Just two days after stumping in South Carolina for Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee, famed TV wrestler Ric Flair showed the underdog politician how to take down a stronger foe: Punch him in the groin.
Huckabee might shun such a low blow against his GOP frontrunners, but there could be a lesson for the former Arkansas governor in the World Wrestling Entertainment match broadcast on Monday night. Flair, a 16-time world champion rallied in the closing minutes to beat the current WWE champion, a much younger Randy Orton. And it was the crushing blow to Orton’s private parts that did the job.
Seriously, Huckabee needs to fight back with his own bit of flair. The Republican hierarchy is coming after him, worried that his surprising strength for Iowa’s kickoff nominating contest threatens to undermine party leaders Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani. GOP-friendly columnist Bob Novak echoed such sentiment in a column this week entitled, “The False Conservative.”
For starters, Huckabee might want to see if his pal Flair could pay a little visit to Novak.
Craig on "Live with Dan Abrams"
Tuesday (11/27) MSNBC 9:00 PM ET
Comments
KGC....
nah..... I wouldn't bother to travel to see her..... she'll probably be in Manchester or Concord..... (both about an hour's drive one way for me).....
but that's because I'm not a groupie.... hell.... I didn't even go see Craig while he was here..... I'm just not a celebrity chaser....
but that's me..... I think a lot of women will gladly give up a Sunday afternoon for her....
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | November 27, 2007 1:10 PM
oh yeah.....
WOO WOO!
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | November 27, 2007 1:11 PM
CRAIG!
LOL.....
yeah.... I'd like to see Flair pay a visit to Novak.... now that I would travel to see...... :)
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | November 27, 2007 1:18 PM
speaking of groin kicks, the guy from pollster,com was on msgop pretty much trashing the on-line zogby poll and saying Zogby was wrong in 2006 as well,. All other polls out this week show Clinton beating every gooper. I think that poll has to be be set aside.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | November 27, 2007 1:43 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-abrams/rove-congress-pushed-bu_b_74039.html
why would anyone pay attention to Karl Rove after this
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | November 27, 2007 1:50 PM
I been thinking about this for sometime. This story about Obama and his early drug use, how do we know it is true? Has Oprah interviewed his dealer, have any of his old school chums surfaced admitting they did blow with Obama? You know there is a school of thought that goes something like this: If you publicly announce your short comings, you appear more like able, more human, he is like me, others will accept you more readily. It sure as hell worked for Bill Clinton didn't it, but in his case there were witnesses, numerous witnesses. In Obama's case, who are the witnesses? The MSM and the rest of America hasn't questioned it, we just accepted it as fact. The question which no one will ask. Why do we just accept it? Is it because Obama is Black, and Black youths are expected to use drugs, so there is no shock, no OMG moment? Wouldn't it be a laugh if Obama used our White America's view, some would call it a racist view, of Black youth and drugs, and used it as part of his like able persona to get elected President. A little Macavelian, but it could just work in his favor: They expect it, why not just admit to doing it, who is going to know the difference?
Posted by: FryDaddy
| November 27, 2007 2:15 PM
fry
projection much......sounds like a gooper trick
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | November 27, 2007 2:25 PM
fry why don't you just forgo any punctuation and make impossible to read your posts? there are about 4 paragraphs in the above post. did you graduate from high school?
yo soy Horsedooty!
Posted by: horsedooty | November 27, 2007 2:31 PM
FD
He put it in a book that has been read by thousands. I'm sure that if someone thought anything that was in that book wasn't true or at least questionable, someone would have mentioned it by now.
We know you don't read well for comprehension, but give it a try some time.
Posted by: Jamie | November 27, 2007 2:33 PM
Speaking of drug use, there's no greater bunch of druggies, than pro wrestlers.
This is a good metaphor for the Republican party: a sport built on lies and illegal activity.
Posted by: nash
| November 27, 2007 2:42 PM
So...Huckabee is now the underdog, threatening the Republican establishment?
Gee. I thoughty he was just another right-wing fundamentalist Christian robot. I thought he WAS establishment.
And by the way, WHO CARES what the slimeball Novak thinks? He should be doing a life sentence at Leavenworth for treason.
Posted by: nash
| November 27, 2007 2:46 PM
Maybe the Huckster got into drugs during his weight loss attempts... notice how they never show fat pictures of him
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | November 27, 2007 2:49 PM
I'm a little slow, but I just figured out what is really, really aggravating about MSNBC's Super Tuesday.
It's all horse race all the time. Who is supporting whom, who got off the best quip, snide remark or "gotcha", what is the latest gossip and then putting up two opposition folks to argue about the latest gossip.
There is not one scintilla of issues, positions, records .. i.e. Obama was working at state level for quite awhile, Edwards was a VP candidate and politician before that, and Hillary has submitted something like 400 bills as a Senator.
Somewhere in all of that there must be a clue about what they think or will do. They talk about "records" but you never hear any analysis of any of it.
Craig and CQ do what can be done in print, but how about a little of it leaking over into TV or just assign all the candidates stalls and feed them hay until November of next year.
Posted by: Jamie | November 27, 2007 3:12 PM
Jamie....
thanks for letting me know I've done the right thing by keeping my tv off today.....
hmmmmm....... there must a little s&m joke somewhere in your post ..... you know..... something along the lines of leather whips and bridles..... :)
Posted by: RebelliousRenee | November 27, 2007 3:22 PM
Completely agree, Jamie. The press turns very serious issues into gamesmanship. No one checks anything or questions anything real. That's how we ended up with "W", the cowboy who hates horses and bought a so-called ranch just to run for president.
Posted by: Patsi | November 27, 2007 3:25 PM
Holy Crap! This is just too wonderful!!! Saw this on a blog:
"At 11 a.m. today, one of FoxNews.com's top stories was an article about a Nevada brothel owner endorsing Ron Paul. But the story wasn't written by Fox News; it was a tweaked version of an Associated Press story that hit the wires early Monday. And, to make matters even more muddled, that story was taken from a Reno Gazette-Journal piece. Something was lost in translation.
The original article was a solid piece about a strange scene at a Ron Paul event in Reno. Tucker Carlson, who was trailing Paul for a magazine piece, invited his friend Dennis Hof out to the event. Hof, who owns the Moonlite BunnyRanch brothel, emerged from a limousine with Carlson and two prostitutes. He then took a liking to Paul and decided to endorse the Republican, saying that he would "get all the Bunnies together, and we can raise him some money."
Posted by: Patsi | November 27, 2007 3:36 PM
Tucker Carlson prissy moralist was with a pimp and two hookers (no offense to them)
he's the one always bragging about his family values... I guess he supports the legalization of sex work as a family value. I wonder if it is his wife's idea.
Great catch Patsi..
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | November 27, 2007 3:40 PM
It really doesn't get much better than a Repug getting Rick Flair to stump for him.
Fry, to borrow a line from AFNW, "Are you de-ranged?" First, when has anyone ever tried to DISPROVE a candidate's mea culpa about drug drug use? You think Obama has more to gain than lose by claiming prior drug use? That's too far out there even for you.
Posted by: pogo
| November 27, 2007 3:43 PM
Well, toodles - gotta go pay the ransom on the car. Later.
Posted by: pogo
| November 27, 2007 3:46 PM
Here's the url for that Tucker Carlson/hooker story:
http://news.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007711250335
Posted by: Patsi | November 27, 2007 4:43 PM
Wow, Novak really did dish out the diss on Huckabee.
“The False Conservative.”
To me Huckabee's rise is THE surprise in this campaign so far.
And while another Crusader is not what I prefer in the White House, I like him better than Bush. I'm still convinced Romney can't lose NH, and he can't win IA.
Posted by: Dexter
| November 27, 2007 4:51 PM
Ric Flair, eh?
Huckabee's turning into the clown candidate of this race. Isn't he the one with 'the ad'?
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| November 27, 2007 4:59 PM
'Tucker Carlson prissy moralist was with a pimp and two hookers (no offense to them).' That guy, Dennis Hof is piggy. A piggy pimp.
Tucker, Tucker, Tucker! It's bad enough for someone to have a 'friend' like Hugh Hefner. But to have 'the pimp' as a friend.....Do y'all like to go fishing together or do ya read the same types of books?
Ewww.......
I say there is guilt by association.
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| November 27, 2007 5:05 PM
http://www.vintagephotos.com/Image%20336A%20Emmett%20Kelly.jpg
Posted by: sturgeone | November 27, 2007 5:23 PM
Ha....found my own picture while i was bumming around over there:
http://www.businessinnovationinsider.com/images/2006/06/Smoking%20bozo.jpg
Posted by: sturgeone | November 27, 2007 5:27 PM
'Fox News propaganda against Iran
A short video highlighting the biased reporting of U.S. TV Station Fox News on Iran.'
http://www.aljazeera.com/mm/video/video.php?op=showvideo&vidid=147
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| November 27, 2007 5:41 PM
LEAVE TUCKER ALONE!!! You are lucky he even performs for all of you! *sobs uncontrollably*
Posted by: Corey
| November 27, 2007 5:44 PM
'Wyatt Gets Year in Prison For Oil-for-Food Violation'
A TX oilman.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119619399362905535.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| November 27, 2007 5:45 PM
If y'all dont watch it Tucker's going to go get his big friend and come back and beat y'all up.......
Posted by: sturgeone | November 27, 2007 5:56 PM
Mama Mia that pot of sauce smells good!
Posted by: BrianInNYC | November 27, 2007 6:02 PM
Tweety may have just topped his title as mysogynistic ass of the year!! with that HIllary is nothing without Bill speech at the end of the show while shouting down the woman until running out of time.
Shall we take a poll of women of her generation who graduated from universities with top honors and then devoted the majority of their talents to a husband's career? Most of those men would have been nothing without the backing of a woman.
How does Mister "Man is God" know what she would have done on her own without the tonnage of a husband ... would she have been head of the Supreme Court by now?
I am really starting to loathe the blond boob. Everybody echo Stephanie now so the big baby can bawl ... RIGHT WING TOOL
Posted by: Jamie | November 27, 2007 6:05 PM
tt,
Guiilt by association? I think you're being too hard on Mr. Hof. I'm sure Tucker isn't the first loser customer that he's tried to offer a leg up.
Posted by: EdVB
| November 27, 2007 6:35 PM
Shall look forward to seeing Craig on Dan Abrams tonight; can endure his appearances on Keith and Abrams shows. Daytime MSNBC: no way Jose.
Countdown to Imus begins. Amazing to me Craig is not finalized as a first show guest.
Posted by: dog's eye view
| November 27, 2007 6:55 PM
People are counting down till Imus is back on the air? Really?
Posted by: BrianInNYC | November 27, 2007 7:02 PM
Just mentioned on Rachel Maddow. Lawyers are volunteering to assist Iraq vets with disability claims
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-11-26-valawyers_N.htm?csp=34&loc=interstitialskip
It's really nice that they are offering to help. It is scandalous that our government cannot process a claim in less than six months, frequently get it wrong, and have a 100,000 person backlog.
Posted by: Jamie | November 27, 2007 7:05 PM
I didn't know Hillary worked for Lufthansa, you learn so many things when you watch TV.
Posted by: BrianInNYC | November 27, 2007 7:13 PM
Brian,
Hillary worked for the Luftwaffe?
Posted by: dnd | November 27, 2007 7:40 PM
That's what Tweety said! Jamie's favorite reporter!
Posted by: BrianInNYC | November 27, 2007 7:43 PM
Biden's on PBS Newshour, making many good points, cogently.
Go Joe!
Posted by: dog's eye view
| November 27, 2007 7:51 PM
Here's the Maureen Dowd "Hillary & Nepotism" column that Tweety was diving off the deep end about. Maureen and Matthews should just get a room somewhere so the rest of us don't have to watch the mutual masturbation.
Posted by: Jamie | November 27, 2007 8:29 PM
dog,
I break down the candidates into three categories: 1) statesmen, 2) ideologues and 3) celebrities. Biden and Richardson are statesmen. And possibly Dodd. I won't comment on the other two categories.
Posted by: dnd | November 27, 2007 8:30 PM
dnd I can only hazard a guess at which group you put Richardson in!
:)
Posted by: BrianInNYC | November 27, 2007 8:37 PM
The Top Three are the celebrities. I don't think any of them are knee jerk idealogues. The question you have to ask is which of them has the immediate capacity to rise to Statesman should a crisis occur. I think either Hillary or Edwards could do that. I don't think Obama is ready as yet.
Posted by: Jamie | November 27, 2007 8:38 PM
Jamie no link in your post. and what do you have against watching people masturbate? It's the safe sex act of the cyber age!
Posted by: BrianInNYC | November 27, 2007 8:39 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/21/opinion/21dowd.html?_r=1&n=Top/Opinion/Editorials%20and%20Op-Ed/Op-Ed/Columnists/Maureen%20Dowd&oref=slogin
Neglected to post the Dowd column.
Posted by: Jamie | November 27, 2007 8:40 PM
Brian,
Two possible answers: (1) Certain practices while fun are not great spectator sports or (2)
Jealousy :-)
Posted by: Jamie | November 27, 2007 8:42 PM
Jamie,
Tweety is a provocateur. MoDo is a satirist.
I think Hillary's claim about her experience as first lady is misguided. Bill Richardson did more for foreign policy during the Clinton years that either Hillary or Ms Albright. And her "inevitability" comment to Katie Couric was likewise questionable.
Don't get me wrong, I think she's a brilliant pol and a damn good senator. And it pisses me off that the narrative from the MSM is centered around her sex or the tabloid crap with her husband.
I just think there are better candidates.
Posted by: dnd | November 27, 2007 8:45 PM
Jamie whether you like it or not Dowd does have a valid point. The problem is not with Hillary's claim of expierence it's with her campaign style of not feeling she has to explain herself or what exactly that expierence is. The one example of knowing her level of involvement during her white house years was health care. And we all know how that turned out!
Posted by: BrianInNYC | November 27, 2007 8:52 PM
dnd
I agree there are better or more qualified candidates since I've been going back and forth between Richardson and Biden since the lineup started. It's just that Matthews really gets my goat when he gets off on one of his "she's just a girl" spiels on the slimmest of excuses or attacks her for absolutely no reason at all except his own prejudices.
I think she would make a good president if elected and I don't like her getting slapped around by the likes of Tweety who twists words and substitutes opinions for facts.
Posted by: Jamie | November 27, 2007 8:52 PM
So stop watching Tweety! Take up a new hobby. Start writing the great American novel.
But Tweety does not reward time spent watching.
Posted by: dog's eye view
| November 27, 2007 8:57 PM
Brian,
I really don't consider the White House years all that much other than the testimony of those who worked with her. I find her time as a Senator and her activites in Arkansas plus her educational achievements have more bearing. A president is rarely experience but more personality and vision. I think she is as qualified as Edwards and more than Obama.
Posted by: Jamie | November 27, 2007 9:00 PM
BTW Obama has Oprah and Hillary now has Streisand
Posted by: Jamie | November 27, 2007 9:01 PM
Jamie,
I repeat, Tweety is a provocateur. Ignore him. He gets his ratings the same way Billo and Hannety do.
I don't think Hillary would make a good next president. The main reason is that she's a polarizing figure these days. Perhaps later. I disagree with many of her views, but this is secondary to the divisiveness, which may not be her fault, but it's there.
Dog was right, Biden looked very presidential on the NewsHour this evening.
Posted by: dnd | November 27, 2007 9:01 PM
Jamie I think she's qualified. But a big part of her campaign is that she is MORE experienced than the other candidates. And the unspoken sentiment is that extra expierence is due to her years in the white house. It's fair game,
And Craig watching you right now on Abrams, I think you are so wrong about Oprah, and that you are thinking with your penis! :)
You and others fail to acknowledge the growing excitement that has formed lately around the Obama campaign, Oprah going on the stump for him is icing on the cake!
Posted by: BrianInNYC | November 27, 2007 9:10 PM
Tweety is more broken record than provacateur ... thank goodness he seems to have finally dropped using Tip O'neill as a job reference. The 30 year time limit must have expired.
The funny thing is that his Sunday show is frequently quite good, but the daily one that I sort of get on the way to Olbermann is atrocious.
Posted by: Jamie | November 27, 2007 9:12 PM
Nice segment with Craig Crawford on Dan Abrams and I agree completely
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | November 27, 2007 9:17 PM
Craig was on the ground in Iowa. I think the excitement about Oprah is like the excitement about Entertainment Tonight or the last dead blond ... something for the chatterers to chatter about. Right now the media is acting like a group of giggly teenagers over Oprah coming to town. She will draw crowds, that doesn't necessarily translate to votes.
In the run down comparing her to Clinton there was a measure of her "Angel Network". Now I'm not sneezing at 70 million raised, but millions watch Oprah. Her show goes world wide. Converting fans to activists is hard to do.
Posted by: Jamie | November 27, 2007 9:20 PM
Craig, great interview and I couldn't agree with you more. I think the Obama campaign thinks Oprah won't sway caucus goers because as I heard it,undecided likely caucus-goers take a back seat to the Obama precinct captains and the people who have volunteered several hours for the campaign when it comes to getting tickets for the events. They are using Oprah's visit in Iowa as more of a reward to the supporters than to sway caucus-goers. If some get swayed along the way because of the press attention, they were probably on their way to supporting Obama in the first place.
I don't think Oprah's target audience members are likely caucus-goers anyway unless they are in a precinct where they know other Oprah fans will be attending the same caucus. Otherwise, I think they would be intimidated in the caucus environment because you have to know the issues and be willing to discuss them.
Posted by: zoey
| November 27, 2007 9:26 PM
I don't care for Oprah. I hope someone asks her what she thinks about giving drivers license to undocumented workers.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | November 27, 2007 9:27 PM
You know you're all funny, you cluck on about Oprah not making a difference and then bitch about how much of a difference she is making in terms of all the press coverage her campaigning is getting. You can bet the farm on what will be the top local news stories leading up to her campaign stops, not to mention the aftermath. Obama owns the media right now, in large part due to Oprah.
Posted by: BrianInNYC | November 27, 2007 9:27 PM
Oh Craig by--the-way, thank Dan for dragging out the whole Madonna - Wes Clark nightmare.
Posted by: zoey
| November 27, 2007 9:30 PM
I don't see any of us bitching about Oprah, just discounting her likely effect on the election and acknowledging the media's infatuation with celebrity rather than actually doing their job and discussing issues and the condition of the U.S. and whether or not any of these people have what it takes to start cleaning up the mess.
Posted by: Jamie | November 27, 2007 9:31 PM
Brian
I don't think anyone said that.. the media is making a circus out of. Zooey post is very interesting because it points out the Oprah events are not open rallies but closed ticketed events -- what's up with that ..wouldn't they want as many people as possible?
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | November 27, 2007 9:32 PM
I think there must be serious safety concerns. And oh please KC, you've railed repeatedly, half the battle of winning elections is managing media coverage, having the queen of media out on the stump for you is a major score!
Posted by: BrianInNYC | November 27, 2007 9:35 PM
You've also failed to grasp the genius of bringing out Oprah now, it won't make much of a difference in Iowa, but it will make a real impact in NH with all those independents who can vote in the Dem primary. As I said earlier, Hillary can afford to lose Iowa, she can't lose NH.
Posted by: BrianInNYC | November 27, 2007 9:38 PM
At least in NH the event with Oprah is open to the public:
http://nh.barackobama.com/page/content/nhhome
Posted by: Kathy | November 27, 2007 9:42 PM
Whatever impact she is can make --it has already happened. She endorsed him one year ago whent he book tour started and she di make him a rock star...but that's done. I don't think she will have any additional impact in either Iowa or NH
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | November 27, 2007 9:43 PM
I don't think it's genius to bring her out now...I think it is desperation without Tim Russert and appearances on Saturday night live all obama has is attacking boomers and frankly that is getting kind of old.
