First Draft

Walker vs. Barrett: REMATCH

Four weeks, cats and kittens. Four weeks for all the marbles. 

Donate here. 

Volunteer here. 

A. 

Some In Wisconsin Are Concerned, But Not Enough That We'd Quote Them

Way to be, NYT:

Amid concerns by some that the winner may have problems with a fractured base, the candidates have made an effort to attack Mr. Walker more than one another in the final days before the primary.

“People have been really trying to make sure we keep it clean and positive so that no matter who emerges there are no hard feelings, there are no burnt emotions,” said Phillip Walzak, a spokesman for Mr. Barrett’s campaign.

Then who's concerned here? I mean, if "some" are concerned, and if we are "amid" those concerns, it might be nice to at least know who is so terribly troubled by the natural political process of choosing a candidate.

(How else were they supposed to do this, btw? Put a bunch of names in a hat and let David Brooks set the hat on fire?)

I mean, if you have five voters who all say, "You know, I'm worried about unity following the primaries," okay, but what you have here is a campaign spokesman who thinks everybody is going to be just fine because they've been working really hard. That's the opposite of what your lead-in graf is asserting. 

Many Democrats in Wisconsin expect the anti-Walker effort to quickly close ranks around its nominee as soon as votes are tallied on Tuesday night. But recent polls and fund-raising totals also suggest that the party has little room for distractions in its quest to unseat the well-financed governor.

Well, if the Democrats do close ranks quickly, then there will be no distractions, so what is the problem here again?

Look, it's not that I don't believe this whole thing has been difficult, but as usual our crack national political reporters are on the case of vicarious trolling and making not-quite-predictions, muttering darkly about "distractions" and "concerns" that they then don't specify or attribute. The story's like please-don't-piss-anybody-off bingo, noting potential pitfalls and then discounting them in the next graf:

Since the start of 2011, Mr. Walker has raised more than $25 million. Campaign finance reports released by candidates last week showed that Mr. Walker raised more than $13 million over the past three months alone, dwarfing Mr. Barrett’s $831,000 and Ms. Falk’s $977,000.

That advantage, however, was less apparent in a poll conducted last month by Marquette University Law School that showed Mr. Walker and Mr. Barrett essentially tied in a general election matchup. Mr. Walker led Ms. Falk 49 percent to 43 percent among likely voters, a six-point advantage that is within the poll’s margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4 percentage points on each candidate.

So the governor's well-financed campaign is dangerous to the Dems, except that a major poll says it's not. There are about a million ways to cover the primary today (as is evidenced, I intend to mostly retweet smarter people than me and poke at the stupid coverage) so why choose the least effective one?

For decent coverage from the locals check out Dane 101's results reporting tonight from 8-10 p.m.

A.

We Used To Be Giants

The New York City Municipal Archive has just released a database of 870,000 photographs onto the internet. People: this is the kind of thing I could spend literally weeks diving into. So, thank God the Atlantic pulled out 53 for me, otherwise y'all wouldn't see me until June.

I'm a huge photography fan and fell in love with Margaret Bourke-White back when I was in high school. With all her flaws, the thing about her that I adored -- besides the fact that she was a woman in a male-dominated field, and walked the scaffolding of the fucking Chrysler Building while it was under construction! -- is that she expressed the majesty of what we humans could do. This was a very Howard Roark/Ayn Rand perspective, but that was quite prevalent in the 1920s and '30s. We built great, glorious things like skyscrapers and bridges and Hoover Dam, and we did it with our own blood, sweat and grit. These were spectacular, fantastic things no human thought possible and they were a thing of beauty. Marvel at what we hath wrought upon the landscape! Celebrate it! And why the hell not? This is the stuff that made our nation great.

And that's why these photos make me sad. Because we can still make great things, we can make even greater, more awe-inspiring things. But we don't. Why not? Is it because we no longer value them? Or, more damningly, perhaps we think we are not worthy?

Check out the photo of the Meeker Avenue Bridge, with the steel proudly emblazoned with the words "American Bridge Company." This company still exists! What an amazing legacy. But I wonder: would such a thing be built today? Would the New York subway system? Or would we have Republican governors and Tea Party "patriots" saying, nah. Meh. Tax cuts for me and mine, please!

We have Republican governors saying no to high-speed rail and tunnels and other massive infrastructure projects because they think tax cuts for millionaires are more important. But worse are the people in these states who don't seem to care. America, what is wrong with you? When did you decide to disengage? When did you check out?

I don't mean to be maudlin and if I don't quit I'll fast descend into "offa my lawn" territory, but I don't get what's wrong with the American psyche. Once upon a time we built great things and we were proud of them. We saw the fruit of our labors as art. Today, the idea of investing in America is derided as "pork" and "socialism."

We've gotten really isolated, insulated and parochial. We don't care about anyone but ourselves and we sure as shit don't care about our legacy. And I don't know when the hell that happened.

They Can't Help Loving the Tea Party

When, oh when, will political reporters' favorite carnival clowns become FUN again? 

The 2010 midterm elections were marked by ubiquitous images of voters waving Gadsen flags in the sun, women with tea bags hanging from their hat brims, and determined men in Paul Revere costumes shouting proclamations.

What happened to those people?

If you ask the people who helped organize the tea party into a movement, they'll readily concede that tea party rallies this election cycle are not as prolific as they were in 2010. But they say they're doing one better this year: Instead of simply rallying, they're organized and on the ground (and on the phone, in your mailbox and on your radio and television) in select states to try to elect tea party candidates to office and effect what they say is "real change."

"The movement has matured … and we're now tea party 2.0," Amy Kremer, chairwoman of Tea Party Express, told Yahoo News. 

Somewhere in this morass is the point; 

The Tea Party Express, which is focused this year on helping Republicans win back the Senate, has endorsed five Senate candidates in addition to Mourdock: Ted Cruz in Texas, Sarah Steelman in Missouri, Jon Bruning in Nebraska, Josh Mandel in Ohio and Tom Smith in Pennsylvania.

FreedomWorks shares some of the same targets, plus additional House and Senate candidates, including incumbents such as Rep. Steve King of Iowa—a tea party star.

Steinhauser identified races in Texas, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Missouri, Florida and Maine among those states where FreedomWorks is active.

They're just Republicans, running candidates in either Republican primaries or in the general. They're not a new political phenomenon. They don't represent any exciting paradigm shift. They're not a third party. They're not a different species. They may make a lot of noise about not tolerating "RINOs" or mouth some "both parties are fiscally irresponsible" pablum on occasion but when push comes to vote, they'll pull the lever for the same party they always have because Teh Lie-bruls SUXXORZ. 

That the fuss seems to have died down about them is just evidence that the fuss has died down. It's not evidence of anything else whatsoever. 

A. 

NOLA Notes: True Crime In Da Parish

New Orleanians have a great deal of fun at the expense of our neighbors in St Bernard Parish. Most of it is good natured based on the bizarre politics and heavy yat accents of folks in what they themselves call da Parish. End of expository opener.

An arrest was recently made in a long unsolved murder case. It's one of the juiciest true crime stories I've seen in a long time. It's got everything: famous gangsters, crooked pols, femme fatales and a pet cemetery. The Sunday Picayune had a front page story on the case and I thought y'all wound find it interesting. I certainly did.

Blogger Ethics, WWII Edition

I wonder if the telephone was destroying journalism at this point, since the proto-Internet hadn't yet allowed the great unwashed to voice their opinions. 

A. 

Today on Tommy T's Obsession with the Freeperati - "Mitt hits the fan" edition

Good morning, gentle people - Firefox crashed and took an hour (it normally takes 3 to 4 hours to do an "Obsession") of unsaved post with it, so this version is going to be marginally less inspired than the original.

Same starting spot, though - Newt goes (for) broke!

Newt Gingrich Campaign Suspension Announcement May 2, 2012
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/SuspensionA ^ | 5/02/2012 | cspan.org

Posted on Wednesday, May 02, 2012 3:08:54 PM by sheikdetailfeather

Sheik?

Sheik???

OMG! The Ay-rabs have invaded Free Republic! Get Ray Stevens on the phone, STAT!

Newt Gingrich announced the suspension of his campaign for the 2012 Republican presidential nominee.

*****************************************************

He did not endorse Romney. Shep said we all must be bored with what he said and Ed Rollins said he self imploded and is a sore loser. Fox is livid. Newt got a lot in about what should be done

Fortunately, people turned him off after about 5 minutes.

in every realm and how the presidency is a small part of where we can focus to make a difference. He went into a lot of detail.

1 posted on Wednesday, May 02, 2012 3:09:11 PM by sheikdetailfeather

No shit.

To: sheikdetailfeather

Newt's campaign is deep in debt in deep shit.

FIFY.

I believe he is suspending, not ending, his campaign for the same reason that Rick Santorum did: A suspended campaign can still raise money. They can still leverage their delegates at the convention to get favorable language to conservatives in the platform and/or ensure a conservative, not a RINO, is put in the Veep slot.

Yeah, right.

4 posted on Wednesday, May 02, 2012 3:16:29 PM by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)

.

.

To: BuffaloJack

Its over Romney is the GOP nominee, accept it.

7 posted on Wednesday, May 02, 2012 3:19:41 PM by jbwbubba

.

.

To: jbwbubba

Romney IS NOT THE NOMINEE.

...but he plays one on TV.

Romney just lost his “delegates” in Massachusetts.

THEY REFUSE TO BOW TO HIM, like you.

9 posted on Wednesday, May 02, 2012 3:21:53 PM by Diogenesis ("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)

Here we go again.

To: sheikdetailfeather

The only difference between the bastard and Willard is that one is half white and the other is white...or, one is half Kenyan and the other is half Mexican.

16 posted on Wednesday, May 02, 2012 3:38:11 PM by Gatún(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)

Romney Courts Hispanic Vote With Animated Sombrero-Wearing Parrot 

.

Of course, this is all Fox News's Fault...

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Yep. I hear you. Since this election, I have heard so many things on Fox against Newt. Shameful. Beck today said he does not know why Newt is announcing he will announce a suspension. “We all get it and his donors got it long ago. Nobody notices,” he said. “We all know you are not going to be president.” I wonder what it is in Beck that wants to kick someone when they are on the ground and keep kicking them when he keeps talking up love so much?

21 posted on Wednesday, May 02, 2012 4:01:09 PM by sheikdetailfeather ("We Need To Teach The Establishment a Lesson" - Newt Gingrich)

.

.

To: sheikdetailfeather; Gator113; onyx

I posted this on another thread about this:

I saw/heard the speech and it was grand. I could not believe what Shep and Rollins said about Newt afterward. It was horrible and disgusting, protraying Newt as a crazy man who never should have run. Shep said he doubted anyone kept listening to the end of the speech.

I will never listen to Shep’s news programs again.

I’ve stopped watching Fox lately and watching movies instead but I knew Newt was going to speak today so had Fox on. I doubt CNN was as horrible as Fox reporting the speech. Newscasters are supposed to report news, not call people crazy.

I am thoroughly disgusted and angry at Fox. That’s it for me and Fox.

Now, I’m watching “Night of the Living Dead”, a zombie movie. It will be nicer than what Shep said.

At least zombies don’t talk.

22 posted on Wednesday, May 02, 2012 4:12:22 PM by Marcella (Romney: for Abortion, homosexuality, same sex marriage - No to Romney)

To: Marcella

Isn’t it interesting that Newt was a regular commentator on Fox and well respected by them until he ran for president and now he is talked bout like a dog? He must be shocked at their viciousness.

23 posted on Wednesday, May 02, 2012 4:19:52 PM by sheikdetailfeather ("We Need To Teach The Establishment a Lesson" - Newt Gingrich)

To: onyx

He’s not only gonna endorse Romney, he’s going to ‘sell’ his endorsement for the price of Romney helping him retire his campaign debt.

At least Santorum’s price for endorsing Romney is getting Romney to agree to some of Santorum’s pet projects.

The beloved, or should I say formerly beloved Mr. Herman Cain made a very fervent endorsement of Romney.

Wonder what Sarah will do?

47 posted on Wednesday, May 02, 2012 5:09:51 PM by altura (Looking for sanity in all the wrong places.)

Whatever it is, I just know it's gonna involve kneepads.

Much more, including Jim Rob's impassioned Whargarrbl to "all just get along" after the I-didn't-jump-I-was-pushed.

Prove Yourself: Game of Thrones Thread

Spoilers within.

Is This Asshole Less of an Asshole Since He's Been to Prison?

It matters so much, guys, that Conrad Black is sorry: 

Brian Stewart said Black now believes that many people — including himself — have been wronged by the U.S. justice system, giving him a sense of sympathy for those who have had the “roughest rides in America.”

“Once he saw the real injustice around him like that, which in his past life he wasn’t really in a position to see, he reacted,” said Stewart, who visited Black three times in prison while he served the first part of his sentence.

“Everyone who knows him that I’ve talked to — who’s known him for a long time — says the transformation has been impressive.”

It's not that I'm not interested in the lasting changes prison might have wrought upon Conrad Black. That's a fascinating topic, especially in a journalistic climate that mistakes celebrity feelings for actual, you know, stuff. However, for the benefit of those of us who saw newsrooms owned and controlled by his company decimated while he fudged the numbers and raided the safe, here are some questions that aren't being asked while we debate whither Lord Black of Crossharbour: 

Are the people unemployed as a result of his thieving and general fuckwittery any less unemployed, or broke, since Conrad Black went to prison? 

Are the communities that lost their major or in many cases only watchdog on public fraud and waste when Mr. Black's papers were contracted or closed any better off? 

Are the stories he and his minions demanded remain uncovered -- or demanded be covered in contravention to common sense and facts -- any less true, or any less false? 

Is he planning on liquidating every single one of his assets in order to make right what he did? 

And if the answers to all of those are no, why should we give a flying pink fuck how his personality has changed? What does that profit any of us, if he's sorry or even if he isn't, if he cares more for the wrongly convicted (hey Conrad, you weren't) or if he doesn't? How does that change anyone's situation? What are we supposed to do, give him a cookie? We have to get past this thing where people's feelings are put on a level of significance with their actions, where if he's sorry then that matters to anybody except him and his therapist. 

During the same court appearance, Black’s wife, Barbara Amiel, fainted when the judge ordered him to return to prison. Black’s release will end a separation that has been “terribly tough” on both of them, Stewart said.

“I think he’s interested in a productive, somewhat sedate existence and nowhere near as controversial, in terms of feuds and that, as it used to be.”

Call me when he does something significant to demonstrate his remorse. You know what, don't even call me then. Call me when he invents a time machine and finds a way to not have been such a stupendous fuckhole in the first place, because that's pretty much the only thing he could do to make up for what he's already done. 

Not that, beyond improving the language in his press clippings, he has any intention of making anything up at all. 

A. 

Fuck Yeah Joe Biden!

Just like that, baby. 

A. 

Sunday Morning Video: The Laff Box

Here's a cool appraisal from the Antiques Roadshow of a laff box; that's right a laugh track machine. I gotta get one of these in order to have self administered rim shots when I'm on a roll:

Watch Appraisal: 1953 Charlie Douglass "Laff Box" on PBS. See more from Antiques Roadshow.

 Via Ken Levine.

 

Weekend Question Thread

There were most definitely parts of my high school years that sucked donkey sack, but I think some of the best times were spent with my friend Carrie at a little coffeehouse (back when such things were unusual in small midwestern towns), talking about our futures. They made this thick dark coffee with whipped cream on top, and the place was full of proto-hipsters playing chess and reading books. 

What's your happiest adolescent memory? 

A. 

Dissing the Disses

In one of the more entertaining shit-fights I’ve seen in a while in academia, Naomi Schaefer Riley took it upon herself to read the titles of several black studies dissertations and then declare the field a complete waste of time. Her blog post on the Chronicle of Higher Education’s website takes three particular grad students to task for their topic selection and then mocks them mercilessly.

In Episode V: The Interwebs Strike Back, folks almost wore out their keyboards beating the shit out of her or defending her for having the courage to take this position. As you would expect, the criticisms, which she aptly summarized in her follow-up post, fell into four distinct categories:

I am picking on people because they are black (and I am a racist).
I am picking on people even though I don’t have a Ph.D.
I am picking on people who are too young and inexperienced to defend themselves.
I am picking on people even though I haven’t read their entire dissertations.

I’m not going to touch on number one (other people have done so far more eloquently than I), but I will say that if she didn’t expect people to be pissed about this post and call her a racist, I’ve got some magic beans I can sell her on the cheap.

With number three, she’s right in her defense of her thoughts. If you make it through grad school in the shortest time possible, you’re probably between 27 and 29 when you get the Ph.D. If all that life experience and scholarship hasn’t got you ready to game up against a snide asshole, you’ve got bigger problems than dealing with the snide asshole. Like tying your shoes.

Her defense in point four is kind of bullshit. No, you don’t need to read the whole dissertation to be able to comment on the scholarship. In fact, in reviewing scholarship, I find myself focusing more on certain parts than others. I don’t sit there and challenge every citation, argue with every bit of the method section or parse the full magnitude of the conclusions. However, when you read the title and mock it, you’re just asking for an ass-kicking. Imagine if we did that with other literary works:

“The Color Purple.” (Do we need a novel explaining purple is a color? Or, if you’re Jerry Falwell’s folks, GAYS! EVERYWHERE! HIDE YOUR CHILDREN!)

“Les Miserables” (Whiny fucking French bastards)

“Paradise Lost” (Get off your dead ass and find it.)

"Paradise Found" (About fucking time...)

“Candide” (I’m not reading this shit. They spelled it wrong.)

“The Count of Monte Cristo” (A guy who likes sandwiches doesn’t need his own book. Of course, it’s written by a guy named Dum ass…)

 

Which brings us back to point number two: picking on people without the requisite degree to do so.

A and I spent a lot of time talking about the issue of power of position and power of person over our time at the Cardinal. We both agreed that when you had to whip out the “Well, I’M the EDITOR IN CHIEF!” stick, you basically lost the argument. Saying someone can’t pick on a Ph.D. because that person doesn’t have a Ph.D. works along that same line of bullshit. I have no problem whatsoever with intelligent conversation on any topic involving anyone of any educational level. There is not a sign outside my office door that reads: “If your degree isn’t THIS TALL, you can’t ride this intellectual rollercoaster.”

That said, she’s missing the point.

It’s not the lack of a degree that’s bugging people, but rather a lack of knowledge that is creating a problem.

For starters, not reading beyond the title of the dissertations you are criticizing is like reviewing a movie after looking at its poster. If you want to go out on a limb about a topic, fine, but let’s at least watch the movie trailer, or in this case, read the damned abstract.

A professor in my doctoral program let us all in on a little secret: The dissertation isn’t going to be, nor is it supposed to be, the best scholarship you ever do. It’s the first major bit of research you do, on your own and you learn a ton by doing it. It’s a launching point for your career and a chance to stretch into a completely foreign field.

Criticizing a dissertation like Riley has done is a lot like criticizing the Army for implementing calisthenics because who the hell gets up and starts doing jumping jacks in the middle of a firefight in Afghanistan?

It’s also not a secret that the dissertation is like a frat hazing: The academics at your institution want to see what you can withstand. That is why these take so long, run so long and are so horribly painful to write. They want to test your mettle and your desire to be good at this so that you CAN move forward from this point and add to the sum of human knowledge. Maybe it won’t be in a field that Riley thinks is worthwhile, but others might. In any case, it’s a starting point, not a complete body of work.

If Riley wants to take shots at some shitty scholarship, there are plenty of targets out there. Some studies I read have scholars comparing two variables that have nothing to do with one another and then offering the “significant differences exist” argument that they found something important. Of course, they see nothing wrong with acting like the guy from Spinal Tap as they arrogantly defend the premise that “these go to 11,” which makes their failure all the more spectacular.

And, no, I’m not going to say, “Go get a Ph.D. and then we’ll talk” because that would be fighting her weak bullshit with equally weak bullshit.

Instead, I’ll simply ask that if she’s going to write for a publication that combines my two passions (education and journalism) that she ascribe to the basic tenets of both of those fields.

Research, report, analyze and then write.

Friday Ferretblogging: Plushy Tilly Edition

I was away from the beasties for almost an entire week. It was AGONY. I mean, usually this plushy pile of fluff is at the end of the bed every morning: 

A. 

Friday Catblogging: Hey, let us sleep

Looks can be deceptive: Oscar is the sweet one but he's shooting Dr. A a laser look. Just ask Athenae: Della is aloof at best and surly at worst. You'd never know that from a cursory look at this picture.

Everybody Still Hates Scott

He's spending money hand over fist, and yet the state still overridingly considers him a bag with which one douches: 

In January, Walker’s job approval was 51 percent; in March, it was 50 percent; and this month, it's 47 percent.

In January, Walker was leading Barrett 50-44; in March, 47-45; and this month, he trails 46-47. (Among likely voters, Walker leads by a point; all of these findings suggest a mostly unchanging dead heat.)

“There’s been a great deal of advertising in the state, especially from the Walker campaign and Republican supporters, and we’ve seen virtually no movement in the Walker numbers,” Franklin tells me.

What’s particularly interesting here is that just yesterday, Walkerannounced he’d raised a staggering $13 million in three months for the recall fight. But even though he’s likely to outspend his Dem opponent in the home stretch, it’s unclear how much that will matter, because the numbers suggest ads are unlikely to move the needle much going forward.

It's not like he's some unknown quantity, either. I'm sure there are people in the state of Wisconsin who just haven't heard enough about Walker to make up their minds if he or whatever organism the Dems nominate would do a better job, but the club of the most of them have spent the past year-plus hearing Walker nonstop, pro and con. Short of his fishing bin Laden out of the sea and killing him again, it's difficult to see what Walker could do that would influence his approval ratings in any way. 

That doesn't mean recall's a lock, though. This stuff's hard for a reason:

“It won’t take much in voter turnout to tip the race either way,” Franklin says. “You can spend an awful lot of money on advertising and it would be unlikely to change many minds. But the advantages that Democrats and unions have traditionally had in the ground game is certainly an area where they can match Walker’s organization at the very least.”

A. 

The Real Europeans

As a part of their endless campaign to "otherize" President Obama, Republicans are fond of talking about his radical Marxist Socialist "European" policies. They rarely let the facts get in the way of their propagandizing, European politics have been drifting rightward in the last decade and Center Left governments have been defeated and replaced by conservative governments that are well to the Right of previous ones. Jacques Chirac was smack dab in the middle of the political spectrum but Sarko is flapping mostly his right wing and rather woefully at that.

Neo-Thatcherite economic policies are in place throughout the continent and enforced by the EU and the big kahuna of Europe: German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Austerity is in vogue and it's led to rioting in Greece and a double dip recession elsewhere.

I seem to recall that Mitt Haircut, Speaker Boner and their Koch owned teabagger fellow travelers are for spending cuts and balanced budgets that will never exist because of their tax cut mania. In short, they're for painful austerity for everyone but the 1%. Nothing has changed in that regard.

Something else that will not change is the Republicans trash talking Europe for the benefit of their moronic nativist base. Europe is full of furriners and furriners are all Socialists except for when they're not. Hell, most Americans are convinced that the current Canadian government is left wing instead of having a neo-Reaganite PM in Stephen Harper. One would think the Goopers would celebrate Canada's misfortune but they'd rather have a straw man to light afire. It's what they do.

Austerity, however, may be on the decline in Europe since Sarko seems to be on the verge of losing the French Presidency to the mild socialism of Francois Hollande. That will end the Merkozy reign of terror but the Germans still carry the big stick in the EU. Uh oh, I'm soundng like Joe Biden right now...

For more on the economics of European austerity read this piece by Robert Reich.

The next time Mittbot spews idiotic comments about Obama's "Euro-socialism," remember who's the real European. He can stick that in in his Otherizer and blend it...

White Rich Man's Burden

From Album4

For all of Conard's alleged daring to defend the obscene amounts of money he and his kind accumulate, it's really just an updated version of uplift and Christianize, minus any acknowledgement of the circumstances that allowed them to become so obscenely wealthy. Circumstances in no small part the function of a civil society that owes a substantial debt to government.

In a genuinely competitive world, I doubt Conard would last twenty minutes.

Your Help Is Needed

Internet, this is Ginnie. Ginnie, Internet.

See that doggie right there?

She belongs to the mother of someone who is very dear to me.  And, as noted above, your help is needed in this little doggie's case. I'll just let my friend say it:

My mom's dog, Ginger fell and broke 2 vertebrae in her neck. She is an adorable miniature brown dachshund who LOVES everyone! She needs surgery and has an 80% chance of a full recovery. The surgery could cost anywhere from $3000-$5000. She is only seven years old. Without meds, Ginger is in a lot of pain and if we cannot find a way to do the surgery, the only option is to put her down. The vets want us to decide today! However, my mom is on SS and is well below the poverty line. She loves her little dog very much and it breaks her heart that she cannot afford to help Ginnie.

So there you go.  You can go here to help however you can.  Select "send money," enter the amount you wish to send, toggle "friends and family," and the e-mail address to send it to is vhealey [at] ssc [dot] wisc [dot] edu.  I know that the world sucks and everyone's broke and we're all at the ends of our respective ropes, but please chip in for this.  Like the boss always says: we're all in this together, or we're sunk.  Okay, so I'm paraphrasing.  Shoot me.  Just go help this old lady keep her friend.

Back to your regular smartassery soon.

Wednesday Night Music: Passion Is No Ordinary Word

This one is for Athenae, Doc, Mr A and all the passionate Cardinalistas everywhere;

 

Mad Men Thread: Ooh La La

It happened again: Mad Men has followed up a shitty episode with an hour of awesome. Roger's good acid trip and exit from his bad trip of a second marriage have restored the twinkle to his eyes and the bounce to his step. It's a pleasant curveball thrown at us by Matthew Weiner's merry band of scribblers or is that scripters? Whichever. Here are a few random, discursive and arguably pertinent comments about an episode that could have been called Family Affair. It was, however, more like the Sly song and less like the sitcom with gruff Brian Keith and his relentlessly cute adopted kids:

The Return of Weird Glenn: Our Sally is growing up. She went to the ACS shebang sans boots and makeup but in a glam dress and with her hair up. She's looking more like Betty every day but mommy dearest would be horrified to learn that she's forever on the phone with Weird Glenn. This is apt to result in Sally surrendering her virtue to the big goober and/or a meltdown with Bets. She could do better but the show could not. Hey, she's already seen a public blow job so what's a phone conversation with a pantsless boy?

The Quebecois Are Coming: We finally met Megan's parents. Her snooty Marxist academic father hates Don and what he stands for but likes his snappy digs. Anyone surprised that Megan has a hot mom? I thought not. Marie spent much of the episode flirting with Don and Roger and fighting with the aforementioned intellectual snob. It explains why Megan not only hates fighting with her spousal unit but freaks out when it happens. I'm not sure if Don reflects her rebelling against dear old dad or she has a raging Oedipal complex; either way it's, uh, complex...

Beanless Pegster: Peggy's off the Heinz account but was more of a character and less an archetype this time around. She continues to be as bad at her personal life as she is good at her job. I gotta admire her guts for not only shacking up with Abe the ham loving Jew but telling her virago mum the truth. I expected Mrs. Olson to be more overtly anti-Semitic than she was but that was a subtext of her "he's using you" rant.

Major Draper Win: The dinner with the pain in the balls Heinz dude was the highlight of the show. Megan was more Draper than Don as she fed him cues and riffed her way to closing the deal.  Megan continues to be a pleasant surprise as a character: she's like Faye Miller only she's good with kids. A winning combination but her father will never like Don, his money or his "studied" manners.

Confederacy Of Hypocrites: Don's award dinner turned out to be a bummer for everyone but Roger. Hummer would be a better description of what happened to the bow tie wearing motherfucker; Roger not The Wire's Brother Mouzone. I'm not sure that the "they'll never hire you because you bit the hand" thing will stick. All it will take is a few successful campaigns and they'll forget that Don kicked back at Lucky Strike after they kicked SCDP to the curb.

Speaking of hypocrisy, that ball room looked like the proverbial smoke filled room that gave us President Warren Gamaliel Harding. I'm hacking just thinking of it.

Finally, all the Francophone flirtation made me think of (what else?) Ronnie Lane's great tune, Ooh La La:

 

An Empty Room

Updated with corrections.

The room was empty. 

I kept telling people that all night, when they were looking at me like I'd lost my mind. People look at you like you've lost your mind when you're wandering around either grinning like an idiot, bursting into tears, or hugging random basically-strangers because they showed up at a party. 

But the room was empty. 

It was the hottest summer any of us can remember to this day, 1995, and our student newspaper had stopped the presses back in February. In that time the people I'd come to regard as not just friends but family were fractious, fighting: Whose fault it was, who didn't see it coming, who could have/should have done more to stop it. Who was doing more to fix it, and who best had earned the right to bitch about those who'd buggered off for bigger and better things. 

As people generally do, when their company goes belly-up, only we were too dumb to know it was time for us to quit. 

We were $137,700 in debt and we had $42.71 in our checkbook. And the room -- a windowless basement in the ugliest building on a beautiful campus -- was empty. 

The Cardinal office always rang with sound: phones, keyboards, arguments, laughter. The Cardinal office was always full. The paper was founded in 1892 and has trained thousands of journalists, thousands of leaders in business and law, thousands of people who for the first time in their lives saw the changes they were capable of making in the world. Our alumni had won Pulitzers, Emmys, Peabodys, Nobels. They wrote for the New York Times, photographed for Life magazine, were elected to state legislatures and altered the face of medicine. They fought in wars from the Spanish-American to the Gulf. They married, had children, and some of those children came back to work for the place that made their parents fall in love. 

They advocated for women's suffrage and equal treatment of minorities long before the rest of the mainstream press accepted those causes as worthy. They walked out on strike in protest of anti-Semitism and assailed a football program for racism. They exposed a corrupt governance board and revealed how taxpayer dollars were intertwined with war and death. 

They did it all in a room, with typewriters and linotypes and C-text computers, cigarettes and beer and more coffee than was good for them, cheap pizza and pretzels and white bread with cream cheese. They did it all beside one another, fighting every day to put out a paper and get to class and in many cases to their second jobs as well, over the objections of family and faculty who simply didn't understand why somebody would spend all that time doing something that a) if it paid at all, paid a pittance and b) actively hurt their grades and social life. 

Trying to explain your passion to someone else isn't easy. Take the thing you love most in the world and make me understand why you love it, and then make me love it, too. Knit it into my muscles and bones, until it thrums like a pulse under my skin and whispers to me in the dark. Explaining why, on the hottest days of the hottest summer anyone could remember, we were inside under the flourescent lights raising money penny by penny to bring back a student newspaper, well, it was like explaining the things of the church, or the appeal of high-stakes gambling, or the feeling of a crowd rising at the crack of a baseball bat. Everybody has something like this, and this was ours. 

And it was gone. The room was empty. 

Every day, no matter how loudly we blasted the Nirvana or George Carlin routines or whatever musical score was wearing out the boombox, no matter how much we few tried to talk while we worked, the silence was always there, and in it was judgment and indictment and hollow animal fear. 

And we ignored it as hard as we could but all of us, at one time or another, felt the weight of all that history and heard the echoes of that noise and thought, "What if this fails?" 

I've been in and out of this blog for the past couple of weeks because I've been planning a party. A big three-day celebration of the paper's 120th anniversary, held last weekend in Madison, with journalism panels and a photography exhibit and a big crazy dance benefit to end the week. I've had a committee of people and an army of volunteers and it was all going very well, 250 people showed up, enjoying the programs and whatnot, and then the paper's current staff held an open house in the same room where Doc and Mr. A and I and a few important others used to sit on those hot summer nights making calls and punching numbers into spreadsheets and trying to figure out how on God's green earth we could ever pull this off. 

And the room was full. 

A bunch of staffers from the mid-1950s were arguing about copy-editing mistakes that had been dust for half a century. A bunch of staffers from the 1980s were re-creating a staff photo taken during their student days and joking about photoshopping in friends who weren't there. A bunch of staffers from the mid-2000s were throwing a football around. And a bunch of staffers from that year were mauling the snacks and showing off their "layout wall of fame" and looking around in wonder at all the people who loved this place just like they did. 

In the corner, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Abigail Goldman was trying to find work of hers from her student days to show her current students at UCLA. She teaches journalism and wanted to show them that she had started out exactly where they had, and struggled with some of the same techniques, made the same mistakes. "There it is," she said, exasperated, pointing at an article in a bound newspaper volume. "Pet peeve number five, right there." 

The artists and editorial cartoonists were comparing heights in the office. Each year before one student editor left and another came in, they signed the wall separating the photo and graphics departments and penciled in their marks above their heads like little kids in their rooms. Despite the fact that all it would have taken was one wet sponge to erase all the marks, no one had ever done so. No one ever thought of it. 

Editor in Chief Robert Lewis, who helmed the paper in 1942 before leaving for war, pointed out the front page from Pearl Harbor day on the wall, its WE ARE AT WAR headline visible from across the room. "That was not trite," he said softly to staffers who were in grade school on 9/11. "We knew war had been coming, and now it was here." 

I believe this the way I believe in gravity: The world gets better when its storytellers are good and true, and you can teach people a million different ways to tell a story but you can't teach them how to want to do it. You can only give them places where they can gather to do that, places where they can learn from one another, push and change and love one another, try for greater and greater connection. Our journalism is critical to us as a country, and for all the time I spend haranguing the punditry and studying the politics and assailing the economics, I know there's nothing more important to the future of journalism than making strong, fearless, unforgiving journalists and that room has always been a place where fearlessness was nurtured and forgiveness seldom given. 

About halfway through the afternoon Saturday, I had to go outside and take a few deep breaths, because when I was at the paper getting to 104 was a forlorn hope that had no chance of coming true and every year just like everywhere there are struggles and the reason we have unlikely victories in the face of impossible odds is that the odds are impossible and the victories unlikely and as much as I say all the time to never give up, I was afraid all the time of not making it that far.

Here was 120, and there is gray in my hair, and the staffers don't know who I am, and that is perfect, that is so ordinary, that is so right. Next year's staff won't have been born when the shutdown happened, which is when I've officially become that guy in the corner yelling YOU DON'T KNOW MAN I WAS THERE, which is also right and perfect. There are still arguments going on at the paper every day, arguments journalism is having too, about new media and how best to use it, about people's reading habits and news consumption then and now, which is just as it should be. 

The most important thing is that that room is full.

And always will be. 

A. 

Best Healthcare In The World Blah Blah

One of the arguments we always heard during the healthcare debate was that America is the driving force behind every major medical advance in the universe, since forever. Indeed, Tennessee's own Junior Senator Bob Corker had the nerve to tell Canada's former Public Health Minister that Canada and France were mooching off of American innovation: we're the ones coming up with all the technological breakthroughs, which they benefit from! And dammit, it's unfair! It's our money paying to develop cures for cancer! Parasites!

Oh yes, that was embarassing. 

I thought of that when I read about a Cleveland researcher's struggle to get funding to start clinical trials of a promising breast cancer vaccine:

With additional funding, the Cleveland Clinic Lerner Research Institute immunologist could begin testing the vaccine in two groups of humans: women with advanced breast cancer and healthy women with a high risk of developing the disease.

The cost to just make the vaccine is an estimated $1.8 million, a small part of the $6 million for all of the costs associated with conducting a clinical trial approved by the Food and Drug Administration, Tuohy said.

As 2010 wound down, however, Tuohy's hope that he would be able to secure sizable grants to cover those costs vanished into thin air.

The National Cancer Institute -- which the year before provided him funding -- and Susan G. Komen for the Cure had rejected his grant proposals, ending any chance that human trials could be launched before the end of 2011.

Why is this happening in America? Because, the article tells us, competition for cancer research funds is "stiff." Only 12% of the grant proposals NCI receives are awarded funds. Komen funds fewer than 80 grants of the 1,400 proposals it receives. And Dr. Tuohy is developing a preventative vaccine, whereas the medical community is focused more on treatment for existing cancer. Apparently prevention goes against the grain in the medical community.

This is the greatest healthcare system in the world? Bah. A paltry $6 million to test a promising breast cancer vaccine? We can't do this because why? With all the money we spend on crap at the Pentagon we can't scrape together $6 million for a preventative breast cancer vaccine? The Army spent $7 million sponsoring NASCAR driver Ryan Newman last year. We can do that but we can't fund clinical trials for a breast cancer vaccine? (On a related note: did you know the Dept. of Defense has a Breast Cancer Research Program? I didn't either. But no, they rejected Dr. Tuohy's application, too.)

So now citizens are pitching in. People, this story just restores my faith in America, it really does. Folks all around the country are holding fundraisers to help Dr. Tuohy, in what has to be the medical research equivalent of a pickle jar by the cash register. They've held garage sales, races, concerts, you name it. They've kicked in big money and little money. A sample:

Earlier this year, Judy Fitzgerald, a retired middle school teacher who lives in Portsmouth, R.I., sent Tuohy a check for $702, money raised from a 1950s-themed dance and items sold at a crafts fair.

These people are my heroes. You'd think our government or fucking GlaxoSmithKline or whatever would be able to cough up $6 millioni dollars for clinical trials -- hell, maybe WellPoint CEO Angela Braly could dip into her $13.2 million annual compensation, after all, isn't a breast cancer vaccine a lot cheaper in the long run for insurance companies than cancer treatment? But whatever. Free hand of the market, yada yada.

So once again the people step in when others have failed. It's not the most seamless or efficient way of doing things but we stumble along and eventually we get there.

The article has lots of links to donation pages if you're interested in getting involved.

Confessions of a Watergate Junkie

I cut my political teeth on Watergate. It was the first political event during my lifetime that I followed obsessively and I remain deeply addicted to any nuggets of Watergate-iana.

It was also the source of considerable familial tension as the shit slowly hit the fan during. My father was not only a Republican but had been a Nixon delegate at the 1972 GOP Convention. His thesis was that Nixon was too smart to have allowed so much dumbassery to go on. I was then, as now, of the school that even smart people do stupid things and let things slide out of control. So, we spent 2 1/2 years arguing Watergate. I was right and he was wrong but he was never going to admit such a thing. So it goes.

There's all sorts of Watergate news as we approach the 40th Anniversary of men in suits being caught breaking in to the DNC's office. Convicted Watergate shitbird, Chuck Colson, a serious candidate for the malakatude hall of fame, died the other day at the age of 80. Colson was the second biggest asshole in an administration full of dickishness. President Tricky was, of course, the bullgoose loony asshole.

Colson also achieved notoriety by being one of the godfathers of the GOP's unholy alliance with religious fundamentalists. Colson allegedly swore off politics after establishing a personal relationship with Jesus in the slammer but I never bought it. How could you buy it from the guy who said: "If you grab them by the balls, their hearts will follow."

In other Watergate related matters, it looks as if Woodstein's claim that they never spoke to any of Judge Sirica's grand jurors simply ain't true. Woodward protege, John Himmelman, stumbled into some info in Ben Bradlee's files that contradicts that assertion. Talking to grand jurors is a no-no BUT the statute of limitations is Woodstein's new best friend. It also appears that the whole red flag in the potted plant  detail of the Deep Throat story may be an embellishment. Guess Woodward should have kept that under his Mark Felt   hat...

Finally, movie Woodward, Robert Redford, is planning a new Watergate documentary for the Discovery Channel. (Hmm, wonder if they plan to run it as a part of Shark Week?) This has led fellow Watergate buff Ron Rosenbaum to urge them to *try* and solve the ultimate Watergate mystery: who ordered the break-in. Rosenbaum and I are as one in our conclusion, Tricky pulled the trigger and then planned how to lie his way out of it:

The best summary of my case appears in this column from 1999: in which I pull together the fragments of the evidence that Nixon was the one who gave the order. Here are the bones of my argument: Nixon is heard on a recording made two days after the news broke of the break-in proclaiming that he was shocked by it and—knowing the tape is rolling—saying it was silly for anyone to break into the Democratic National Committee party headquarters because any savvy pol would know that all the valuable dirt would be found in the (yet to be named) presidential candidate’s headquarters.

And then he delivers one of his most inculpatory statements on tape: “That’s my public line.” In other words, that was how he was going to lie his way out of any connection: By arguing that if he were planning a break-in, he wouldn’t have targeted Watergate, because nothing of value could be found there. When, in fact, as later tapes and witnesses would show, he thought something very, very important to his future might be there.

I'm pretty sure that then DNC Chairman and later NBA Commish Larry O'Brien had some dirt on Tricky's connection with Howard Hughes after the mogul stopped looking like Leo DeCaprio and began to resemble a Monty Python Hermit dude. Dirty money was second nature to the germophobic billionaire...

End of today's spasm of Watergate mania. To be continued when John Dean comments...

Here's a video Jude sent me a link to. If you hate it, blame him not me but who among us hates Futurama?

 

Cardinal's Pulitzer, Emmy Winners Optimistic About Journalism's Future

That really shouldn't have to be a headline, right, but how many of these do I complain about to you guys, panels of journalists talking about how journalism's glory days have passed by and kids today don't read and everybody's just interested in Kardashians now and everything sucks? I either attend one of those things or read about one happening elsewhere once a week, which is why I drink so much. 

Finally, on Friday, I went to one that was inspiring instead of hectoring. It was in conjunction with The Daily Cardinal's 120th anniversary, and was actually two panels, one of Emmy/Peabody winners and another of Pulitzer winners. They had in common that they got their start at the University of Wisconsin-Madison's oldest student newspaper, and they were speaking primarily to an audience of journalists and other journalism students. 

In the morning, there was a lot of talk about ethics and transparency in traditional media. Chuck Salituro of ESPN said the network now bans its journalists from writing "as told to" books for sports figures, because of the inherent conflict in being the ghostwriter for someone you're covering (IMAGINE). Both Steven Reiner and Peter Greenberg of CBS talked about video news releases and the perniciousness of their use in smaller markets. 

They also spoke about "experts" paying to opine on various news subjects. And all these things were allowed to happen, were allowed to flourish, because the new economics of journalism placed ever more pressure on people to produce material, and the temptation to take the easy path was greater. 

(As an aside: Why is it that every Q&A ever includes at least one person who stands up and says, "MY QUESTION IS I HATE YOU?" It's like a law of nature.) 

Cardinal photo by Mark Kauzlarich

In the afternoon, the print folks took over and a lot of the questions they were asked about the "future of news" resulted in my two favorite answers: It's always been endangered and it's actually less endangered now because new voices have less expensive platforms to work through. 

Abigail Goldman, formerly of the LA Times, said that one day we'll look back on this as a golden age of journalism, because students are learning to be entrepreneurial, to scramble, to push themselves through the noise online. "Those who do good work will rise," she said, and, "The medium doesn't matter. The story does." 

Neal Ulevich, who photographed the Vietnam War for the AP, said the web has been good for getting news photos attention, and noted that a lot of the imagery coming from war zones now comes from cell phone cameras. "It's not about the technology. It's about the image." 

Which is very true. What we have now, in journalism, are tools we didn't have before, and the ability to combine those tools, to specialize in terms of subject matter but broaden our work in terms of the ways we cover things. Immediacy isn't always bad. Twitter isn't ruining everything. Asking people to send in a cell phone video is not going to kill us all. And as long as the story isn't trivial, the coverage won't be. 

A. 

Today on Tommy T's Obsession with the Freeperati - "Freepathon meltdown" edition

Suit up, folks - the fit has hit the shan over in greater Freepistan for sure.

When I put last week's "Downfall" parody together, I had no idea how closely reality would follow satire, but it has, and more.

This:

 

...had become this:

Let's put this FReepathon to bed. We have bigger fish to fry.
April 27, 2012 | 2ndDivisionVet

Posted on Friday, April 27, 2012 6:56:50 AM by 2ndDivisionVet

Everyone please send whatever you are able to, whether it is $10, $100 or $1,000+. The DUmmies, Morons, Kos Kiddies and that crew are laughing up their sleeves. Jim may have to make this site members only or allow ads. Better for us to just help with what we can. Maybe you can donate as a memorial for a lost loved one, a servicemember who never made it home or was disabled defending our country. Perhaps you'd like to give to keep free discussion alive and to show them that we're not knuckling under. I'm sure a well thought out or prayerful meditation will lead you to see the need and how you can help. If every registered FReeper and our lurkers would each just help out with a fin or a sawbuck, or better yet a Ben Franklin, we could put this to bed and get on with the conservative cause.

1 posted on Friday, April 27, 2012 6:56:52 AM by 2ndDivisionVet

.

.

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

Well - we're off to a flying start on this thread - whatever could that first response have been? 

