Thursday Afternoon Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 05:23:37 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Open Thread.

< Thursday Morning Open Thread | 120K Jobs Created; U3 Down To 8.6% On Revisions, Reduction In Workforce Participation >

The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

Menu

Home | About | RSS
E-Mail | Comment Policy |
Search
Login

Make a new account

Existing Users

Username:
Password:
Creator and Principal Author
- Jeralyn E. Merritt
TL Alumni

Contribute To TalkLeft

Sections
Site Credits
- TalkLeft Graphics by C.L., Our Man in Hollywood (2006 - 2008)
- TalkLeft Header Graphic by Monk
- Powered by Scoop
Legal
- All Content Copyright ©2002-2023. Reprints only by permission from TalkLeft.com
- Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.
- TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.
"The pump don't work 'cause the vandals took the handles"
© 1965 Bob Dylan

Thursday Afternoon Open Thread | 68 comments (68 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

We're sorry you can't comment, BTD. (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by observed on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 09:02:45 PM EST

Hope you get better soon.
And please, do it again, any time.

: He gave himself permission (none / 0) (#28)
by oculus on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 11:38:47 PM EST

To comment in open threads. Which is amusing.

Parent

Here to report Hugh Jackman's rep (5.00 / 2) (#21)
by oculus on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 10:38:46 PM EST

As a charmer is well-deserved even from row H of mezzanine.

I just (5.00 / 1) (#42)
by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 07:11:33 AM EST

watched Scott Pelley's segment on the homeless children in Central Florida. That is so sad.

There has been a heartwarming local response (none / 0) (#47)
by ruffian on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 08:25:36 AM EST

Many offers of housing for the families shown on TV, and even an offer of Stetson College tuition for some of the kids.

Still so many more families that need help though. This area is really hurting.

Parent

And the local news would rather focus (none / 0) (#48)
by ruffian on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 08:28:43 AM EST

on the latest missing young woman. Nearly the whole half hour Wed night was devoted to the search, to the effect of 'yep, it's real heard to search this brush.' Ya think?

Parent

: Well (5.00 / 1) (#50)
by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 08:33:45 AM EST

thank heavens for 60 minutes at least drawing attention to the problem because from the sound of it, your media never would. I see this here too. The media needs to put forth this "perfect false face" to the world for some reason. They will report on crime but they are atrocious when it comes to families suffering and whole host of other things.

Parent

I know (none / 0) (#49)
by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 08:31:33 AM EST

you just can't keep up with the need. The demand is so high for help and then you have families that are barely holding on themselves who might want to help but aren't able to and on it goes.

We have the same problem here in GA too but just not quite as bad.

Parent

: With the theme park and hospitality (none / 0) (#54)
by ruffian on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 09:52:59 AM EST

industry being such a key part of the economy here, there are a higher proportion of lower income service industry jobs here than in most places. As I know you know, so many people are just a missed paycheck or two away from disaster.

Parent

Please tell me it isn't really Wednesday (none / 0) (#1)
by Anne on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 05:48:34 PM EST

AGAIN (post title: Wednesday Afternoon Open Thread); I was so looking forward to tomorrow being Friday...

Groundhog Day. (none / 0) (#2)
by oculus on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 05:49:25 PM EST

Parent

Thanks (none / 0) (#3)
by Ga6thDem on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 06:00:20 PM EST

I thought my eyes were going bad very quickly or something or I was having double vision or something. Glad to know it's not me.

Parent

: Could be BTD doing time travel (5.00 / 1) (#4)
by oculus on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 06:21:09 PM EST

so as to avoid his self-imposed timeout.

Parent

At least he didn't call it (none / 0) (#5)
by jeffinalabama on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 06:43:21 PM EST

Plough (or plow, for those on the American side of the pond) or Chequer Tree, the 8th of Frimaire, the names associated more or less with a wednesday (possibly thursday) in the French Republican Calendar.

I know, too much information.

Biden spoke! (none / 0) (#6)
by Edger on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 07:06:37 PM EST

I was wondering what happened to him.

Figured he's been staying out of range the past few months so he doesn't get any on him.

I just (none / 0) (#8)
by Ga6thDem on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 08:42:12 PM EST

saw another article shopping this changing the VP junk. I guess they never get tired of trying to replace Biden.

Parent

I kind of get the impression (none / 0) (#9)
by Edger on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 08:47:20 PM EST

that he's probably happy to be distanced from a sinking ship, myself...

Parent

Probably (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by Ga6thDem on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 08:50:54 PM EST

He sure doesn't seem to come into the public eye much.

Parent

: He may (none / 0) (#11)
by Edger on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 08:57:53 PM EST

have a large brain? ;-)

Parent

Last time (none / 0) (#7)
by Edger on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 07:34:12 PM EST

there was a president almost this bad, people could be easily sold on some vague promises and a virtual guarantee that almost anyone from the "other guys" couldn't help but be better even doing next to absolutely nothing.

And they were right. Absolutely nothing would have been much better.

For next year I think we're already way past "we don't suck as much" being a viable platform, and someone new doing nothing probably won't cut it either.

And "boo" has pretty much run it's course too, even being only one syllable and simple enough for a lot of people, so it probably won't be too motivational either.

So what's left? Would anything in October surprise you?

What would surprise me most.... (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by christinep on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 09:32:57 PM EST

is if you could give the predictable, monotone about how-horrible-everything-is a bit of a break.
(OTOH, keep it up & we'll all glide by.)

Peace.

Parent

Pointless (none / 0) (#14)
by MKS on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 09:39:08 PM EST

Nothing new, no policy discussion.....

Some people think 1968 really helped liberals.....

Parent

Ther you go again (none / 0) (#15)
by cymro on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 09:53:55 PM EST

Posting indecipherable coded statements with no explanatory context. Are you embarking on another of your private conversations intended only for the eyes of the cognoscenti? If not, please elucidate.

Parent

How about 1980 or 2000? (5.00 / 1) (#17)
by MKS on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 10:11:41 PM EST

Parent

1980 and 2000 (5.00 / 2) (#34)
by shoephone on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:20:45 AM EST

Yeah, 1980, the election you're trying to blame on Ted Kennedy? Please. Even my grandmother, a lifelong liberal Democrat, despised Carter and vowed to vote for anyone but him. And so, like my lifelong Democrat parents, she voted for Anderson. And in the general she voted for Reagan. (My parents reluctantly voted for Carter.)

And 2000? You musta missed the part where the Supremes declared Bush their little favorite, even though recounts showed Gore won Florida. But I get it, you're trying to blame that one on Nader, everyone's favorite punching bag.

How boring.

Parent

Carter was very good on human rights (5.00 / 2) (#38)
by MKS on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:53:58 AM EST

And he was very good with respect to Central America. Carter cut-off aid to the Guatemalan military, and Reagan re-instituted it. A Genocide of horrific proportions and depravity resulted. The election in 1980 mattered.

I suppose all that is arcance ancient history for those in haste to defeat Obama. But it mattered to the 200,000 that the UN estimates was butchered.

I think you bash Carter mistakenly.

Parent

It may be fashionable--here-- (none / 0) (#35)
by MKS on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:41:17 AM EST

to dismiss these defeats, but the point as boring as you think it is, is very real.

The elaborate rationalizations some go to justify trying to defeat Obama.

Parent

I'm not dismissing anything (5.00 / 3) (#41)
by shoephone on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 03:40:08 AM EST

I'm merely pointing out facts about the elections you referenced. Carter did not have a snowball's chance in he[[ of winning the 1980 race. I worked as a canvasser in D.C., Virginia, and Delaware the summer of 1980. Based on the responses I was hearing from residents there, it was obvious to me that Reagan was going to sweep the floor with Carter that November.

It is you who insists on beating this dead horse about how someone other than Obama -- a bunch of anonymous commenters on a blog??? -- will be responsible for him losing, if, in fact, he does lose. I'm not at all convinced he will lose, but either way, the results will be due to his performance as president, and whether his campaign team was able to convince the voters to give him four more years. I guess whining and b*tching about voters is convenient. You seem to spend an extraordinary amount of time trying to shut people down who have have serious disagreements with Obama's policies.

THAT is what is so freaking boring.

Parent

Not trying to shut anyone down (none / 0) (#51)
by MKS on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 09:39:16 AM EST

Disagreements about policy and actual ideas is very helpful.

I do not see much of that here.

What I do see is an avalanch of repetitive snide comments without any discussion of policy at all. Over and over again these comments appear.

A discussion of ideas would be refreshing.....

Parent

Refresh yourself (none / 0) (#52)
by Edger on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 09:47:57 AM EST

Unified Progressive Platform

Also see:
How To Help Obama Win A Second Term

Parent

Single payer and war crimes trial for Cheney (5.00 / 1) (#55)
by MKS on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 10:19:24 AM EST

Fine. Cool, even.

But it won't happen and it is not the way for Obama to win in 2012.

And Obama supporters get ridiculed with "Hopey changey" and you suggest war crimes trials as a way to win re-election?

Talk about irrational idealism and naivete. Hopey changey back at ya.

Parent

I didn't think you'd like it (none / 0) (#56)
by Edger on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 10:24:08 AM EST

Keep cheering for the republican policies you're getting now.

No matter who wins next year you'll get more and better republican policies, without you having to lift a finger.

Parent

Actually, I do like your ideas (none / 0) (#57)
by MKS on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 10:32:33 AM EST

I would enjoy a discussion of these ideas.

I have done a fair amount of research that gets pretty close to pinning torture chambers on Cheney in 1989.

Parent

I just gave you (5.00 / 1) (#58)
by Edger on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 10:37:40 AM EST

two discussions of them. You didn't like them.

Parent

Spending more time discussing them (none / 0) (#59)
by MKS on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 10:45:03 AM EST

and less time trashing Obama and his supporters, would be helpful.

Parent

You're a waste of time (none / 0) (#62)
by Edger on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 11:05:32 AM EST

Parent

No more olive branches for you (none / 0) (#64)
by MKS on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 11:22:16 AM EST

Parent

: Impressive sales ability (none / 0) (#67)
by Edger on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 11:52:49 AM EST

That must be an obama campaign approved pitch...

Parent

The 1968 election (none / 0) (#16)
by MKS on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 10:10:14 PM EST

Wikipedia can probably bring you up to speed.

Parent

So, you think that 1972, 1976, (none / 0) (#24)
by observed on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 11:02:51 PM EST

1984, 1988, 1992, 1996, 2004 and 2008 were helpful for liberals?
The years 1976 and 2008 are quite significant on this list, IMO.

Parent

The Left does love self-destruction (none / 0) (#26)
by MKS on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 11:19:37 PM EST

Parent

Not the point. (none / 0) (#27)
by observed on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 11:22:54 PM EST

1976 saw the conservative Democrat run. Liberals didn't kill the party in the late 70's----Jimmy Carter did.

Parent

You exempt Bill (5.00 / 1) (#30)
by MKS on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 11:47:51 PM EST

But that is revsionist history.....Bill was the original DLCer, and signed Welfare Reform and pushed Nafta.

Winning is better than losing.

If your standard is an unabashedly liberal President, then you will search in vain.....

Parent

Carter was the precursor of Clinton (none / 0) (#32)
by observed on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:01:33 AM EST

in many ways. He also weakened financial regulation.
You can include 1992 on the list if you like. It doesn't make much difference.

Parent

So, we have never had an (none / 0) (#37)
by MKS on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:44:30 AM EST

acceptably liberal President.

Life sucks....So, crash the system.....

Parent

The political Holy Grail (none / 0) (#43)
by christinep on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 07:24:22 AM EST

Even typing the word "political" next to "Holy" is hard to do. Ah yes. The perfect candidate! (I've often wondered what he or she would look like or be in our non-perfect world?)

Good point.

Parent

No doubt my perfect candidate (none / 0) (#60)
by sj on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 10:45:52 AM EST

would be different from yours. It's inevitable. I know that I'll never have my perfect candidate. Accepted that years ago. What I'm determining now is where "unacceptable" lies on that spectrum -- the Unholy Grail, if you will.

Everyone's mileage will vary on that side of the spectrum as well.

Parent

Surprisingly...just guessing... (none / 0) (#65)
by christinep on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 11:22:47 AM EST

my perfect & ideal candidate in a perfect world might not be that different than whom you would choose. I'm guessing, too, that several people here make their choices based upon what each deems practicable...and, our different experiences will give us different perspectives on what is practical in terms of votes in a general national election. (Short: You may be more idealistic on one level of "not settling" & going for what should be; I may compromise/settle to get the increment now and come back again the next day.)

Parent

: I don't think that would be (none / 0) (#66)
by sj on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 11:47:46 AM EST

too surprising :)
my perfect & ideal candidate in a perfect world might not be that different than whom you would choose.
and I agree with this too:
I'm guessing, too, that several people here make their choices based upon what each deems practicable
After all, I did too. For many years. I actually still do.
But I no longer count inaction a suitable action. Try and fail? Fine. Try and succeed a teeny tiny bit? Fine. Give away something of value to me so that you can look like you succeeded a teeny tiny bit? Not fine.
But this doesn't apply to me (although no doubt it applies to some):
:(Short: You may be more idealistic on one level of "not settling" & going for what should be...
Speaking for myself only, it isn't that I won't "settle" for something so much as I won't "enable" something. It's that I won't vote against my own interests, not that a candidate must champion all of my interests. I won't vote for the Unholy Grail, if you will.
And where tha "Unholy" line is, each must decide for him/herself.