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | November 27, 2007 9:44 PM
Geez KC, desperation? Where is that coming from? Just because I don't support doesn't mean I can't admire where he's doing well. I doubt desperation is the mood within his campaign right now.
Posted by: BrianInNYC | November 27, 2007 9:48 PM
look at where he is polling in the tsunami tuesday states...there is more than Iowa and NH
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | November 27, 2007 9:50 PM
The big effect from Oprah's visits in the early states, is that there will be a lot of attention given to it. Speaking for NH, the vast majority of people are very much undecided and will be until the week of the primary- they may have a leaning or be supporting someone, but it is squishy.
Oprah's visits will be spoken about over and over on radios playing everywhere- there will be buzz all over the place. It will keep the attention up on Obama, and also help to show that Hillary is not the inevitable candidate. That will be the main effect of Oprah- to keep Obama elevated.
Posted by: Kathy | November 27, 2007 9:51 PM
One of the dangers of "celebrity endorsements" is reporters asking the celebrity questions about why they support the candidate and questions about speciific issues.
Is Oprah going to say she supports him because he is good looking ..because she supports driver;s licenses for undocumenteds, because he is from Chicago...because he is black...
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | November 27, 2007 9:55 PM
Geez KC, that smacks of repug smear tactics. Not going there with you.
Posted by: BrianInNYC | November 27, 2007 10:02 PM
I'm with KCG. Oprah said she didn't endorse anyone before because she doesn't pay that much attention to politics. I'm guessing she is not paying all that much attention now either. She's only paying attention to the horse race. Just who you want voters to be listening to when they decide who shall run for president...
Posted by: zoey
| November 27, 2007 10:25 PM
I get the feeling that many of you feel that Oprah is betraying her gender by supporting Obama. It's interesting that it seems mostly to the females on this list that are must upset about Oprah.
Posted by: BrianInNYC | November 27, 2007 10:30 PM
must = most
Posted by: BrianInNYC | November 27, 2007 10:32 PM
It has nothing to do with gender issue or even her endorsement...the question is what will the impact of personal apperances be...and I say no impact because she has already done everything she can
she endorsed him a year ago. I don't think she will get him one more vote than she already has.
Do you think Gail will campaign with her in iowa :)
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | November 27, 2007 10:42 PM
Brian,
It is not about gender. There is no problem whatsoever with Oprah supporting Obama. She's a citizen. She likes him. She contributes to his campaign and she is appearing on his behalf. All of those are her right. We are talking about whether or not her celebrity will sway the election in any fashion and whether or not the media is pushing the whole story just to fill air time or because they like the horse race.
Barbara Streisand supports Hillary. All of the items above said about Oprah apply to her. I don't think she will have any effect on the election either. There was a one sentence mention of Streisdand in the midst of the all Oprah all the time coverage.
Posted by: Jamie | November 27, 2007 10:43 PM
Evening all. Missed Craig, so will see if Abrams is rebroadcast. ...
I think Oprah is a way better endorsement than Barbra Streisand, and that, like Oprah, I wonder if Barack Obama might transcend racial boundaries. Probably not, but I wish he could.
Don't think the Oprah endorsement will necessarily help, but it sure don't hurt.
Posted by: dog's eye view
| November 27, 2007 10:50 PM
looks like dan rather was right about awol
http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/11/27/running-scared-2/#comments
Posted by: Katherine Graham Cracker | November 27, 2007 10:57 PM
Barbra being chummy with the Clintons is no news at all.
Posted by: BrianInNYC | November 27, 2007 10:58 PM
Here are the latest polls later states are on the left
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/latestpolls/index.html
Brian, I wasn't saying that the Streisand endorsement was news. I was saying that the Oprah endorsement was not the overwhelming news that the media is making it out to be.
Dog, I actually think he does transcend racial boundaries for just about everyone except die hard Dixie crats who will be voting Republican anyway. I just don't think he is qualified to be President. Of all the Dem candidates, he ranks about number five with me.
Posted by: Jamie | November 27, 2007 11:05 PM
"I was saying that the Oprah endorsement was not the overwhelming news that the media is making it out to be." Gee and here I thought it was the media that decided what the news is. I'm glad I have you all to set me straight. Now if you can just convince the other 300 million Americans, good luck.
Posted by: BrianInNYC | November 27, 2007 11:11 PM
Dex I just broke open a fresh carton of B&J's Creme Burlee, topping it with homemade warmed apple pie filling. Care for a bowl?
Posted by: BrianInNYC | November 28, 2007 12:28 AM
Google’s Next Frontier: Renewable Energy
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/28/technology/28google.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
Posted by: Brian In NYC | November 28, 2007 12:51 AM
Brian, I just read the Google/Energy article. Great minds!
tt
Posted by: tiptoe
| November 28, 2007 12:58 AM
After i finish my baloney-on-Hillbilly brand bread and green tea I'll catch the train north and pop in for a bowl, sure!
I watched a 25 year-old VHS tape my buddy sent me tonight...Monty Python gang, Sting, Phil Collins, Jeff Beck & Eric Clapton teaming up, many others, in a benefit gala for Amnesty International. Phil Collins was bald even then, and Sting looked like a 16 year old kid. It was a hoot with all the Python sketches. Where has the time gone, anyway? Hell, I look just the same as I did then!
Posted by: Dexter
| November 28, 2007 1:00 AM
"Hell, I look just the same as I did then!" Don't you get a headache watching TV without your glasses on?
Posted by: Brian In NYC | November 28, 2007 1:02 AM
I saw the ABC story last night ... geo-thermal drilling & pumping hot water for energy...but the most amazing thing was tethered kites way up in the sky that windmill the wind back to the ground for energy...and the solar deal with the mirrors...AND IT'S ALL FEASIBLE TO BE UP IN JUST A FEW YEARS.
Posted by: Dexter
| November 28, 2007 1:02 AM
Glasses? I only use them to read a book, but I don't need them even then.
My brother's older than me and he has never had glasses , either.
I was fitted for bifocals 7 years ago, but I am sure the optometrist just took me for a ride...I use drug-store reading glasses and my bifocals have been in their case all these years. 20-20...and I passed drivers vision test easily 2 months ago. I don't even need them to see this tiny type-set in this blog!
Posted by: Dexter
| November 28, 2007 1:09 AM
Good vision helps when Real Sex comes on HBO!
Posted by: Dexter
| November 28, 2007 1:11 AM
hey Clisters and Mixers
a couple of months ago pogo mentioned someone keeping track of all of our campaign predictions and for some reason mentioned Jamie and I even though we've never done anything to him. So I started thinking(always a dangerous endeavor as the last time I gave considerable thought to a problem I ended up duct taped to a chair) (true story).
At any rate, to keep from making a short story long I started puttering around with some polling and survey software I have, invited a couple of Crawdads to join in on the fun and games to which they graciously accepted.
I'll leave them anonymous for now in case they would prefer to remain that way.
A few notes on the poll\survey. It will be a closed poll except for registered members, this will keep people from voting more than once and keep people that are not Crawdads\Mixers from rigging the polls. Anyone can be registered so any lurkers want to join in please do.
Registration will be simple, everyone that would like to parcipitate(see the Schmenges) will send me an e-mail, when I activate the poll\survey on Friday an e-mail will be sent to everyone containing their password and informing them that the poll is active.
I will probably deactivate the poll on Sunday night and post results with some wicked sweet graphs hopefully on Mondays, then people brighter than I will tell us what, if anything, it all means.
So what I would like to know from you folks is, will there be any interest from you in taking a 5 minute survey\poll once a week until the elections next year? Obvioulsy the more folks we have the better but I think we will need at least 25 to make it interesting. Also you can enlist husbands, wives, girlfriends, boyfriends..blah blah blah.
It's probably going to be next week before we're ready so think about if you need to.
If you would like to join you can email thepollman at isleofran dot org
________________________________________________________________________
also we have some new posters and we wanted to invite you to join us on the Map to Crawford's List Stars. There is a link on Craig's blogroll to the map if you want to see it.