Unfortunately for the Freeperati, I captured it defore deletion:

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Yes, ya’ll haven’t smeared Romney near enough to re-elect your favcrite house negro President.

2 posted on Friday, April 27, 2012 7:15:58 AM by Peter from Rutland

Oh, my.

Perhaps you'd like to give to keep free discussion alive (???????)

10 posted on Friday, April 27, 2012 7:58:01 AM by wtc911 (Amigo - you've been had.)

.

.

To: wtc911

You don’t believe that free discussion takes place here?

11 posted on Friday, April 27, 2012 8:01:02 AM by 2ndDivisionVet (Ich habe keinen Konig aber Gott)

.

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Insulting FReepers is not exactly the best way to solicit funds.

You may want to reflect on why contributions are way off.

12 posted on Friday, April 27, 2012 8:03:32 AM by Second Amendment First ("Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not..." - Thomas Jefferson.)

 

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I believe that there used to be a model of free discussion here. But, the number of zots over opinion as opposed to violation of posting rules gives credence to those who say that this model has ceased to exist.

You know that I speak my mind. What you don't know is that I have received well over a dozen messages in the past two years from freepers who said that they were afraid to post similar opinions for fear of being zotted.

 That's the fact of it...many long-time freepers do not feel "free" to discuss. I believe that the pendulum will swing back but in the mean-time FR will lose good people.

15 posted on Friday, April 27, 2012 8:12:52 AM by wtc911 (Amigo - you've been had.)

.

.

To: wtc911

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/blogger-could-be-thrown-in-jail-for-writing-about-his-diet/

If FR survives the next four years of Obama, I will be pleasantly surprised.

18 posted on Friday, April 27, 2012 8:19:07 AM by netmilsmom (I am Breitbart)

If Freepervile survives this thread, I will be pleasantly surprised.

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Try harder next time, perhaps threaten my life.

19 posted on Friday, April 27, 2012 8:20:22 AM by Peter from Rutland

.

.

To: Peter from Rutland

Aren’t we the little martyr? And your “house negro” comment sure doesn’t hurt those enemies of FreeRepublic who constantly attempt to paint us all as hood wearing Klansmen or skinhead neo-Nazis.

Just what a troll would do.

28 posted on Friday, April 27, 2012 8:41:51 AM by 2ndDivisionVet (Ich habe keinen Konig aber Gott)

.

.

To: WatchOutForSnakes

Ask all the people who have been run off over a simple difference of opinion

Bless your heart. It's not a simple difference of opinion.

1. A Conservative bastion cannot support a socialist.

2. Conservatives are fighting Republican liberals for control. Surrendering is just that, surrender. Why would they ever believe conservatives "line in the sand" if we cave to them again?

3. Principles matter.

34 posted on Friday, April 27, 2012 8:50:48 AM by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)

Freepers argung over principles is like two Heart Attack Grill patrons arguing over healthy lifestyle choices.

To: Peter from Rutland

The originator of this post is doing a fine job of “putting this FReepathon to bed”.

I wonder if he is actually an anti-freeper looking to put the final nail in FR as we have known it.

35 posted on Friday, April 27, 2012 8:52:03 AM by Second Amendment First ("Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not..." - Thomas Jefferson.)

.

.

To: wtc911

You are so correct. I have been a member since 2001 and have always been quite loyal. However, the insults and constant badgering that is currently allowed has soured me on the site. Believe me I am extremely conservative, but feel that it is more important to remove Obama than anything else. That is obviously no longer the objective on this site. Instead it seems to be to insult anyone who believes as I do.

Because this site is supported by we who contribute, I don't understand the thinking that only some peoples ideas can be heard. Of course, if I am an Obama backer I should be insulted and banned, but that is far from the case. It will unfortunately destroy the site. I am so sad, because I have always loved this site. i just don't come here any more because of the insults.

44 posted on Friday, April 27, 2012 9:05:19 AM by w1andsodidwe (Barrak has now won the contest. He is even worse than Jimmah.)

.

.

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The vindictiveness that comes out on almost every thread is far from open and free discussion. This is a major part of the donation problem, as I see it.

47 posted on Friday, April 27, 2012 9:12:02 AM by SouthTexas (You cannot bargain with the devil, shut the government down.)

 

To: Second Amendment First

those being banned are the ones silenced for expressing their opinions.

The owner has made clear that Conservative FR will not support a socialist. Those banned for various reasons know the rules. They made a choice.

A decade ago this used to be a real free discussion site

Then you haven't been paying attention. For the whole life of FR there have been "lines in the sand" and there has been those who chose to cross them.

49 posted on Friday, April 27, 2012 9:17:00 AM by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)

.

.

To: 2ndDivisionVet

“Free discussion...” LOL! How can you even post such a lie. I told the goon squad last January they were losing donations due to their stupid antics of Zotting, tattle tailing(sic) and brow beating posters that don't tow(sic) the line. Now you come with your tin cup in hand wondering where the money went. It's NOT the economy but you all won't listen anyways.

51 posted on Friday, April 27, 2012 9:20:20 AM by ladyvet ( I would rather have Incitatus then the asses that are in congress today.)

.

.

To: norwaypinesavage

I don't believe that telling the truth is "stirring the pot". Sometimes the truth hurts, but that's usually when it most needs to be said.

That is not what you are doing. This is a fund raising thread

(Clouseau) "Not any-meure."

and you have taken this opportunity to take shots at FR for standing on principle.

54 posted on Friday, April 27, 2012 9:25:45 AM by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)

I'm sorry - was that a double, or triple-bypass burger?

To: DJ MacWoW

Principles matter? Are you kidding. They are so fluid here, I’m not even sure they exist. Many of the “Go Newt!” crowd were flaming him as a liberal they couldnt vote for as late as last December.

55 posted on Friday, April 27, 2012 9:25:47 AM by Raider Sam (They're on our left, right, front, and back. They aint gettin away this time!)

Much more and much worse to come after the manifold, including an appearance by Jim Rob himself on what I'm now calling the official "What the fuck's wrong with you people??" thread

Skinchanging: Game of Thrones Thread

Spoilers, as always, within. 

Sunday Morning Video: Sunday Street

A bit of Squeeze for a Sunday morning. It's an odd duck of a video though: it was filmed in Los Angeles whereas the song evokes strolling through the Portobello Market in London. Oh well, it's a good tune:

 

Weekend Question Thread

You find a $100 bill on the ground. You're only allowed to spend it on yourself. What do you buy? 

A. 

Caption This: Mitt the Sandman Edition

Here's a photo taken by TPM's Benjy Sarlin: