Skip to content
Categories:

Sunday Night Open Thread

Post date:
Author:

So, what’s on your mind? Got any links you want to share? Stories that need a plug? Requests to make?

The floor is yours….

Comments

  • Dee Loralei

    says:

    Isaac Hayes has died, was on the news in Memphis, no links sorry.

    Jim Benton, Tom Cleaver, you guys are sci-fi fans right? Didn’t we have a convo about which Dr Who and Torchwood? Was wondering if either of you, or anyone else for that matter, watched “Primeval” last night on BBCA. What did you think?

  • PeteCO

    says:

    If you’re talking which Doctor Who, I would have to say Jon Pertwee, with Tom Baker as runner up. My elder brothers would doubtless ridicule my youthful folly, citing William Hartnell as the real deal.

  • Michael

    says:

    Kevin Drum talked briefly about the consequences of Russia v. Georgia. If you have any other insight to give I’d appreciate it.

  • Sue Folawn

    says:

    Just a quick note to tell you how much I appreciate your format. SOOOO much quicker and easier to read that many others. Thank you!

  • Ten Bears

    says:

    Just what the hell kind of name is “Cokie” [Roberts] anyways? What is she, some kind of dope whore?

    Bummer about Issac Hayes, he was the real deal.

    My son was telling me about a Dr Who episode where he encountered bees fleeing, and in that there are virtually no berries on the vine, few pears and no plums in my back yard, I’m reminded that Einstein predicted that were the bees to leave, infour years would we.

  • Ms Carpetbagger

    says:

    Dee – I totally forgot to set the DVR for Primeval last night. Curious to hear what anyone thought of it. What I saw of the story it didn’t grab me like Dr Who or Torchwood do.

  • Drew

    says:

    Don’t know how closely anyone’s been following the Georgia/Russia conflict, but there’s been quite a bit of good discussion and multiple posts about it at my blog, pseudobodypolitic.blogspot.com

  • Prup (aka Jim Benton)

    says:

    Dee and Mrs. C: Had missed it entirely until you mentioned it, but caught your reference just in time to record tonight’s rebroadcast. Hope to have seen it in time to comment in next weekend’s Open Thread — and Mrs. C, if it’s on again I’ll let you know when.

    As for the ranking of The Doctors (switches to track announcer’s voice” “It’s PERTWEE by half a length over Davidson and McCoy, with Davidson barely nosing out McCoy for place. Behind them a length is Tom B., trailed by the same amount by Hartnell, and bringing up the rear by a good eight legths is the horse wearing the multi-colors, Colin B.” (BBC’s prime screw-up keeps me from rating Patrick Troughton, but I expect he would have been bunched with Tom and Hartnell. The ‘Eighth Doctor” I ignore — though the books featuring him show there was potential there.)

    But, in reality, David Tennant is simply a level above the others, not as much fun, perhaps, but a brilliant actor with a different take on the Doctor that makes him realer, and with the return to some of the original ideas, starting with the Sontarrans and the use of human dupes, and the ambiguity of the dual forces in the stories, there is no doubt that the new Doctor is way above the older ones. I don’t know — nor does anyone — if he’ll be back for the Fifth New Season (in 2010 $%@!%*) but he’s set a new level to shoot at if he isn’t.

    On another topic, if there is anyone in or near Brooklyn who feels like helping a ‘fumble-fingered ignoramouse’ with some very simple computer tasks — like adding more memory and getting rid of four years of accumulated dust and cat hair, as well as a little advice on getting certain programs out of the start-up tray, please check my blog for my e-mail address and contact me — that’s the only reason I leave the thing up, to give an e-mail address. I’ll pay for time and materials, but would rather give money to a member of the TCR family than to an anonymous professional — especially after some bad experiences with other ‘professionals.’ Only, if you are allergic to cats or tobacco, or don’t like cats, don’t bother to apply. We are owned by four members of the Master Species and I’m a pipe smoker who is limited to smoking in my room, where the monster machine is located. I try and clear it out, but not for a highly allergic person.