Parent

Actually, many would say 1968 (5.00 / 1) (#31)
by MKS on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 11:52:30 PM EST

killed the Democratic Party.

Carter's winning was an anamoly caused by Watergate and Ford's pardon of Nixon. And Ford almost won.....

The Pendulum started to swing back to the Conservatives in 1968 and was only--briefly--interrupted by Carter.

But many here apparently hope Obama loses, and let's see what happens if he does.....It would be brutal for liberals.

Parent

Obama winning has already been brutal (5.00 / 2) (#33)
by observed on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:02:01 AM EST

for liberals.

Parent

You think President McCain (none / 0) (#36)
by MKS on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:43:32 AM EST

would have pulled out of Iraq, singed DADT repeal, and appointed Sotomayor and Kagan to the Supreme Court.....

I suppose you can dismiss these achievements....

Parent

That's an acceptable complete (5.00 / 2) (#40)
by observed on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 03:37:24 AM EST

list of accomplishments for Obama, except that DADT shouldnt' be credited to him.
He didn't push for it, and the courts were going to force it anyway.
Compare that list to what FDR did in his first 100 days, then get back to me.

Parent

: Do you really believe (5.00 / 1) (#53)
by MKS on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 09:52:33 AM EST

that the U.S. Supreme Court would have invalidated DADT?
Assuming a President McCain, who would have fought it saying it was a matter of national security, and who would have appointed two Altio/Scalia/Roberts clones instead of Sotomayor and Kagan?
Never, ever, not even remotely possible. "The courts" is really about what Justice Brennan called the rule of five, as in getting five votes on the Supreme Court. The Citizens United Supreme Court.
Why not give credit to Obama for the repeal of DADT, or least recognize it would never have happened with a Republcian President?
Just one more piece of evidence showing how too many will fabricate a basis of criticizing Obama.

Parent

Cute as always (none / 0) (#44)
by christinep on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 07:27:38 AM EST

But. Not real. But #2...big points for overstatement :)

Parent

As always, your fangirl opinion (none / 0) (#45)
by observed on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 07:30:30 AM EST

is noted and weighted appropriately.

Parent

: And that cute response is "accepted" (none / 0) (#46)
by christinep on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 07:37:51 AM EST

Parent

Obama has been pretty bad (5.00 / 1) (#39)
by The Addams Family on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 01:14:02 AM EST

but one thing i will never forget

the feral roar that engulfed that mob in Austin when it was announced that Al Gore had retracted his concession

i don't want those wolves in charge of the executive branch ever again

Parent

Does Gingrich count as feral? (none / 0) (#61)
by MKS on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 10:54:55 AM EST

Parent

: god yes (none / 0) (#68)
by The Addams Family on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 12:10:46 PM EST

Parent

The Marlins (none / 0) (#18)
by CoralGables on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 10:19:55 PM EST

grab a piece of the oculus baseball pie.

Reports out of Miami are the Marlins have inked a deal with Heath Bell.

Since we rarely win, don't need a. Closer. (none / 0) (#19)
by oculus on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 10:36:43 PM EST

Plus we acquired your DL catcher.

Parent

Now that the Marlins (none / 0) (#20)
by CoralGables on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 10:38:38 PM EST

will be playing indoors, Heath won't have to worry about the South Florida humidity damaging his svelte waistline.

Parent

Hey. The guy actually sprints from bullpen. (none / 0) (#22)
by oculus on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 10:41:09 PM EST

Pretty damn impressive.

Parent

It is impressive (none / 0) (#23)
by CoralGables on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 10:47:14 PM EST

but there is a fast spreading rumor that there is now competition for the Marlin with the largest waistline...Heath Bell or Billy the Marlin

Parent

: One of the Padres radio guys ad. Heath's (none / 0) (#25)
by oculus on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 11:06:14 PM EST

Workout regimen is the. WII.

Parent

If this makes (none / 0) (#29)
by Makarov on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 11:40:47 PM EST

Florida less likely to sign Reyes, I'm all for it.

Congratulations!

GM Mastermind Ruben Amaro Jr is one step closer to signing a shortstop.

Parent

: Here's a tweet (none / 0) (#63)
by CoralGables on Fri Dec 02, 2011 at 11:13:00 AM EST

from Joe Heyman at Sports Illustrated this morning.
"#marlins are pretty optimistic on reyes. but they are considering upping 1st bid soon to try for quick resolution."

Parent

Thursday Afternoon Open Thread | 68 comments (68 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment