Open Thread: Any Journalists Up for Some High-Stakes Adventure?


(see * bottom of post)
.

Next day:

You know that old folk curse, “May you live in interesting times?”

* schrodingers_cat: The movie has been panned by critics but I love its title track, especially the panchakshara* stotra, the female voice in Sanskrit interspersed with a rapid fire, rap-like (in Hindi) description of Shiva.
Panchakshara == 5 letters (na ma shi va) nam = name shiva

Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
Share On Google Plus
Share On Pinterest
Share On Reddit

30 replies
  1. 1
    Manyakitty says:

    So do we think he’s given up, too?

    ReplyReply
  2. 2
    hilts says:

    The Sunlight Foundation has a good roundup of Trumpenstein’s conflicts of interest
    https://sunlightfoundation.com/tracking-trumps-conflicts-of-interest

    ReplyReply
  3. 3
    efgoldman says:

    I fear that the reason Trump’s nominees arent filing typical disclosures w/ ethics office is a competence issue, not trying to hide things.

    There’s good reason to believe that BOTH reasons are true.

    ReplyReply
  4. 4
    BGinCHI says:

    I think we’re underestimating Both Sides Do It here. The media are in the legitimation biz.

    ReplyReply
  5. 5
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Manyakitty:

    I think it’s more that he’s become afraid that the Trumpistas are going to destroy us out of sheer incompetence and ignorance instead of malice.

    That scares me, too. At least if it was malice, it would mean someone had a plan.

    ReplyReply
  6. 6
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @BGinCHI: the NPR dink whose name escapes me on the morning show asked Tim Kaine today if Republican X (Cruz?) didn’t have a point in saying that it’s a dangerous world, and it’s not a good idea to postpone these national security appointments? Tone and phrasing were incredibly tendentious. I think Tillerson and Mattis are the ones being the most cooperative with the ethics people, but Cruz (if it was him) was including Sessions as part of “national security”

    ReplyReply
  7. 7
    Anne Laurie says:

    @Manyakitty:

    So do we think he’s given up, too?

    I think he’s putting down a marker on his Pulitzer, myself!

    ReplyReply
  8. 8
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Mnemosyne: Who is “he” in this context?

    ReplyReply
  9. 9
    Sandia Blanca says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: I believe that was Steve Inskeep, and you are right that he was really pushing the Nice Polite Republicans line of questioning. To their credit, however, NPR has actually been bringing some Democrats on to discuss politics, lately–we haven’t heard much of that from them in at least a decade.

    ReplyReply
  10. 10
    efgoldman says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    the NPR dink whose name escapes me on the morning show

    Heard one NPR dink, you’ve heard them all.

    ReplyReply
  11. 11

    I like this version, better, since it doesn’t have too many of the ridiculous stunts, plus its the official version.

    ReplyReply
  12. 12
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Adam L Silverman:

    Eichenwald. I’m assuming that’s who Manyakitty meant, too.

    ReplyReply
  13. 13
    NotMax says:

    @schrodinger’s_cat

    Keep forgetting to ask if you’ve ever seen The Pink Mirror (Gulabi Aaina)? Seem to recall it was banned in India and remains so.

    ReplyReply
  14. 14
    Anne Laurie says:

    @schrodingers_cat: Okay, but I thought the ‘ridiculous’ hair-raising stunts went better with the quesiton of journalists pursuing the truth under Trump!

    ReplyReply
  15. 15
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Mnemosyne: Okay, that’s what I thought, but I wasn’t sure. I get the impression Eichenwald is going to continue doing his reporting.

    ReplyReply
  16. 16

    @NotMax: Nope. Never heard of it either.

    ReplyReply
  17. 17
  18. 18
    NotMax says:

    @schrodinger’s_cat

    Wikipedia must have a page. (On hold music.)

    Ah, yes, and it confirms my recollection.

    ReplyReply
  19. 19
    Miss Bianca says:

    @schrodingers_cat: I dunno, I kind of like the ridiculous stunts. Is that guy supposed to *be* Shiva?

    ReplyReply
  20. 20

    @NotMax: It does, I read it, low budget film with no name actors. Not that there is anything wrong with it. My renewed interest in Hindi/Indian movies is less than a year old. So I totally missed many of the movies of the mid nineties to mid teens.

    ReplyReply
  21. 21

    @Miss Bianca: No, he is supposed to be some mountaineer person, or something.

    ReplyReply
  22. 22
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Adam L Silverman:

    I do, too, but I’m assuming that he has his holy shit, I can’t believe this is happening moments just like the rest of us.

    ReplyReply
  23. 23
    NotMax says:

    @schrodinger’s_cat

    Well whaddaya know, YouTube has the trailer.

    ReplyReply
  24. 24

    @NotMax: Thanks, I will take a look.

    ReplyReply
  25. 25
    Paul in KY says:

    Excellent CGI in that video, looks really real. Thanks for showing it.

    ReplyReply
  26. 26
    debbie says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    I don’t think pointing to incompetence (and I read it as the incompetence of the transition team) is a sign of weakening resolve. Does it really matter whether they’re hiding stuff intentionally or through incompetence? Either way, they’re not sharing like they should.

    ReplyReply
  27. 27
    manyakitty says:

    @Mnemosyne: Good point, I guess. Criminally incompetent is a thing.

    ReplyReply
  28. 28
    manyakitty says:

    @Anne Laurie: Let’s hope so! He and David Farhenthold should share one, as far as I’m concerned.

    ReplyReply
  29. 29
    manyakitty says:

    @Mnemosyne: Yes, I was commenting on his tweets in the post.

    ReplyReply
  30. 30
    artem1s says:

    Part of ethics office is ensurng nominee isnt in something that, as public official, wuld be illegal. Protects THEM. Once in office, 2 late.

    you know, like getting and sending EMAILS!

    ReplyReply

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *