hillary Clinton and tolerated no criticism of Obama.  Now let him stew in his own juice.

    Parent

    I can't begin to tell you (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by Jim J on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 07:08:51 AM EST
    how much better my life is now that I don't go there anymore.

    Parent
    John McCain and Sam Nunn (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:31:09 PM EST
    have something in common, in addition to their age and right-wing policies.  Keith Olbermann ridiculed Senator McCain for "living in the past", because he referred to the Czech Republic as Czechloslovakia, not apparently realizing that that country was peacefully divided, in 1993, into the Czech Republic and Slovakia. However, Nunn, referenced in the media, as one of the most knowledgeable Democrat in foreign affairs and national security, met with Senator Obama today as a foreign policy expert and potential vice presidential running mate. Like, McCain, Nunn also refered to that country as Czechloslovakia. Nunn as vice president would be a disasterous "blast from the past".

    Lucky! I would rather have PCNC, too. (5.00 / 0) (#63)
    by Joan in VA on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:31:20 PM EST
    Even here, it would have to be more useful than MSNBO.

    Snarf Snarf! (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by blogtopus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:48:44 PM EST
    I just had a vision of Snarf from Thundercats saying that quote above... it had that feeling to it. Snivelicious.

    It also occured to me today, when I saw another Obumper sticker, how much Barack is the epitomy of the kind of politician we all fear: A person who's sole purpose in life is to GET ELECTED, not govern. He knows how to win elections, but bubkis about what to do once he moves in.

    Interrrresting times we live in.

    thundercats (none / 0) (#132)
    by jjsmoof on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 07:13:19 AM EST
    LOL havn't heard that name in a while.  No i have an image of mummrah (sp?) a.k.a McCain.  

    Parent
    Jib Jab is at it again (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by Lahdee on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:54:49 PM EST
    This time it's BO and the old man with cameos from Bill and Hill. Here


    thanks just made a new thread with it (none / 0) (#95)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:21:55 PM EST
    According to the linked NYT article (5.00 / 0) (#82)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:58:42 PM EST
    at NN08 (!!!), Obama was invited, but couldn't make it, as he has to prepare for his trip overseas.  But Nancy Pelosi will be there.  Incoming.

    Wow (none / 0) (#106)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:45:25 PM EST
    She's got b***s to go there, I gotta say.

    Parent
    YOUR friend Markos (5.00 / 0) (#121)
    by Edgar08 on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 01:55:22 AM EST
    Not mine.

    There must be a blogroll thing going on here.

    Someone who claims to speak out against sexism can't straddle that divide.  It only discredits the effort.


    One more thing (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by Edgar08 on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 03:24:12 AM EST
    If I cared about FISA as much as everyone else claims they care about FISA I would not like a quote where Obama's actions on FISA were described as merely "problematic."

    It's a dumb self-centered self-serving quote from just about every perspective I can imagine.


    Too late Markos (5.00 / 0) (#135)
    by Carolyn in Baltimore on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 08:05:15 AM EST
    When I was still undecided on candidates I wrote a diary on the Obama campaigns' aggressive fundraising after they called and harassed me for not agreeing with them. No one discussed the agressive tactics - they made the issue me.
    And I made note that while Obama was not a DLC member, they loved him and suggested he was not a democrat in spirit and was troll-rated.
    And I took Kos to task for being a bone-headed sexist on some internet safety issues.

    Kos was off m bookmarks many moons ago. Verbal abuse is not tolerated anymore.

    You like that quote because... (5.00 / 0) (#138)
    by lizpolaris on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 08:31:11 AM EST
    it's so hilarious?  ironic? lacking in self-awareness? it's missing the obviously intended /snark tag?  it's so deliciously false?  it consisely reveals the cluelessness and delusion of the one quoted?

    DailyKos is...not carrying water for anybody.  ROFLMAO

    Some selective memory by Atrios Wednesday (5.00 / 0) (#148)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 09:01:20 AM EST
    It's The 90s Again

    MSNBC just spent 3 minutes covering Hillary Clinton's new hairdo.

    Please kill me.

    I guess he missed the last 8 years of MSNBC Hillary coverage.

    I have no idea where everyone is. I did (none / 0) (#2)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:33:47 PM EST
    read on Huff Post three major TV networks are accompanying Sen. Obama on his tour overseas.  

    I saw that in the NYT as well... (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by OrangeFur on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:39:08 PM EST
    The NYT noted that when McCain went to Iraq earlier this year, none of the networks seemed to care at all.

