Support NeoGAF

[PhoenixDark]

God started the flood due to angels mating with human women and creating giants. I don't see why more fantastical creatures being included in the film too is an issue.

 

[The Technomancer]

I actually really want to see Noah, it looks like "The Bible as epic mythic fantasy a-la The Ten Commandments" and that sounds like a blast

 

[NYCmetsfan]

God started the flood due to angels mating with human women and creating giants. I don't see why more fantastical creatures being included in the film too is an issue.

Because that happened.

Spoiler

Rock monsters

are obviously unrealistic though

Johnson added, though, that the movie seemed to promote theistic evolution and it had “too much emphasis on environmental abuse.”

Do you guys remember when religion wasn't just a reactionary Force? And promoted things like environmental stewardship and scientific discovery as a way to honor God's creation?

 

[KingGondo]

I actually really want to see Noah, it looks like "The Bible as epic mythic fantasy a-la The Ten Commandments" and that sounds like a blast

Also: it has Russell Crowe on a boat.

100% guaranteed it will be awesome.

 

[RustyNails]

So is 6m+ signups and NC beating expectations by a huge margin good news or bad news for kay hagan?

 

[NYCmetsfan]

So Chait and TNC are still talking poverty: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/03/barack-obama-vs-the-culture-of-poverty.html

I think the highlight of TNC pessimistic turn is really key. The 2008 article and now his current writing seem illustrate a frustrated with current politics and the racism which Obama has not combated to his liking which I think clouds his thinking in the over arch of history and colors his judgement. He reads the worst into everything which leads him to the spurious comparison to Ryan and over emphasis and twisting of the use of 'culture' in Obama's statements into something Obama isn't expressing.

I don't understand this paragraph in TNC article:

The passage of time is important because it allows us to assess how those arguments have faired. I contend that my arguments have been borne out, and the arguments of progressives like Chait and the president of the United States have not. Either Booker T. Washington was correct when he urged black people to forgo politics in favor eliminating "the criminal and loafing element of our people" or he wasn't. Either W.E.B. Du Bois was correct when he claimed that correcting "the immorality, crime and laziness among the Negroes" should be the "first and primary" goal or he was not. The track record of progressive moral reform in the black community is knowable.

He's dubiously comparing Du Bois and BTW's view that Black Culture is the "first and primary" thing to fix to help blacks with Chait and Obama who have made no such claim. They instead see the systemic systems to blame and think that in the absence of the ability to fix wider problems due to political factors there is room to use the space that is available to tackle some of the worst effects of the discrimination and oppression to at least ameliorate them, while never losing the goal to fix the wider problems.

I also think there is a problem which Chait highlight that TNC seems to think Chait and the President are using culture to mean 'moral values' or 'way of thinking.' So when they refer to a culture of poverty it gets picked up as a negative judgement. But Chait and Obama in my reading aren't saying that the legacy and continued presence of racism and white supremacy have created a moralistic failure in black america but rather have lead to outward behaviors which are interpreted that way. The urban decay isn't a sign of black failure but the countries failure to them which encourages certain behavior which is response to oppression. As the report Chait highlights says:

It generally does not define culture as comprehensively as Lewis did, instead being careful to distinguish values from perceptions and attitudes from behavior.

There is no evidence that black people are less responsible, less moral, or less upstanding in their dealings with America nor with themselves.

The people he's talking with aren't saying this (certainly not TNC in his 2008 piece)! I think their talking past one another.

It defies logic to think that any group, in a generationaly entrenched position, would not develop codes and mores for how to survive in that position. African-Americans, themselves, from poor to bourgeois, are the harshest critics of the street mentality. Of course, most white people only pay attention when Bill Cosby or Barack Obama are making that criticism. The problem is that rarely do such critiques ask why anyone would embrace such values. Moreover, they tend to assume that there's something uniquely "black" about those values, and their the embrace.

 

[zargle]

So is 6m+ signups and NC beating expectations by a huge margin good news or bad news for kay hagan?

Well, you know what they say, no news is good news, and this certainly counts as news, ipso facto, bad news.

 

[Fenderputty]

Erick Erickson is PISSED Noah isn't as realistic as the bible (Spoilers for Noah but worth it for Erick's incredulousness)

@EWErickson 4h
20 minutes into Noah and it may be the dumbest movie ever made. There are

Spoiler

rock monsters.

I've heard the Christian Right is boycotting because of this. Fundies aren't happy. Would be hilarious if it bombs.

 

[pigeon]

I also think there is a problem which Chait highlight that TNC seems to think Chait and the President are using culture to mean 'moral values' or 'way of thinking.' So when they refer to a culture of poverty it gets picked up as a negative judgement. But Chait and Obama in my reading aren't saying that the legacy and continued presence of racism and white supremacy have created a moralistic failure in black america but rather have lead to outward behaviors which are interpreted that way.

No, I think Chait is doing TNC a disservice here by ascribing that misinterpretation to him (whitesplaining?). There's a casual question here which is being sidestepped.

The "culture of poverty" argument goes like this:
* White supremacy damages black communities...
* Causing them to adopt maladaptive behavior patterns...
* Which reduce their ability to succeed.

TNC would argue this:
* White supremacy makes it impossible for black people to succeed...
* And, denied actualization, they create a separate culture which they control...
* Which is then characterized as maladaptive and part of the problem.

In other words, the argument that African-American "culture" makes them less likely to succeed is impossible to bear out unless you can point to an example of that happening where white supremacy, and the considered "superiority" of "white" American culture over the African-American counterculture, wasn't also present. Since this is America, it's impossible to produce such an example -- so the "culture of poverty" is kind of the intelligent design version of racism. "Just because white supremacy exists doesn't mean black inferiority doesn't also exist! You can't prove it!"

I also strongly disagree with you and Chait about TNC's "pessimistic turn". When Ta-Nahisi writes about racism, he's been very consistent in saying that racism is predominant, that it still represents a major and perhaps the major force in American politics, that people continue to insist that it has gone away in the face of all the economic and statistical evidence, and that while this is true it will certainly continue to be a scourge on America. He's been saying this for years and years. His position hasn't changed, only his target.

 

[shadowsdarknes]

http://www.demonews.org/watch-a-lying-koch-spokeswoman-explodes-at-chris-hayes-over-obamacare-2/

This is so embarrassing.

Not sure if this was posted already where Chris Hayes has to debate some Koch-funded anti-Obamacare crybaby.

Somehow she is arguing that an extra 2 week deadline is affecting her children. The extra 2 week deadline does nothing but give people more time to procure insurance.

If people are still signing up at a fast rate, it doesn't quite make sense to be so harsh on the deadline. That's like a professor witnessing their students work so hard on their term paper all semester long and when they ask for a little bit more time to make sure it gets done right, the professor says, "Nope sorry. A deadline is a deadline."

She goes on to rant about the medicaid expansion not helping people, and goes on a useless rant about her having less healthcare options when the debate is about the extension.
Ultimately, Americans for Prosperity want to see the ACA fail so hard. And the best way to see the law fail is to see enrollment numbers fail to meet expectations. With thousands of people signing up every day, the extension will only help people get insurance.
Many of these people will not have had health insurance before as the uninsured rate has dropped to a 5 year low.

With the deliberate sabotage and obstruction of this law where states have resisted medicaid expansion, put tough restrictions on navigators, spread lies, and have sabotaged state run exchanges, its a miracle that this law is even working.

And here's an article that fact checks and refutes her bullshit claims.
The Wire

 

[Wilsongt]

Barny Frank is coming to give a lecture at my university. yaaaaaas, I will be there.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Mike Rogers is retiring.

 

[Crisco]

I really don't want to be a poll truther or question statistical analysis, but if the entire GOP strategy for 2014 is shitting on Obamacare, how can that possibly work if the law is successful? How can they run against the health care of 6m+ and counting? The projections of huge losses for Dems in the House and Senate just don't jive with recent developments, IMO.

 

[Hobbestetrician]

Mike Rogers is retiring.

No...stop...don't go...

(My hometown representative)

 

[Metaphoreus]

I really don't want to be a poll truther or question statistical analysis, but if the entire GOP strategy for 2014 is shitting on Obamacare, how can that possibly work if the law is successful? How can they run against the health care of 6m+ and counting? The projections of huge losses for Dems in the House and Senate just don't jive with recent developments, IMO.

For one thing, buying insurance through Healthcare.gov or one of the state exchanges doesn't mean that the purchaser supports the law. It also doesn't mean the person didn't have insurance in the past. The availability of a plan through an exchange may end up being a wash to many people--or may end up costing them more than their old plans.

So it would be foolish (47%-style foolish) to assume that every enrollee supports the law.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

@ron_fournier
6 Million Insured, Give Or Take A Few Million #MissionAccomplished? pic.twitter.com/FIB8luLGmS

same thing

 

[tanooki141]

Mike Rogers retiring is the greatest news in a long time.

 

[theprodigy]

so you're saying there's a chance for a pickup?