  • Michael W

    says:

    I’m so glad to hear other people actually watch BBC America, and my new favorite, Torchwood. I don’t watch much TV anymore, but whenever I see that it’s going to be on, I clear my schedule and make room for it.

    We’ve been getting friends hooked on it with the Season 1 DVDs, and are dying for the Season 2 set. I understand they are either in production or about to be in production for Season 3. Rumor has it that it will be in more of a miniseries format.

    Oh, and Captain Jack is HOT!!!

  • MsJoanne

    says:

    I watched Primeval last night and it reminded me of what initial reviews of Robin Hood (season 1) were; it was OK but…

    I’ll be watching to see what happens, so I suppose it did the trick as a premiere.

  • libra

    says:

    Gaucho Politico, @7,

    Thanks for the Bai link; I’d have missed the article, since I tend not to read the Magazine, but it was *fascinating* (especially to a “cracker white” voter like myself). Though loooong.

    Has anyone else gotten a “Barack’s VP: be the first to know” donation lure from the Obama campaign? I thought that, when I sent him his b-day present (aka donation), I was very careful to un-check the “send me updates” box, but, apparently, I was not successful enough (that’s what comes from being a McCainiac vis-a-vis ‘puters)…

  • Mark

    says:

    I was in Saigon (Ho Chi Minh City) a month or so ago, and an English-language newspaper there carried a story on Barack Obama. The overall tone was quite positive, I thought. The world outside the U.S. is ready for this guy to be president. John McCain – not so much. I sure hope Americans don’t have another fit of stubbornness and decide to elect McCain just because nobody tells Americans what to do.

  • CJ

    says:

    I actually had the privilege of meeting Isaac Hayes several times…all by chance…when he was living in Atlanta during the 1980’s. He was a customer at the camera store where I worked in high school, he was in my karate class during my college years (yes karate), and post-college, we lived in the same apartment building where I would run into him relatively frequently. This was all post-Shaft, pre-South Park.

    Anyway, I point this out to say that I had met him enough times, all in various settings, to know that he was a very pleasant, friendly, down-to-earth, personable guy. Honestly, there was no sense of egotism or arrogance that one might expect from a celebrity. At least from the point-of-view of an aquaintance, he was always as nice as he could be.

    My thoughts and prayers are with his family and friends.

  • libra

    says:

    Thanks, Donna @17,

    Nice to know that a) Obama doesn’t stiff “the help” when it comes to tips and that b) contrary to Deranged Larry Johnson’s blog-rag, he *did* take his entire family to see grandma.

  • Prup (aka Jim Benton)

    says:

    Captain Jack is somewhat hot, if you like the type, and is, in real life, totally gay and open about it. Unfortunately, he is, in my opinion, a actor so bad as to belong in the David Caruso/Joe Flanagan category. (Actually he’s been better during his appearances on DOCTOR WHO.) I’ve seen a few TORCHWOODs, and have most or all of the rest on disk, and intend to watch them in sequence sometime this fall, assuming there is ever time and I finish some better shows like SAVING GRACE and BATTLESTAR, also waiting to be watched a series at a time. So far, ‘uneven’ is the best i can say about it, and I doubt if I can go back and finish “Cyberwoman.” But some of the episodes, like the one with the plane from the past were quite good.

  • ericfree

    says:

    Column of the weekend: “That Was the Obama We’re Still Waiting For” by Michael Tomasky, editor of Guardian America, about Obama’s ’04 Convention speech and what happened to that particular character. I’ve been wondering too. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/08/AR2008080802944.html

    On Doctor Who, no question, Baker, Hartnell, Pertwee. Baker because of his obvious talent and outstanding supporting cast (who can resist an incurving nose?), but also because of his chief scripter, Terry Nation, formerly story editor of The Avengers. Ever wonder why so many Avengers’ plots (Triffids, Cybernauts) turned up as multi-episode Whos? Don’t know about you, but last night we were treated to a double Cybermen peril, first from the ’80s, then from last year. It all started with Nation. Hartnell just for who he was and how well he played against type (ever seen the British film with him as a safecracker who lost his hands, dispatching his former partners with new steel ones?), and because that was the beginning of it all. Pertwee, despite being the best actor of the bunch, was a trifle gay and devastatingly Earthbound. All the others pale. I thought the one after Baker was better than usually rated (good Albert Campion a few years later), but defeated by some of the weakest scripts of the series, and that’s really saying something. Happily, the recent incarnations have been better than ever, but that’s because the creative people take them seriously. Prior to, I think Nation was the only one who ever did.

  • Prup (aka Jim Benton)

    says:

    Back to politics.

    I have been making a point that i really would like some feedback on. So far, there has been plenty of major ‘sliming’ of Obama, but it hasn’t been coming from the McCain campaign or the Republicans — though I’m sure they are egging it on and helping pay for it.

    It has been coming from the PUMAs. They are the ones who are claiming Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery, that he’s ‘really’ a Muslim, that he would be a ‘Pearl Harbor’ for America — or something like it, there’s a very low limit for my toleration for Larry Johnson and my anti-itch cream and anti-nausea pills ran out. They even were the ones pushing the Larry Sinclair story and the fake ‘whitey’ tape.

    And they are doing it, supposedly, in support of Hillary Clinton.

    Why is it so wrong to suggest — or demand — that she make a statement such as this:

    “The nominee of the party has been the recipient of some of the most scurrilous slanders and libels in recent political history. His patriotism, his religion, his sexual orientation, even his identity has been challenged. Sadly, this has, for the most part, not been done by open Republicans but by a group of so-called Democrats who claim to be acting on my behalf.

    “Now this is America and, if they have not crossed over the legal line, they are free to make such statements, but they are not free to use my name in connection with them. So, to these so-called ‘PUMAs’ I say the following:

    “I have stated that Sen. Obama IS the nominee of our party, and that I will do everything in my power to see that he becomes the next President of the United States. I not only have no connection with these internet web sites, but I demand that they stop claiming to speak in my behalf, that they remove my picture from their website, as well as any reference to my candidacy, and that they cease and desist both from their campaign — as far as it reflects on me — and that they do not attempt, as they have threatened to do, to disrupt a Convention that is intended to, and will be, the first formal step towards electing Senator Barack Obama our next President.”

    I think requesting that she do this is hardly unreasonable, that the PUMAs are reflecting badly on her, and that, if she is sincere in her promise to support Senator Obama, this is the first step she should take. But so far, every time I have said this, it has been met with silence.

    If she has done this, and I am unaware of it, please let me know. If there is some reason why she should not do it, please tell me what it is — and ‘not calling attention to them’ is not sufficient, since they are calling enough attention on themselves already.

    We have frequently spoken of the percentage of Americans who think ‘he’s a Muslim,’ and have blamed the Republicans for this, but, at least openly, it has not been them who have been pushing this, but the PUMAs, acting, supposedly, in the name of Hillary Clinton. Shouldn’t it be her responsibility to do all she can to shut them down, or at least separate herself from their lies, publicly?

  • donalda

    says:

    I thought that this was interesting/amusing (from the Bookslut)

    August 06, 2008
    Trochaic Theory Picks Obama [by David Lehman]

    If you want to be president, your chances of winning office will be best if your name parses out as a trochee, preferably a double trochee, as in the case of Harry Truman, Andrew Jackson, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Warren Harding, Chester Arthur, Jimmy Carter, Millard Fillmore, Grover Cleveland, Andrew Johnson, and all four of the presidents whose first and last names begin with the same initial (Woodrow Wilson, Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover, Ronald Reagan). [Ed. note: A trochee is a metrical foot consisting of a stressed beat preceding an unstressed beat, the inverse of the normative iamb, in which the stressed beat follows the unstressed.] Twenty-one presidents have trochaic last names. Eisenhower’s last name is a double trochee.

    If greatness is your aim, consider having a dactyl for your surname: Washington, Jefferson, Madison, the two Roosevelts, Kennedy.

    On the other hand, the evidence suggests that an administration headed by a one-syllable name (Polk, Pierce, Grant, Hayes,Taft, Ford, the two Bushes) will prove undistinguished.

    The trochaic method of judging electoral odds has proved accurate in every instance except years when both candidates have metrically identical names, as in 1948 and 2000, effectively neutralizing the system.

    Applied to this year’s presumptive nominees, metrical theory predicts a narrow victory by Barack Obama.

    “Barack Obama” in metrics equals two iambs followed by an extra unstressed syllable, like half a pyrrhic foot. The name has a feminine ending. There are three precedents among presidents past: “Martin Van Buren,” “James Buchanan,” and “William McKInley.”

    “John McCain” translates as an iamb preceded by the stressed half of an invisible iamb. The one predecessor among US Presidents is “James Monroe.” McCain alliterates with Monroe and James Madison. But “Monroe” is also one of several presidential names (Pierce, Fillmore, Coolidge) ending in a vowel, as Obama’s does. Obama would, however, be the first whose last name ends in a vowel other than e, one sign of his originality. He would join Chester Arthur as the only commnander-in-chief whose last name does not commence with a consonant.

    History, when there is no incumbent, traditionally sides with the candidate with the greater number of beats in his last name (Kennedy vs. Nixon in 1960, Eisenhower vs. Stevenson in 1952) except when the opposition is a single spondee [ed. two strong beats in a row], as in 1988 when the first George Bush defeated Michael Dukakis. The groundbreaking fact that “Obama” begins and ends with a vowel is an anomaly that historians will doubtlessly ponder.

    — DL

  • Bruno

    says:

    prup @ 25…. I couldn’t agree with you more.

    I wonder if Hillary will take the second day at the convention (since she’ll be the headliner) to denounce the so called PUMA’s, and make a statement along what you’ve proposed. Personally I wonder whether those PUMA were actual ‘democrats’ or just an amalgamation of people who for whatever reason can not see themselves vote for a ‘black’ man, regardless of what party they belong to.

    I hope she’s not going to wait until then. The sooner she nips it in the butt, the better it will be. On the other hand, I doubt the PUMA’s will stop just because Hillary asks them. They’re a fringe group who will do whatever they desire, and don’t claim to be ‘true democrats’.

    It would not surprise me at all , that the PUMA’s get quite a bit of funding from conservative groups and individuals. Just like the Republicans bankrolled a petition to have Ralp Nader put on the ballot in Oregon back in 2004; I wouldn’t put it past them. It reeks of Rovian tactics, if there ever was one.

  • Prup (aka Jim Benton)

    says:

    Bruno:
    I don’t think they will stop either, but if Hillary is on record against them, that is important in itself. And no, not at the Convention, not when whatever number of them actually have shown up and begun causing trouble, but now, because they are currently hurting Obama more than McCain is.

    Other than that, all I can hope is that, rather than leaving her name in nomination, Hillary agrees to second Obama’s nomination, something to show her promises of support are more than just words — and I haven’t seen her all over the airwaves the way even Kerry is.

    No, I still don’t trust her. (But then I was the one to predict she’d start a new center-right party for 2012 to replace the totally discredited Republicans.)

  • zoe from pittsburgh

    says:

    I’m currently watching a CSPAN rerun of Michelle Obama’s roundtable with military families in Norfolk, VA from last Wednesday.

    She really is amazing. I completely adore her. I find it so hard that anyone would watch her and see some awful, superficial stereotype of a mean, angry black woman. She’s intelligent, humble, perceptive, warm, empathetic, passionate– she’s also fabulously real. The Obamas just make so much sense together in a way that the McCains are just sort of creepy– wrinkly old white guy with much younger, blonde Stepford heiress (2nd) wife.

    As far as presidential spouses matter, I think that Michelle Obama says a lot about Barack’s values and that Cindy says a lot about John’s– one is flattering and one is not. One chose an equal, a strong woman with a mind of her own that challenges him, that keeps him grounded. The other has a much younger trophy wife who just so happens to have a hundred million dollars. Hmmm.

  • KRK

    says:

    Prup,

    Yes, she ought to do it. But she’s going to continue to dance on the line: speaking supportively, even passionately, of Obama but not directly challenging the PUMAs and their ilk, thereby giving fodder to their theories that she’s (a) being forced to act against her true wishes, and/or (b) she’s sending them coded messages.

    She’s doing this because she wants their money for her debts. I think she’s smart enough to realize that her political career would be over if she were to try anything against Obama right now, especially after her recent very pro-Obama statements. But she’s never going to directly rebuke anyone who might be a possible contributor.

    Priorities, priorities.

  • Bruno

    says:

    zoe @ 32 said:

    The other has a much younger trophy wife who just so happens to have a hundred million dollars. Hmmm.

    I don’t know whether McCain got lucky because he was able to ‘hook up’ with millionaire Cindy, who happens to be fairly good looking as well.

    OR

    If Henry Kissinger’s famous quote played a role: “Power is the greatest aphrodesiac” Implying that even an ‘ugly’ looking man can get a nice looking lady.

  • Prup (aka Jim Benton)

    says:

    Hilzoy has a very good article on both the Atlantic Clinton piece and a piece from NEWSWEEK on the incredible Rielle. It’s http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/08/strange-days.html#comments

    and that does it for me. Forget about sleeping with her, the fact that John Edwards could even stand to be in the same room as someone who spouted the sort of New Age twaddle about “Old Souls” and, apparently, reincarnation would have been enough to rule him out as President. A quote:
    “Her purpose on this Earth, she said, was to help raise awareness about all this, to help the unenlightened become better reflections of their true, repressed selves.

    Her latest project was John Edwards. Edwards, she said, was an old soul who had barely tapped into any of his potential. The real John Edwards, she believed, was a brilliant, generous, giving man who was driven by competing impulses—to feed his ego and serve the world. If he could only tap into his heart more, and use his head less, he had the power to be a “transformational leader” on par with Gandhi and Martin Luther King. “He has the power to change the world,” she said.”

    Gaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh!

  • Dee Loralei

    says:

    MsCB@#13, I enjoyed it, not nearly as thoroughly as I enjoyed Torchwood, Dr Who or RobinHood. It’s fun, the cast seem to be characters. Albeit of the geeky-nerdy variety, but heck that’s me. I think it has potential and they are going back in time so as not to step on Torchwoods balliwick. And there are two mysteries to build a series around. What happened to the wife and what causes the anomolies to form? And as MsJoanne said @#17, it did what a premiere was supposed to do. I’ll be watching mext week. I’m sure the first hour will be on before next weeks episode, BBCA usually schedules its series like that. But then again, what the heck do I know, I actually like Eureka on Sci-Fi!

    I didn’t watch the earlier DrWhos, but David Tennant makes me swoon and weak in the knees .

    And CJ, yea I met him twice too, he did seem pretty normal and genuine. Saw him in concert a few years ago too.

    And Prup, I don’t know what she should do about them. She’s asked them many times to get behind Obama. I think because they’ve taken it so far beyond what “normal” partisans do that maybe they weren’t ever really in it for her, but for any number of other reasons. So I don’t know what to tell you.

  • zoe from pittsburgh

    says:

    It’s completely under the radar but Michelle Obama has been having these fairly amazing roundtables with military families– showing support and empathy for these families that have been almost completely neglected and ignored in the course of the war(s).

    It’s a pretty amazing strategy,although frankly considering how little coverage they get it’s not really a political “strategy” so much as a genuine interest. It also touches on so many things that affect everyone– like health care, child care, employment, etc.

    Watching this just proves how little the MSM really pays attention to how much the Obama campaign is actually doing, how it is reaching out and paying attention to neglected groups like military families.

  • Dee Loralei

    says:

    Oh, and another thing. Obama’s campaign seems to be signalling that a veep selection is somewhat imminent. Kuchinich will be Hawaii this week. Then again so will Bush. Think it might be one of them.

  • zoe from pittsburgh

    says:

    I personally hope it’s going to be someone interesting and unexpected– Sebelius would be a super pick. She’s the only one that hasn’t been superficially vetted by the MSM. I have a hard time thinking it’s going to be Kaine or Biden.

  • Prup (aka Jim Benton)

    says:

    Oh, Lord, it is even worse. Again to quote from the original article on the NEWSWEEK site:

    “I struck up a conversation with the woman at the next event, as we waited outside. She told me her name and asked me what my astrological sign was, which I thought was a little unusual. I told her. She smiled, and began telling me her life story: how she was working as a documentary-film maker, living with a friend in South Orange, N.J., but how she’d previously had “many lives.” She’d worked, she said, as an actress and as a spiritual adviser. She was fiercely devoted to astrology and New Age spirituality. She’d been a New York party girl, she’d been married and divorced, she’d been a seeker and a teacher and was a firm believer in the power of truth.”

    And John Kerry was willing to put someone who was capable of having an affair with someone like that ‘a heartbeat away from the White House’ — after he was unable to get John McCain!

  • libra

    says:

    Prup, @25,

    Was today really the first time you visited Johnson’s No Quarter? No wonder you feel like you’ve just taken a shit shower; I almost puked, after my first visit. But I’m not even sure that Johnson and his follower are PUMAs. PUMAs are dead enders, but their derangement seems to me to be of a different sort than Johnson’s; equally stupid maybe, but not as vile.

    And yeah, Johnson has been on “our side” for a long time — I used to read him at TPM cafe, long before the primaries. He was equally vitriolic then; hatred and overinflated ego have always seemed to be his forte. In many ways, I was not surprised to hear — here on TCBR — that he and Tom Cleaver had been friends (or e-friends) until they parted ways over the preferred candidate; the two have struck me as being two of a kind, and both have always made me uncomfortable.

    As for Hillary denouncing that scum (PUMA *or* Johnson)… Don’t hold your breath, or you’ll turn blue and we’ll lose you 🙂 Do read the article linked by Gaucho @27 and this one:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/10/opinion/10cottle.html?ref=opinion
    They still want their “catharsis” (and I still think they need a dose of castor oil instead) and Hillary is, probably, torn between “doing the right thing” (endorsing Obama full-heartedly and campaigning for him, ditto) and hoping for a Miracle at the Convention, where she’ll end up being the True Nominee, trouncing the presumptive one.

    I don’t think any of them think long term — what it would mean to the *country* if Hillary lost, as she’d be almost bound to, given the amount of hatred stored in Repubs’ lizard brains — though I have a feeling that Hillary, herself, sometimes wakes up from that daze and does have an inkling (but then, I used to like Hillary very much and am as inclined to give her some slack as the McCainites are to their memory of the 2000 version)

  • Prup (aka Jim Benton)

    says:

    Dee: CJ is ‘normal.’ Gay is normal. If only he were a better actor.

    And what Hillary can do, as I keep suggesting is publicly demand they take her picture off their websites, stop claiming they are speaking for her, and call them the lying, libeling low-lifes that they are. Don’t just plead with them, condemn them, and tell everybody, loudly, that they can’t be trusted to give directions to the bathroom without lying about it.

  • zoe from pittsburgh

    says:

    I am still watching the Michelle Obama roundtable with military families– they’re talking about military-related issues that NO ONE is talking about in the public square. EVER.

    As someone who comes from a predominately military family it’s amazing to hear ANYONE talking about those issues– both parents being deployed at the same time, PTSD should be treated as any other medical condition, the challenges of moving to new and varied school districts every few years, long-term health care concerns, what to do after (early) forced retirement, and so on.

    Seriously, after watching this McCain shouldn’t have any edge over Obama as far as military families are concerned. His campaign is showing a heartfelt interest in the challenges these families face that McCain doesn’t seem to ever show beyond references to his personal experience over 25 years ago. What about the challenges that military families are facing today? Is McCain connected at all to what they’re going through?

  • Prup (aka Jim Benton)

    says:

    I still am afraid of that speech from Bill, especially if Obama has a slight slippage right before the Convention. The die-hard Hillary supporters ARE right that votes could switch, and he is a powerful orator. I don’t think this would happen, but I’m old enough to remember how the chaotic convention in 72 hurt McGovern, and if it looked like this again, and Bill went on and on, it would not be good. However, whatever happens, Obama is strong enough to win, and we can count on McCain repeatedly shooting himself in the foot, or in tenderer places.

  • petorado

    says:

    Why are Bush I and Bush II all over my Olympics TV? Russia and Georgia aren’t on the brink of war, I’d pretty much call it a full-on war now. A president with half a brain, and a quarter of a conscience, would have figured Moscow ain’t too much further to fly from Beijing and would have been out there in person speaking with Putin instead of Kobe. Bush’s “senioritis” has kicked in and the guy could give a f*ck about about governing, not that he ever did on the first place.

  • KP

    says:

    I wonder how Americans would respond given the following statement:

    ‘A nation known to possess WMDs has aggressively invaded an smaller neighboring country in order to increase its control over the oil market.’

    Sounds like Iraq?
    But isn’t that what Russia is doing to Georgia?

  • Glen

    says:

    Time to discuss what that asshat of a President we have is doing again –

    Why has the President traveled to China? I’m getting a little tired of the W kisses Chinese butt show. It’s like watching a never ending ad for Walmart.

    Why hasn’t the President traveled back to DC and started working on the Russia/Georgia mess? This is largely a mess he has enabled by a complete and total neocon meltdown i.e. losing War on Terror, wrongheaded and losing invasion of Iraq, stupid threats against Iran, enabling US torture, failed massive debts, failed massive economic meltdown (i.e. trade imbalance to China).

    DId it ever occur to the neo-idiots that the single largest reason we were the leader of the free world is because we were leading the world in the direction it wanted to go? And now that we’re not? What happens now? A lot more insanity just like we’re seeing in Georgia.

  • GovtFlu

    says:

    Exactly KP. Our deplorable so called “leaders” in the DC Mafia sound stupider than ever. They forget Bush ignored world leaders calls to not to attack Iraq, ignored the UN, and did what he wanted by launching an illegal war of choice & aggression.. based on lies no less. McCain sounds wicked hypocritical “We must remind Russia’s leaders that the benefits they enjoy from being part of the civilized world require their respect for the values, stability and peace of that world,”

    Like all the “respect” the US displayed for the UN “no” vote? and the mad respect Bush displayed for the stability of the world? I so hope a Russian leader calls them on it, “why should anyone listen to you after what you did to Iraq?” I’d love to watch McCain blink, stutter and mumble his way out of that.

  • GovtFlu

    says:

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idUKN1027297820080810?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0

    U.S. ambassador to the UN, Zalmay Khalilzad, suggested Russia is guilty of attempting ‘regime change’, adding the Russians were “targeting civilians” in a “campaign of terror against the Georgian population,” Isn’t “regime change” of leaders we don’t like a stated policy of the DC mafia?

    Russian UN ambassador, Vitaly Churkin, responded: “This statement, ambassador, is completely unacceptable, particularly from the lips of the permanent representative of a country (USA) whose actions we are aware of, including with regard to the civilian populations in Iraq and Afghanistan and Serbia,”

    Which is a polite way to say “STFU hypocrite”. Lets see if anyone asks Mc Corpse for a response to Russia writing off US opinions as little more than laughable bold face hypocrisy.