    The media is choosing Obama just as they chose Bush in 2000. I still shake my head at the ridiculous swoon they did after Obama's Greatest Speech Ever on race. Still, at least this time they picked a more reasonable candidate than 2000.

    Parent

    Unlike McCain, (5.00 / 3) (#11)
    by madamab on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:47:29 PM EST
    Obama is smart enough to leave Joe Lieberman at home.

    Parent
    And, doubtless, Sen. Obama has been (5.00 / 0) (#13)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:50:03 PM EST
    thoroughly briefed on the non-existence of Czechoslovakia

    Parent
    And the Soviet Union! (none / 0) (#16)
    by madamab on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:51:53 PM EST
    Didn't McCain keep saying that too?

    Parent
    I thought that was Fred Thompson (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:19:41 PM EST
    Oh, you're right! (none / 0) (#53)
    by madamab on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:22:43 PM EST
    I couldn't remember which of the clueless GOP candidates had said that.

    Parent
    Heck (5.00 / 0) (#71)
    by Steve M on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:45:06 PM EST
    Even Condi says that, and she's a Sovietologist!

    Parent
    Why would the media... (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Dadler on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:58:29 PM EST
    ...go to Iraq with a well-established loon like McCain.  As soon as McCain made his absurd, dishonest, incredible remark about how safe the streets of Baghdad were, when reality was precisely the opposite, he ceased to be a serious or credible voice on the issue.  Now, I don't think that's why they failed to follow him out there.  But it's certainly the best reason to ignore him and remind him what a fool he was/is on the issue.  A malevolent, addled fool.

    Parent
    Care to prognosticate on the NL's chances (none / 0) (#7)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:45:24 PM EST
    of ever winning the All Star game?

    Oooh, you're just mean. (none / 0) (#8)
    by madamab on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:45:54 PM EST
    Not to say that I wasn't happy with the AL's win. ;-)

    Parent
    I thought the NL had it for once. (none / 0) (#10)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:47:15 PM EST
    That would have made me happy; not that the Padres have even a faint chance of going to the World Series this year.

    Parent
    Preach it, oculus... (none / 0) (#12)
    by madamab on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:50:00 PM EST
    I grew up with the Orioles. :-p

    They were good back then.

    I must say I was excited to see Brooks Robinson, Jim Palmer (swoon), Eddie Murray and Cal Ripken, Jr. at the beginning of the program. Those were the days, baby.

    Parent

    Cal has beaucoup de fans. We were (none / 0) (#15)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:51:33 PM EST
    outnumbered 7 to 1 at Cooperstown.

    Parent
    Cal is a real mensch... (none / 0) (#18)
    by madamab on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 09:52:53 PM EST
    steady as a rock and played in almost every game every year. :-)

    Parent
    Gotta Love Brooks (none / 0) (#26)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:01:27 PM EST
    My favorite Brooks Robinson memory...him telling a story about his son running down the street saying "My dad made three errors last night".

    Indeed he did, three errors in one inning in a World Series Game. Hopefully Dan Uggla takes a lesson from it and puts his three errors last night behind him.

    I never Saw Brooks make an error, but as they say...you could look it up.

    Parent

    My Mom... (none / 0) (#139)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 08:32:26 AM EST
    ...is from Curtis Bay, so I had no other choice than to be an O's fan from the time I was born.  

    My Aunt arranged to have me meet Brooks in the clubhouse at old Memorial Stadium when I was a youngster.  Still have the autographed ball.  

    Someday, probably not soon, but someday they will regain their rightful place atop the AL East!

    O's, hon!

    Parent

    The Padres are a mess (none / 0) (#34)
    by Dadler on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:06:37 PM EST
    And the owner is about to lose half his dough in his divorce.  While Petco Park bankrupts the city for years to come.  Great yard, bad deal for the city.  Can you believe Moores somehow got away without building the hotels he was supposed to build?  Now we're stuck with new and vacant condo towers not brining in property taxes.  A complete disaster.  Can you fathom the stupidity behind the move to switch from hotels to condos?  Or that a court allowed it to occur, under the reasoning that it only constituted "fine tuning" to Prop C. that the voters approved?

    Parent
    I'm more annoyed with how the (none / 0) (#37)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:09:53 PM EST
    city let Moores substantially trim down the Park at the Park.

    Parent
    The city gave Moores the city (none / 0) (#107)
    by Dadler on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:48:31 PM EST
    Almost literally.  They handed him a giant swath of downtown and he has not lived up to his promises.  Which should be no surprise, given his completely shady Peregrine Systems stock sale.  The park at the park is just another f.u. to the fans.  And this dingweed city just let it slide.  We'd jump ONTO a sinking ship, I'm convinced.  Oh wait, we already have.  It's called existence.  Goodnight now.

    Parent
    Just be grateful you're not (none / 0) (#41)
    by shoephone on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:12:57 PM EST
    a Mariners fan. My team is a pathetic joke, just like last season.

    Parent
    But the Mariners beat the Pads. (none / 0) (#43)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:14:01 PM EST
    And they still have (none / 0) (#48)
    by shoephone on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:19:22 PM EST
    the worst record in MLB.

    Sigh.

    :-(

    Parent

    solidarity! (none / 0) (#57)
    by Little Fish on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:25:29 PM EST
    My nephews little league team could put up a fair fight against the Ms and he's only 7.

    Parent
    M's had front office issues. (none / 0) (#66)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:39:23 PM EST
    If your nephew is a singles hitter maybe the M's will sign him for 20 mil a year too. I like Ichiro but 20 mil a year for a singles hitter? Richie Sexson who wiffs more than anything. And head case Bedard all on the same team.  Who is in charge in the great northwest.

    Parent
    But Ichiro is so graceful when he (none / 0) (#70)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:42:47 PM EST
    hits all those singles.

    Parent
    Graceful as Baryshnikov? (none / 0) (#74)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:49:23 PM EST
    At $100,000 a single he better be more graceful than Baryshnikov...although I hear the ichirolls with a little sake can help get you through 9 innings in Seattle this year.

    Parent
    I never blame the singles hitter. After all, (none / 0) (#80)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:55:46 PM EST
    that was T. Gwynn's speciality.  Its the rest of the lineup.  Small ball, guys.  Just do it.

    Parent
    Who is in charge in the Great Northwest? (none / 0) (#78)
    by shoephone on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:55:21 PM EST
    Paul Allen. But he just owns the Seahawks and most of Seattle's prime real estate.

    Parent
    Oops. (none / 0) (#81)
    by shoephone on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:57:46 PM EST
    Almost forgot his Trailblazers.

    Parent
    shhhh don't tell anyone (none / 0) (#85)
    by Little Fish on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:03:20 PM EST
    I used to work for the Mariners back in my baseball grrrrl days. I'm quite disillusioned from the experience.

    Parent
    I worked at Fenway during the 1990 playoffs (none / 0) (#88)
    by shoephone on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:10:03 PM EST
    but.. it wasn't for the team. I was a waitress at the "600 Club", where I met the venerable and thickly eyebrowed Tip O'Neill.

    And sometimes I got to serve Mrs. Yawkey her daily cocktail which, if my memory is correct, was a G&T.

    Parent

    cool! (none / 0) (#118)
    by Little Fish on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 12:48:04 AM EST
    Working the playoffs is fun and at Fenway to boot! I'd love to see a game at Fenway.

    Without getting too specific I did just about every job there. From babysitting players kids to working in the front office. (I offered to come out of the bullpen once because I couldn't have done any worse, really). It was fun, but eye opening. I thought it was my dream job and wanted to work up the ranks and be in PR but I learned very fast that it was a boys club and women had to be twice as good and work twice as hard to get half as far as men. :/  

    I did get to meet a bunch of awesome people though!  All the broadcasters, lots of players, their wives etc. And I got to see Derek Jeter in his undies. Bonus!

     

    Parent

    That put a smile on my face (none / 0) (#86)
    by shoephone on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:05:18 PM EST
    and I must say, I believe it.

    Parent
    I hear echos of BTD (none / 0) (#28)
    by Lahdee on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:01:56 PM EST
    in that statement from your friend Kos.
    I guess nobody's around cause they're all on the road to Austin.

    Yeah... (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:07:38 PM EST
    but from BTD the original sounds a whole lot more clear.

    The kos echoes coming through the carried water pitchers sounds a bit distorted...

    Parent

    Article in LA Times about Sen. (none / 0) (#31)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:03:09 PM EST
    Obama's father.  Quite interesting.  Unfulfilled potential, for sure.

    LAT

    Someone at work (none / 0) (#32)
    by kredwyn on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:03:47 PM EST
    was trying to explain that whole thing to someone else. I overheard a chunk of it...and it made absolutely no sense.

    I'm from Wisconsin, and I oughta know (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by Cream City on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:52:04 PM EST
    that all you need to know is this:

    Brett Favre is being a drama queen.  Making it worse for the team with every interview.  It's a sad end, but those of us in the town with his restaurant, back in the day, could tell you that the guy has a good heart but simply lacks class.

    Parent

    From what I read and watching his (none / 0) (#87)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:08:12 PM EST
    interview on Greta, it sounds like he just wouldn't make up his frakkin' mind and was jerking back and forth over the whole thing.

    Sigh.  I love Brett, but this is not graceful in the least.

    Parent

    Favre is a self-centered egotist (none / 0) (#104)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:42:50 PM EST
    like they all are, all the big stars in every field.

    But he said repeatedly in the Greta interview that he knows he's always been "wishy-washy" (his word) at the end of every season about whether he wants to come back the next year or not.  He says he's always told management that he has no ability to tell at the end of the season how he'll feel when the next one rolls around.

    He told several stories on Greta tonight about GM Thompson basically lying to him about different personnel issues over the last few years.

    Parent

    Brett wants to be the GM (none / 0) (#110)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:59:12 PM EST
    Listening to Brett it almost sounded like he wants to be in charge of player personnel. Someone forgot to tell him he's just a player. A damn fine one in his time, but his time is fading. Hope he doesn't hang on and embarrass himself like Dan Marino did near the end.

    Parent
    Gee, I don't know Favre (none / 0) (#119)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 12:58:11 AM EST
    from the man in the moon, so my opinion means nothing.  But just about every major sports star exerts a great deal of influence on management about player selection.  That's especially true of football quarterbacks, whose performance depends heavily on players in particular positions.

    Favre didn't sound aggravated because his advice wasn't followed.  He was aggravated because the GM told him he'd done things it turned out he hadn't done, or said things that simply weren't true.  Sounds like typical dishonest management behavior, if true, a legitimate gripe to me.

    I'm sure he's a royal pain in the butt for management to deal with, but I honestly didn't hear from him the typical signs of a guy trying to make himself look good by casting blame on other people.  He sounded pretty straight.

    Parent

    And he tossed his friend (none / 0) (#113)
    by Cream City on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 12:02:48 AM EST
    Campion under the bus, revealing a confidence.

    There may be a reason why management doesn't tell all to Favre.  And yes, we in Wisconsin have been rallied by Favre repeatedly for five years now, I think, to agonize over will he or won't he retire.

    Yawn.

    Parent

    What A Letdown (none / 0) (#38)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:10:04 PM EST
    You sent me scurrying to my remote to see if they moved Versus into my lineup. I would have been able to see the rest of the Tour de France, but alas my Channel 30 on Comcast is still MSNBC.

    I hate to debunk a good (none / 0) (#102)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:34:51 PM EST
    conspiracy theory, but it actually has to do with ratings and payments.  MSNBC gets lousy ratings and wants more money from the cable/sat companies than they think they should pay, so you only get it on higher tiers in most systems now.  I had to go to a much higher level sat package than I wanted to get it, and Fox, too.  Lower levels have only CNN.

    Parent
    The telephone poller I talked to (none / 0) (#40)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:12:53 PM EST
    last night asked my view of BBC, Fox, and CNN.  Since I don't watch TV news shows, I was tempted to go into a rant [based solely on reading BTD and the comments here] about MSNBC and Olbermann, but resisted.  

    i.e. Party Allegiance? (none / 0) (#45)
    by fctchekr on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:15:56 PM EST
     The similarities are there: i.e. it's Putin all over again, but of course we're going to vote for him anyway, aren't we....and on..

    What say you? Is Markos correct:? (none / 0) (#61)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:29:22 PM EST
    Daily Kos, which isn't the broader netrroots


    I know you weren't asking me but (5.00 / 4) (#91)
    by shoephone on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:17:14 PM EST
    I would say that DK is, indeed, the broader netroots, though certainly not the deeper netroots. The latter category includes Greenwald and Digby.

    And even though I don't dare venture into the FDL comment threads anymore, I am very impressed with the strength, vision and focus that Jane and Christy and Marcy have shown at that site recently.

    Parent

    Jane, Christy and Marcy (5.00 / 3) (#94)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:21:16 PM EST
    are great. And dedicated to making FDL the best it can be. They've done tremendous things with FDL, from adding front page blogs to the book salon, ACLU  joinder on FISA, raising money for candidates (Blue America) and so much more.  They are smart, exceptional and talented women.

    Parent
    And tireless, too. (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by shoephone on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:36:41 PM EST
    Unlike me. I get so overwhelmed by the hypocrisy and betrayals of the Congressional Dems I constantly feel like throwing in the towel. FDL keeps fighting the fight, no matter what.

    Apparently, there is going to be a big announcement from Jane tomorrow at the NN conference, regarding major changes for her site.

    Curiosity abounds...

    Parent

    The people at the Netroots Nation (5.00 / 0) (#149)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 09:03:54 AM EST
    convention, which used to be the Yearly Kos will be surprised to hear that.

    Parent
    I give Kos some credit (none / 0) (#79)
    by ajain on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:55:28 PM EST
    He was wildly (and often ludicrously) supportive of Obama during the primaries. But I think you have to give him credit for not bending sideways and backwards to support absolutely every crap he does, the way other Obama-lovers do.

    You can tell by that statement, the Kool-Aid is wearing off. If Obama is elected, in a couple of years there will be no love lost.

    I'm not sure how much credit (5.00 / 6) (#89)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:15:06 PM EST
    being better than other Obama-lovers is really worth.

    Esp. since he sounds defensive and *ss-covering.  Perhaps he shouldn't have kicked quite so many Clinton supporters off his site, or done something to stop the wilding to drive the rest away.

    Too bad he didn't realize that popularity and credibility aren't the same thing sooner.

    Karma, it's a b*tch.

    Parent

    Wondering how the deal in Austin (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:16:55 PM EST
    will pan out.  If it is really broader than DK, might the disaffected show up?  

    Parent
    I Had Registered (5.00 / 3) (#111)
    by The Maven on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:59:28 PM EST
    ages and ages ago, but the mobs with pitchforks mentality over at orangeworld (and elsewhere in the political blogosphere) made the prospect of traveling there far less enticing.  Then, when things started getting busier at the office, I can't say I made any real effort to get this time off, which would have required a lot of negotiating on my part, anyway.

    For every person I know and would still want to talk with in person who'd originally planned to attend, there's someone else on whom I'd want to spit.  Although NN08 is "broader" than just DK, that site is still far and away the dominant component.  And as such, I'd have to guess that there's plenty of lingering bitterness because of the site's dishonesty and betrayal of principles.

    It will be a while yet before the netroots are all a big happy family again (if they ever were); right now, we're not even back to the level of dysfunctional families about which they make quirky indie movies which premiere at film festivals.

    Parent

    Just curious (5.00 / 0) (#114)
    by shoephone on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 12:09:03 AM EST
    Since you had already registered and then decided not to go... were you able to get your money refunded?

    Parent
    My only motivation would be to (4.00 / 1) (#117)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 12:30:23 AM EST
    sit down w/Elise for a glass of wine or two and ask why she whole-heartedly supported Obama from the get-go and if his FISA back track causes her concern now.

    Parent
    The kool aid isn't wearing off (5.00 / 0) (#122)
    by Edgar08 on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 01:58:09 AM EST
    The hypocrisy is coming full circle.


    Parent
    Neil Young's on letterman NOW! :) (none / 0) (#93)
    by nycstray on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:19:49 PM EST


    He was great! (none / 0) (#108)
    by splashy on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:48:32 PM EST
    Has a new movie out that looks interesting.

    Parent
    His car project is interesting (none / 0) (#112)
    by nycstray on Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 11:59:55 PM EST
    My farmers converted an old tractor from the 50's to electric. A farmer upstate has the instructions  online and iirc, it's only around 150 to convert the tractor. Beats the heck outta the price of fuel and it's better for the sustainable farms.

    His movie looks like something I would go see.I'm going to have to check into it.

    Parent

    Here's an article on it (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by splashy on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 02:32:43 AM EST
    Here from November 2007

    Parent
    Sadly, (none / 0) (#124)
    by Amiss on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 02:16:44 AM EST
    It is still on the Comcast here for the Tallahassee area.

    MileHi Hawkeye (none / 0) (#156)
    by DancingOpossum on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 10:08:26 AM EST
    from Curtis Bay, so I had no other choice than to be an O's fan from the time I was born.

    Heh, your post reminded me of a bar I frequented years and years ago in South Balmer (before it became hip), where the standard retort to someone bragging about his big plans and big dreams was, "Yeah, sure. He'll be lucky to make it as far as Curtis Bay." Tough crowd, hon!!

    Charm City, hon... (none / 0) (#158)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 10:54:32 AM EST
    ...youse got to love it!  A lot of the Pollacks in my family didn't venture too far from the old CB homestead.

    Parent