 

[Crisco]

For one thing, buying insurance through Healthcare.gov or one of the state exchanges doesn't mean that the purchaser supports the law. It also doesn't mean the person didn't have insurance in the past. The availability of a plan through an exchange may end up being a wash to many people--or may end up costing them more than their old plans.

So it would be foolish (47%-style foolish) to assume that every enrollee supports the law.

I mean, I get that, but the GOP's opposition to Obamacare lacks the subtlety of your analysis. I just don't see their extreme messaging resonating with people who've actually gone through the process of signing up and getting healthcare through the exchange.

 

[Fenderputty]

For one thing, buying insurance through Healthcare.gov or one of the state exchanges doesn't mean that the purchaser supports the law. It also doesn't mean the person didn't have insurance in the past. The availability of a plan through an exchange may end up being a wash to many people--or may end up costing them more than their old plans.

So it would be foolish (47%-style foolish) to assume that every enrollee supports the law.

Is that why McConnell has changed his verbiage to now be about fixing instead of repealing? This obviously has more to do with Kentucky's governor cooperating and accepting the Medicade expansion. However I think it highlights how equally foolish (47% style) it will be for the GOP to hammer home repeal repeal repeal for the long term.

Then again ... Maybe the whole thing blows up and it works out for them.

 

[Aaron Strife]

so you're saying there's a chance for a pickup?

Obama won the district by 6 in 2008, lost by 3 in 2012.

So yeah!

 

[NYCmetsfan]

lol Christie

 

[B-Dubs]

lol Christie

This is hilarious.

 

[Mike M]

lol Christie

This is hilarious.

It's okay, I didn't want context anyway.

 

[Avon Barksdale]

lol Christie

What happened?

 

[B-Dubs]

It's okay, I didn't want context anyway.

He's giving a press conference in which he is defending the investigation he called of the bridge thing. Basically he's saying, "Why would these guys lie? They're good guys, they wouldn't lie! Please believe me, please believe me!"

 

[NYCmetsfan]

"the report seems to indicate there was a traffic study of some kind."

"I have a healthy respect for people's constitutional rights."

squares well with this doesn't chris?

On page 115, the report also says that Kelly’s recent invocation of her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination “leads to a reasonable inference that her motives and actions here were, in whole or in part, improper.” The report makes the same inference for Wildstein on page 110 and adds that his silence “corroborates the substantial evidence.”

 

[WayneMorse]

Fuck the headline at Huffpo made me think for a second that Christie was resigning.

 

[Ecotic]

Man Christie has a terrible personality. If I was a reporter and had to take those insults for asking the questions I'd be so pissed. And this 45 minute press conference is a classic case of 'look at me' narcissism.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Man Christie has a terrible personality. If I was a reporter and had to take those insults for asking the questions I'd be so pissed. And this 45 minute press conference is a classic case of 'look at me' narcissism.

He had that 2 hour one a few months ago.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Um. What's going on?

 

[Black Mamba]

For one thing, buying insurance through Healthcare.gov or one of the state exchanges doesn't mean that the purchaser supports the law. It also doesn't mean the person didn't have insurance in the past. The availability of a plan through an exchange may end up being a wash to many people--or may end up costing them more than their old plans.

So it would be foolish (47%-style foolish) to assume that every enrollee supports the law.

I think the problem moreso is that it's the people who don't have to enroll that have a negative view.

Among those on medicaid and heavily subsidized, they're more likely to vote Dem but also not vote in midterms out of all groups.

I think most enrollees will support the law come election time but I think most would vote Dem anyway (if they vote).

But that's not enough to carry an election. Especially in states without the medicaid expansion.


I still don't think the anti-ACA stuff will carry the election come November, either. By then, I do think it will be a wash.

 

[Ecotic]

Wow, the cameraman just fell asleep.

Um. What's going on?

You remember in high school when the class was acting up and the teacher goes on a 20 minute scolding session? It feels a lot like that. Every other question is Christie insulting reporters about how incompetent and stupid they are.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Man Christie has a terrible personality. If I was a reporter and had to take those insults for asking the questions I'd be so pissed. And this 45 minute press conference is a classic case of 'look at me' narcissism.

It will sell him to the GOP base. He knows what he's doing.

 

[B-Dubs]

It will sell him to the GOP base. He knows what he's doing.

Yea but if he manages to survive this it will kill him with normal voters.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

bad news for kay

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/...w_n_5050815.html?&ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000016

 

[smokeandmirrors]

Man Christie has a terrible personality. If I was a reporter and had to take those insults for asking the questions I'd be so pissed. And this 45 minute press conference is a classic case of 'look at me' narcissism.

But he's such a tough talker and is getting things done! Nj needs a strong leader who doesn't take any shit!

Can't tell you how many times I've heard this here from Christie supporters especially in response to him being a huge dick.

 

[speculawyer]

Steven Segal takes conservative Putin ball-licking to a new low .. .

Action guy Steven Seagal weighed in on the international dispute over Russia's annexation of Crimea this week. Spoiler alert: he's siding with his friend Vladimir Putin and not with President Obama, whom the action star believes is one Benghazi revelation away from impeachment. In an interview with the state-run Rossiskaya Gazeta, Seagal called Putin "one of the great living world leaders," adding that he "would like to consider him as a brother."

The fighting celebrity's American legacy is, at this point, more or less relegated to the pages of World Net Daily and Joe Arpaio's county in Arizona. But he's very famous in Russia, and has recently struck up friendships with a handful of Russian oligarchs. As the Moscow Times notes, Rossiskaya Gazeta's interview seems to gloss over Seagal's waning popularity in the West, presumably to insinuate that his comments may carry some bite overseas (if the amused response that greeted his previous comments on Ukraine is any indication, this assumption is not true). The Times paraphrases the general idea of those remarks:

In the interview on the set of a movie he is shooting in Romania, Seagal said President Vladimir Putin's "desire to protect the Russian-speaking people of Crimea, his assets, and the Russian Black Sea military base in Sevastopol … is very reasonable."
Criticizing the "idiotic" U.S. policy on Ukraine, Seagal said the American media coverage of the crisis was promoting the agenda of U.S. President Barack Obama.

http://news.yahoo.com/steven-seagal-loves-putin-might-become-russian-citizen-153636115.html

I think I'll create a short-lived thread on this.

 

[PhoenixDark]

No, I think Chait is doing TNC a disservice here by ascribing that misinterpretation to him (whitesplaining?). There's a casual question here which is being sidestepped.

The "culture of poverty" argument goes like this:
* White supremacy damages black communities...
* Causing them to adopt maladaptive behavior patterns...
* Which reduce their ability to succeed.

TNC would argue this:
* White supremacy makes it impossible for black people to succeed...
* And, denied actualization, they create a separate culture which they control...
* Which is then characterized as maladaptive and part of the problem.

In other words, the argument that African-American "culture" makes them less likely to succeed is impossible to bear out unless you can point to an example of that happening where white supremacy, and the considered "superiority" of "white" American culture over the African-American counterculture, wasn't also present. Since this is America, it's impossible to produce such an example -- so the "culture of poverty" is kind of the intelligent design version of racism. "Just because white supremacy exists doesn't mean black inferiority doesn't also exist! You can't prove it!"

I also strongly disagree with you and Chait about TNC's "pessimistic turn". When Ta-Nahisi writes about racism, he's been very consistent in saying that racism is predominant, that it still represents a major and perhaps the major force in American politics, that people continue to insist that it has gone away in the face of all the economic and statistical evidence, and that while this is true it will certainly continue to be a scourge on America. He's been saying this for years and years. His position hasn't changed, only his target.

Chait deserves more respect and benefit of the doubt than to suggest he's whitesplaining anything.

Like many black commentators, TNC has a long history of opposing "Booker T" views on race. I understand it, I remember how my worldview changed when I first read Du Bois, but I think there are a couple ways to look at this. My problem with TNC is that he constantly suggests Obama is taking a Booker T perspective on race and has a problem whenever the president mentions the "hard work" meme. Obama addresses nearly every issue in the exact same way: he highlights too extremes and then selects a middle ground on which people should be able to agree on. With respect to this issue, he always acknowledges the institutional impediments that have negatively impacted black people, while also arguing we have a responsibility to do what we can to achieve (education, parental involvement, etc). That's not a Booker T argument.

With respect to the idea of a culture of poverty, I think we should be clear on what we're discussing. There are parts of the country, be it Flint, MI or Appalachian areas, that are ravaged by institutional inequality and poverty moreso than other places. There are indeed people who have no concept of work or education because there are next to none offered in their neighborhood. When Chait or Obama reference this, they aren't suggesting these are people who are born and bred lazy, or that they're professional leeches on society who need to stop making excuses and get a job. The point is that they live in situations that are significantly worse than others, with next to no opportunities - and that breeds a vicious cycle of stagnation and cynicism.

When Obama talked about this he specifically referenced rural areas where jobs have been outsourced, schools are broken, healthcare is non-existent, etc - and these circumstances breed a level of distrust in government, and dependence in some cases. People who have lost everything except their guns and religion, in short. When I hear the phrase "culture of poverty" I think of people in that situation. And I also think of people who live like this. Sure, some extreme level of "boot strap pulling" could save a person in Flint; I know people who have gotten out. But for the most part you're fucked.

The biggest misconception is that this is a black issue. It's a poor issue. If we can discuss it on that level we can avoid the white guilt that seems to automatically set in with some people.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

I'll respond more to this later. I've been swamped so I've not been able to write a long response

The biggest misconception is that this is a black issue. It's a poor issue. If we can discuss it on that level we can avoid the white guilt that seems to automatically set in with some people.

I think this is wrong and write at the same time.

 

[Black Mamba]

GOP cutting off their nose to spite their face, lol.

 

[DasRaven]

GOP cutting off their nose to spite their face, lol.

indeed. I wonder if any of them have really thought through how their family would feel if something did happen to them or others they love due to willful refusal of insurance.

 

[speculawyer]

GOP cutting off their nose to spite their face, lol.

You know, I wonder if this could ultimately back-fire on GOPers. If many of them pay the fine instead of buying insurance, you'll have a lot of uninsured GOPers out there who opted out of ACA. A small percentage of them will get cancer, be in a severe accident, catch a dangerous disease, etc. And if they have no insurance, they likely have very little money. And they will end up as the people who don't pay their bills such that they are the moochers that everyone else ends up having to pay for in the form of higher premiums.

Thus, a bunch of GOPers may end up as the parasites who failed to take personal responsibility and become the socialist moochers. Go Figure.

 

[Avon Barksdale]

GOP cutting off their nose to spite their face, lol.

38% is kinda high. I'd thought it would be lower, TBH.

 

[BSsBrolly]

You know, I wonder if this could ultimately back-fire on GOPers. If many of them pay the fine instead of buying insurance, you'll have a lot of uninsured GOPers out there who opted out of ACA. A small percentage of them will get cancer, be in a severe accident, catch a dangerous disease, etc. And if they have no insurance, they likely have very little money. And they will end up as the people who don't pay their bills such that they are the moochers that everyone else ends up having to pay for in the form of higher premiums.

Thus, a bunch of GOPers may end up as the parasites who failed to take personal responsibility and become the socialist moochers. Go Figure.

A lot of GOPers already are the parasites they rail against...

 

[Stumpokapow]

TPM is now running sponsored articles, so that's it for me, deleted out of my bookmarks. Anyone have suggestions for a replacement media source? Should be generally progressive in terms of politics, focus on beltway/inside news, assume a high level of literacy on the part of the reader, and must absolutely positively not be willing to run advertorials. Not looking for a general news source, I have those. Also not looking for a blog, I have those. Looking for a 1:1 replacement for TPM.

 

[WayneMorse]

TPM is now running sponsored articles, so that's it for me, deleted out of my bookmarks. Anyone have suggestions for a replacement media source? Should be generally progressive in terms of politics, focus on beltway/inside news, assume a high level of literacy on the part of the reader, and must absolutely positively not be willing to run advertorials. Not looking for a general news source, I have those. Also not looking for a blog, I have those. Looking for a 1:1 replacement for TPM.

New Republic

 

[thepotatoman]

TPM is now running sponsored articles, so that's it for me, deleted out of my bookmarks. Anyone have suggestions for a replacement media source? Should be generally progressive in terms of politics, focus on beltway/inside news, assume a high level of literacy on the part of the reader, and must absolutely positively not be willing to run advertorials. Not looking for a general news source, I have those. Also not looking for a blog, I have those. Looking for a 1:1 replacement for TPM.

Maybe The Nation?

 

[Oblivion]

TPM is now running sponsored articles, so that's it for me, deleted out of my bookmarks. Anyone have suggestions for a replacement media source? Should be generally progressive in terms of politics, focus on beltway/inside news, assume a high level of literacy on the part of the reader, and must absolutely positively not be willing to run advertorials. Not looking for a general news source, I have those. Also not looking for a blog, I have those. Looking for a 1:1 replacement for TPM.

Washington Monthly?

 

[benjipwns]

TPM is now running sponsored articles, so that's it for me, deleted out of my bookmarks. Anyone have suggestions for a replacement media source? Should be generally progressive in terms of politics, focus on beltway/inside news, assume a high level of literacy on the part of the reader, and must absolutely positively not be willing to run advertorials. Not looking for a general news source, I have those. Also not looking for a blog, I have those. Looking for a 1:1 replacement for TPM.

http://www.truthrevolt.org/