home

Silly Season

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 03:27:15 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

This is silly. Frankly, it does harm to real and legitimate claims for an Obama mandate

When your mandate measure puts anyone ahead of FDR, it is time to stop.

Speaking for me only

This is an Open Thread.

< Did "The Middle" Decide The Election? | A Plan to Close Guantanamo >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Silly Season | 76 comments (76 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Oh BTW (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 03:35:05 PM EST
    FDR won the 1932 election by 18 percentage points, and 57% of the vote.

    Also lost Pennsylvania while winning Mississippi (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by andgarden on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 03:41:18 PM EST
    Oh, and he never won Maine or Vermont.

    Sh*t changes.

    Parent

    I assume then he would've lost to McCain (none / 0) (#27)
    by lilburro on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:06:50 PM EST
    who won 19.557% of the nation's population.  ...

    Parent
    Very Odd (none / 0) (#50)
    by Pepe on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 09:24:53 PM EST
    "When your mandate measure puts anyone ahead of FDR, it is time to stop."

    I read the link to Nate's post and the link to the previous post that the post cited. And nowhere in either post by Nate does he mention FDR in comparison to Obama or the word mandate.

    So what is it you are attacking him on? Something he did not say? Just saying you know. I read your post and it make no sense to the link you posted. It was about the percentage of vote to the population - not about a mandate or FDR. And Nate even included some qualifiers as to why earlier Presidents couldn't get as high a percentage as Obama did.

    Very odd. I don't get it.

    Parent

    Try applying some reading comprehension: (none / 0) (#51)
    by ThatOneVoter on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 09:29:10 PM EST

     Barack Obama can lay claim to being president of the entire country in a way that few candidates of the past can.

    is the key quote.

    Parent
    Well that sure doesn't (none / 0) (#52)
    by Pepe on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 10:00:19 PM EST
    say anything about FDR does it? Nor does it say a thing about a mandate does it?

    It says more people voted for Obama and as such he is the "President of the entire country" - meaning more people consider him their President because they voted for him. That's all it says.

    My reading comprehension is just fine as I don't inject what I like into what was said or not said.

    Had the post been talking about FDR or mandates elsewhere in the post and there was a legitimate connection between your provided quote and those mentions then OK. But neither FDR or mandate was even uttered in the post - not once. Nothing is there to connect.

    Try applying some reading comprehension yourself.

    Parent

    Did you look at the chart? (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by lilburro on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 10:11:35 PM EST
    The point of the chart is to illustrate in Nate's words, that Obama " can lay claim to being president of the entire country in a way that few candidates of the past can."  [which includes FDR]

    He does this by being second in a chart that includes FDR's 1932 victory (which BTD describes above).  The rankings are not arbitrary.  Obviously if Nate didn't mean to compare previous presidencies with Obama's, he would not have included other names on this chart.  BTD offers other criteria by which to judge FDR's success/mandate.

    Nate's chart invites us to think of Obama as having a claim to something real, even though he dismisses without elaboration the following categories of voters, all of which get their say today:

    women, African-Americans, and 18-to-21 year-olds, which it did not originally.

    Anybody want to bother adjusting the statistics to project what kind of vote FDR would've gotten in totday's electoral conditions?  No?  Okay.  Then it especially means nothing.  If Obama wants to brag for the sake of bragging he can, but the % of total population stat has no worthwhile value considering the ways our "total population" has changed.  

    Parent

    My Gawd! (2.00 / 1) (#57)
    by Pepe on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 11:26:58 PM EST
    Of course I saw the chart. It was part of Nate's evidence of his argument which had nothing to do with a mandate. NOTHING. That was not part of his argument. But if I recall BTD has suggested that Obama has a mandate and in these times can do pretty much what he wants to do. In fact I believe words to the affect are in a post on the front page today!!

    So if one is going to suggest a mandate and say Obama can do what ever he wants which is equatable to a mandate then why bash Nate about mandates? Especially when he didn't mention the word?

    Silly Season indeed.

    "Obviously if Nate didn't mean to compare previous presidencies with Obama's, he would not have included other names on this chart."

    Well then if he and a host of others including renowned historians didn't compare Obama's margin of victory to past Presidents then there would be no comparison to make would there? Duh! God forbid anyone compare Obama's numbers to anyone for fear of catching h*ll from someone. Silly Season indeed.

    Out! Too much Silly Season.

    Parent

    This is your most ridiculous comment (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by ThatOneVoter on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 11:44:28 PM EST
    ever. Do you even know what the word "mandate" means??? Just give up.

    Parent
    You waste your time with this commenter (none / 0) (#62)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 06:25:16 AM EST


    Parent
    Correct (none / 0) (#67)
    by Pepe on Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 10:06:26 AM EST
    He is wasting his time with a non-argument like that last post.

    You know I am right in my original comment. You know Nate said nothing of FDR nor mandates. In fact his 'theme' was the percentage of votes Obama got versus past Presidents. That was clearly his theme throughout and was carried through in his post from a previous post he was following up on. You can't argue that isn't true or you would. But you can't so you make a comment like you just did that is even unbecoming for a common poster?

    Last time you stooped to name calling which I pointed out was the territory of the average drive-by common poster. And you agreed I was right in my comment. Then you said you were 'goading me'  which was also unbecoming. Like you want to be known for going around harassing posters and picking fights? Really? Is that what Greenwald would do?

    Now you are going to try to play 'Don't talk to him'?!!! LOL. Talk about unbecoming!

    Dude if you want to be taken serious by people who may cruise by and read your posts then you better start acting serious. If you act like some second rate adolescent punk poster then that is the image you are projecting. Is that the image you want to project?

    We all have choices. I'm just trying to help you out to see what you are doing so you don't lower yourself.

    Parent

    are you saying "Correct" (none / 0) (#71)
    by coigue on Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 03:13:51 PM EST
    to BTD?

    LOL!

    Parent

    so true. (none / 0) (#72)
    by coigue on Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 03:15:23 PM EST
    reminds me of the saying:

    "better to keep your mouth shut and have people wonder if you're ignorant, than to open it and leave them without doubt"

    Parent

    LOL (none / 0) (#65)
    by Pepe on Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 09:50:42 AM EST
    So you think some throw away line like yours is convincing? It's not even.

    If you know what the word mandate means then where is the word in Nate's post? It's not there is it? Nor is even a hint of that is what he was talking about.

    His 'theme' was the percentage of votes Obama got versus past Presidents. That was clearly his theme throughout and was carried through in his post from a previous post he was following up on. But you missed that. So did others who can't read for themselves.

    Like I said right after the election several credentialed well known historians spoke of the same theme. They didn't use the word mandate either because that was not there theme. Take the issue up with them. But I'm sure they'd just smile and walk away.

    Parent

    Like you do? Repeating your inanity (none / 0) (#68)
    by ThatOneVoter on Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 10:47:37 AM EST
    ad nauseam?
    BTD is right.


    Parent
    LOL (none / 0) (#70)
    by Pepe on Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 11:09:43 AM EST
    You are a One Trick Pony.

    With not much to say but childish attempts at insults. Sad.

    Parent

    also what do you mean (none / 0) (#54)
    by lilburro on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 10:21:08 PM EST
    "consider him their President"?  Are only the people who choose the winner in the election able to consider somebody their President?

    Unfortunately, vote though I may, I consider Bush my President.  Because he is my President.  My minority voice (in terms of the entire population) couldn't do a thing about his minority voice (in terms of the entire population) being inaugurated and reelected once voting was done.

    His 21% beat my 19-20% in 2004.  Oh well.  Does that mean my 19-20% doesn't consider Bush our President?  Uh, no.

    Parent

    Well, if you think Silver is (none / 0) (#55)
    by ThatOneVoter on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 10:56:14 PM EST
    playing with numbers to make a meaningless point, then sure, I'll agree with you.
    Since I don't care much for his opinion, the question is not important to me.

    Parent
    Ya know . . . . (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by nycstray on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 03:39:11 PM EST
    methinks some folks need some new hobbies now that the election is over. How many ways will he crunch the numbers . . . .?

    GOOOOOOOO JETS!!!!!!!Woot! Jones just scored a nice one, and he's on my fantasy team ta boot! :)

    The football gods... (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 06:44:38 PM EST
    ...saw fit (and rightfully so) to punish your blatent homerism.  

    Woot! indeed.

    Parent

    Still got my fantasy points! (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by nycstray on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 06:59:24 PM EST
    key to placement in the playoffs for me.

    Excuse me for typing my excitement while commenting while watching the game  ;)

    Parent

    Heh... (none / 0) (#30)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:24:17 PM EST
    ...no sweat off my back that you gave the Jets the dreaded kiss of death.  

    The Donkeys need all the help they can get.  

    Parent

    What am I missing here. Isn't (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by oculus on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 03:40:21 PM EST
    it more relevant to compare the percentage of registered and/or eligible-to-be registered voters in a given year?  Birth rate, immigration w/o benefit of citizenship--many counted by the census cannot vote.  

    Shhhhhhhhh! (5.00 / 4) (#5)
    by nycstray on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 03:48:27 PM EST
    Get with the program. Obama is the bestest ever!!
    Heck, I don't even see the point of him actually governing after reading some of the crap out there. He's a done deal for the bestest and nothing is gonna change that. Got it?   ;)

    Parent
    I'm trying. I really, really am. (5.00 / 10) (#6)
    by oculus on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 03:53:15 PM EST
    I'm delighted Obama has tapped HC for Secretary of State and Hillary Clinton has allegedly accepted the position, even though I think the Obama regime requiring Bill Clinton to hold his foundation mtgs. in the U.S., submit his speaking engagement prospects for vetting, etc. is burdensome and unequalled. Next they'll insist he wear an electronic movement monitor.

    Parent
    Cold medicine and spiked coffee (5.00 / 10) (#7)
    by nycstray on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 04:05:13 PM EST
    make it a bit easier to believe, lol!~

    I'm happy with the Hillary choice as I think she'll work her heart out. I do wish there were 2 of her as I know she was on top of some issues I care about as my Senator. I do think Bill had to give up too much re: his charity work. I keep hearing how much Obama loves his wife and won't that be great to see in the WH {gag!}, but Bill is strangely overlooked in that respect. Watching him throughout this election shows just how far he would go and how much he believes in Hillary.

    Parent

    Yes. The state of marriage as we know (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by oculus on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 04:11:19 PM EST
    it will most likely be transformed for the betterment of humanity with the Obamas in the White House.

    Parent
    There ya go! (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by nycstray on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 04:16:09 PM EST
    Very good. There's hope for you yet, lol!~  :)

    Parent
    Hope you feel better soon (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 06:35:38 PM EST


    Parent
    No kiddin, Bill loves his girl (5.00 / 4) (#16)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 06:31:01 PM EST
    Always has and always will.  There is a difference between love and sex, I think for some the difference is greater than it is for others and I think it probably has to with genetics among other factors.  That Bill loves him some Hillary though and apparently would do just about anything for her benefit.  My husband and I are both horrible flirts, nothing further than that.  He just likes to be enthralled by women and I just can't be jealous about it because I'm always finding something enthralling about someone.  When we were at his class reunion though his best friend came up to me and asked where he was and I said where ever those two redheads are and then I started peering out over the heads to find them :)

    Parent
    shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! (none / 0) (#12)
    by cpinva on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 04:22:09 PM EST
    don't give them any ideas!

    Next they'll insist he wear an electronic movement monitor.


    Parent
    No one needs a mandate (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by oldpro on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 04:21:40 PM EST
    to do the right thing or to do a good job.

    I don't care what you call it.

    Just do it.

    And reading Krugman is worrisome given the lollygagging and lack of oversight.

    gagging and oversight is for wussies! (none / 0) (#13)
    by cpinva on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 04:29:54 PM EST
    And reading Krugman is worrisome given the lollygagging and lack of oversight.

    real men (read: people that want to steal your money and send your children off to war) don't need no stinkin' oversight, the cutthroat market will police its own! look at the war market; already two going, and more potentially on the horizon.

    why don't you people ever report on the positive side of things?

