drsmooth wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:My man Chris polling at 8% nationally

Strike while the iron's hot, fatty

the waffle iron?

another regional pol gets attention for his health care vote:

<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/j9gH6Janp-8&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/j9gH6Janp-8&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>

the pick of Runyan suggests he has every reason to join the inevitable class-action-type action of former NFL players seeking compensation for their multiple concussions

Is this the change we voted for? Well he ran saying he was going to vote for repeal. And he got more votes than his opponent. And then he voted for repeal. So yes this is the change I and the rest of the district voted for.

jerseyhoya wrote:Is this the change we voted for? Well he ran saying he was going to vote for repeal. And he got more votes than his opponent. And then he voted for repeal. So yes this is the change I and the rest of the district voted for.

well, to be more accurate, you and a share of the district sufficient to elect him.

on another matter, jerz, how's Gov. Christie gonna process his Sohail Mohammed problem on the national stage, what with the likes of sane-sounding Reagan nutwagon Frank Gaffney dogging his steps?

Ryan to deliver SOTU response. Yay guys.

Need a lie counter for when he talks about social security.

Olbermann resigned or got fired or something

nooooo

i blame comcast

Hah, heard a former boss and a guy I like and respect a lot is going to be Newt's campaign manager. He's got no business running a presidential in 2012, and I hope it doesn't kill him.

jerseyhoya wrote:Olbermann resigned or got fired or something

This

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... id=topnews

makes it sound like he left because he didn't get along with his boss.

This is quite plausible. I know someone who once worked for Olbermann, and he says that Olbermann is a miserable human being who doesn't get along with anybody.

jerseyhoya wrote:Hah, heard a former boss and a guy I like and respect a lot is going to be Newt's campaign manager. He's got no business running a presidential in 2012, and I hope it doesn't kill him.

we have another thing sort of in common; a colleague is working/has worked for newt's health care meme factory

if your ex-boss is not susceptible to dying of chronic embarrassment I'd say he's got an interesting new line in his resume

ok now i blame phil griffin. they suspended him earlier for no legit reason, either. what a joke

Over/Under on his re-emerging on FNC? I can totally see that as an FU from both he and FNC.

VoxOrion wrote:Over/Under on his re-emerging on FNC? I can totally see that as an FU from both he and FNC.

I had the same thought. Him throwing to O'Reilly, or vice-versa, would be all time great/awkward TV.

that would make no sense.


anyway, this opens the door for cenk uygur to get a full-time show. yay, but was kind of hoping he'd replace chris matthews instead

Omigod Mr Trump

yes, yes please run, please please please

you loveable insane weird hair man

Requiring telcos to give customers a heads-up concerning their account usage is a violation of the telcos' 1st amendment rights:

NY Times wrote:The F.C.C.’s [regulatory] proposals are modest, calling only for alerts when use limits are approached and again when they are reached....

Rather than embracing the F.C.C.’s alerts-only proposal as a less costly solution than one that would suspend service, the wireless industry is fighting regulation of any kind....

The wireless industry’s trade group, C.T.I.A.-The Wireless Association, argues that the F.C.C.’s proposal “violates carriers’ First Amendment protections”; it contends that compelling carriers to provide use alerts is a form of “compelled speech.”

How about this: if I near my acct limit without a notice from my telco, I may compel insertion of my handset no fewer than 11 inches up the CEO's rectum

video of the act to be uploaded to YouTube

and then I get a new handset

death threats are coming infor a 78 year old professor because of some paper she wrote 40 years ago. Why? Well, apparently Glenn Beck's been ranting about her everyday on his program and his online publication. Who knew that a random CUNY professor helped bring about the demise of our 'system'? Where's my pitchfork?

pacino wrote:death threats are coming infor a 78 year old professor because of some paper she wrote 40 years ago. Why? Well, apparently Glenn Beck's been ranting about her everyday on his program and his online publication. Who knew that a random CUNY professor helped bring about the demise of our 'system'? Where's my pitchfork?

I don't like having to defend Glenn Beck, but it's not just about her paper from decades ago. In the article that you cited, last month she wrote that "an effective movement of the unemployed will have to look something like the strikes and riots that have spread across Greece,” and that “protesters need targets, preferably local and accessible ones.” Saying that we need riots like Greece, with local "targets," sounds like the sort of ignorant inciting to violence that she is decrying from Beck.

Of course, the death threats are awful.

Nice concise history of the 1992 presidential race and the impact of the First Gulf War from jh's favorite liberal journalist.

Werthless wrote:

pacino wrote:death threats are coming infor a 78 year old professor because of some paper she wrote 40 years ago. Why? Well, apparently Glenn Beck's been ranting about her everyday on his program and his online publication. Who knew that a random CUNY professor helped bring about the demise of our 'system'? Where's my pitchfork?

I don't like having to defend Glenn Beck, but it's not just about her paper from decades ago. In the article that you cited, last month she wrote....

Good for you, you at least peered at the NYTimes article ABOUT her article. Butgo read it - it's just about as short at the Times blurb.

In it, she basically explains that jobless people can be harder to organize & mobilize than you might at first imagine, because, y'know, they don't have much discretionary resources to work with, being jobless & out of money & credit & with their conventional social connections somewhat disrupted & stuff. You or I might have suggested she clarify that the odds against her hypothetical are 1,302,428,741,430 against, but I doubt that would have kept the Fox crowd from croaking themselves hoarse.

So once you've read her actual article, you may like having defended that loathsome gob of sphincteral exudate at Fox even less.