Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Just because you believe it, that doesn’t make it true.

Hot air and ill-informed banter

Sadly, there is no cure for stupid.

The cruelty is the point; the law be damned.

I know this must be bad for Joe Biden, I just don’t know how.

I’ve spoken to my cat about this, but it doesn’t seem to do any good.

Nancy smash is sick of your bullshit.

Shallow, uninformed, and lacking identity

People are complicated. Love is not.

If you’re pissed about Biden’s speech, he was talking about you.

Bark louder, little dog.

It may be funny to you motherfucker, but it’s not funny to me.

T R E 4 5 O N

No offense, but this thread hasn’t been about you for quite a while.

We cannot abandon the truth and remain a free nation.

I’d try pessimism, but it probably wouldn’t work.

Let us savor the impending downfall of lawless scoundrels who richly deserve the trouble barreling their way.

Putting aside our relentless self-interest because the moral imperative is crystal clear.

A sufficient plurality of insane, greedy people can tank any democratic system ever devised, apparently.

Good lord, these people are nuts.

Their freedom requires your slavery.

Red lights blinking on democracy’s dashboard

The willow is too close to the house.

The words do not have to be perfect.

You are here: Home / Open Threads / Sunday Night Open Thread

Reader Interactions

199Comments

  2. 2.

    ajr22

    I have been a little disappointed in the Pacific. Maybe it’s just that I had such high expectations, because I loved Band of Brothers so much. It seems to be suffering from a little bit of Thin Red Line syndrome. The characters stories don’t really have clear paths, and the battles don’t have clear objectives. People are always just running around, and besides the three stars you can’t tell who anyone is. It is still well made, but it is no Band of Brothers.

  3. 3.

    Jaim

    The Pacific is fantastically overrated. None of the actors manage to distinguish themselves. (Literally — who are these guys? I can’t tell the apart.) But this is more a fault of the writing than anything else.

    It has that sepia-tone look down pat though, and this forces critics to consider it high art lest they offend the “Greatest Generation” industrial complex.

    Ugh. It’s one thing to be awful. It’s another to be told how great something awful is, repeatedly.

  4. 4.

    Mike in NC

    @ajr22:

    I have been a little disappointed in the Pacific. It is still well made, but it is no Band of Brothers.

    That seems to be the general consensus, but it’s a bit of an apples vs. oranges thing. My late dad served in the Army in New Guinea and the Philippines (and did R&R in Australia), and the production values really do a good job of capturing what we saw in the photos and pencil sketches that he brought home from the war, i.e. miserable jungle living conditions. My wife’s late dad served in the Army in North Africa and Europe, and it was a bit ‘nobler’ in those theaters, if you’ll pardon the expression.

  5. 5.

    demkat620

    Yeah, it has definitely not lived up to the hype. BofB was much, much better but The Pacific still is worth watching.

    Treme, however, is really good.

  6. 6.

    debit

    Not watching either, sorry. I did however, have an absolutely awesome bike ride. 25 miles and I felt like I could go out and do it again when I got home, so I need to figure out a longer loop and take it up to 30. Maybe find some hills, too.

  8. 8.

    burnspbesq

    NCAA men’s lax selection committee is insane. Hopkins doesn’t even deserve to be in, much less be the number 12 seed. Duke-haters will be screaming conspiracy theories all week.

    Delaware is my second favorite team this week. C’mon you Fighting Blue Hens!

  9. 9.

    SIA

    I’m watching the 2nd episode of what will, I suppose, really be the last series for Foyle’s War. Looking forward to indepth discussion with Steeplejack (think that’s who it was) about the characters, plot construction, flaws in the story line etc. :)

    Thanks to the miracle of modern technology, the program is being recorded while I go soak in a nice hot bath.

    I’m old enough to still get thrilled about blackberry, DVRs, GPS, ipods, streaming movies, and the INTERTUBES. WTF is the internet anyway? Where is it???

  10. 10.

    Jennifer

    @jeffreyw:
    It’s like a lot of David L. Simon stuff – he really develops his characters, so it takes a bit of time to get to know them and longer for the story to get rolling. Just last week I started to really get the feel for it.

  11. 11.

    Perfect Tommy

    After the failure of the cofferdam to stop the leak due to accumulating methane hydrates rendering the 100 ton structure buoyant, the Deepwater Horizon continues to spew oil into the Gulf.
    Plan B?
    They are going to try filling the hole with garbage ….
    CNN

  15. 15.

    Steeplejack

    @SIA:

    Yeah, that was me. I’m recording Foyle’s War and will watch/analyze/discuss later. Really hope it’s better than last week. I watched that episode again, and it didn’t get any better.

    Sunday night has become “traffic jam on the DVR” night for me. The Pacific, Treme, Masterpiece Whatever, International Mystery (omnibus series on tiny network MHz where I get my fix of Montalbano, Maigret and Wallander–the Swedish version, not Kenneth Branagh), usually a few other odds and ends. Tonight it’s Jesse Stone: No Remorse, the latest installment in the occasional series of movies with Tom Selleck as the police chief of a small Massachusetts town, taken from Robert B. Parker’s books. Low-key and oddly satisfying.

    All that stuff goes on the box because I like having the Sunday night baseball game on in the background while I putter around. The Red Sox are pummeling the universally reviled Yankees, which is fine with me.

    I have recorded all episodes of The Pacific and Treme but haven’t started watching them yet. Don’t know why. Actually, with The Pacific I think I do. The ground war in the Pacific was horrible, horrible, horrible. Total war and a race war. I just can’t see how they can give it enough “greatest generation” uplift to get it on TV and keep it real. I’ve said it before: Ernest Sledge’s With the Old Breed: At Peleliu and Okinawa is one of the best books about war I have ever read. But it is harrowing.

  17. 17.

    Mike Kay

    if Obama nominates reich marshall Kagan, I’ll cut myself and marry someone he’ll hate.

  18. 18.

    Michael G

    I have no idea why the network guys schedule TV like they do, but today is one of the two of my marathon TV days.

    Sunday = Treme, The Pacific, Breaking Bad, Simpsons, Family Guy, and American Dad.
    Monday = nothing
    Tuesday = nothing
    Wednesday = nothing
    Thursday = The Office, 30 Rock, Community, and Parks&Rec.
    Friday = nothing
    Saturday = nothing.

    Thank god for Tivo so I can spread it out.

  19. 19.

    Steeplejack

    Side note: I scored seasons one and two of Chuck on DVD from a coworker and will dutifully get up to speed on that ASAP.

  21. 21.

    BR

    http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2010/5/9/214048/9169/4#c4

    Watch Monday for all sorts of news dumps hitting the wires about 10 minutes after Obama announces. This is one of those rare moments when you know that the news cycle is not going to pay any attention to whatever you are confessing.

    Hope someone will be watching for news dumps that are intended to get shadowed by SCOTUS + BP oil spill + Greece fire.

  23. 23.

    Rafterman

    I just finished With the Old Breed and Helmet for my Pillow I highly recommend both books. They are far better than The Pacific

  24. 24.

    jacy

    The underlings followed my Mother’s Day list and so after a breakfast of scrambled eggs and pre-packaged scones, I happily opened my Tunch gear. Like Cole, I can now drink my scotch out of a Tunch mug. Well, I don’t really care for Scotch, but vodka works, right?

    If you haven’t ordered your Balloon Juice swag yet, do so. It’s swell!

  25. 25.

    Mike Kay

    @BR: sad conspiratorial, neurotic, drugged-up, self-hating hippies. I mean, there were no “news dumps” when obama name sonya, yet they project all their daddy/mommie issues onto Barack.

  26. 26.

    Pigs & Spiders

    I’m on Part 7 of the Pacific so I guess I’m a week behind. So far the only part I’ve really enjoyed has been the one where they were stationed at Melbourne and they focused on Leckie. Not that the battles have been ill-produced, but there’s none of the obvious chemistry on screen that coalesced so swiftly in BofB. Although, I do have to say that Snafu is going to be up there with Oddball as one of my favorite WWII movie characters ever.

  27. 27.

    Mike Kay

    BRAKING
    Okay. it’s “official”.

    NBC now reporting Obama has selected reich marshall kagan for the supreme court

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36967616/ns/politics-supreme_court/

    Let the wailing begin.

    God damn obama! Aren’t there enough new york city, jewish, butch, lesbian, harvard law dean conservatives on the court?

    Let Obama know you’re outraged by this betray by making a sizable contribution to the firebag blog of your choice.

  29. 29.

    frankdawg

    @ajr22:

    In the Pacific there was no single group that went from island to island so you are not going to get the continuity there was in BoB. I think the disconnect is a feature not a bug. When you are in the shit you really don’t see what the heck is going on other than the shit right in front of you.

    In BoB they cut out the down time so it appeared to be a linear story but I bet the guys that were there had less of a sense of a straight line form Normandy to Bertesgarten.

  30. 30.

    New Yorker

    So Dallas Braden is quickly becoming a folk hero to all baseball fans out there who hate the Yankees, A-Rod, and everything they stand for. His grandmother rules, too.

  31. 31.

    frankdawg

    @Steeplejack:

    YES! if you want a good sense of being in the shit read Ernest Sledge’s With the Old Breed: At Peleliu and Okinawa .

    But don’t expect a nice linear story its disjointed like his experiences.

    OTOH has anyone noticed the stuff about Ambrose making shit up that has come out recently? I think one of the reasons BoB is such a good story may have to do with his embellishing the story to make it flow better. That is NOT a knock on the men who slogged across Europe. Its hard to fault Ambrose for wanting to make his story interesting but it is not ethical.

  32. 32.

    Anya

    @Mike Kay: Wouldn’t this make our progressive betters terribly dissapointed with Obama?

    Seriously, I think he would nominate a woman so that he can nominate Duval Patrick when Ginsburg resigns.

  33. 33.

    Steeplejack

    @frankdawg:

    Good point. Plus Band of Brothers covered one year–June 1944 to May 1945 (or thereabouts). Even though Peleliu was in late ’44 and Okinawa was in the spring of ’45, the ground campaign in the Pacific started in ’42. Guadalcanal was the first big (offensive) campaign, I think.

  34. 34.

    SIA

    @Steeplejack:

    International Mystery (omnibus series on tiny network MHz where I get my fix of Montalbano, Maigret and Wallander—the Swedish version, not Kenneth Branagh)

    WHOA. How can I get that International Mystery stuff??

  35. 35.

    Alex

    It has that sepia-tone look down pat though, and this forces critics to consider it high art lest they offend the “Greatest Generation” industrial complex.

    I’m thinkin’ the Internet needs a new rule, a sort of Godwin-corollary: In any discussion, the likelihood of someone accusing the other side of being home to a massive, elite, dissent-quashing conspiracy/machine approaches 100%.

    And if this comment was made in jest, let me be the first to accuse its progenitor of being part of the global jest conglomerate.

  36. 36.

    Nick

    @Anya:

    Wouldn’t this make our progressive betters terribly dissapointed with Obama?

    Aren’t they already?

    At some point, you’ve cried sellout enough, you just end up being ignored. If it wasn’t this, it would be something else.

  38. 38.

    frankdawg

    Sorry, I want to put in one more post about BoB and Ambrose. I loved the story but I made a terrible mistake, I read Dick Winters autobiog. The man was arrogant, anti-semitic, and an asshole. Those qualities probably served him well in command as I doubt he suffered self-doubt when he sent men forward (an unpleasant but necessary good quality in combat) but a very unpleasant read.

    It made me wonder about the whole deal with Sobel. In Winters book he makes it clear he didn’t like being commanded by a Jew. Would the guy have been a good officer if he had the respect of his men? Maybe not but Winters made sure that he did not have any support.

  39. 39.

    Mike Kay

    the only way Obama will ever listen to the firebaggers is if they pull a jonestown. then he’ll have no choice but to listen to their disemboweled voices.

  40. 40.

    Anya

    @Nick: This one will be the straw that broke the camel’s back. You see this action is a prime act in treachery that the base won’t show up in November. It’s as though Obama wants to lose both houses.

    @General Egali Tarian Stuck: LOL @ “Scalia in a skirt”

  41. 41.

    Martin

    Hmm. Lessig thinks she’ll be better than Stevens. The left loves Lessig, and they have decided to hate Kagan.

    So, now Lessig will be dead to them for breaching their outrage. The outrage rules all, you know.

  42. 42.

    KRK

    @SIA:

    More Foyle’s War! I am so glad you mentioned this. I’d assumed that All’s Clear was the end of the series. I’d watch it for Michael Kitchen alone, but the rest of the show is great too. I see the DVDs will be out in June. I’ll have to make sure my library knows about them.

  43. 43.

    General Egali Tarian Stuck

    And to cheer up everyone, BP has said the oil dome has failed, but they are on it.

    “We’re gathering some data to help us with two things. One is another way to do containment, the second is other ways to actually stop the flow,” BP chief operating officer Doug Suttles told Reuters in Venice, Louisiana.

    Brilliant deduction there Watson.
    But I love this one.

    “We’re actually dealing with a source that doesn’t have human access,” Allen said

    .

    No shit sherlock, at a mile deep. duh! the article is all funny in a dark and disturbing way. The black blob is now drifting toward Texas, also, too.

  46. 46.

    Svensker

    @Steeplejack:

    I’m recording Foyle’s War and will watch/analyze/discuss later. Really hope it’s better than last week. I watched that episode again, and it didn’t get any better.
    Sunday night has become “traffic jam on the DVR” night for me. The Pacific, Treme, Masterpiece Whatever, International Mystery (omnibus series on tiny network MHz where I get my fix of Montalbano, Maigret and Wallander—the Swedish version, not Kenneth Branagh), usually a few other odds and ends. Tonight it’s Jesse Stone: No Remorse, the latest installment in the occasional series of movies with Tom Selleck as the police chief of a small Massachusetts town, taken from Robert B. Parker’s books. Low-key and oddly satisfying.

    The Foyle was better. Am going to Netflix Jesse Stone when it’s done — so no hints!

  47. 47.

    Ash

    The Pacific is terribly blah. I don’t find any of the characters appealing, and the story has been done a billion times before. It’s got nothing on either Band of Brothers or Generation Kill. And I know it’s still the beginning of Treme, but I literally fell asleep during the last episode.

    [/killjoy]

  48. 48.

    Mike Kay

    @burnspbesq: the online left is not to be mocked. They handed Dean the nomination. They handed Edwards the presidency. They knocked Loserman out of office. They scuttled HCR. Don’t fuck with them.

  49. 49.

    Martin

    @Mike Kay: That’s more like it! Remember, the gay community thought that Obama was anti-gay because Sotomayor wasn’t a lesbian. Guess that proves that Obama is not only anti-gay but also a corporate sell-out.

  52. 52.

    Nick

    @Anya:

    This one will be the straw that broke the camel’s back. You see this action is a prime act in treachery that the base won’t show up in November. It’s as though Obama wants to lose both houses.

    If I had a nickel for everytime I’ve heard that in the past year, I could buy myself a Senate seat.

  54. 54.

    frankdawg

    OK so now I am full-on firebagger. Can someone please explain to me how Obama is better that McCain or even Boy Blunder? Holder seems to think the constitution is optional. The USSC is getting stacked with even more corporate whores who are unimpressed with personal rights (unless that ‘person’ is a company). The healthcare reform was a piece of shit that will cost us more in the future (very similar to Medicare part D, a gift that keeps on giving – to the corporations). We still think is is OK to kill citizens without a trial if the Prez gives the OK. BHO has expanded the unconstitutional surveillance program.

    I have tried to be positive (within my limited ability to ever be positive) but really even by horseshit Broder levels of centrism what the fuck is the point to supporting Dems when they are just as happy to fuck you over as the Republicans?

  55. 55.

    Corner Stone

    @Mike Kay: It’s very telling that you have the epically stupid Stuck, Anya, and “defender of all things corporate-esque” burnspbesq on your tip.
    You’re off to a good start.

  56. 56.

    Nick

    @frankdawg:

    Can someone please explain to me how Obama is better that McCain or even Boy Blunder?

    If we have to, then you’re already lost. Sorry. You’re just as gone as someone who needs proof the sky is blue

  69. 69.

    Lolis

    Meh. People said Sotomayor wasn’t liberal enough and yet I have not heard one peep about any of the cases she has decided so far. Kagan is obviously a Democrat. I read she cried after the 1980 presidential election and is a strong opponent of DADT. As others have pointed out, Lessig is a huge fan of hers and thinks she will change the court for the better. He actually knows her and I would trust his knowledge of her over one article by Glenn Greenwald.

    I was hoping Obama would save Kagan for a later pick, but I haven’t read anything that makes me think she is not liberal enough.

  75. 75.

    Steeplejack

    @SIA:

    MHz is local to me (NoVa), but it shows up on some cable systems and on DirecTV (channel 2183). There is a chart on this Wikipedia page that shows the systems it is on, but it may not be complete or up to date. I don’t see anything for Atlanta.

    Even if you get MHz, International Mystery is easy to miss. Most of MHz’s programming is (English-language) foreign news shows, the kind of stuff you skip right over without even registering. I found it originally because it shows Australian-rules football on Monday nights. (Don’t ask.) International Mystery is on at 9:00 and 12:00 (Eastern time) Sunday nights and Tuesday nights. (The same program is shown at all four times.) Might be worth looking at your cable listings to see if it is buried among the shopping channels and other obscure stuff.

    The programs are usually quite good. They are reruns of European series from the last 10 years or so, shown in the original language with English subtitles. Montalbano is my favorite. Italian police inspector in Sicily. Pretty good plots (taken from Andrea Camilleri’s novels), good acting and amazing scenery–not touristy, just Sicily in its natural beauty. Here’s a nice clip from the end of The Trip to Tindari. Montalbano is the bald guy. . . . I forgot the great music, sort of Claus Ogerman lush jazz.

  78. 78.

    Nick

    @Cacti: If anyone ever bothered to read her positions on civil rights, she’d be a liberal blogger’s dream. Someone who thinks a President should exert strong control over the Executive Branch departments to force his or her agenda…she’s Sirota’s dream come true.

    One must look beyond Glenn Greenwald’s butthurt over his HBFL Diane Wood not getting the nod.

  80. 80.

    Mike Kay

    @Cacti: if she’s an unknown quality, then by definition she can’t be right or left of anyone. can’t have it both ways.

  82. 82.

    Cacti

    @Nick:

    It also doesn’t hurt that she’ll be the youngest SCOTUS Justice by 5 years if confirmed.

  84. 84.

    Nick

    @burnspbesq: Hunny Bunny For Life! DUH!

    Ok so my ex-girlfriend and her best friend made it up about six years ago, I’m trying to coin a catchphrase.

  86. 86.

    Mike Kay

    interesting, she was the first female dean in the 193 year history of harvard law.

    that’s it. I’m chaining myself to my modem in protest.

  87. 87.

    BR

    We’re only 2 hours into Kagan’s pre-nomination, and firebaggers are melting down across teh Internets.

    At least with Sotomayor we didn’t have to hear them whine, because they realized their complaints wouldn’t come across well.

    It’s going to be a long few weeks.

  89. 89.

    burnspbesq

    @Mike Kay:

    if she’s an unknown quality, then by definition she can’t be right or left of anyone. can’t have it both ways.

    Not quite. Those statements can both be true, but they can’t both be demonstrably true. She could be a stealth winger. But if she’s an unknown quantity, there is no rational basis to assert that she is to the right of Stevens – and conversely, if there is sound reason to believe that she is to the right of Stevens, then she’s not an unknown quantity.

  91. 91.

    Nick

    @Cacti: Which is probably what clinched her. That and Republican support. If Diane Wood was 45, she may very well be the pick right now.

    Hell if Diane Wood was 45, she would’ve been the pick last year.

    You’re President Obama, midterms are coming up and you have an agenda you want to fight for in six months, what do you do? Do you?

    A.) choose a judge who would likely have a rough confirmation fight, who would be a liberal anchor (we assume, since SCOTUS picks are often unpredictable), who would serve 20-25 years if we’re lucky, assuming she gets confirmed at all and not ripped apart. Sorry Greenwald, you’re not enough to protect her.

    or

    b.) choose a candidate who has support from the other side ensuring a relatively easy confirmation, who would be a liberal leaning judge with proven experience as a consensus builder (again, we assume), who would be on the court 30 years easy.

  93. 93.

    jl

    I have no idea whether nominating Kagan makes Obama better or worse than Snidely Whiplash or Crabby Appleton, or Boris Badanov, whoever. Or worse even than Bush. Omigod. Lions and tigers and bears, oh my!

    I do know that I would prefer someone else, based on fact that I think Kagan will not push against what is becoming our Bush-Cheney security state heritage. Some of which is being continued by the Obama administration.

    I don’t object to ‘firebaggers’ trying to shoot this nomination down, if they come with evidence and good arguments. But I hope they spare us any ‘Obama is Bush’ nonsense. That does not do any good.

    Obama is a cautious centrist, rather less politically imaginative and daring that many of would have hoped. I think the Kagan nomination is more from that vein.

  94. 94.

    Mike Kay

    @BR: they don’t even know who to support. all they know is they oppose everything their parents stand for. that’s why they have such rotten teeth – they’re not gonna sell out to crest and colgate like they’re corporatist parents.

  95. 95.

    JG

    I see some of the commentariat is already deeming it unacceptable to criticize Kagan’s potential nomination. I guess I don’t understand why BHO couldn’t have settled on a known liberal quantity for the bench – you know someone with an actual record to examine? There are dozens of people out there who fit that bill and some of them (say Dianne Wood) are confirmable. I’d say Sid Thomas would have been doable as well.

    Conservatives got movement conservatives for Bush’s court picks – Roberts and Alito – and Obama’s base gets someone who has basically managed to take no discernible positions in her entire academic career. And you people are ok with this?

    But please continue calling people firebaggers who dare criticize the President. After all, how dare we?? Mike Kay, you are probably the most predictable and least insightful commenter here. You are pretty much like a computer program that spits out insults about PUMA’s and firebaggers no matter the subject.

  96. 96.

    General Egali Tarian Stuck

    It is almost certain that Obama will get another pick before the end of his first term. Maybe then the economy has recovered and he has more political capital than now and can go with a more certain libtard nominee. Though, believe it or not, contrary to nutroot rumors, Ms. Kagan is, in fact, a liberal and a democrat with a long history of supporting equal rights. Just in case anyone asks.

  97. 97.

    Elizabelle

    WaPost online (digital version of the Fred Hiatt-Kaplan daily) already has its putdown up.

    Headline: No Bench Experience for Kagan

    “The woman tapped for the Supreme Court has never been a judge — not by her own choice.”

    At least the accompanying picture is fetching.

  98. 98.

    burnspbesq

    Nothing about Kagan on the front page of FDL. It’s quiet. Too quiet.

    “And suddenly, from out of the west, came the entire Prog-blog nation. And believe me, they was open for bidness.”

  99. 99.

    General Egali Tarian Stuck

    @JG:

    I see some of the commentariat is already deeming it unacceptable to criticize Kagan’s potential nomination.

    LOLwut? That is what you are doing. People may not agree with your reasons, but if you expect them to, then it is you with the problem.

  100. 100.

    Mark S.

    Even the liberal New Republic

    But, for a president to appoint someone to a lifetime position, wouldn’t it be preferable to know what she believes on the biggest issues of the day—and how she arrived at those conclusions? If Obama does nominate Kagan, as he likely will, he will be taking a very big risk.

    Yeah, I’m sure Obama doesn’t have a fucking clue what she thinks.

  102. 102.

    BR

    @JG:

    I see some of the commentariat is already deeming it unacceptable to criticize Kagan’s potential nomination. I guess I don’t understand why BHO couldn’t have settled on a known liberal quantity for the bench – you know someone with an actual record to examine? There are dozens of people out there who fit that bill and some of them (say Dianne Wood) are confirmable. I’d say Sid Thomas would have been doable as well.

    Hmm. The way I see it is that if there’s anything that Obama is qualified to do, it’s pick supreme court justices. That’s the one duty of the presidency that he’s probably more knowledgeable about than the last ten guys who held his office.

    I recall the same voices complaining about Sotomayor for similar reasons, yet not only has she not disappointed in the few cases that there have been thus far, but she questioned corporate personhood in one of her first opinions. Not bad IMHO.

  103. 103.

    burnspbesq

    @JG:

    I see some of the commentariat is already deeming it unacceptable to criticize Kagan’s potential nomination.

    Really? You see that? My opthalmologist is really good – want me to email you his number?

  105. 105.

    Elizabelle

    @Mark S.:

    Incidentally, I love the blog tag along lines of “How has Obama failed you today?” Goes right along with these kind of comments by those who should know.

    Better.

    Something. Whatever.

  106. 106.

    TuiMel

    @jl:

    Crabby Appleton

    He’s rotten to the core! Long time no reference (heard by me, anyway).

  107. 107.

    Lester'sDollHouse

    This is the reason why there have been so many more movies made about the European theatre than the Pacific.

    The war in the Pacific was a much longer, more brutal conflict than the war in Europe. No cheering civilians, no parades and town squares. No POW camps, no surrender.

    The short American war in Europe (just 11 months) will always make for better tv and cinema than the almost barbaric 3 year war in the Pacific.

  108. 108.

    Mike Kay

    @JG: this is ridiculous revisionism.

    After Bork, the gooper went to stealth candidates with no paper trails, like Souter and Thomas (the left opposed him because he had no credentials). Even roberts’ c.v. was stealth.

    Yes, reagan nominated fire breathing movement conservatives like O’Conner and Kennedy.

    Nixon and Ford nominated nazis like Blackmun, Powell, and Stevens.

    Ike nominate imperial storm troopers warren and brennan.

    And bush nominated miers who used to take her shoe off and pound the table at the U.N.

    firebaggers are nothing if they can’t fix facts to their poutrage.

  110. 110.

    jl

    @TuiMel: I am actually to young to know Crabby Appleton, except for some, even then, old reruns I saw as a very young kid.

    I wish I could fine me a good Tom Terrific cartoon CD or archive. Anyone know of one? About the only thing I can think of that sometimes makes me wish I were older. Other than big band swing dancing.

    For the record, I did support Sotomayor, and thought she would be a good justice. Sorry I cannot say same thing about Kagan, as mentioned above, because I have doubts about her attitude towards security state issues and civil liberties.

    Maybe Obama can make a good case and put my doubts to rest. I hope so.

    Also, too, I do not see the harm in a rousing battle over a SCOTUS nomination that the Democratic ‘base’ could get behind, before the midterms. Especially if as, or more, qualified than Kagan. But I know others here would disagree.

  112. 112.

    Mike Kay

    @burnspbesq: Obama caught them off guard. This was a sneak attack. He knew the poutrage blogs would be buzy drowning their sorrows over their Mommie Dearest issues on mother’s day.

  113. 113.

    burnspbesq

    @jl:

    because I have doubts about her attitude towards security state issues and civil liberties.

    And exactly what is the basis for those doubts? That she signed off on briefs that took positions that you don’t like? She has signed off on briefs that took positions (specifically, on the state secrets privilege) that I think are abominable. However, I have been a litigator, and I don’t make the mistake of assuming that the positions in those briefs are positions that she would personally agree with. You’re gonna need to prove that before I’ll believe it.

  114. 114.

    Brien Jackson

    @JG:

    Diane Wood is 60 years old. It’s absurd that that is a dispositive factor, but it is. Let’s at least be honest about all of the factors involved.

  115. 115.

    Mike Kay

    @JG:

    Mike Kay, you are probably the most predictable and least insightful commenter here. You are pretty much like a computer program that spits out insults about PUMA’s and firebaggers no matter the subject.

    and yet you read all my comments. I win.

    I’m sorry your skin is so thin. but weeping hysterically on an hourly basis does dry out the flesh. on the other hand, I’m buying more stock in Kleenex.

  116. 116.

    Mike Kay

    @Brien Jackson: I didn’t know she was that old. Damn. At that age she should forget about the supreme court and start picking out a plot and getting her affairs in order.

  117. 117.

    Brien Jackson

    @Mark S.:

    This is what I find to be so absurd about much of the Kagan criticism. It’s one thing to assert that the fact that she doesn’t have much of a record for the public to evaluate, and that this is problematic, it’s another thing to assert that literally no one, including the President, knows what her personal views on issues likely to be relevant to the Court are.

  119. 119.

    jl

    @burnspbesq:

    Well maybe I am not in fact too young to know Crabby Appleton after all.

    So, yeah, OK, I read Greenwald and his links earlier today. Let’s stipulate that.

    IMO, the Bush-Cheney security state heritage and associated civil liberities issues are important enough to me that I would prefer that any nominee have a postive record indicating that they would push hard against it.

    I submit as evidence of my open mindedness that I said in an earlier comment that I could be convinced Kagan would be a good justice on those issues, and do hope that is the case. I hope there is some pounding on the law and facts, not the table, wrt to this nomination.

  121. 121.

    Brien Jackson

    @jl:

    Personally, I find the evidence she would be bad on those issues pretty thin, but I guess that’s because her entire record is pretty thin. But given her credentials, I’m willing to give her the benefit of the doubt and see how she handles her hearing, questionaire, etc. before I start trashing her.

  122. 122.

    Mark S.

    You all won’t be laughing when Kagan writes the opinion overruling Roe v Wade.

    The helicopters won’t be laughing either.

  123. 123.

    SIA

    @KRK: I just got finished watching it. Thought this episode was really good. I’d be happy if they went on forever!

  124. 124.

    Mike Kay

    OMG!

    Turns out Kagan clerked for Thurgood Marshall and Abner Mikva.

    That just reeks of fascism.

  125. 125.

    SIA

    @Steeplejack: Thanks for the info – I’m going to see if I can get it here in ATL. I like any Brit mystery, preferably pre-1950’s.

    Thought tonight’s Foyle’s War was very good. Nothing in it irritated or distracted me like the last one.

    ETA are you in the DC area?

  127. 127.

    SiubhanDuinne

    Any Lena Horne fans here? You’ll be saddened to know she has died, age 92.

    Re: Kagan, I confess I don’t know much about her. Have tried valiantly to stay away from news and commentary as much as possible over the past two weeks, but (sigh) vacation is over now. Anyhow, I want to wait for more info before I either support or condemn her. I expect there will be plenty in the weeks to come.

  131. 131.

    Martin

    I think people are forgetting that Obama and Kagan were colleagues at Chicago. There’s no question he knows her far better than anyone scrutinizing her record.

    I think Lessig makes an important case for Kagan – she’s a progressive (maybe not as liberal as others) but more importantly she’s a coalition builder, which is what Stevens was. While Stevens was on the bench, someone *else* like Stevens wasn’t that necessary. With Stevens gone, someone like Stevens is very necessary.

    If we’re going to hang on 5-4 decisions at least until the next retirement, it’s critical we swing that 5th vote our way. It doesn’t matter how liberal the next justice is if all they’re doing is casting the 4th dissenting vote. Seriously, second-guessing Obama, who is an expert on this if he’s an expert on anything, is pathologically stupid.

  132. 132.

    Mike Kay

    @SiubhanDuinne:

    Any Lena Horne fans here? You’ll be saddened to know she has died, age 92.

    she must have died when she heard obama wasn’t nominating Diane wood to the court. hope you’re happy BHO, you’ve got Lena’s blood on your hands.

  134. 134.

    General Egali Tarian Stuck

    @JK: She was my first choice, and it is fair to say she is a known hard liberal from her time on the fed bench, and would have been a good SC0TUS justice. But “a better pick”, I don’t think we can know that right now, but Martin’s comment is encouraging.

  136. 136.

    Corner Stone

    @Martin:

    There’s no question he knows her far better than anyone scrutinizing her record.

    What exactly does this mean?

  138. 138.

    JMY

    If anybody ever read the SCOTUS blog, during Kagan’s confirmation for SG, she was asked about whether Al-Qaeda members could be indefinitely detained during a time of war and she said yes. GG, among others criticized her for it. BUT, Dawn Johnsen, answered the same question and agreed. People always harp on Kagan for that answer, but have nothing to say to the fact that Johnsen answered the same way.

  140. 140.

    Martin

    @General Egali Tarian Stuck: I should also note that Lessig was at Chicago with Obama and Kagan, so he knows her personally as well.

    This pick seems very strategic to me. I mean, you don’t go and sign a .400 hitter after you lose your best starting pitcher.

  141. 141.

    tavella

    @General Egali Tarian Stuck: It is almost certain that Obama will get another pick before the end of his first term. Maybe then the economy has recovered and he has more political capital than now and can go with a more certain libtard nominee. Though, believe it or not, contrary to nutroot rumors, Ms. Kagan is, in fact, a liberal and a democrat with a long history of supporting equal rights. Just in case anyone asks.

    Very amusing. As if the economy mattered; the only thing that matters is the composition of the Senate, which is going to be more unfavorable, possibly vastly so depending on how badly November goes. Defend Kagan on her own merits, not that stupid “oh, if you are just *patient* Obama will get around to nominating a liberal” game.

  143. 143.

    Mark S.

    @Corner Stone:

    He picked her for Solicitor General. That’s not a position you staff with a hack unless you’re an idiot who likes losing at the Supreme Court.

  144. 144.

    General Egali Tarian Stuck

    @tavella: Kagan is a liberal, just not a known one with a judges background that we can gauge. She may turn out to be the liberal lion GG and you hope for. But she will not be more conservative than the GOP appointed republican that was JP Stephens. Despite his drift to the left on some issues in recent years. He is not a liberal, that is a left wing myth.

    And as long as dems hold the senate, and with the economy recovering, Obama will have more political capital to fight out a confirmation battle for a known hard libtard candidate. It’s called politics and it always has a seat at the table.

  145. 145.

    Corner Stone

    @Mark S.: I’m not calling her a hack. And she’s clearly not a sub-par individual.
    Not exactly the same thing that’s going on here.

  146. 146.

    Martin

    @General Egali Tarian Stuck: Yeah, pretty much.

    More specifically, Obama, having taught Con law, knows his shit better than us spectators. Hell, even 95% of the lawyers out there are spectators on this topic. Obama also has known he’d have this job for quite some time and has thought about it – he’s admitted as much. On top of that, he’s got more resources to bear on vetting these folks and it’s not an area he’d do a half-ass job on. Finally, if we haven’t already established that he’s got more knowledge on this than, well, probably anyone else, he personally knows her and has spent time talking with her as a colleague, which adds reams more information than anyone that lacks that kind of relationship with her.

    Now, we can argue somewhat about Obama’s judgement on this, but nobody can credibly claim that he isn’t overwhelmingly informed on this topic. And on his judgement, I refute any argument by going to Lessig, who also knows Obama and Kagan, who is trusted by progressives, and who says that Kagan is a good pick here because she is most like Stevens in her ability to sway others to her viewpoint, and we pretty much always need at least one vote swayed. Nobody refutes that was Steven’s importance to the left, so why has nobody really made an argument for any of the other candidates along the lines of Steven’s most important quality?

  147. 147.

    Corner Stone

    @General Egali Tarian Stuck:

    Obama will have more political capital to fight out a confirmation battle for a known hard libtard candidate.

    And based on what exactly do you think he’d consider a “libtard” candidate?

  148. 148.

    JK

    @General Egali Tarian Stuck:

    From what I’ve read about both of them, it seems clear to me that Wood would have been a better choice than Kagan.

    I would’ve preferred seeing Obama swing for the fences by nominating the most left wing person who could get confirmed given the fact that Republicans were going to throw a giant hissy fit no matter which person he selected. Predictably, Michelle Malkin and Robert Stacy McCain are foaming at the mouth complaining that Kagan is a leftwing commie pinko.

    For my money, Glenn Greenwald best summed up the situation when he wrote the following:

    “Democrats love to mock the Right for their propensity to engage in party-line, close-minded adherence to their Leaders, but compare what conservatives did with Bush’s selection of Harriet Miers to what progressives are almost certain to do with Obama’s selection of someone who is, at best, an absolute blank slate.”

  149. 149.

    General Egali Tarian Stuck

    @Corner Stone: I mean one with a paper trail as a judge that makes his/her libtard qualifiable and quantifiable. Obama knows Kagan very well, and we don’t. Sotomayor was a known liberal with a record of decisions, so I say it is more likely than not Obama sees Ms. Kagan as a solid liberal. And with the Sotomayor pick, I think he has earned being given the benefit of the doubt, eternal puma suspicions notwithstanding.

  150. 150.

    JMY

    @Martin:

    Read the comments of his HuffPo article. Hilarious. They do not like this at all. I guess liberals aren’t gonna love him anymore.

  153. 153.

    Firebagger

    Obama, just like Bush, corporatist, sputter-sputter, bully pulpit! So called progressive!

    Public option, public option, Obama, kool-aid, dear leader…..bully pulpit. Bully pulpit, public option, corporatist, liberal base, Novermber, corporatist!

    Pro-administration stenography, RAHM(!), 3rd party, primary Obama, public option, bully pulpit!

    GREENWALD! GREENWALD!

    http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/index.html

    Pragmatist(?), Rahm, Rahm, public pulpit!

    Oh Jane, stop this crazy thing;

    http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/45760

    In closing; public option, bully pulpit, pragmatist, corporatist, 3rd party, Rahm, Glenn Greenwald, Jane Hamsher.

    So there! Palin 2012.

  154. 154.

    Mike Kay

    diane wood is too old. she might as well be betty white.

    say ginsberg retires next year, after all she’ll be 78. Who should obama nominate to replace her? the poutOsphere should start making a blacklist now, so Obama knows who to pass over. Can’t keep saying diane wood over and over. and the funny thing is, no one can name one of her cases – not one – yet somehow, they swear by someone they know nothing.

  157. 157.

    Mike Kay

    @JK: failed attorney greenwald is an idiot.

    based on his standard, he would have rejected William O. Douglas, Hugo Black, and Earl Warren for the supreme court because they were pols who were legal “blank slates”.

    plus, to say the first women dean of harvard law, a tenured professor, is an “absolute blank slate” is a smear.

  158. 158.

    Martin

    @JMY: GOS is going nuclear as well. Most of it over the 3 advisory committee meetings she attended at Goldman. Clearly these people have no fucking clue what an advisory committee is. I help organize 5 of them for my employer – focusing in different areas. They’re one part auditors and one part critics. A good advisory board is one that, admittedly, cares about the success of the organization, is smarter than any of your people in at least one area that you care about, and has a perspective on the role of your organization in the larger market that you lack. They’re not cheerleaders. They’re not hostile, but the strongest and most respected criticism comes from the advisory committee.

    Somehow this means that Goldman has now bought themselves a Supreme Court justice.

  159. 159.

    JK

    @General Egali Tarian Stuck
    Glenn Greenwald will never win any personality contests. Sometimes, he exudes an unpleasant smugness and comes across as a sanctimonious prick. Once I get past his personality flaws, I generally find his commentary to be well reasoned and sensible.

    @JMY:

    Greenwald’s point was not to compare Kagan to Miers in terms of their respective qualifications. His point was that conservatives were willing to hold Bush’s feet to the fire, whereas liberals and progressives are always inclined to give Obama the benefit of the doubt.

  161. 161.

    Martin

    @JK: Always? How’s that working out for his stance toward Israel or closing of Gitmo, which almost every Dem in Congress was willing to step in front of. Or do you mean the commentariat? I think this is the only site that doesn’t think that Obama is black Bush.

  162. 162.

    Comrade Kevin

    whereas liberals and progressives are always inclined to give Obama the benefit of the doubt.

    If he actually believes that, he really does live in fantasy land.

  163. 163.

    JMY

    @Martin:

    I know, her being part of the committee has nothing to do with what Goldman did. Absolutely nothing. We need to focus on having an intelligent, competent, and fair judge, not just a liberal one. Every day I am convinced that no matter what the president does, no one will be satisfied. It’s your prerogative to disagree with the decision, but stop acting as if the sky is falling or the world is ending because he didn’t pick who you wanted. People bitched when Sotomayor was nominated. They harp on the fact that she agreed that al-qaeda members could be detained during this conflict, but refuse to mention that Dawn Johnsen, who they all love, agrees. They seem to forget that the role of a Solicitor General, is to defend the laws and statues of the federal government, even if they disagree.

    Now, I’m suppose to believe that because she hired a bunch of white people and 1 asian at Harvard as dean, that some how disqualifies her from being a SC judge. Media Matters does an excellent job of refuting a lot of these claims.

  164. 164.

    Mike Kay

    @JK: this is revisionism. Conservatives didn’t hold Bush sr. feet to the fire for his stealth nominees (souter/thomas). They didn’t hold Reagan’s feet to the fire for nominating openly pro-choice sandra day o’connor or the moderate anthony kennedy (can you imagine the dems tolerating a dem picking an openly anti-choice nominee). And if lack of scholarship is the key, then john roberts was also a stealth candidate. the right didn’t hold Ford and Nixon’s feet to the fire for their picks (Blackmun, Powell, Burger, Stevens). but no, glen cherry picks one incident in 40 years and says that’s standard operating procedure.

  165. 165.

    Mike Kay

    @Comrade Kevin: I think glen must have slept though the entire 2007/2008 primary season. Geez, remember when Kos, himself, threw a temper tantrum when Obama choose Biden instead of his favorite Kat Sebelius.

  166. 166.

    JMY

    @JK:

    When did conservatives hold Bush’s feet to the fire? When they voted for the PATRIOT Act? The trillion dollar tax cuts? Medicare Part D? There was opposition from conservatives because she was not qualified & not intelligent in regards to the law.

  168. 168.

    robertdsc

    Is Kagan pro-choice? I guess that’s the only issue I’m interested in, otherwise I don’t have much to say.

  169. 169.

    Mike Kay

    @Martin: this is the mirror image of Liz Cheney’s “al Qaeda 7” smear.

    Every single progressive would freak out if someone was attacked for representing an accused terrorist. I don’t know anyone who dislikes Jeryln Merritt for representing Tim McVeigh. Oh, but somehow represent goldman or a banking firm in any way, shape, or form and the civil libertarians turn into liz cheney and form blacklists. Ironically, one of their heroes, greenwald, began his career working for a corporate firm who represents banksters, JP Morgan and FISA outlaws AT&T.

  170. 170.

    Mark S.

    @robertdsc:

    I’d be shocked if she weren’t.

    What’s annoyed me about Greenwald’s performance on this issue is that there was no reason to attack Kagan like he has. If he wanted to turn his blog into a daily paean to the greatness of Judge Wood I’d have no problem with that. But he’s decided that Kagan is the enemy (and he always has to treat whoever he disagrees with as the worst person since Hitler) based on some surmising and other bullshit. It’s like he’s paid no attention at all to the last thirty years of SC nominations and doesn’t realize that there are a lot of other factors that go into choosing someone who can get through the process. He might have the most tin ear to politics of anyone who has a prominent platform.

  172. 172.

    Martin

    @robertdsc: Given that Obama knows her personally, I think we can be 100% assured that Obama is satisfied with her stance on key issues.

    Of course that means she’s a corporatist, soçialist, anti-gay rights torture defender who hates the constitution and white people.

  173. 173.

    Cacti

    I can already see that the tantrum is shaping up to be

    “Why not Diane Wood?”

    To which I would reply…

    Who was the last 60 year old Republican SCOTUS nominee?

  174. 174.

    Mike Kay

    @JK: that’s why I voted for Nader. Marty’s long time friendship with Gore, going back to college, convinced me there was no difference btween Bush and Gore. Gore would have nominated roberts and alito, and invaded iraq, just like bush.

  176. 176.

    JK

    @Mike Kay:

    You’re a funny guy.

    Obama has disappointed me, but on his worst day, he’s still a trillion times preferable to John “Bomb Iran” McCain, Sarah “Mooseburger Helper” Palin, Rudy “9/11” Giuliani, and Scott “Beefcake Bimbo” Brown

    HOPEFULLY, Elena Kagan has absolutely no embarrassing skeletons in her closet that conservatives can exploit.

  177. 177.

    Mike Kay

    @Cacti: you have to go back 40 years to nixon, who nominated Burger, Blackmun, and Powell, all in their 60s.

    but it’s a really good point. Dems suffer from not having a deep bench. From 1968 to 2008, the goopers held the white house for 28 of 40 years. 12 years of carter and clinton didn’t provide much time to plant seedlings. It’s not like there are 2000 groves with globs of fruit waiting to be plucked. But leave it to the poutOsphere to be short sighted. I mean, to them history started in 2002 when google’s blogger application went online.

  178. 178.

    Allison W.

    @JMY:

    That’s because Dawn J. is on the pre-approved list of the Progressive club so she gets a pass. If Kagan had more Liberal cred no one would be arguing about her inexperience or anything else for that matter.

  180. 180.

    Martin

    @Mike Kay: Dems have a plenty deep bench. The problem is that Dems do their little purity dance. They rally behind a name that they really know little about, but some Very Important Persons feel is as perfectly liberal as Congress can tolerate, and then denounce every other name (that they know little about) as being the worst choice ever, until the next round when they forget the last dance and start fresh anew. The right is little different, mind you.

    But there’s plenty of talent out there – they’re called law schools and law firms.

  181. 181.

    Allison W.

    @Mark S.:

    Indeed. He has done a very good job at getting his readers to invest heavily in Diane Wood so that anyone else will be seen as a disappointment. And that’s exactly how it is unfolding. Every where I go I see: Greenwald says……..

    What makes him more qualified than Obama? – who has done this before AND had to vote on a SCOTUS nominee before

  182. 182.

    Martin

    @Allison W.: The only reason Dawn J is on the pre-approved list is because the right threw a fit over her. That Kagan didn’t get filibustered for SolGen means that the right must love her, therefore she’s got to be awful.

  183. 183.

    NR

    @General Egali Tarian Stuck:

    Though, believe it or not, contrary to nutroot rumors, Ms. Kagan is, in fact, a liberal and a democrat with a long history of supporting equal rights. Just in case anyone asks.

    Well, except for on tiny little insignificant issues like whether the government has the right to keep you in prison indefinitely without a trial.

    In that respect, Obama might as well have nominated another Alito.

  184. 184.

    Yutsano

    @Martin: Hell the Republicans were still trying to find their asses with both hands when Kagan was up for SG. Now that they have the 41 seat majority, they will be all over any nominee Obama puts up daring him to either spend political capital or recess appoint and get blasted as a partisan. If it were just about the person (and remember Republicans have zero interest in competent governance) this charade would be over by now and all Obama’s slots would be filled.

  185. 185.

    Martin

    @NR: That was exactly Dawn Johnson’s position as well. Is she another Alito?

    At her confirmation hearing, Solicitor General nominee Elena Kagan said that under military law there is no requirement to let captured enemies go back to the war. Do you agree?
    Johnsen’s answer was:
    Answer: Yes, I do agree with Dean Kagan’s statement that under traditional military law, enemy combatants may be detained for the duration of the conflict. That is what the Supreme Court said as well in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507 (2004).

  186. 186.

    Mike Kay

    @Martin: what do facts have to do with poutrage?

    Plus, Kagan is frumpy.

    Why can’t obama nominate some lipstick lesbians!?!

  187. 187.

    Martin

    Oh, and I should add that Kagan never said how she would have interpreted the law in the quote everyone is so quick to tar her with. All she said was that under the current law, under Hamdi, what the law was.

    Remember that how she answers questions for solicitor general would (if she’s smart) be different than how she’s answer for a bench position. They are different jobs representing different viewpoints on the law. Her answers don’t need to in any way be inconsistent, but she needs to answer in a manner that is representative of the authority in the position. All jobs candidates need to do this and I suppose its too much to ask that people be aware of that nuance.

    Further, Kagan co-wrote a letter to Leahy stating the following:

    ‘To put this most pointedly, were the Graham amendment to become law, a person suspected of being a member of al-Qaeda could be arrested, transferred to Guantanamo, detained indefinitely … subjected to inhumane treatment, tried before a military commission and sentenced to death without any express authorization from Congress and without review by any independent federal court. The American form of government was established precisely to prevent this kind of unreviewable exercise of power over the lives of individuals.’
    ‘When dictatorships have passed similar laws, our government has rightly challenged such acts as fundamentally lawless. The same standard should apply to our own government.’

    Of course, everyone remains willfully blind to those words.

  188. 188.

    Martin

    @Mike Kay: True, poutrage is the common currency of the left these days. GOS is absolutely fucking marinading in it, deciding apparently that the firebaggers shouldn’t get all the spotlight.

  189. 189.

    middlewest

    From Salon magazine, of all places, a debunking of the left’s stupidity on Kagan.

    It’s fascinating to me that Glen Greenwald and progressives have embraced Liz Cheney’s theory that attorneys should be treated as potential co-conspirators with the crimes of their clients. I guess if you follow the Cheney/Greenwald theory, prosecutors are the only choice you have for judicial appointments.

    Me, I’m happy we have a nominee that didn’t come up through the prosecutor assembly line, maybe we can get some respect for the criminal defense bar from an academic.

  190. 190.

    MikeJ

    @middlewest:

    Me, I’m happy we have a nominee that didn’t come up through the prosecutor assembly line, maybe we can get some respect for the criminal defense bar from an academic.

    A-fucking-men.

  192. 192.

    JSD

    I’ll wait to watch both of these on disk/streaming after they complete. I can’t stand waiting a week to watch the next epi.

  193. 193.

    burnspbesq

    @JK:

    ““Democrats love to mock the Right for their propensity to engage in party-line, close-minded adherence to their Leaders, but compare what conservatives did with Bush’s selection of Harriet Miers to what progressives are almost certain to do with Obama’s selection of someone who is, at best, an absolute blank slate.”

    The above passage you quoted, with its false equivalence, is acompletely typical example of Greenwaldian intellectual dishonesty. Meirs was manifestly unqualified. Kagan may be a number of things, but unqualified is not one of them.

    Elections have consequences. Winners get to pick Supreme Court justices. If Greenwald wants a seat at the table, he should run for something.

  194. 194.

    burnspbesq

    @NR:

    “Well, except for on tiny little insignificant issues like whether the government has the right to keep you in prison indefinitely without a trial.”

    Sigh. Yet another person who doesn’t understand, or chooses not to understand, the role of the SG.

    Show me something – one fucking shred of credible evidence – that shows that Kagan’s personal views on the issue are congruent with the arguments she was instructed to make. Can you?

  197. 197.

    asiangrrlMN

    @JK: That quote is false equivalence. The only reason the right stood up to Harriet Miers is because she was patently unqualified and the left actually made grumblings over it. The minute Greenwald did a Miers/Kagan comparison, he lost all creditability with me. And, I think Obama has earned some benefit of the doubt by now given the job he’s done thus far. W.? Not a chance in hell.

    I don’t have a problem with people debating the qualities of different eligible nominees. I do, however, have a problem with people on the left basically saying Kagan is guilty until she proves herself innocent.

  198. 198.

    mclaren

    The Pacific is absolutely terrible compared to Band of Brothers but there’s a good reason for that. The European theater of WW II had a natural dramatic arc — Americans started with the invasion of Sicily, everyone knows where Sicily is, everyone knwos what the objective was, then we moved on to the invasion of Normandy. Once again, everyone knows where France is, everyone knows what the objective was…move up through France into Germany, take Berlin.

    The European theater of WW II had a nice neat narrative to it, a clear start (from the American point of view) and a dramatic finish. Americans (along with Russians) took Berlin and they killed the main Bad Guy (well, Hitler killed himself, but same deal). End of story. It’s dramatically satisfying and easy to understand. Geographically, everyone knows what’s going on with the War in Europe, including the GIs on the ground. No GI who waded ashore at Normandy had any doubt about where he was or why he was there. You’re in Italy to take Rome and put Italy out of the war. You’re in France to take Germany and end the war in Europe.

    But the Pacific theater of WW II was completely different. It’s inherently dramatically unsatisfying. Can you point out where Pelelieu is on a map? I can’t. Can you point out where Tarawa is? Where Kwajalein Atoll is? How about Iwo Jima? Guadalcanal?

    I still can’t identify these tiny little coral blips in the middle of nowhere on a map. They’re a thousand miles from anywhere, and some of ’em are only a couple of miles across.

    MacArthur hopped from one island to another, bypassing many of ’em, so to the marines on the ground, there was no inkling why they were fighting where they were fighting, or where the next battle would be, or why. So a miniseries that follows the marines will inherently be chaotic and incoherent and dramatically chopped-up and inchoate.

    Then there’s the conditions on the ground. Hot, rotting coconuts, rats everywhere, malaria, fungus, mud, constant rain, just vile ugly conditions. And it went on and on and on. In Europe they had rain but then it let up. You had snow but only for a short time. In the Pacific it was non-stop insects, rot, fungus, fever, mud, all the time.

    And then there’s the unsatisfying conclusion of the Pacific war. The marines fight and die on all these islands in the middle of nowhere, then as they’re gearing up for the big finale, the invasion of Japan, words arrives that some weird superbombs got dropped and now the war is over. In purely dramatic terms, that’s a total anticlimax. It makes you question why all those marines had to fight and die on all those godforsaken islands. (There are strategic reasons, but they’re never ever explained in this miniseries. Ever. Compare with the 1965 film In Harm’s Way, which did a good job of explaining the overall strategic reason for various battles.)

    From the POV of the individual marine fighting in the pacific, the war was chaotic and largely incomprehensible, it wasn’t clear why they were fighting on any particular atoll, they never knew where they’d go next or why, and then right in the middle of the whole process suddenly it’s over…and they had nothing to do with the final attack that made Japan surrender.

    In fact, missing from the entire miniseries of The Pacific is the huge story of the firebombing raids on Japan by the air force. Curtis LeMay’s firebombing campaign brought Japan to the edge of surrender and while it wouldn’t have been possible without the marines’ victories on some of the atolls that were used as airfields, we get no indication at all during this miniseries that Japan is being pounded and burned to the ground by incendiary bombing raids that killed as many as 150,000 Japanese men and women and children in a single night, night after night after night.

    Because of this, it seems unlikely that any script could make the American war in the Pacific either comprehensible or dramatically effective.

    It’s worth noting that individual movies have focused on individual campaigns in the Pacific — In Harm’s Way deals with the Battle of the Coral Sea, Midway deals with the Battle of Midway, various John Wayne movies from the 50s deal with Iwo Jima or Guadalcanal, and King Rat deals with the POWs in the Philippines, Pearl Harbor deals with Doolittle’s raid as does the earlier film 30 Seconds Over Tokyo. But no single movie or miniseries has dealt with all those campaigns because [1] the Pacific theater of WW II had too many different things going on, an air campaign, MacArthur’s island-hopping campaign, the Manhattan Project, and the naval surface battles; [2] as mentioned, the conclusion of the Pacific War was inherently dramatically unsatisfactory, lacking a nice neat dramatic arc in which the soldiers wade ashore on Japan and invade and conquer the enemy’s homeland and capture Tokyo in a pitched battle and kill the Big Bad Guy (Tojo, in this case); [3] the locations of the Pacific naval and air and ground battles are so spread out, and so obscure, and the islands themselves so tiny and so isolated, that it’s impossible to figure out strategically what’s going on unless you’ve got a huge map with you at all times. Regular world maps don’t even show tiny little flyspecks like Kwajalein or Tarawa!

    So while the miniseries The Pacific was a mess and a huge disappointment, I don’t think it could have been anything else. The script is terrible, but from a scriptwriter’s point of view, how could it have been done any better? You would’ve had to constantly cut to MacArthur droning on with an exposition lecture about why we need to take this island, blah blah blah. And you would’ve constantly had to cut to the naval battles and the incendiary bombing of Japan, which would only have bogged down the action on the islands where the Marines were fighting.

    The Pacific campaign in WW II just isn’t suited for a movie or a miniseries. It’s as bad a choice to make a movie or miniseries about as The Thirty Years’ war or Cromwell’s civil war in England. Notably, no good movies have been made about those conflicts either.

  199. 199.

    LanceThruster

    For a program suposedly celebrating musical heritage, the Treme theme song sucks. The Pacific has its moments, but there’s an unevenness about it. Seems to me Marines in combat buckled their damn chin straps more often too.

Comments are closed.