comment #1

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Hmm, what state is missing from that roundup?

Could it be any more obvious which candidate the Times is spinning for?

comment #2

Mr. Gittes says ...

This SNL Obama/Clinton ad beats any skit they've done this year. There can only be one...

http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/play.shtml?mea=252562

comment #3

dangovich says ...

Obama needs to hammer Bush and McBush on their opposition to the new GI Bill. It's utterly disgraceful.

comment #4

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Why, he must be against soldiers! Yes, I'm sure people will be dumb enough to believe that a man who spent most of his twenties in a North Korean prison, in no small part because he wouldn't rat on his fellows and take special privileges, is anti-soldier. Good luck with that one.

The so-called "GI Bill" is a ploy by the Democrats in Congress to bribe soldiers not to reenlist, so they can trumpet falling reenlistment rates (which have remained stubbornly strong despite the debacle of a quagmire of a disaster in unwinnable, surge-proof Iraq). Yes, it's disgraceful, but not for the reason you say.

comment #5

Wrecktum says ...

Korea? How do you even begin to make a mistake like that?

comment #6

Zac Bertschy says ...

MgMax do you only ever come here to bitch about Obama or do you actually like movies or what

I'm having a hard time figuring it out since you only ever seem to post when you can throw a temper tantrum and vomit talking points.

comment #7

rockne says ...

Yeah, wasn't it North Vietnam?
Hanoi Hilton, I think...smart move...
And who the hell is the conspiracy theorist now?
He is supporting the stance of an administration whose track record with GI's is disgraceful.
Hold your conspiracy theories, cretin, and don't speak in a long, only once-broken rant without first getting the country right...
You attack-dog idiot...the dichotomy between your smart regurgitation of facts and blind ignorance is overwhelming...
Give it a rest and go watch Fox News some more...seeing as how the New York Times is so biased...

comment #8

D.Z. says ...

Mgmax: "Yes, I'm sure people will be dumb enough to believe that a man who spent most of his twenties in a North Korean prison, in no small part because he wouldn't rat on his fellows and take special privileges, is anti-soldier."

It's called Stockholm Syndrome. McCain is showing man-love to a guy who feeds our troops on whatever Halliburton can dig up from the trash, and who likes arming them with equipment made of tin foil.

"The so-called "GI Bill" is a ploy by the Democrats in Congress to bribe soldiers not to reenlist, so they can trumpet falling reenlistment rates"

Yes, compensating them for their work is dumb. They should be glad to suffer PTSD for their country. BTW, Mgmax, while they're re-enlisting, when are you going to enlist?

"(which have remained stubbornly strong despite the debacle of a quagmire of a disaster in unwinnable, surge-proof Iraq). "

Except for record numbers of people not wanting to serve to the point that they're hiring convicted felons...

comment #9

ferrylee says ...

This guy has posted his personal ad to a celebrities dating sitefor several months. That site called "millionaireloves.c om". I justvisited his profile page yesterday seems he is a certified millionairethere.

comment #10

TheCahuengaKid says ...

I agree with Rockne

comment #11

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Korea? How do you even begin to make a mistake like that?

Oh, pretty much the same way you make this one:

"What it says is that I'm not very well known in that part of the country," Obama said. "Sen. Clinton, I think, is much better known, coming from a nearby state of Arkansas. So it's not surprising that she would have an advantage in some of those states in the middle."

(If you don't see the problem here, look at a map, and see which states border Kentucky-- and which don't.)

I'm having a hard time figuring it out since you only ever seem to post when you can throw a temper tantrum and vomit talking points.

Then apparently you're only reading the threads about politics. Try reading ones about older movies recently released on DVD, for instance.

BTW, Mgmax, while they're re-enlisting, when are you going to enlist?

When are you going to hide in the sewers and plot resistance against fascism?

Rockne: two points for using "dichotomy" almost correctly, but you need to stop using "cretin" and its ilk. It would be much more effective to attack me as cynical, heartless, etc., the usual litany against supposed rightwingers, than to imply that I'm stupid. I'm clearly bright and literate, just unspeakably twisted and evil in my horrifying beliefs that liberty is better than being a ward of the state, the government that governs best governs least, free markets have produced more happiness than planned economies, etc.

comment #12

D.Z. says ...

Mgmax:

"(If you don't see the problem here, look at a map, and see which states border Kentucky-- and which don't.)"

Who cares? You supported a President who can't even find the right exit during a press conference.

"When are you going to hide in the sewers and plot resistance against fascism?"

I don't need sewers when I got what's left of this country after what Bush did to it.

comment #13

Movie Watcher says ...

Mgmax, any credibility you had, if in fact you had any, is gone. Korea? How stupid are you? Take it from a vet, McCain is a joke. He should know better than that; he has to vote for the new GI Bill! He say's it's too expensive. He knows that Senator Webb is behind the bill, and he can't go along with that. If a republican was behind it, he'd be all over it. And I really am a vet, retired from the air force. When did you enlist? Hey, just pull up a chair next to Hannity, put on a flag lapel pin, and feel right at home.

comment #14

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Thank you for your service, Movie Watcher. However, in a democracy we extend the right of debate to all citizens, not just the military. And those who harp on a simple misstatement are acknowledging that they don't have something more substantive to say.

comment #15

Walter Sobchak says ...

Cretins, all of you!

comment #16

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Or at least Koreans.

comment #17

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Okay, here's a serious issue, and I have a serious position on it that is not crudely partisan for one party. Read this:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121115437321202233.html

Considering that we're on a blog being run by exactly the sort of new worker this article is about, I think it's pretty hard to argue that this isn't a pretty good picture of the future, even if you find it sort of boosterish. We are increasingly living in freelance nation.

So which party represents those interests? It would be very hard to say-- except maybe on the issue of health care-- that it would be the Democrats. They're the party of unionized urban government machines, Obama cares a lot more about reducing federal oversight of the Teamster's mob connections than he does about reducing the unfair burdens of the tax/Social Security codes on freelancers and consultants.

Yet is it the Republicans? Hard to see how you could make much of a case there either. They like business and entrepreneurs, to be sure, especially very large ones who want to keep smaller ones out of the marketplace. Just look at the (Big Corporate) Farm Bill (a bipartisan abortion to be sure, but I'm happy to give the GOP its full share of that blame).

So here's the political movement I'd belong to, if it existed. Which party will stand for me, and Jeffrey Wells, and all the others who don't go to work every day at a company listed on the NYSE?

comment #18

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Okay, here's a serious issue, and I have a serious position on it that is not crudely partisan for one party. Read this:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121115437321202233.html

Considering that we're on a blog being run by exactly the sort of new worker this article is about, I think it's pretty hard to argue that this isn't a pretty good picture of the future, even if you find it sort of boosterish. We are increasingly living in freelance nation.

So which party represents those interests? It would be very hard to say-- except maybe on the issue of health care-- that it would be the Democrats. They're the party of unionized urban government machines, Obama cares a lot more about reducing federal oversight of the Teamster's mob connections than he does about reducing the unfair burdens of the tax/Social Security codes on freelancers and consultants.

Yet is it the Republicans? Hard to see how you could make much of a case there either. They like business and entrepreneurs, to be sure, especially very large ones who want to keep smaller ones out of the marketplace. Just look at the (Big Corporate) Farm Bill (a bipartisan abortion to be sure, but I'm happy to give the GOP its full share of that blame).

So here's the political movement I'd belong to, if it existed. Which party will stand for me, and Jeffrey Wells, and all the others who don't go to work every day at a company listed on the NYSE?

comment #19

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Sorry sorry for the double double. No doubt that's more proof I'm a cretin.

comment #20

BurmaShave says ...

Jesus how did you guys let Mgmax win this thread after he started out like that? I swear sometimes it's like watching Cassius Clay in a barfight.

comment #21

D.Z. says ...

Mgmax: "However, in a democracy we extend the right of debate to all citizens, not just the military."

Yes, who cares about "experts" when you have people who act on impulse like Rumsfeld and Bush?

"And those who harp on a simple misstatement are acknowledging that they don't have something more substantive to say."

The same applies to your rant against Obama regarding Wright.

"We are increasingly living in freelance nation. So which party represents those interests? It would be very hard to say-- except maybe on the issue of health care-- that it would be the Democrats. They're the party of unionized urban government machines,"

You don't seem to get that freelancing isn't a choice, but that it's the result of diminished union power which has led to employers refusing to hire anyone for long-term work, because they don't want to provide them with medical benefits.

"Obama cares a lot more about reducing federal oversight of the Teamster's mob connections"

And Republicans like reducing federal oversight of war profiteering.

"than he does about reducing the unfair burdens of the tax/Social Security codes on freelancers and consultants."

You've got it the other way around, Mgmax. The tax code is unfair to freelancers precisely because they don't make the same money as the top 1% embraced by the Republican Party. The financial burden for everything from the war to the Bear Stearns bail-out is being carried on the backs of the poor and the working class.

comment #22

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

"You don't seem to get that freelancing isn't a choice, but that it's the result of diminished union power which has led to employers refusing to hire anyone for long-term work, because they don't want to provide them with medical benefits."