    Parent

    Positive side of things: enlistments (none / 0) (#14)
    by oculus on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 04:36:18 PM EST
    are up as job losses grow.

    But, you must be patient and see what Obama and Gates do about these and future wars.

    Parent

    I figured it would happen (none / 0) (#20)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 06:42:15 PM EST
    We have future pilots stacked up at Fort Rucker like cordwood.  I guess we couldn't train them as fast as they were leaving.  We have people tracked for flight school and having to sit here for six or nine months before they can even start.  It is such a mess replacing the highly skilled right now!  Same ole FUBAR different wars

    Parent
    God is mad at Knoxville... (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by Teresa on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 06:39:43 PM EST
    It is over forty degrees, it just started thundering with lots of lightning and then ice/sleet started falling. Everything is covered.

    We are supposed to get a little snow later tonight but I've never seen anything like this. The stuff won't melt.

    The revenge for firing Fulmer?

    I can relate... (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 06:59:41 PM EST
    ...as it has been snowing here for the last two days.  Not a skating rink out there by any means, but when you combine the idiots that forget (or have never known) how to drive in snow with the Christmas shopping obsessed, it is not pretty out there.  

    I've been holed up where it is warm and dry and safe.

    Parent

    I will fall over and faint if we actually get (none / 0) (#26)
    by Teresa on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:05:15 PM EST
    snow. They always tease me and then it only snows in the mountains. I swear I used to wear out sleds and now we never get snow. In 1996, we got about four good snows, 7-8 inches, and now we get nothing.

    It makes me so mad! I can remember 1996 as the year because I ran down the hall at work to get a ride home and fell and broke my arm in two places! I miss the snow so bad.

    Parent

    That's been happening as far North... (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:20:57 PM EST
    ...as Iowa and Minnesota in recent years--what once came as tons of snow is now mostly freezing rain and ice.  

    I don't think God is po'd about Fulmer as much as us screwing up the planet.

    Parent

    I put winter socks on today (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by The Poster Formerly Known as cookiebear on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:38:48 PM EST
    ... for the first time.

    I despise winter. I'm counting the days until spring.

    Parent

    Dear "The Poster" (none / 0) (#58)
    by oculus on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 11:41:49 PM EST
    Am I correct re the Hamilton Beach slow cooker:  do not put the stone ware portion on a heated stove top burner?  Appliance was made in China and the instructions as to "cookware" are kind of vague.  Thanks.

    P.S.  First trial:  delicious.  Center pork roast with apples and onions.  

    Parent

    My old HB has a stonewear pot (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by nycstray on Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 11:02:48 AM EST
    and it is for use on the stove and in the oven. I think I need to keep it on the lower heat adjustments, but I've browned meat on the stove with it.

    Check amazon and see if they have more clear instructions for compatibility.

    Parent

    Thanks. An on-line (none / 0) (#73)
    by oculus on Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 05:35:20 PM EST
    recipe for HB slow cooker called for first browning the meat, then browning the onions, and after the heating unit did its thing for 8 hours, removing the roast to a covered, warm platter; then medium heat to thicken the apples/onions.  There is no medium setting on the heating unit for the pot.

    Parent
    I don't know (none / 0) (#63)
    by The Poster Formerly Known as cookiebear on Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 06:28:56 AM EST
    I suspect that would be the case, as I seem to recall it's taboo to do that with any slow cooker. But I may be imagining things.

    How did it work? Do you like it? I ::heart:: mine.

    Parent

    All Clad has an anodized aluminum (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by Fabian on Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 08:14:17 AM EST
    insert that you can use on the stove top or the oven!

    I got the ceramic insert because the aluminum insert was way pricey.  I do love my All Clad.  It's huge, it has a Keep Warm feature and when you put it on High, it really cooks!  But washing that insert is a chore I loathe.  I can't lay the insert flat in the sink and it's a helluva job to wash it around without chipping it.

    This Christmas is stainless steel replacements for my nonstick fry pans and skillet.  Maybe next year I'll get the aluminum insert.

    Parent

    When I first read your post, (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by The Poster Formerly Known as cookiebear on Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 06:47:32 PM EST
    I thought it said "caramelizing insert." I was about to pop over and faint, it sounded so good.

    Parent
    First test was delicious. (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by oculus on Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 10:01:21 AM EST
    Pork roast with apples and onions.  Guests were impressed, as they all know I don't cook!

    Parent
    Here's the answer (from HB's (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by oculus on Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 05:47:12 PM EST
    website FAQs):

    Q Is the crockery liner oven, stovetop, microwave, and dishwasher safe?
    A The crocks are microwave, oven and dishwasher safe,
    Q do not
    A use on stovetop.


    Parent
    Bummer (none / 0) (#76)
    by squeaky on Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 07:53:31 PM EST


    Parent
    God's always mad at Knixville (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by tnjen on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 08:57:04 PM EST
    ..that's why the interstate is ALWAYS under construction and yet never seems to get any better! I blame it on the solar-phallic idol we built back in 1982. :)

    Parent
    ...so mad in fact that (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by tnjen on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 08:58:04 PM EST
    ...I can't spell Knoxville's name right!

    Parent
    and how would (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by lilburro on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 06:47:26 PM EST
    winning less than 1/4 of the entire population give you a mandate anyway, if that's the set of numbers you are using?

    These numbers are just games.  If you're just going to throw crap out there for the hell of it, you should at least alert people as to how irrelevant it is.

    Swiss back heroin prescription for addicts (none / 0) (#9)
    by nycstray on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 04:15:08 PM EST
    ZURICH (Reuters) - Swiss voters on Sunday backed a scheme allowing heroin addicts to obtain the drug under prescription, angering conservatives who believe crime will rise as result.

    Some 68 percent voted in favor of the prescription program that was already approved by parliament, making permanent an experiment that has been in place since 1994.

    Link

    About time (none / 0) (#19)
    by lentinel on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 06:41:26 PM EST
    I have two dear friends who would be alive today if this sort of treatment had been available to them.

    Parent
    No, no, no (none / 0) (#46)
    by NYShooter on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 08:07:07 PM EST
    ".....angering conservatives who believe crime will rise as result."

    If conservatives really believed that then they would at least be acting out of principal. Their conservatives are like our conservatives, pretenders who appropriate the name, but are clueless as to it's meaning.

    They are simply control freaks who know best how everyone should lead their lives, exactly how they tell them to.

    Please don't give them any more credence than they're entitled to......"0!"

    Parent

    Open thread? (none / 0) (#15)
    by lentinel on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 06:26:05 PM EST
    I have posted this link in other open threads.
    This will be the last time, I promise.

    It is a video of faux Hillary and faux Cheney singing "Reunited" together. How the video was created, I have no idea.

    It is technically amazing, to me anyway.

    Hillary and Dick

    There is also something touching about it.
    I can't figure out why.

    OT reply (even for an open thread): (none / 0) (#31)
    by oculus on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:27:05 PM EST
    my dinner guests enjoyed the sweet potato salad.

    P.S.  I still can't say I like swwet potatoes (hot or cold).  

    Parent

    Did you mean (none / 0) (#47)
    by lentinel on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 08:23:17 PM EST
    Kasha Varnishas?

    Parent
    I don't think so. Kashna (none / 0) (#60)
    by oculus on Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 01:35:00 AM EST
    appears to be bulgar.

    Parent
    Instead of working, I'm reading (none / 0) (#23)
    by andgarden on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 06:47:29 PM EST
    about desegregation and "massive resistance."

    The more things change

    [I]t seems fashionable to question the right of citizens of northern Virginia to have opinions about state affairs[.]

    (Letter to the Governor of Virginia, 1954. My transcription.)

    Oklahoma (none / 0) (#28)
    by lilburro on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:19:27 PM EST
    lining up to take on Alabama or Florida...unless they lose to Missouri I guess.

    I enjoyed watching them last night so I'm down with an Oklahoma v. ? matchup.  This may not be just, but a certain somebody has made it difficult for me to cheer for Texas...

    When did the Big 12 decide (none / 0) (#32)
    by oculus on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:29:40 PM EST
    to have Northern and Southern divisions, and why?  For that matter, when did the Big 8 become the Big 12?  What's going on here?

    Parent
    Talk about Silly Season (none / 0) (#33)
    by lilburro on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:36:32 PM EST
    Texas and Oklahoma should just play again.  

    I'm just hoping this is an elaborate setup to launch Penn State into the championship game after all...

    Parent

    That's old news (none / 0) (#45)
    by phat on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 08:02:06 PM EST
    This is the big twelve's 13th season.

    I've not been a big fan since Nebraska doesn't play Oklahoma every year anymore.

    However, I was lucky enough to be at the CU game on Friday and the 57 yard field goal for the win was truly amazing.


    Parent

    1996-1997, according to (none / 0) (#61)
    by oculus on Mon Dec 01, 2008 at 01:58:04 AM EST
    the "Big 12" website bio.  Not even a nod to its roots, though.

    Parent
    It's Oklahoma - Missouri (none / 0) (#38)
    by The Poster Formerly Known as cookiebear on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:41:33 PM EST
    It's headline news here (Okla.)

    I was rooting for OSU. Of course, I always root for the underdog.

    Parent

    Sweet Jesus I hate Andy Rooney (none / 0) (#34)
    by ruffian on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:38:42 PM EST
    to borrow a phrase...

    Why do they schedule 'The Amazing Race' after '60 Minutes', when '60 Minutes' always runs late because of freakin' football?

    Sorry, I just had to vent...

    And please no one critique my (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by ruffian on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:40:44 PM EST
    taste for fakey staged competitions after we all watched 50 presidential debates.

    Parent
    When I was a kid, I cursed the NFL (none / 0) (#36)
    by andgarden on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:40:34 PM EST
    because it cut into 60 Minutes. And I love(d) Andy Rooney. So there.

    Parent
    LOL (none / 0) (#39)
    by ruffian on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:41:52 PM EST
    But you grew up!

    Parent
    The whole show (none / 0) (#40)
    by andgarden on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:43:51 PM EST
    comports with my cynical view of the world. I don't often watch anymore, but it has a place in my heart.

    The NFL just involves. . .

    Never mind, you don't want to hear what I have to say about the NFL.

    Parent

    I think I stopped watching (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by ruffian on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:46:59 PM EST
    60 Minutes about the same time I stopped watching football.  Not sure if there is a connection there.  Maybe just that I found other things to do on Sundays - oh yeah - The Sopranos!!!!.

    Parent
    One serious note on Rooney (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by ruffian on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:53:32 PM EST
    A few weeks ago when CBS again held me hostage waiting for TAR, he had the most amazingly disingenuous commentary on the financial meltdown I have ever seen.  It really made me mad. Acted like the whole thing was just too hard for his poor little head to understand, so we should all just leave the decisions to the experts and trust them to do the right thing. Since then I have been wondering just what kind of crap he has been spewing in the years I have not been watching.

    Parent
    Well, he is getting old. . . (none / 0) (#43)
    by andgarden on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:54:07 PM EST


    Parent
    I know..I'm getting even crankier than he is! (none / 0) (#44)
    by ruffian on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 07:56:20 PM EST


    Parent
    NYT sez (none / 0) (#56)
    by lilburro on Sun Nov 30, 2008 at 11:11:14 PM EST
    Democrats said they expected him soon to name Adm. Dennis C. Blair, a retired Pacific Fleet commander, as director of national intelligence.

    NYT

    Don't know much about him though.  Blair seems to know a lot about Asia, including India.  PBS.  Not sure what his baggage looks like.  He retired from the Navy in May 2002.  It appears he was not involved in any intelligence mischief (renditions, torture, etc.)

    It is unclear to me what sort of business dealings he has right now.  This article suggests he serves on the boards of two organizations.  Again, don't understand how Obama's lobbying rules apply to former military people raking in the dough through private companies now.  That seems to be an open question we are not supposed to think very hard about.

    Silly Season | 76 comments (76 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment