Weekend open thread 5/25/12

 This weekend we honor those who have given their lives in service to their country. While we are at it, let's thank a soldier, sailor and Marine for their service as well.

In the news: Tonight at 8PM Central Time, Republican Gov. Scott Walker and his Democratic opponent, Milwaukee mayor Tom Barrett, will square off in a debate in advance of the June 5 recall election. The debate will be carried by C-SPAN and should also be available for livestreaming. Since it is C-SPAN, it most likely will be repeated again during the weekend.

Today Vice-President Biden gave an emotional speech about loss to the Gold Star parents of soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. He related how he lost his first wife and daughter in an accident, his son barely surviving, and shared how he knew a little bit about what they were feeling. He commiserated with them over the "black hole" their lives had become since losing a loved one, and there is no way the country can ever repay them for the sacrifice of that family member.

And finally, to further demonstrate that he is "on top" of things, Dori Monson sputtered his outrage that sex ed workshops were held at The Evergreen College this past week.  We are relieved that Dori follows the hard news.

This is an Open Thread.

Comments

[Lenard]

I get it! Tommy flounced out of here on April 1. Why didn't I get that the first time. Well played, sir.

[Reverend B,T, "Tommy" Beamer, (Tommy008's uncle)]

The nephew emailed me this missive, about an hour ago from Cannes -"good God, ...Rasmussen has Romney 45% versus Obama 45%......that's actually not a tie....that's a big "winning" for "Romney" this early in the game....a siting president with a healthy support level should be polling 5 or 6 points ahead, minimum....oh boy.... i see the 'flop sweat' coming out on their foreheads and under their armpits real soon "............

[KS]

My previous comment about the dog whistle of the left being the racism charge was removed per Blatherwatch rules.

[Truth-seeker]

Thank you for a thoughtful comment, Michael. Your analysis led to a deeper understanding for me and I appreciated your clarity. One of the reasons I like Chris Hayes and Chris Hedges is that they both try to articulate clearly and honestly.

[Reader]

Chris apologized saying that he "sounded like a typical out-of-touch pundit seeking to discuss the civilian-military divide and the social distance between those who fight and those who don't, I ended up reinforcing it, conforming to a stereotype of a removed pundit whose views are not anchored in the very real and very wrenching experience of this long decade of war. And for that I am truly sorry." I've always thought this "social distance" was a useful thesis, helping to explain why the Villagers are so out of touch with the average person. But what I hadn't reckoned with until now is a sort of tyranny of "walking the walk" that results once you acknowledge it.

All citizens have a right and an obligation to participate fully in American civic life. If we are now going to say that those who haven't "walked in the shoes" of whomever is directly affected by a policy are not sanctioned to have an opinion, we are essentially saying that we are only responsible to ourselves rather than the body politic. It becomes a fragmented sort of social responsibility in which we substitute experience and expertise for democratic participation.
A democracy becomes very weak when dissent from the conventional wisdom or sacred ritual can be shouted down simply because the person who's doing it hasn't "walked the walk." Its success depends upon the people being able to make decisions about many policies with which they have no personal experience or affect people from whom they are socially distant. Moreover, it's important that they do so. For instance it's necessary to have the perspective of women on the issue of combat or of men on the issue of abortion or of any number of contentious subjects which may not personally affect us but which affect our country and our countrymen. It's a mistake to completely outsource your opinions to "experts" or those who are personally involved. (Look what's happened with banking regulation…)

Ironically, Chris Hayes' example shows that in an odd way, acknowledging the "social distance" that makes many elite pundits and analysts out of touch with average Americans may just be leading to a different sort of elitism. And judging from his body of work, I'm fairly sure that's the last thing he intends to do.

So, get over it Puget Sound. So people disagree with you. Typically, you start name calling. What good does that do to move the conversation forward?

[Puget Sound Blathers]

So, get over it Puget Sound. So people disagree with you. Typically, you start name calling. What good does that do to move the conversation forward?

Posted by: Reader | May 30, 2012 at 11:46 AM

nice try, reader, in today's society people voice their opinions.
and then are subject to criticism. we call it democracy. you can read about it in the constitution.

that the usual knee jerk responses was to rush out and defend chris hayes without understanding his real critique should be leveled at the citizens who keep the military in an un-winable war was the real weakness in what Chris Hayes wrote. he should be directing his critique at Pres Obama, not showing a reluctance to honor our fallen heroes.

but the dog whistle blew and we had the responses defending Hayes.

that it continued EVEN AFTER HAYES apologized shows a stubborn adherence on the part of those who responded to the dog whistle.

and to the Blatherwatch Crew, it would be one thing if you were going after name calling etc. but you all know what i posted -and you erased- was less about name-calling and more about accurately stating the weakness in the argument of some of your posters.
which is a nice compliment. and yes, your welcome. moreover, i plan to continue doing so within the rules in effect.

[Truth-seeker]

Who are you to tell him who he should critique? That "democracy" you are talking about applies to him as well.

And I don't know what dog whistle you are talking about. I haven't heard any dog whistles.

[KS]

The dog whistles are figurative ones - the ones that race baiter/racist Al Sharpton refers to.

As for BW rules, what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Haters come from both the left and the right and project it with their name calling. More equality in treatment of haters on both sides would seem to make this be a better environment to have meaningful comments from all.

As PSB mentioned, there is a difference from critiques of weaknesses or inaccuracies in arguments by commenters, which can be done in a less hateful way as truth should always be a virtue, as painful as it might seem. When things deviate in to partisan blather and name calling and hating on them, others including myself would be less likely to post here. I'll attempt to keep posting within the framework of BW crew rules.

[Reverend B.T. "Tommy" Beamer (Tommy008's uncle)]

i digress but........i seem to notice a trend on the cable news networks of putting very proper Britishers on to deliver our news...CNBC has that very, very British fellow doing Wall Street anchor duties during the day , and even worse is that black British woman with her 100% heavy Brit accent, sharing the news reporting wiht Anderson Copper. She does American news stories. I really don't want to hear some prim and proper Britisher woman talking about something going on in Mississipi. If these networks want to have these people on" live from London" to cover finance and news in their home country and Europe that's fine. As for this other.......no thanks. please- we're Americans.

[Reverend B.T. "Tommy" Beamer (Tommy008's uncle)]

hard liquor in the Safeways of Seattle tomorrow morning,,,, good God, first gay marriage and now this.........Ben Paris and Charles O. Carroll aer spinning in their graves.......hard liquor in our Safeways and Bartells ....great God.....

[Reverend B.T. "Tommy" Beamer (Tommy008's uncle)]

what's wrong with this headline? The Seattle Times ,May 31st, 2012... Sales of Hard Liquor to Start in Drugstores and Grocery Stores Tomorrow ............it should read The Seattle Times, May 31, 1912.......

[Tommy008 (tagteaming comments with uncle from France, poolside)]

moments away from going down the hill and into my Qfc to view a sight i have never see nin my long, long lifetime.........bottles of Johnny Walker Red and Cutty Sark Scotch lined up on shelves of a private grocery store, offered for sale. They say the price will stay the same for a while, but will eventually start coming down, due to heavy competition . At least now the state tax will be displayed seperately on your bill ,so you can see where your money is going.

[Tommy008]

Uncle, here in France they're all laughing at the state of Wshington as i regale them with this story.......

[DontWorryBeHappy]

Gawd! Havent we had enough of that.

[Reverend Beamer]

Nephew T008- well i finally made it down to the QFC at about 5 pm . Safeway . QFC and stores of that size are the first out of the box, as they easily surpass the 10,000 square foot rule, but other smaller stores will qualify later under a size exemption known as being inside a "trade area" which apparently is still being defined. At the local QFC, the new liquor section was all along the east wall of the former all wine and liqeur section. Looks like they are not completely stocked yet. Bourbon Whiskey . Gin and Tequila seemed to dominate. A fellow wearing a Jack Danels hat and shirt, obviously a company rep, was standing to the side asking if could answer questions about his booze. I guarantee you he'd never have been allowed inside a state store. People were gawking almost in wonderment at the rows of various bottles and jugs of hard liquor, all suddenly completely free of the control of the tight-sphinctered state, and their silly little men and women in gold, government smocks. What a travesty and a joke, that we have stood for this for so many decades, allowing this ossified, prohibition era system of control obviously designed to discourage you as much as possible from buying and drinking booze, to continue to exist. By makinG it such a tediously inconvenient, time-consuming and uncomfortable process, the idea was that wouldbe boozehounds would just give up for the most part, if it wasn't Christmas or their birthday.. We allowed the bluenosed prudery and disapproval of a bunch of smallminded jackasses to be encoded into our state's liquor laws for over a half century- outrageous. The recent news stories about the changeover have cited a figure of around 350 state outlets under the now defunct state system, compared to the 1500 venues projected to be granted liquor sales licenses, once all the smoke has cleared. 350? really? what a joke.