Danny Glover Invokes the Wrath of Gaia
Yeah, I was tweeting about this last night, but decided not to post on it, because . . . is stupidity on Glover's part really newsworthy? Anyway, Fausta's got the story, including an interesting bit about his still-to-be-released movie project with Hugo Chavez, which I didn't know about.
I spent a little time this morning in a chat on the site of one of Boston's local TV stations, which featured one of their political reporters and the guy who headed up the Suffolk University poll that showed Brown up by 4 points yesterday. It was infested with Coakley supporters who seemed to think that her woes were entirely caused by media bias. In Massachusetts? Uh . . . anyway, not a single one of them seemed to think that her consummate incompetence has anything to do with where she is.
As numerous other bloggers have pointed out, the Dems on the national level are already working on their spin, should she lose, stating that that would have nothing to do either with Obama or his health care plan. Meanwhile, some other equally paranoid bloggers have some of the same concerns I do about vote tallying in Massachusetts.
Not a hard one to call, but I did say that if Scott Brown seemed poised to win in Massachusetts, the Dems would redouble their efforts to push through the health care crap sandwich.
Charles doesn't think that Glover was saying that the earthquake was caused by global warming, but doesn't offer any kind of reasonable explanation of what Glover's saying. Okay, so "this" (whatever that might refer to, and he's been talking about the earthquake and the tragedy) is a "response" (by which I think he can only mean "effect," since everyone seems to be responding) to "what we did" . . . "in Copenhagen." Okay, so what does that mean? Maybe "this" is the catastrophe apart from the earthquake? Is it because then the conference failed in its aims of redistributing wealth? It's so vague, that you could say that he's invoking a zeitgeist, maybe? In which case "this" is a "response" to our refusal to sign on to Glover's values and beliefs? Just what is he saying, Charles? Ya know?





January 15th, 2010 - 12:16
The little president man is staying far away. Cause of he’s scared.
Yes, it’s a judgment on you, loser.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
January 15th, 2010 - 12:26
C’mon, happs. He’s got important backroom arm twisting to do on behalf of union goons.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
January 15th, 2010 - 12:31
Zero said SEIU would have a seat at the table. What he failed to say was they’d get to eat the whole meal plus dessert. Bon appetit!
Like or Dislike:
0
0
January 15th, 2010 - 12:58
Dan, the only still I’ve seen from the ad shows the WTC and the vista hotel, so it’s clearly not a post-9/11 photo.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
January 15th, 2010 - 13:12
Yeah, you’re right. My screen was dim, and it looked, due to the angle, like a toppled building on the left.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
January 15th, 2010 - 13:49
but it does show a rather interesting mindset that that is the picture they chose to represent ‘wall street greed and corruption.’
considering that bin laden obviously chose the same picture.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
January 15th, 2010 - 13:54
Yeah, a day after she was in DC taking Pharma lobbyists’ money. The Shirt of Nessus really suits her.
Like or Dislike:
0
0