22c5f486dd97274d499c…

Maybe I am nitpicking, Marc, but you and another person once raked me over the coals for pointing out Christopher Hitchens love of drink…saying that what people do in that respect isn’t important, and shouldn’t be mentioned…aren’t you being a little hypocritical here?

If you don’t have the facts on your side, then I guess you just make shit up.

No, it’s just further proof of your witless wanking. It’s called Google.

Like you…you are a total right-wing nationalist…which is a nicer way of calling you a fascist.

Speaking of Cuba, Mark Cuban, who owns the Dallas Mavericks, won’t do business in Georgia until a kid is released from jail (and, he should be.) But, Mark won’t go so far as to forfeit his games with the Hawks and pay fines to the NBA.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6590217.stm

The Lakers need help tonight, they are playing a team from a
“right to work” state.

Starting with the assent of Ronald “noble effort” Reagan, the right’s rewriting of History began in ernest, until the Nixon White House’s dead enders with their boy Prince, dragged the country into Iraq. The small tragity of the “radical” school as examplified by this blog is that they never seemed to absorb that while “The Best and The Brightest” ended in 68, the war didn’t.

Thus such radicals as Christopher Hitchens would end up colaberating with Henry Kissinger on new noble efforts, and would learn to take his Judge Garzon selectively.

Halberstam gave an interview in Salon right after 9-11, explaining that W’s unilateralist dreams had just come to an end.
When it became clear that would not be the case, he and some others were strangly silent for far too long. Also, for someone so firewall unforgiving of McNamara, he was quite the sucker for John McCain, who still swears by Vietnam, as well of our quagmire of choice in Iraq.

Also, writers like Halberstam were far too quiet on the entire “embedded” episode, an attept at perfectly seamless Military propaganda, no less disgraceful for becoming the fiasco within the fiasco.

That said, I thought the guy was great, and hope to one day get around to reading wonderful “Fifties” book again.

Woody & jcummings axis to show us why liberals are always wrong…hmm…You’ve got an amazing site Mr. Cooper.

Anything short of summarily deporting
a man who blows up civilian airliners and hotels will make a mockery of the
administration’s vow to fight terror.

But would anyone like to try to explain the difference between the way our government and media handled this case and say, Jose Padilla?

Am I to take the silence here that not one cares about our government releasing the biggest terrorist of the Western Hemisphere? Maybe now that I see Daily Kos has a diary on it, some of you will perk up to the judicial atrocity our government is committing here and now in our name?

As for the Times, why does anyone expect a publicly traded US company to focus on anything but the bottom line? Now we have a Times workforce cut by 40% since the Tribune bought it. And indications are this is not the last round of cuts. It would be nice if only household appliance reporters were canned, but we know it is often the most expensive foreign reporters and bureaus to go. The argument that bloggers can pick up the slack is very, very misguided.

Moss Hart was a giant of Broadway in the days when, as the song went, “a millions hearts beat quicker there, a million lights still flicker there.”

With George S. Kaufman he wrote “You Can’t take it with you” and “The Man who came to Dinner.” He wrote the book for musicals by the Gershwin boys and Cole Porter. He wrote the remake of “A Star is Born” for Judy Garland and Directed a little thing on Broadway called “My Fair Lady” which he co-wrote with Alan J. Lerner.

As Reg already told you, Kitty was the opera singer befriended by Groucho, Chico, and Harpo in the movie. (She didn’t like Groucho or Chico but adored Harpo – but then everyone did). Kitty was also one of the showgirls who hung around that table at the Algonquin.

And Groucho sang “Whatever it is, I’m Against it!” in “Horsefeathers.” But for our purposes here he should be known for his note resigning from the Hillcrest CC:

“I refuse to be a member of any club that would have me as a member.”

Better than anything Fuerbach ever wrote!

Even if we disagree, we both have contempt for liberalism as a philosophy. Left wing and liberal are two very different points of view. A conservative like yourself should know that.

Before the Internet, we needed journalists to explain all manner of things, from which washing machine is better to which political candidate raised the most money from arms dealers.

Now, I can find out about washing machines from a blog about people who’ve just bought them and/or are looking to buy one, plus the washing machine maker’s own Web sites.

I can find out who’s bribing whom directly from the campaign filings on the Center for Responsible Politics Web site.

The investigative function of journalists remains, and, we can only hope that money newspapers save by canning nonessential journalists will be devoted to digging out stories that won’t be found anywhere else.

And…I strongly suspect that the reporters involved in the Pulitzer piece will stay on at the paper or find higher-paying work elsewhere.

Hey, G.M. never sent me your email. Would you mind trying it again? Thanks.

The piece that won the Pulitzer is worth reading:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/oceans/la-oceans-series,0,7842752.special

Or listening:
http://www.npr.org/templates/dmg/popup.php?id=9537255&type=1&date=12-Apr-2007&au=1&pid=11546465&random=6554747124&guid=000DEFAA736E05E425DCCB5E61626364&uaType=WM,RM&aaType=RM,WM&upf=Win32&topicName=&subtopicName=&prgCode=FA&hubId=-1&thingId=9537252&mtype=WM

The thought that the LA Times does not see the value nor has the willingness to support this kind of journalism should be of serious concern to us all.

I should note that this story has serious ramifications, especially for anglers like Mr. Cooper.

I should also note that this is FAR more important than debating Cuba. At this point, Cuba matters very little. Ecological disaster will cause much more human suffering than Castro. This is an archaic debate suited for people who are nostalgic for the Cold War.

Yes Castro is a bastard and so was Boris the Spider. Even to blinded leftists, Cuba is not an ecological paradise. The former USSR is an unspeakable ecological disaster. Clearly Communism in ANY form will not liberate humanity in a way that is sustainable.

On the other hand, there’s got to be a lot of idiots, because he is one of the most cited sources among graduate students, in the world. No sane person disagrees that he’s perhaps one of the more important linguists of all time.