And you're simply wrong. More places than I can count have wanted to hire me, and I've stayed freelance, as a life choice (I raise my kids, I do other kinds of writing besides advertising, I simply don't want to spend 40+ hours a week in any office). The cost of a few benefits is a wash since my freelance day rate is well above what my salary plus benefits would be full time. I'm not saying medical isn't a significant factor in the lower part of the workforce, but you're wrong to extrapolate up from the Wal-Mart level to all the people doing some form of freelance or consultative work these days (not to mention, I'd like to know what union I was supposed to be joining in advertising-- The Amalgamated Brotherhood of Prima Donnas, Cokeheads and Aspiring Screenwriters?)

"The tax code is unfair to freelancers precisely because they don't make the same money as the top 1% embraced by the Republican Party."

This is, of course, laughably simplistic, but even say it were that simple-- where's the party who's planning to do something about it? This is the future of America, which of our hidebound, base-protecting parties even sees that it exists?

comment #23

T. S. Idiot says ...

New Yorker reports that the Republicans have run out of ideas:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/05/26/080526fa_fact_packer

comment #24

sardine says ...

THE NEW YORKER....again has given us the best reporting on the campaign.

just wish it had good movie critics.

comment #25

T. S. Idiot says ...

"THE NEW YORKER....again has given us the best reporting on the campaign.

just wish it had good movie critics."

One wholeheartedly agrees.

comment #26

D.Z. says ...

Mgmax: "More places than I can count have wanted to hire me,"

Of course they do, because you're not going to work for them for the long-term.

"and I've stayed freelance, as a life choice (I raise my kids, I do other kinds of writing besides advertising, I simply don't want to spend 40+ hours a week in any office)."

But you're experienced enough for it to be a choice for you. Everyone else is being stuck with grunt work which does not even cover you, in the case of an accident or work-place injury.

"The cost of a few benefits is a wash since my freelance day rate is well above what my salary plus benefits would be full time."

That's only if your job is professional enough for them to pay you that much money.

"but you're wrong to extrapolate up from the Wal-Mart level to all the people doing some form of freelance or consultative work these days"

There are very few people doing consultative work. Freelancers generally just do the majority of the simplistic, but tedious and repetitive, work, because management is too cheap to train new people. It's just an exploitation of their professional know-how meant to avoid any real investment in training and equipment. What you get, as a result, is inefficient and inconsistent service, due to the inability to meet deadlines and oversee every stage of the planning and production process. You're basically outsourcing leadership and responsibility for the sake of lower overhead fees.

"This is, of course, laughably simplistic, but even say it were that simple-- where's the party who's planning to do something about it? This is the future of America, which of our hidebound, base-protecting parties even sees that it exists?"

Well, I imagine the Dems would lower taxes on freelancers and raise taxes on businesses which profit off of them, and/or require them to cover any medical issues said freelancer might have, thus leveling the playing field for the rest of us.

comment #27

BurmaShave says ...

Mark my words, within a generation there will be a major Conservative Party in this country, run by the likes of Mitt Romney and George Will. The cretins have been at the helm of the GOP for far too long.

comment #28

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

"Of course they do, because you're not going to work for them for the long-term."

No, I mean they offered me a permanent position.

"Everyone else is being stuck with grunt work"

That's an absurd overgeneralization. True for some folks some times, not true other times, hell, it's true for me some times, the good thing is, I'm not forced to sit in an office for 40 hours a week doing the grunt work, I get it done in two and bill 'em for 8! ;) I dunno, most work in this world is grunt work, really. The promise of freelance nation is that at least you can manage yourself doing the gruntwork, not have some Lumbergh type breathing down your neck and micromanaging you.

"It's just an exploitation of their professional know-how meant to avoid any real investment in training and equipment."

There is some truth to that. Of course, the flip side of it is, they teach me a bunch of new stuff, and never reap the benefit of it because I take the skills with me to the next gig.

"Well, I imagine the Dems would lower taxes on freelancers"

If that actually happens under our next Democratic president and Democratic house and senate, I'll take my savings to fly to LA and buy you sushi at Urasawa.

The medical issue is a big deal and not easily or simplistically solved, which is why it hasn't been solved yet. The issue in this area with universal health care is not killing small business in the process, or killing the job market because you create a strong disincentive to hire new and younger people. Hillary, who was very blithe about telling small business "tough shit," was a real danger in that regard. I frankly don't know what Obama thinks about all this, though God knows he's certainly had little enough exposure to anything but government, non-profits, and high-priced law firms.