Beltmann

Yes, and I take it as a personal swipe.

I would do everything possible to get to such a show. Of course, Milwaukee would be even better...

My favorite part of O'Reilly's "apology" was when he insisted that no offense was intended and that "context is everything." Context is everything. Unless, apparently, you are trying to hate on Michelle Obama. Irony is just so damn cool.

I do know what you mean, but I guess I'm okay with Anderson's archness for the same reasons I'm okay with Orson Welles' archness--they have the chops and artistic insight to pull it off. In their hands, it seems justifiable. Maybe I'm confessing a bias; I like when directors swing for the fences. Oddly, I've always considered the Coens to be in that category, too. To my eyes, many of their films are among the most self-aware movies I've ever seen (and I don't intend that as criticism). I liked Juno, but yeah. Its achievements are relatively mild.

Gotta think metaphorically. I wrote this elsewhere: It was a very good year for American movies, and no movie was more American in its vision than P. T. Anderson

Weird. That's how I feel, but flip-flopped. I actually think TWBB might be one of the best American movies of the last 10 years. I was absolutely mesmerized by every frame, every artistic decision, every nuance. It's been a long while since I responded to a film so deeply and on so many levels. That's not to denigrate NCFOM, though, which, to my eyes, is also a classic. Agreed. In recent memory, I can't think of another year so strong, at least for American movies. I'm a little dismayed, though, about how most of the riskiest and most rewarding movies didn't perform so hot at the box

Sorry, I didn't mean to sound so hostile.

I love them both, but I love There Will Be Blood a lot more.

Good grief. And yet you're not smart enough to understand that, in context, the comment had nothing to do with partisanship. Your (mis)interpretation, though, is profoundly colored by partisanship.

Maybe, but two years' worth of enjoyment still sounds like a worthwhile investment.

I thought the debate was civil, substantive, and won by Obama by a hair.

So you are willing to let one extremely minor slip-up (even that's a stretch, I think) to completely overshadow her considerable career achievements? Let me understand: Do you actually believe one single comment proves beyond doubt that she can't possibly have been a successful and capable attorney?

My favorite part of O'Reilly's stance regarding Michelle Obama was his assertion that he'll go after her if it's true that she believes America is a "flawed" nation. Which begs the question, who doesn't believe this country, or any country, could stand to be improved in some way? If speaking up about perceived "flaws" is how we should measure a lack of patriotism, then O'Reilly might the least patriotic person in America. After all, he spends all of his time pointing out the "flaws" he sees in American politics: liberals, gays, pro-choicers, etc. It's too easy to turn the rhetoric around:

The irony of this is that Bill O'Reilly responded to Michelle Obama's utterly inoffensive comment with a genuinely insensitive comment. Using the term "lynching party" at this stage of American history--now there's a real mistake, a real lack of taste and judgment, a real insult to certain American citizens. I wonder how many people rubbed the wrong way by Michelle Obama reserved equal harrumphs for O'Reilly? My guess: Not many. And my guess for why? Most don't really care about what Michelle Obama said, because deep down they know it was an innocent comment; what they care about is just

I tried to listen last night, but I couldn't get it work. As I've listened many times before without hassle, I suspect the trouble had something to do with the wireless system here at the hospital. Bummer. (I would have only had a chance to listen for 15 minutes, anyway.)

Um, yes? It was obviously meant to criticize decades of poisonous and/or apathetic politics, only to praise how, for many new voters, that might be changing. That sounds like a pretty good thing to me, not to mention fairly accurate. When I listened to the speech Monday night, it didn't strike me as anything but a point about the improving health of the American political scene, with perhaps a dash of innocent hyperbole. I can't believe this is even remotely controversial. Who could possibly misunderstand this comment, except people who want to think the worst of people (especially oppone

No, she just gave a chance to people with trouble grasping context to show off their shortcomings in the critical thinking department.

I thought about St. G a lot over the last few weeks, and yesterday was no different. She wasn't a fan of C-sections, but I'm sure she would have forgiven our (necessary) choice!

Ha! Last night one of my friends asked if he was named after Alex Keaton. I replied by saying if we were going to name him after somebody in that family, it would have been the parents, not the corporate cutthroat!

Her name is Kael Zalisha. In both cases, we wanted a middle name with an international flavor--something about breaking down cultural barriers, or some nonsense! [quote name='JUDE

Stacy and I voted absentee on Monday--and the baby's middle name means "defender of men," which I thought went well with the theme of primary day. We took our three-year-old daughter along to city hall, and the clerk gave her a scrap piece of paper so she, too, could "vote." Later, in the car, I asked her who she voted for. She said, "I voted for Obama." Last night I was home alone with her... she was having a terrible time dealing with the fact that mom was away for the night. She was weeping, and I said, "Hey, Obama won today." She immediately stopped crying, looked up at me, cocked h

These days I always "reply to all." Who knows? Maybe one of those people would like to read a rebuttal. I figure, that's better than just hitting delete. (I also receive fewer forwards now!)

Yeah... they will have to address it, but only because morons will make it a big deal--thereby lowering our national discussion to moronic levels, as usual. I don't think it was a true "mistake," in the sense that there was absolutely nothing controversial about the statement in context. How sad it is when a public speaker is accused of a "mistake" only for assuming that her listeners are capable of grasping context.

What's annoying about that kind of bitching is that those commentators know they are being petty spinmeisters, spinning a gripe that has no substance whatsoever. If anyone deserves criticism, it's them. Every time they try to land such low, meaningless blows, I feel personally insulted--do they really think I, and by extension all Americans, are dumb enough to buy this crap? (The worst part is that too many Americans do buy this crap.)

This isn't directed at Tweedling, but is a generalized observation: I saw Michelle Obama's speech in its entirety (on C-SPAN), and within context it was clear what she meant by that line, and it should be obvious to anyone with half a brain. I can't believe so many people get so worked up about such meaningless, petty crap. We could be talking about health care in this country, and instead we talk about Obama's middle name. Jeebus. Speaking of stupid "gotcha" politics, why is it that Ms. Clinton so often stoops to such levels? When she resorts to such childish "gotcha" politics, you mar