So, zooey, Jameson and even you FryDaddy if you would like a dot on the map and possibly be somebody, send an email to mapkeeper at isleofran dot org
please include the following information please
Your Trail Mix nickname
Your location: don't have to be too specific but I need some sort of idea
Dot color: right now we have red, blue and purple available or you can rassle tiptoe for her green dot.
Your blog, person page or web site you would like to link to
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Craig: hope you are going to parcipitate(see the Schmenges) in our poll
and also do you mind if I post this everyday for a week or so until everyone has a chance to see it?
Posted by: ran | November 28, 2007 1:13 AM
In other words your eye sight is fine, you're just delusional.
Posted by: Brian In NYC | November 28, 2007 1:13 AM
Ah! Now for the baloney and cheese with mayo on Hillbilly bread.
Years ago we ate Silvercup bread, but as Brian pointed out to me last year, that bakery in now a movie-TV filming studio.
Posted by: Dexter
| November 28, 2007 1:13 AM
Why do I suddenly feel queasy? Is it Kosco brand bologna? Day old bread? Govt. cheese?
Posted by: Brian In NYC | November 28, 2007 1:26 AM
dnd: sorry I lost your email when I poofed my last email account
thepollman at isleofran dot org
Posted by: ran | November 28, 2007 1:39 AM
sorry about this
pogo can you drop me a line at thepollman at isleofran dot org at your convenience, thanks
Posted by: ran | November 28, 2007 1:41 AM
Eckrich baloney, the best in the midwest for like, forever.
Fresh, soft bread just off the store's shelf.
And deli Muenster cheese my wife brought home just hours ago.
I added some pickled peppers I pickled myself.
Hey, you got a line on that government cheese? Send me some!
Actually, I was laid off for a while during the Ford admin, and I qualified for a brick of government cheese. I ate it, too...in those days, they'd give ya that stuff if you were laid off from work.
Posted by: Dexter
| November 28, 2007 1:58 AM
Some times I want to just shake my fist and say BRAVO !
So I did after reading Maureen Dowd's Wednesday column. :
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/28/opinion/28dowd.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
Posted by: Dexter
| November 28, 2007 2:01 AM
Man, that was a good baloney sandwich! My pickled peppers made it so!
Best pickled peppers I ever had were at a bar called "Pop Edwards Bar" in Philly.
My reuben was so darn excellent, I tipped the waiter and sent the cook a fiver tip, too. The cook came out and said he couldn't take it, but he did when I insisted...I just told him, "best reuben , best peppers ever...deserves a tip!"
That was the last time I ever tipped a grill cook. Pop Edward Bar...and Ortlieb's Beer..."Try Joe's Beer" was the slogan.
Posted by: Dexter
| November 28, 2007 2:08 AM
and to sign off, how I miss the...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AI0ztRmYGAg
Posted by: Dexter
| November 28, 2007 2:15 AM
why all the fuss about oprah and da streis.....we'll all know exactly what impact they will have had after the Iowa vote.......Matthews, et al: they can .talk, they can talk, they can bicker they can talk, they can bicker bicker bicker, they can talk, they can talk, they can talk talk talk talk bicker bicker bicker.........(but ya gotta know the territory)......
Posted by: sturgeone | November 28, 2007 6:17 AM
Wake up everybody! Richardson is on MoJo.
Posted by: dnd | November 28, 2007 6:37 AM
ask oprah obama and hillary what they think of this:
http://consortiumnews.com/2007/112707.html
Posted by: sturgeone | November 28, 2007 6:45 AM
the beady-eyed dweeb has democrats on but they dont get much time.....the last time I watched, the highlight of the show was the reading of derogatory emails......sorry I missed old Richardson though......
Posted by: sturgeone | November 28, 2007 6:54 AM
Babs Streisand is a neocon? Who knew?
"People, people who kill people, are the luckiest people in the world..."
Posted by: dnd | November 28, 2007 7:28 AM
ha....went down and decided to see if beady eye was reading any e-mails maybe, and it came on with "We'll be right back with Pat Buchanan, after this....." yeah, right.......thanks, but no thanks....
Posted by: sturgeone | November 28, 2007 7:28 AM
Post A Comment