text:
Eva (cunoscut și ca Povestea unui secol) este un film românesc din 2010, regizat de Adrian Popovici. Rolurile principale sunt interpretate de Vincent Regan, Amy Hayes, Michael Ironside, Patrick Bergin, Emily Hamilton, Dustin Milligan, Maia Morgenstern, Vlad Rădescu și Claudiu Bleonț.

Filmul prezintă o poveste de dragoste între Eva și Tudor, care se desfășoară pe fundalul celui de-Al Doilea Război Mondial. El a avut premiera la 20 mai 2010 la Festivalul de Film de la Cannes.

Rezumat

Conducându-și iubitul la gară, Eva Alion (Amy Beth Hayes) simte o neliniște inexplicabilă. În acea dimineață avusese loc o simulare de atac aerian. La despărțire, Tudor (Vincent Regan) îi spune că o va duce în America la mama lui după ce se va termina toată nebunia. În timp ce trenul pleca din gară, ea îi strigă că este însărcinată. La scurt timp, începe un bombardament aerian care devastează Bucureștiul, iar Eva își aduce aminte cum îl cunoscuse pe Tudor.

După moartea tatălui ei, Eva se mutase împreună cu mama ei, Maria (Maia Morgenstern), și cu sora ei mai mare, Betty (Emily Hamilton), în casa unchiului Alfonse (Michael Ironside), un maior de cavalerie lacom și fustangiu. Fiind doar tolerate acolo, cele două fete doreau să se mărite pentru a scăpa din casa maiorului. Alfons intrase într-o noapte în camera lui Betty și a profitat de ea, amenințând-o că le arunca pe toate trei în stradă dacă va spune cuiva ce s-a întâmplat. Betty îi mărturisește Evei, însă neagă povestea în fața mamei sale.

La 22 iunie 1936, în ziua în care a împlinit 16 ani, Eva l-a cunoscut pe Tudor, un bărbat tânăr care locuia în apropiere. El fusese plecat din țară și se întorsese acasă după câțiva ani ca un "fiu risipitor". După moartea tatălui său, mama sa vânduse fabrica și plecase în America. Cu banii moșteniți, Tudor cumpărase o pădure și un gater, locuind într-o cabană de pe munte. Eva se îndrăgostește de Tudor de prima dată. Temându-se că maiorul ar putea încerca să o abuzeze și pe ea, Eva fuge din casă și se duce să-l caute pe Tudor în cabana de pe munte. La scurtă vreme, el primește o scrisoare din America prin care era anunțat că mama lui este bolnavă și pleacă, promițându-i Evei că se va căsători cu ea la întoarcerea în țară, adică peste o lună - o lună și jumătate. Până atunci, fata se întoarce în casa maiorului unde-și așteaptă iubitul. Lunile trec, dar Tudor nu-i trimite nicio scrisoare. Eva află de la maior că iubitul ei vânduse la plecare pădurea, gaterul și cabana și începe să se întrebe dacă Tudor se va mai întoarce vreodată.

Într-o noapte, pe când mama și sora ei se aflau pentru două zile la Câmpina, maiorul intră în camera Evei și încearcă să o violeze. Fata opune rezistență, împușcându-și unchiul în încăierare. Alfons este paralizat și internat la un sanatoriu. Eva este judecată și achitată de tribunal, jurații considerând-o nevinovată de acuzația de crimă. În timpul procesului, ea l-a cunoscut pe baronul Oswald von Seele (Patrick Bergin), consilier la Ambasada Germaniei în România, și s-a căsătorit cu el mai târziu, mutându-se la moșia Jungerwald.

Într-una din zile, la trei ani după plecarea sa, Tudor revine în România și o caută pe Eva, iar aceasta nu îi poate rezista și își părăsește soțul. Cei doi petrec o vară de neuitat la Constanța, dar Tudor o anunță că trebuie să plece la Marsilia, invocând afaceri urgente. La plecare, el îi dă un bilet de tren pentru București, cheile de la apartamentul său din cartierul Cotroceni și îi depune 5.000 de lei într-un cont bancar. În ciuda rugăminților ei de a nu o lăsa singură, Tudor pleacă. Eva rămâne însărcinată și pierde copilul. Sentimentele ei față de Tudor se transformă în ură pentru că i-a distrus viața, legând-o de un viitor nesigur. Deprimată, ea încearcă să se sinucidă, dar este salvată de Oswald, de care divorțase între timp.

Eva se mută din nou cu Oswald, iar mai târziu află că Tudor s-a întors în țară și o caută. Într-una din nopți, Tudor încearcă să intre pe furiș în casă, dar este împușcat de baron și grav rănit la braț. El pierde câțiva centimetri de os și se află în pericol de a paraliza. Eva îl îngrijește timp de câteva luni, iar Tudor se însănătoșește. Între timp, începe cel de-Al Doilea Război Mondial. O mașină a Ambasadei germane este atacată în Piața Lahovari de persoane necunoscute înarmate cu puști mitraliere, iar col. Rainer Krauss, atașatul militar, și șoferul sunt uciși, baronul Oswald von Seele fiind rănit la braț.

În iarna anului 1941, la scurtă vreme după atentat, Tudor pleacă din nou, de data aceasta la Lisabona. În valiză, Eva descoperă un pistol și începe să se teamă pentru viața lui. Simțindu-se singură, ea intră într-o organizație caritabilă înființată de Regina-mamă Elena a României și, la invitația medicului Gunther Bohm (Vlad Rădescu), se oferă ca asistentă medicală voluntară la Spitalul Militar. Acolo îl cunoaște pe Lucien (Dustin Milligan), un student la medicină, iar între ei se înfiripă o relație afectuoasă. Oswald pleacă într-o misiune la Cairo, lăsându-i înainte de plecare o sumă mare de bani. Ea află ulterior de la Gunther că fostul ei soț a fost ucis la Cairo, în împrejurări misterioase.

Cu banii primiți de la Oswald, Eva deschide la București un magazin de articole muzicale. Într-una din zile, pe când se întoarcea acasă, ea îl găsește pe Tudor care o aștepta. Dându-și seama că nu va fi pentru Eva mai mult decât un prieten, Lucien se înrolează în armată și este trimis pe front. Fiind căutat de serviciile secrete, Tudor o roagă pe Eva să îi facă rost de documente false pentru a putea părăsi țara. Cu o zi înainte de plecare, ea află că este, din nou, însărcinată și decide să nu îi spună pentru a nu-l face să își schimbe planurile. Eva îl conduce pe Tudor la gară și după urcarea lui în tren începe un bombardament aerian. La sfârșitul raidului aerian, clădirile din apropierea gării erau transformate în ruine, iar calea ferată era distrusă. Totul era în flăcări, iar de pretutindeni se auzeau strigăte de ajutor.

Eva îl caută disperată pe Tudor, dar nu îl găsește nici printre morți, nici printre supraviețuitori. În bombardamentul din 4 aprilie 1944 Gunther a fost rănit de un șrapnel și și-a pierdut ambii ochi. Lucien a murit pe front undeva în apropiere de Iași. Eva este abordată într-una din zilele următoare de un străin, pe care îl zărise de mai multe ori întâlnindu-se cu Tudor. Acesta îi spune că este în pericol de moarte și se oferă să o ajute să părăsească țara și să plece la mama lui Tudor din America. Eva și străinul pleacă din România cu un vapor, mituind un căpitan turc. Străinul, care era verișor cu Tudor, îi dezvăluie femeii unele secrete. Tudor fusese recrutat ca spion american și participase la atentatul din Piața Lahovari, dar nu l-a ucis pe Oswald, știind că acesta complota împotriva lui Hitler. Fostul ei soț lucra ca ofițer de informații în armata germană și fusese trimis de amiralul Wilhelm Canaris la Cairo pentru a negocia în secret capitularea Germaniei în fața Angliei. El a fost ucis acolo de Gestapo.

Distribuție

 Vincent Regan - Tudor
 Amy Beth Hayes - Eva Alion (creditată Amy Hayes)
 Michael Ironside - Alfonse, unchiul Evei
 Patrick Bergin - baronul Oswald von Seele
 Emily Hamilton - Betty, sora mai mare a Evei
 Dustin Milligan - Lucien
 Maia Morgenstern - Maria, mama Evei
 Andrei Finți - Tiberiu Alion
 Vlad Rădescu - medicul Gunther Bohm
 Claudiu Bleonț - medicul care l-a operat pe Tudor

 Claudia Prec - Savina
 Rusandra Enescu - Helga, soția lui Gunther
 Claudiu Trandafir - judecătorul
 Alin Olteanu - Constantin
 Marius Chivu - Tache
 Silvia Gîscă - Irena, servitoare în casa maiorului
 Doru Cătănescu - Caramatis
 Radu Bînzaru - președintele juriului
 Andreea Grămoșteanu - Ioana
 Radu Iacoban - Andrei Cantacuzino, pilot militar

 Irina Săulescu - Silvia, servitoare
 Andrei Ionescu - Petre, șeful de sală de la restaurant
 Gelu Nițu - preot ortodox
 Attila Gasparik - Gheza, servitorul lui Oswald
 Andras Demeter - polițist
 Mihaela Rădescu - Martha
 Mihai Niculescu - preot catolic
 Coca Bloos - moașa (creditată Cornelia Bloos)
 Mădălina Ghițescu - femeia slabă
 Stacey L. Quinney - necunoscutul
 Elias Ferkin - marinarul

Producție
Potrivit propriilor afirmații, regizorul Sergiu Nicolaescu și-a dorit la începuturile carierei sale să realizeze un film după romanul Întoarcerea fiului risipitor (1947), intitulat la o nouă reeditare Fiul risipitor, de Radu Tudoran. El considera însă că filmul era greu de realizat din cauza faptului că trebuia găsită o actriță care să reprezinte personajul principal feminin de la vârsta de 16 ani și până la 34 de ani sau cel puțin două actrițe care să semene între ele. Nicolaescu a afirmat ulterior că regretă că nu a făcut niciodată acest film.

Mai târziu, Radu-Aneste Petrescu, Adrian Popovici și Steve Attridge au scris un scenariu inspirat din romanul Fiul risipitor (1947) de Radu Tudoran. Filmul, care trebuia să poate inițial titlul de Povestea unui secol, a câștigat concursul de proiecte din 2005 al Centrului Național al Cinematografiei și i s-a acordat un credit financiar rambursabil fără dobândă în sumă de 430.000 RON. CNC și-a suplimentat apoi finanțarea la 6,5 milioane de lei.

Acest film a fost realizat cu susținerea Centrului Național al Cinematografiei și cu sprijinul Societății Române de Televiziune, Ogilvy Group - România, BV McCann-Erikson, Media Investment Communication, Optimum Media Direction, Artisfilmproduktion Gmbh, Transeuro Film & Lab și a Fundației Artis. El a fost produs de Artis Film Romania, producător executiv fiind Cornelia Paloș. Selecția actorilor a fost realizată de Jeremy Zimmermann și Manuel Puro. Cascadoriile au fost coordonate de Răzvan Puiu.

Filmul urma să înceapă, potrivit primei variante de scenariu, cu prezentarea Evei "ca o octogenară îmburghezită, fostă demimondenă de duzină, cu nașteri ratate și cu relații în cercurile înalte ale societății". Rolul Evei la bătrânețe urma să fie interpretat de Vanessa Redgrave. Tudor ajungea la bătrânețe "un spion deplorabil, care dispare și reapare în jocul unor interese neclare".

Filmările la Povestea unui secol au avut loc în septembrie - noiembrie 2007 și au durat 60 de zile. Primele cadre au fost filmate la 3 septembrie, la Sinaia, pe platoul Valea lui Bogdan. S-a filmat apoi la Căciulați, Căldărușani, pe litoralul Mării Negre și în studiourile Media Pro de la Buftea. La 2 octombrie 2007 au avut loc filmări pe faleza Cazinoului din Constanța, fiind aduse trăsuri din timpul celui de-al doilea război mondial, dar și costume din acea perioadă. Alte cadre au fost filmate pe podul de la Năvodari, dar și în localitatea Vadu.

Regizorul s-a declarat mulțumit de lucrul cu actorii străini, afirmând că nu a fost nevoie să le dea prea multe indicații. În plus, el a recunoscut că Michael Ironside i-a sugerat mai multe idei. Actrița britanică Vanessa Redgrave (n. 1937), laureată a unui premiu Oscar și a două Globuri de Aur, urma să filmeze în luna noiembrie ultimele cadre ale filmului. Regizorul a declarat că a ales-o pentru că "i se potrivește rolul". Deși și-a dat acordul să apară în film, actrița a solicitat ca filmările sa fie amânate din cauza faptului că se simțea extrem de obosită după turneul de promovare a filmului «Atonement». Ea și-a amânat sosirea, iar cele trei zile de filmare în care urma să apară au fost decalate pentru perioada martie-aprilie 2008. Vanessa Redgrave trebuia să primească un onorariu de aproximativ 100.000 de euro. Din cauza apariției unor probleme de finanțare, s-a renunțat la apariția în film a actriței britanice, concomitent cu cea a fratelui său mai mic, Corin Redgrave (1939-2010), care urma să-l interpreteze pe Tudor la anii senectuții.

În martie 2008, filmul se afla în postproducție, lipsind doar cele trei zile de filmare cu Vanessa Redgrave, iar regizorul spera ca premiera să aibă loc în primavara anului 2009. Regizorul Adrian Popovici a declarat în aprilie 2008 că se investiseră până atunci aproximativ 1.600.000 de euro. Din cauza neînțelegerilor cu moștenitoarele lui Radu Tudoran, producția filmului a fost stopată, iar, potrivit Corneliei Paloș, varianta finală a filmului ar fi costat peste două milioane de euro. Scenariul a fost modificat, renunțându-se la scenele în care apărea Eva la senectute. După modificarea scenariului, denumirea producției cinematografice a fost schimbată din Povestea unui secol în Eva.

Premiera filmului în România a avut loc la 8 octombrie 2010, la cinematograful The Light Cinema din București, în cadrul Romania International Film Festival (Ro-IFF).

Conflicte cu privire la scenariu
Diana Turconi-Bubenek, Daniela Coroiu și Cristina Coroiu, moștenitoarele scriitorului Radu Tudoran și deținătoarele drepturilor de autor asupra cărții Fiul risipitor, au citit scenariul și au considerat că "scenaristul nu a înțeles opera lui Radu Tudoran și a modificat trăirile personajelor, deformând substanțial concepția, gândurile și sensibilitatea marelui romancier". Diana Turconi-Bubenek, prim-colaborator la Ambasada României pe lângă Sfântul Scaun, aprecia că scenariul "ștergea cu linii groase farmecul inefabil al personajelor și vulgariza întreaga atmosferă degajată de original. Opera scriitorului R. Tudoran apărea astfel modificată esențial și sărăcită de valoare estetică (...): Eva, simbol al feminității pline de grație, era înfățișată ca o bătrână îmburghezită, fostă demimondenă de duzină refugiată în SUA, misteriosul "fiu" se explica în pielea unui spion deplorabil, iar întregul rezulta penibil și neconvingător".

Cele trei moștenitoare au susținut că mai întâi a fost scris scenariul filmului și abia apoi li s-a cerut acordul pentru realizarea de opere derivate și au solicitat în scris la 4 septembrie 2007 companiei Artis film Romania ltd., producătorilor Adrian Popovici și Cornelia Paloș, CNC, DACIN SARA și ORDA să oprească imediat filmările până la reglementarea raporturilor juridice între părți. Neprimind răspuns, ele au cerut în instanță suspendarea activităților privind realizarea filmului.

Regizorul Adrian Popovici s-a apărat, declarând că filmul nu este o ecranizare a cărții, iar scenariul conține doar câteva elemente inspirate din roman. El a precizat că moștenitoarele lui Radu Tudoran au deschis acțiune în instanță pentru că nu s-au înțeles cu compania producătoare cu privire la banii pe care urmau să îi primească. Cele trei moștenitoare ar fi cerut un procent din bugetul de producție, mai mare decât procentul maxim permis de lege pentru capitolul drepturi de autor.

În aprilie 2008, Tribunalul București a decis "suspendarea activităților privind realizarea filmului «Povestea unui secol» până la reglementarea între părți a raporturilor juridice privind drepturile de autor corespunzătoare operei «Fiul risipitor» de Radu Tudoran". Regizorul a atacat cu recurs decizia la Curtea de Apel București.

Recepție
Într-un articol publicat în revista "Dilema Veche", jurnalistul Andrei Gorzo a criticat cu severitate acest film, considerându-l "un film complet lipsit de merite cinematografice; nu e cinema, ci umplutură destinată unor ochi lipsiți de discernământ (...) în care, la nivelul gîndirii cinematografice (și dramaturgice, și narative), nu se întâmplă niciodată nimic, nu mișcă nimic". Scenariul este considerat a fi rudimentar, axat pe prezentarea continuă de evenimente, el nereușind să profite de materialul epic al romanului. Regizorul Adrian Popovici este acuzat că a extras o serie de materiale de bază ale genului (peisaje, mașini de epocă, cai) și le-a alăturat în mod neprofesionist. Imaginile cinematografice sunt apreciate a fi simpliste, "doar poze în mișcare cu niște actori și niște decoruri care încearcă să întrețină o ficțiune". Directorul de imagine Mihail Sârbușcă este ironizat că și-a lingușit actorii cu un prost-gust prezent "poate doar în producțiile porno soft de pe Playboy TV", proiectând asupra lor o "lumină siropos-diafană". Filmul este interpretat în limba engleză, dar din cauza faptului că actorii sunt britanici, americani și români, există un amestec de accente. Unii actori români, din cauza necunoașterii suficiente a pronunției, Actorii români sunt acuzați că nu știu destul de bine limba engleză, produc confuzii lingvistice (medicul interpretat de Vlad Rădescu îi recomandă la un moment dat eroinei gravide să meargă doar pe la umbră, dar expresia "walk only in the shade" seamănă foarte mult cu "walk only in the shit").

Opinia aspră a lui Gorzo nu a fost împărtășită și de alți critici. Călin Stănculescu considera filmul lui Adrian Popovici "o superbă poveste de dragoste inspirată de proza lui Radu Tudoran, cu o impresionantă distribuție internațională".

Premii
Filmul Eva a fost prezentat la diferite festivaluri de film:
 Festivalul de Film de la Cannes (20 mai 2010)
 Festivalul Internațional de Film de la Monaco (3 decembrie 2010)
 Festivalul Internațional de Film de la Cairo (9 decembrie 2010)
 Festivalul Internațional al Filmului de Dragoste de la Mons - Belgia (18 - 25 februarie 2011)  - filmul a rulat în secțiunea Regards Croisés, în care au fost prezentate pelicule europene și nord-americane care nu au fost difuzate în sălile de cinema din Belgia
 Festivalul de Film Istoric de la Râșnov (6-15 august 2011)

Eva a obținut unele premii și nominalizări și anume:
 Festivalul Internațional de Film de la Monaco (2-5 decembrie 2010)
 Premiul pentru cea mai bună imagine - Mihail Sârbușcă
Premiul pentru cea mai bună muzică originală - Adrian Popovici și Vlady Cnejevici
 Premiile Gopo 2011 (26 martie 2012)
 Premiul Special MTV pentru cel mai bun sărut, votat pe mtv.ro – Vincent Regan și Amy Hayes din Eva, povestea unui secol - decernat la Gala Premiilor Gopo 2011
 nominalizare la Premiul pentru cel mai bun machiaj și cea mai bună coafură (într-un lungmetraj de ficțiune) - Lidia Ivanov și Edwina Vodă pentru filmul Eva
 Festivalul Național de Film Românesc de la Mamaia (12-17 iulie 2011) - organizat de Consiliul Județean Constanța, Fundația Fantasio Constanța și S.C. Aleea Film, cu sprijinul Centrului Național al Cinematografiei
 Premiul pentru cel mai bun machiaj - Edwina Vodă
 Premiul pentru cele mai bune costume - Viorica Petrovici
 Premiul pentru cea mai bună scenografie - Cristian Niculescu
 nominalizare la Premiul pentru cea mai bună imagine - Mihail Sârbușcă
 nominalizare la Premiul pentru cea mai bună actriță - Emily Hamilton

Ca urmare a faptului că filmul Eva a fost selecționat la Festivalul Internațional de Film de la Cairo, Consiliul de Administrație al Centrului Național al Cinematografiei i-a acordat producătorului filmului (SC Artis Film Romania SRL) un sprijin financiar nerambursabil în sumă de 257.049 lei pentru producția filmului Cernozaurii  și un alt sprijin financiar în aceeași sumă pentru producția filmului Se caută o mamă.

În unele publicații s-a vehiculat zvonul că filmul Eva ar fi fost invitat să candideze la Premiul Oscar pentru cea mai bună coloană sonoră, iar, în ședința sa din 1 aprilie 2010, Consiliul de Administrație al CNC a furnizat în acest scop un buget de promovare de 222.700 de lei (aproximativ 50.000 de euro).

Referințe

Legături externe

 Eva pe situl Cinemagia
 Situl filmului

Vezi și
Listă de filme românești despre cel de-al Doilea Război Mondial

Filme din 2010
Filme românești
Filme în limba engleză
Filme regizate de Adrian Popovici
Filme despre Al Doilea Război Mondial
Filme istorice din anii 2010
Filme istorice românești

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
2020 Election / American Politics / Feature / Government / Politics
The House Knocks Back
by Andrew Donaldson · July 12, 2019
"I'm not going to be discussing it any further."
That definitive statement was issued Thursday evening by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, but it came off as more of a wish. Or a prayer. Good luck with that, Madam Speaker.
With the Democratic Primary in a merciful news lull between debates, the focus of the news and commentariat has returned to the border issues, and the long-simmering discontent in the Democratic caucus that has erupted into a boil since passage of legislation funding aid for said border crisis. As it has for most of this legislative session, the focus swiftly turned to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and "squad" of like-minded progressive newcomers to the House.
Even some progressives who admire AOC, as she's nicknamed, told POLITICO that they worry she's not using her notoriety effectively.
"She needs to decide: Does she want to be an effective legislator or just continue being a Twitter star?" said one House Democrat who's in lockstep with Ocasio Cortez's ideology.
"There's a difference between being an activist and a lawmaker in Congress."
It's an open question whether Ocasio-Cortez can be checked.
Oh, wait, that wasn't this week, that was back in January, when AOC had barely been in congress for week and had already begun to work with the Justice Democrats in singling out insufficiently progressive members for primary challenges.
Let's try that again:
Thursday's meeting threatened to open a new breach. After Democratic moderates joined with Republicans to pass an amendment…Pelosi said they should show more "courage" on politically sensitive votes, according to the people in the room. That struck some as tone-deaf, as did Ocasio-Cortez's comments about primary challenges.
Ocasio-Cortez in a tweet said she was not making threats but warning that the Democratic defectors "were inadvertently making a list of targets for the GOP and for progressive advocates" by voting with Republicans.
The eruption followed weeks of growing tension between wings of the party. Freshmen who were elected on platforms of cleaning up big-money politics and fixing the heath-care system have found themselves voting on, and answering for, a different set of issues, and some are feeling the heat from their constituents.
Oh, oh dear, no, that wasn't right either, that was from back in March, and it was a gun control legislation that time that saw 26 Democrats join the Republicans and draw the ire of the true believer caucus.
Ah, here it is, yesterday. So here's the readers' digest version of the fallout from that border funding bill and the ongoing rift between AOC and squad vs Speaker Nancy Pelosi, as broken down well by our friend Michael Siegel . Which brings us to this and the Speaker's presser last evening:
And then the fallout began.
"Didn't realize this needed to be said, but: you can be someone who does not personally harbor ill will towards a race, but through your actions still enable a racist system. And a lot of New Democrats and Blue Dogs did that today," tweeted Saikat Chakrabarti, the chief of staff for Ocasio-Cortez. It was an extraordinary attack by a staff member on elected officials.
"This is in reference to my comparing Blue Dogs and New Democrats to 1940s Southern Democrats," he wrote in another. "Southern Democrats enabled a racist system too. I have no idea how personally racist they all were. And we're seeing the same dynamic play out now."
That weekend, in trying to tamp down the divisions, Pelosi dismissed the influence Ocasio-Cortez and the squad — Reps. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., and Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich. — in a Sunday newspaper column. But it seems to have only enhanced their stature.
Allies of the foursome swiftly came to their defense, suggesting Pelosi was marginalizing the women of color who are the new face of the party. Chakrabarti tweeted his own critique of Pelosi.
Ocasio-Cortez told The Washington Post on Wednesday that "the persistent singling out…it got to a point where it was just outright disrespectful…the explicit singling out of newly elected women of color."
In a fundraising email Thursday, Justice Democrats, the progressive group that recruited Ocasio-Cortez to run for office, criticized Pelosi for "singling out four new leaders who are progressive women of color." The group is backing a handful of primary challengers to congressional Democrats, aiming for 25.
On Capitol Hill, the centrists got to work. Aides were quick to point out the co-chairwoman of the Blue Dog Coalition, Rep. Stephanie Murphy, is a refugee and the first Vietnamese-American elected to Congress. Two members of the coalition are African American lawmakers who lived through segregation. One of the members of the New Democratic Coalition, Rep. Terri Sewell, who is African-American, represents her hometown, Selma, Ala., as well as Montgomery and Birmingham, Alabama, and had reached out multiple times to Ocasio-Cortez after the tweets, to no response.
"I personally experienced Dixiecrats' bigoted policies growing up," Sewell said in a statement. "So, to even insinuate that I, or any other member of the New Dems, would promote policies that are racist and hateful or ones that would negatively impact communities of color is deeply offensive and couldn't be further from the truth."
Rep. Lou Correa, D-Calif., another co-chairman of the Blue Dogs and member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, said he has warned his staff off such actions. "It's sad, it's very sad."
One freshman, Rep. Mikie Sherrill, who won what had been a Republican-held seat in New Jersey, said the centrist lawmakers "work really hard to build broad coalitions. When people in the progressive wing of the party disagree, I do feel like they're not kind of lining up their sights on the right target."
Progressives and those allied with the Ocasio-Cortez and the squad wanted to shift the debate.
One of those friendly fire targets, Rep. Wm. Lacy Clay (D-Mo.) whose primary challenger is being supported by the Justice Democrats, was less tactful:
"How dare they try to play the race card at this point," said Rep. William Lacy Clay, an African-American Democrat from Missouri who faces a primary challenge backed by allies of Ocasio-Cortez. He called those making the claims "ignorant" of racial history. "It shows the weakness of their argument. It's damaging to this party and the internal workings of the Democratic party."
Rep. John Lewis, the Civil Rights icon, shared his view.
Lewis said it was "a little too far" for the staff member to compare lawmakers to segregationists.
"We all must work together, pull together for the country's good," the Georgia Democrat said in an interview. "The great majority of the caucus membership tends to work together and get along. We need to go forward, not backward."
When the current row first exploded, AOC and her compatriots took umbrage with Pelosi properly placing them as just four members who have large amounts of social media and commentariat attention, but correctly reminded everyone that all the news stories, coverage, notoriety, and Twitter followers still get them exactly one vote each in the House of Representatives. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez responded, among other things, with this tweet:
That public "whatever" is called public sentiment.
And wielding the power to shift it is how we actually achieve meaningful change in this country. https://t.co/u6JtgwwRsk
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) July 7, 2019
The problem is the premise is flawed. Twitter isn't public sentiment. Twitter is microclimate within the larger socio-political ecosystem. It's a sliver of social media users, about 7% in America, and those user tend to be more urban, younger, with above-average incomes, and much more politically active than the general population.
In other words, on Twitter there are a lot more people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her like-minded colleagues and staff than in the real world.
Every two years, every member of the House of Representatives is up for re-election. Twitter does not get a vote. Nor do the 16,898 folks in NY-14 that propelled AOC past a stunned and out-of-touch Joe Crowley in their 2018 Democratic primary get to vote for anyone in any other congressional district. Besides, that district isn't going to be anything but blue for the rest of our lifetimes.
The folks the Justice Democrats seem to want to expunge as part of their puritan purge of moderates are the one's that gave the Democratic Party the House back, and Nancy Pelosi her second stint at the gavel. Back in February, NY Times did some home district visits with the freshmen who weren't constantly in the news, and discovered that the folks back home had questions:
It was Democrats like Mr. McAdams, Ms. Stevens and Ms. Spanberger who secured the party's House majority, political moderates who won districts often long represented by Republicans. Of the 67 Democrats in Congress's freshman class, roughly a third prevailed in districts where President Trump won in 2016.
That serves as another indication that Democrats will have to confront the intraparty tussle between liberals and moderates to decide what they stand for, whom they appeal to and where their electoral future lies.
Last week, home for the first district workweek of their term, moderate Democrats got to see firsthand how the raised voices of a small but vocal number of lawmakers such as Representatives Tlaib, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York are reverberating in far more marginal districts. Some, like Representative Andy Kim of New Jersey, were asked to account for the "uptick of negative rhetoric" coming from the freshman class…
"Many of the newly elected progressive freshmen probably "aren't thinking that whatever they say might do harm to their class, and that's not going to change," said Rodell Mollineau, a Democratic strategist and former aide to Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the former majority leader. "The more progressive messaging is what sells right now. That's what everyone is talking about, so it will be harder for moderates to break through. But that's why it's important to repeat their view of the world to their constituents."
The key word there is "sell." It's telling that while the Justice Democrats were sending out fundraising emails and cranking up the rhetoric at their own leadership on social media for more money and more attention, the moderates were going to their leadership the old-fashioned way — in person. There is a generational aspect here, as to handling interpersonal communication and how it's perceived. The yutes, of course, see nothing wrong with doing everything on the social media they are so fluent in, while the older generation can take umbrage and find it disrespectful whether it's intended to be or not.
But for better or worse, closed-door caucus meetings and face-to-face hash-it-out sessions are still how things are done when it comes to legislating. Nancy Pelosi's call to "come to me" instead of Tweeting out criticism is something most supervisors, leaders, or for that matter parents in the modern age have had to say. Pelosi and the moderates know about and have been through one thing the freshman have not yet: re-election. They know each and every one of them are on the ballot come November 2020, and the record they amass as a group has a lot of sway.
When Rolling Stone's Peter Travers reviewed "Knock Down the House," Netflix's documentary on Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other women running in 2018, he wrote this piece of insight:
You could argue that Knock Down the House is gilding the lily by giving so much of its running time to AOC, trading in her burgeoning popularity to win audiences for this Netflix doc. Fair enough. But the inherent and more crucial message in this probing film is that many women would have to fail in order for one to succeed. Lears, who served as her own cinematographer with Blotnick editing, makes it abundantly clear that the other female candidates under her microscope make points at least equally valid as AOC's and that they would run again in the future.
There is a harbinger there. Mostly identical messages and ideologies, all women, and all with fire and passion to run for office, failed in St Louis, Nevada, and West Virginia for the other three subjects of the documentary. AOC became the superstar because she won, perfectly seizing the moment from an over-confident incumbent in a district she well reflects both in her person and politics.
Paula Jean Swearengin, the candidate for Senate in West Virginia in the documentary, was supported by the Justice Democrats after dust-up on a conference call with incumbent Senator Joe Manchin. The life-long moderate who still wears his blue dog credentials overtly to the annoyance of many in his party, was having none of their calls for a more progressive agenda to earn their support:
As Senator, Manchin made enemies of the progressive left as much as the hard right, but neither are large segments of the mountaineer electorate. During a conference call with supporters of Bernie Sanders who were challenging Manchin from the left, the Senator got contentious:
"What you ought to do is vote me out. Vote me out! I'm not changing. Find somebody else who can beat me and vote me out."
In the 2018 Democratic primary, Manchin faced a challenger from the left (Swearengin), and won 69.8 percent of the vote.
The Justice Democrats and other die-hard progressives are convinced their message can, and should, work everywhere. But it doesn't, it won't, and if they really want to change things they will have to work with those they currently deride as "lesser" to get it done. Fight the power all you want, but if your greatest success in changing popular sentiment is to get those who you need as allies uniformly frustrated and angry at you, you are going about changing the world the wrong way.
For now, though, when the chips were down and legislation needed to be passed, they were four votes on the wrong side of a decisive defeat. Their poor reaction to that defeat is not serving them well, and is becoming a problem for the rest of the left side of the People's House. It was inevitable that those seeking to knock down the house — the house who have their own constituencies, own concerns, and own political careers to worry about — would start knocking back.
"I warn you to travel in the middle course, Icarus, so that the waves may not weigh down your wings if you go too low, and so that the sun will not scorch your wings if you go too high. Stay between both," Daedalus warned Icarus. Nancy Pelosi is not Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's father, but she has flown this path before, and escaped the political labyrinth more than once like the characters of mythology were attempting to do. Ovid's Metamorphoses tells the familiar tale thus:
when the boy began to rejoice in his bold flight
and deserted his leader, and attracted by a desire for the sky
he took his path [went] higher. The vicinity of the sun
softens the fragrant wax, the chains of the feathers;
the wax melted: he shook his bare arms
and lacking oarage he takes up no air,
By November of 2020, we will know if Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the rest of the Justice Democrats are the new wave, or the Icarian candidates about whom people wonder what went wrong for those who so quickly, if momentarily, soared so high.
Tags: AOCcongresselection 2020HouseJustice Democratsmoderatespelosi
Andrew Donaldson
Born and raised in West Virginia, Andrew has since lived and traveled around the world several times over. Though frequently writing about politics out of a sense of duty and love of country, most of the time he would prefer discussions on history, culture, occasionally nerding on aviation, and his amateur foodie tendencies. He can usually be found misspelling/misusing words on Twitter @four4thefire and his writing website Yonder and Home. Andrew is the host of Heard Tell podcast.
The Art of Pizza, Chapter Three: Cheese
Some clarifications and further thoughts on new atheism and the Church
President Trump Uses Veto on National Defense Authorization Act
Chip Daniels says:
Over at Balloon Juice, front pager mistermix references an article in the WaPo about AOC's chief of staff, who says this:
"The whole theory of change for the current Democratic Party is that to win this country we need to tack to the hypothetical middle. What I think that means is, you don't take unnecessary risks, which translates to: You don't really do anything. Whereas we've got a completely different theory of change, which is: You do the biggest, most badass thing you possibly can — and that's going to excite people, and then they're going to go vote. Because the reality is, our problem isn't that more people are voting Republican than Democrat — our problem is most people who would vote Democrat aren't voting."
The incrementalist and radical wings have always been in tension, and until the last few years I've been in the incrementalist camp.
But incrementalism relies on the other side playing by the same rules and norms. When the other side radicalizes, the place for compromise moves further away than is possible to follow.
Except in our current environment, the compromise place hasn't moved; It's disappeared altogether. The Trumpists can't be compromised with because for them, the very existence of liberalism; that is, equality, rule of law, fair play, a loyal opposition- is considered by them to be illegitimate and must be destroyed.Report
North in reply to Chip Daniels says:
Yeah but AoC's chief of staff doesn't mention that the incrementalists notched actual policy achievements with their incrementalism while the lefty absolutists have a list of policy achievements that can be summed up as "bupkiss". Even more importantly the GOP; which they obviously admire for how its incrementalists indulged, then used, then capitulated to their extremists; has similarly achieved very little policy movement for all their wild extremism.
Yes, the leftists deride gay marriage as heteronormative, the ACA as insufficient, the various financial regulations and stimulii as propping up capitalism, but they have no achievements of their own, few concrete proposals that can command a majority even within their own party and no plans to correct either of those.
I'm glad they're here, for the record. AOC is probably shifting the overton window a bit to the left. She's making Republicans talk about Pelosi as a moderate which is no small thing and the energy they represent is important to a party and the Dems have, perhaps, suffered for the lack of it. But I am glad that the moderate majority isn't interested in following the same trail of idiocy and ruin that the GOP went shambling down.
There's an alternative to this though. It's to move to the center, capture the center and the left and then do the compromising -internally- rather than with the deranged right wing rump. And that seems like a more plausible plan than some twitter based socialist revolution (Talk about waiting for Godot) or trying to bargain with the utterly captured and deranged Republicans.Report
Chip Daniels in reply to North says:
"AOC is probably shifting the overton window a bit to the left"
There's your accomplishment right there.Report
That is a political accomplishment; not a policy one. Trump and all the wingbats who came before him shifted the Overton window to the right plenty. I doubt if you time traveled back to the eighties or nineties and told the old GOP crew that indulging their wingers would let their racist, revanchavist and populist demagogues be horrible and become the face of the Republican Party and Conservativism in the USA that they'd be pleased to receive that news.Report
JoeSal in reply to North says:
It's kind of cute that you fellas think there is still only one overton window, instead of two moving equally in opposite directions.Report
North in reply to JoeSal says:
Eh, *shrug* two small ones or a big one with two edges, six of one-half a dozen of the other.Report
Catchling in reply to North says:
They'd be displeased because they'd assume that a too-obviously-racist GOP would be electorally doomed, which was indeed conventional wisdom until 2016. Buckley would find Trump uncouth, but he'd definitely vote for him.Report
Mike Dwyer in reply to Chip Daniels says:
If you tack away from the middle because you believe you have to fight extremism with extremism, doesn't that imply the public wants extremism? And yet the polling numbers never show that, nor does the majority of Americans registered as Independents.Report
JoeSal says:
I'm glad they aren't yelling 'RACIST!!!' at each other, that would just close the circle twerk of a dumpster fire going on over there.
Good stuff AndrewReport
George Turner says:
I think AOC, Omar, Tlaib, and the others will be as vital to Republican success in 2020 as Newt Gingrich and Karl Rove ever were. Republicans ran against Nancy in almost every district, but running against AOC is even better.Report
North in reply to George Turner says:
So now Pelosi is the moderate and AoC and her small gang are the dangerous radicals. Looks like having some wingers about is already paying dividends.Report
George Turner in reply to North says:
Note that when there's a few Congressional Republican nutcases running crazy, Democrats across the country run against them in campaign ads, and ignore McConnell or Hastert or Boehner, because it works.
The they didn't risk getting caught, the RNC would fundraise for ACO, Omar, and Tlaib.Report
Hah! McConnell and Boehner were the sane ones in the right wing loony bin. Their wingers were scuttling their own legislation. The sane congressional GOP members appear to be the exception now; the loons are the rule and are ruling on the right.Report
Mr.Joe in reply to George Turner says:
Team blue said the same about the tea party. How did that work out for them?Report
I am basically going to just copy what I said on LGM under my other num de internet:
1. The Watergate Democrats were still coming in strong from the tailwinds of the New Deal coalition. Yes Nixon creamed them in 1972 but his victory was not enough to turn either house of Congress to the Republicans. Wikipedia tells me that the Democrats gained one Senate seat in 1972 and only lost 12 House seats.
2. Nancy Pelosi entered in 1987. At this point, they had just regained control of the Senate and lost to Reagan twice and badly.
3. She was around for the grand shellackings of the 1990s and 2000s. She did gain a few huge majorities but saw them go away quickly. Since 1994, Democrats controlled the House in 2007-2011 and then 2019 until ???.
4. I suspect she is quite liberal but remembers all too clearly for most of her political career, liberal was a very dirty word. As I said yesterday, I remember in the mid 90s to early 2000s when it was a thing to say "I am a progressive, not a liberal" because people thought that world act as a shield.
5. AOC is nearly a decade my junior. I think her cohort is going to be much more important politically than my generation of late Generation Xers. This nine years can make a huge difference. My first political memories are the 1992 Presidential election and the 1994 Republican revolution. Her political development around the same age would be 9/11 and Iraq II.
6. This is a very long way of saying she is from a cohort that does not remember decent Republicans, constantly getting kicked during the blowbacks to the New Deal coalition and liberalism of the 1980s through 90s, etc. So they want more action.
7. Nancy Pelosi in learning the lessons from the last war has beecome Bartelby the Scriviner. She thinks any dramatic action can lead to a huge blow back and lost majorities. So this is where the "self impeachment" and "just not worth it" comments are coming from. She thinks letting Donald Trump stay around will help Democrats politically. A failed impeachment means losing the House.
There are some things I suspect. I suspect Pelosi might not have the votes for impeachment in her own caucus but doesn't know how to say it. The GOP is losing support from college-educated suburban white women who could theoretically go back GOP but might not. My view is that her comment about how Trump is "just not worth it" used to be that she was referring to impeachment and was a major unenforced error. Now I think "it" means losing the House. I still think the comment was poorly phrased and the "self-impeachment" comment is eye-roll worthy.
This being said fights over go big or not have been things since I was in high school and college and I graduated from high school in 1998. I suspect that a lot of newer Democrats learned the lessons of go big.Report
LeeEsq in reply to Saul Degraw says:
Pelosi can't tell the truth without making the Democratic Party seem impotent against Trump and the Republicans.Report
Morat20 in reply to LeeEsq says:
There is, bluntly, an entire chunk of the left (I think heavily concentrated online) that seems to think control of the House means "won government" and is confused Pelosi hasn't ordered the Congressional battalions to storm the WH and drag people before Congress.
They talk about "inherent contempt" and the "Sergeant at Arms" without ever asking themselves "Why have those powers fallen by the wayside in favor of using subpoenas, civil contempt and the DoJ and Courts as mechanisms" instead of sending whatever poor guy is currently SAA with a pair of capitol police to get turned away from wherever their subpoena target is.
They think that, apparently, the mechanisms for inherent contempt have been kept oiled and ready for action for the last 90 years or so, and that it is a magic bullet that will strike forth.
But mostly, they're impatient as hell and can't count to 67. They think the House should be able to get the work of weeks done in hours, that this is Nixon again (even though, in the next breath, they'll quote 'If fox news had been around, Nixon wouldn't have resigned'), and frankly that if Pelosi just showed enough willpower, she'd Green Lantern this whole mess into shape.
And when asked to choose between their fantasy that it could all be fixed tomorrow if they just wanted it bad enough and a reality that is ugly, complex, and doesn't give them the results they want — they go with the fantasy.
"It can't be done that way" is met with "Of course it can, but it won't because [insert conspiracy here]". Whether it's why subpoeaning and contempt citations took a few months rather than hours or why the President can't legalize pot via EO. It's the same from left and right and center.
People don't like to hear that, well, what they want and what they can get aren't often the same.Report
LeeEsq in reply to Morat20 says:
The debate among saner liberals and leftists recognizes that the Senate isn't going to convict. However, many still believe that there are ethical, legal, and strategic reasons to impeach Trump. The other side believes that impeachment with a failure to convict is a big win for Trump but can't quite say that without giving Trump another win.
I'm growing more supportive of the impeach Trump even though we can't get a conviction in the Senate or at least hold a series of very loud and very public hearings on Trump's various wrong doings. Its clear that he is simply one of the vilest if not the most vile man ever to hold the office of the President. Even Nixon wasn't a plausible child rapist. Trump seems to have committed many vile and base ordinary crimes, extraordinary political crime, and is racist misogynistic demagogue and a thief. There is simply nothing redeeming about him. TLDR for once "we have to do something, this is something, let's do it" might be correct.Report
I agree with this.
I think that the House should have started impeachment hearings in March or April and, barring that, need to do it the *SECOND* they get back from August recess.
If it's too close to November 2020, it'll look like a stunt and they very, very much want it to not look like a stunt.Report
Michael Drew in reply to Jaybird says:
It'll also look pointless and futile to the point of silliness to do it basically in the election year when it was obviously justified a year or years sooner.
(Additionally, I agree with everything you and Lee said.)Report
Chip Daniels in reply to Michael Drew says:
It is a truth universally acknowledged that impeachment cannot happen in the first year of a term, because it looks premature, like a political stunt;
It also cannot happen the next year, because that is an election year, which of course makes it look like a political stunt;
Further, it can happen in the third year, but not if the crimes were obvious in the previous year, because then it looks like a political stunt;
Finally, it cannot happen in the fourth year, because, well, this too is an election year and it will look like a political stunt.
These are universal truths revealed by the Cult Of The Savvy, the High Priests of Sophistry.Report
Dark Matter in reply to Jaybird says:
If it's too close to November 2020, it'll look like a stunt and they very, very much want it to not look like a stunt.
The cameras will give time to whoever is saying the most outrageous thing.
That would be AOC (etc) accusing Trump of running death camps, making children drink out of toilets, etc.
And as Vile as Trump is, he isn't running death camps, he didn't create the crisis on the border, the drinking fountain is next to the toilet because they both use water pipes, etc.
So we'll have many months of the Dems looking insane and Trump looking like the reasonable man in the room.
And then the Senate will pass on the whole thing.
And then we'll have the election.Report
Catchling in reply to Dark Matter says:
A border agent literally told the Washington Times, not exactly a liberal publication, that at least one detainee drank from a toilet. He added the preposterous assertion that the woman didn't know that was the toilet part of it.
This notion that the fact of double units somehow "explains" it all is just erroneous. Everyone in this conversation is perfectly damn aware that it's a combo; the further allegation is that people are drinking from the toilet part, and even that is being admitted.
Further, the horrible Facebook group is an absolute smoking gun for a culture of abuse — leading members of the agency were in it. They do not perceive their wards as having anything like human rights, the way good Americans do.
Anyway, you really wannq bet money that Trump won't, at any point, rant that toilets are too good for these people?Report
Dark Matter in reply to Catchling says:
Anyway, you really wannq bet money that Trump won't, at any point, rant that toilets are too good for these people?
It takes a lot of work to make him look like the sane person in the room. Arguing that agents were forcing everyone to drink from the toilet in the face of those photos is a good way to start.
…the horrible Facebook group is an absolute smoking gun for a culture of abuse
And now you've arguing we should impeach Trump for things we're going to find out existed under Obama. That the toilet/sinks/drinking fountains have been standard since then. That facebook was a thing then.
No doubt Trump made it worse, but giving Obama a total pass on this sort of thing while claiming Trump should be impeached will look grand.
I don't think impeachment is the tool you want here, I think defeating him at the ballot box is.Report
That the toilet/sinks/drinking fountains have been standard since then.
The point isn't that it's a fucking double unit. It's that multiple detainees told multiple members of congress, not just AOC, that they were made to drink from them. One of those congresspeople found no water to go through at least one sink, which corroborates what was going on, and again, a border agent literally said that toilet water was drunk by somebody, so yeah, it happened even if you think everyone but the guards are liars.
Why does this point not go through? Why do people say "Oh, but see, it was a double unit, that's what you're talking about, you're just talking about the fact that the sink overhangs the toilet part. You really thought you had us there, but guess what — it's actually a double unit! Checkmate!" I don't even understand it.
I'm torn on impeachment, but we have to have hearings just to discuss what we even stand for. "We can't do better because Obama is the best that can be expected" isn't an answer.Report
Links?Report
Jaybird in reply to Catchling says:
"We can't do better because Obama is the best that can be expected" isn't an answer.
Yes, Obama deported more people than Trump but context is everything | Analysis https://t.co/hKKI1wXTVb pic.twitter.com/g6gX5ofaA8
Catchling in reply to Jaybird says:
Is "deported" supposed to be read as a catch-all term for all forms of mistreatment? For instance, none of the children taken from their parents were deported, by definition. But I guess if Obama "deported more people" his immigration policy must be crueler.
As for a link, I've been saying Washington Times but it was the Washington Examiner: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/bordering-on-madness-whats-really-happening-at-the-southern-borderReport
I don't know. I didn't read the article either.Report
Chip Daniels in reply to Dark Matter says:
What are you even trying to argue here? That the detainees aren't being subjected to cruel and inhumane conditions? And that this is being done deliberately?
When people hear accounts like this and then seize on one minor anecdote to litigate, it makes you sound insincere, like you want to discredit the entire story but can't.Report
Dark Matter in reply to Chip Daniels says:
What are you even trying to argue here?
That the BULK of the problem is bad policy, which is also known as "unrealistic laws". Laws that Dems and Reps got together and agreed upon.
Yes, Trump is trying to implement them from a xenophobic point of view, but the reason there's so little practical difference between him and Obama on this issue is because the law itself is screwed up. The big difference is the press gave Obama a pass on "children in cages" etc.
With current budget restrictions, the current law results in subjecting the detainees to cruel and inhumane conditions. Increase the budget, and the results will be less cruel and less inhumane… but we're still going to be doing things which in other contexts would be considered outrageous.
Trying to impeach Trump for this will quickly degenerate into a farce.Report
No, this is not even close to true.
The "law" does NOT force them to do this.
The overcrowding, the lack of facilities, the cruelty of separating children…these are all the result of conscious policy choices, done specifically to inflict suffering.Report
We have something like 10+ million immigrants. Something like half of them came through the southern border.
The law, as previously implemented, didn't work.
I'd argue it's along the line of prohibition, but that's me saying the law needs to change. Back in the day, staring at the failure of prohibition, law-and-order types would say the issue was with not enough enforcement or not stern enough enforcement. That the solution was to punish their way into making the law work.
So you're right in that the law doesn't say "make Y happen by doing X", but it does say "make Y happen", and everything but X has failed.Report
Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels says:
When people hear accounts like this and then seize on one minor anecdote to litigate, it makes you sound insincere, like you want to discredit the entire story but can't.
I've no desire to discredit the entire story.
My point had to do with what I was responding to.
The line I quoted? I was showing how "We can't do better because Obama is the best that can be expected" is an answer.
CNN made a story about it.Report
There's also the problem that, in am impeachment, everything gets run through one Committee — the rest of the business grinds to a halt. (And anything that is ongoing, is utterly lost in the news cycle).
So pragmatically: Is it best to focus your efforts on one Committee and one set of investigations, or continue letting every relevant Committee conduct oversight on it's own particular area of control?
Pelosi seems to lean towards the latter — she doesn't think the likely focus of the Judicial Committee (the Obstruction charges Mueller was very careful not to exonerate Trump on) will do the trick, and would prefer to continue to have multiple lines of inquiry making the news.
In the end, the "Let's make a statement" stance is quite understandable. Except the statement that'll get made is "We totally disapprove of Trump, but the GOP don't care" — which everyone already knows.
I think the real problem is the truth is depressing — Trump could shoot a baby on TV, and you couldn't find enough GOP Senators to successfully impeach over public murder.
That doesn't make people who want things to get better NOW happy.
Me? I find symbolic gestures…well, pointless here. It's not going to change anything. Might as well keep digging so that the public has the most possible information on Trump going into 2020, and that if the Democrats win, they have a lengthy list of things to start codifying into law. The "Crap Trump Pulled That Was Only Possible Because We Never Thought We Had to Codify This Crap Into Law" bill. (With the Rider of "Things That Were Legal But Never Subject To Such Abuse, So We're Putting Our Foot Down" bill).
No concentration camps, no you can't declare a national emergency and spend money however you want, yes you really DO have to give your tax returns to Congress, we mean no nepotism even if it's unpaid, you can't just keep shuffling Cabinet members around to avoid Senate oversight, you can't just run on "Acting" heads, you have to offer X years of tax returns if you want to run, etc….Report
Saul Degraw in reply to Morat20 says:
It isn't like much of the business gets done anyway with McConnell in the Senate. If Democrats keep the House, win the White House, but not the Senate in 2020, not much will get done then either. Perhaps even less.
The thing about living in the Trump era is that it is vastly demoralizing. The man does not have a rock bottom. He seems able to take every low and then say "hold my beer" to himself. Such as this week's wonder:
https://www.vox.com/2019/7/11/20690150/trump-tweets-off-the-rails-july-11-2019
Or the "social media summit." I almost hesitate to bring this stuff up here because I can predict who in this group will basically say "suck it lib" because I called living in this presidency demoralizing.
All this said, I think Pelosi's language on the subject has not been good. I now get that "it" means "lose the House" when she said "Trump's just not worth it." But the comment was ambiguous and easy to misread. It could easily be impeachment and if Trump isn't worth impeachment, who is? The "self-impeach" line just reads like wish-thinking.
I suspect the other thing that frustrates younger Democrats is that there is a real generational divide over struggles. I suspect even a lot liberal Democrats are guilty of Old Economy Steve thinking. Biden made some comments towards that way. Erik Loomis related on LGM that liberal democratic representatives in Oregon just don't understand the student debt issue because they are old and went to college in the age when it was free or at least very cheap. The Boomers are still a very large cohort that are not going away anytime soon (because the youngest boomers are only 54) and even if the Democrats win the trip prize, there is a good chance of Old Economy Steve lectures and playing to Joe Manchin.Report
Michael Drew in reply to Saul Degraw says:
If Pelosi doesn't have the votes (and couldn't get them if she were whipping it) it doesn't much matter what she personally thinks, but for what it's worth I absolutely think she's wholeheartedly with the cowards.
She's not a secret impeacher who's just letting her caucus get there on its own time. She's a no. She's been signaling that since November 2006.Report
Mr.Joe says:
This sounds quite a bit like the articles I read as the first waves of tea partiers were arriving in congress. Blah blah actually have to govern now… blah blah Regan rule… blah blah. Turns out the upstart kids had the right strategy. Many are still there and those that followed the above advice got thrown out, Eric Cantor being the most notable.
2020 will be a good test. If this portion of the party sees gains or manages to primary more centrist democrats, I would expect team blue to move strongly in their direction as team red moved in a tea party direction in 2012 and beyond.Report
Andrew Donaldson in reply to Mr.Joe says:
the tea party failed so completely that a few short years most of those focus enthusiastically embraced Trump, the antithesis of most of what they proported to hold important.Report
Mr.Joe in reply to Andrew Donaldson says:
I would disagree on the failure part. They are getting a healthy share of what they want with Trump. Large tax cut, de facto deregulation, going hard against immigrants, small government minded judges, expansions of religious liberty definitions. They have positive movement on like 80% of their agenda and nearly no negative movement. He may be a crass asshole, but he is getting it done for them. I expect them to turn out in force for him next year.
The extreme wing of team blue would be over the moon happy to fail that in that policy is stable or moves in their direction for 80% of their agenda.Report
Chip Daniels in reply to Andrew Donaldson says:
"purported"
I think I found the problem right there, mister!
What the Tea Party purported and what they really cared about is demonstrated exactly by their embrace of the man who shared their hatred for Obama.
Taxes, schmaxes, they hated Obama and liberalism with a passion and found in Trump a kindred soul who was unburdened by the need to drape himself in the decorations of Federalist Society gibberish.Report
Andrew Donaldson in reply to Chip Daniels says:
Thank you Chip.
To your point, Evidence demands a verdict.Report
Saul Degraw in reply to Andrew Donaldson says:
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/7/12/20690910/donald-trump-justin-amash-republicans-primaries-conservatives
It's worth dwelling on that idea for a moment. One way to think of conservatism is as an ideology, a philosophy that exists separate and apart from politicians and political parties. Another way to think of it is as a social identity, in which being a conservative means identifying with the group of people who call themselves conservatives.
What Barber and Pope figured out was a way to test that precise question. If conservatism was an ideology first and foremost, then a stronger attachment to that ideology should provide a stronger mooring against the winds of Trump — in their formulation, you should see more "policy loyalism" and less "party loyalism" among people who saw themselves as committed conservatives. Instead, "we observe exactly the opposite: strong 'conservatives' are the most likely to be partisan loyalists — following Trump in a liberal direction when told of his support for a liberal policy."
What this experiment suggests — and what Amash, Sanford, and other philosophically conservative politicians have found — is that the Republican form of conservatism is first and foremost an identity group. That identity group sees Trump as their champion, and his critics, be they left or right, as threats to the group's interests.
Shortly before he left Congress, I sat down with Mark Sanford for an episode of my podcast. I asked him how his constituents expressed their anger at him for his criticisms of Trump. His reply has stuck with me. "People would come up and they say, 'Look, he's the quarterback. You got to go with the quarterback.'"Report
George Turner in reply to Saul Degraw says:
When viciously and repeatedly attacked by some party, people often end up identifying with all the other people who are being attacked by that same party.
The Allies in WW-II agreed on virtually nothing except defending each other against the Axis, whereas the Axis had broad philosophical, social, and political agreement on a wide range of issues. The Americans disagreed strongly with Britain's colonialism and retaining a monarchy. Both were wildly anti-communist, but got in bed with Stalin, and China even joined too. Yet they didn't start out identifying as a group at all.
Everybody who's been attacked as a hick, a racist, a bitter clinger, and a deplorable has ended up in the allied camp, dedicated to fighting National Socialism, international socialism, pan-Arab socialism, and eco-socialism.
Ideological purity is completely secondary to winning the war, because if the war is lost then all hope is lost.Report
greginak in reply to George Turner says:
Yeah Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan really had a lot of social agreement. Strong work there. And lord knows Britain and America had no, NONE AT All, social similarities. That's just history amairight?Report
Chip Daniels in reply to George Turner says:
When a guy reacts to being called a racist by embracing the party of racism, yeah, that's pretty much where his head was at all along.Report
Chip Daniels in reply to Saul Degraw says:
The "high ideology" types never had any traction with either party.
A lot of liberals have mocked the Tea Partyiers for riding around in Medicare hovverrounds, but it isn't hypocrisy, because they never really believed in "small government" crap to begin with, no one does or ever did.
Jonathan Haidt may get a lot of crap from liberals, but I think his perception is more or less correct, that liberals and conservatives care about different moral foundations.
What I think motivates conservatives is less and less the foundations like Authority and Patriotism, and more and more Tribal groupishness and yes, revolving around white culture.Report
Saul Degraw in reply to Chip Daniels says:
One of our libertarians admitted to me recently that very few people are sold on "princepled inaction." The number of people that do are small and largely exist to make scholastic dancing on a hairpin arguments for billionaires about how Republicans are the party of real liberty.
FWIW I don't think Haidt gets a lot of crap from liberals for his moral foundations argument. I think he gets crap from liberals for being the kind of middle-aged white guy liberal who decided that fortune awaited on the wing-nut welfare circuit by being the guy that says "I'm a liberal college professor and college students these days sure are coddled."
The issue with broad left is that we are a coalition with some overreaching sentiments (everyone should have adequate access to healthcare, food, shelter, clothing, education, civil rights, etc.) but very different ideas on how to get there including whether you can have those sentiments and still have capitalism. Chait would say it is necessary. Others, not as much.Report
Road Scholar in reply to Saul Degraw says:
FWIW I don't think Haidt gets a lot of crap from liberals for his moral foundations argument.
Did you ever read his book? This liberal is willing to give him some crap, not about the conceptual basis of the theory but about the execution. The problem is he identifies a handful of moral values — he doesn't explicate how he chose those particular values — and then constructs his survey instruments around those. When he graphs those results out he ends up with more of those values running low to high from liberal to conservatives and a smaller number running the opposite direction.
The end result is a graph, x-axis for liberal/conservative and y-axis for values, with liberals being very high on a few, like 2 or 3 categories, and low on the rest, while conservatives are about the same on all of them. Big spread on the left (liberal end) converging to middling-high values on the right end. From this he concludes that conservatives generally hold all or most of these identified values more or less equally and liberals only value a certain small number of them.
He places way too much faith in the cardinal numbers coming out of his survey instrument, assuming that the a three on one scale, say Purity, is the same as a three on another scale, say Care. He also doesn't seem bothered by having 3 or 4 value scales directly overlapping on the graph. He never considers that maybe he actually isn't measuring 3 or 4 separate things but 3 or 4 aspects of the same thing.
Finally, he's also well entrenched in the uni-dimensional left/right, liberal/conservative paradigm. Libertarians are mentioned only twice, once as libertarians where they're basically dismissed as oddballs, and later as "economic conservatives" who again don't really fit into the paradigm. The existence of communitarian types — who are the exact opposite of libertarians in being economically liberal and socially conservative — is completely ignored.
So he's ignoring data that doesn't fit his model and that model itself is a bit sketchy, not so much the notion of "foundational values" but the identification and selection of those values. So in the end he concludes that conservatives are fundamentally more moral — or at least hold more moral values — than liberals as opposed to just holding different values. I find that highly questionable.Report
I think the real deal here that's being exposed by Trump is that "conservatism" isn't one thing but actually two in a lose coalition called "Republicans". Similarly, the 2016 primaries also showed liberals (or the Left) as being composed of two distinct groups in a coalition called "Democrats".
The social cons are indeed motivated primarily by tribal instincts, which explains the phenomenon of certain Evangelicals (not all Evangelicals, h/t Mark Kruger) going all in for very clearly morally bankrupt Trump. For that group, Protestant Christianity is just one aspect of tribal identity, not terribly unlike the way you're culturally Jewish but not particularly religious.Report
This fight with in the dems is almost as good as Trump winning the pres election. *makes popcorn–sits down to watch*Report
Jaybird says:
37 has an insight:
That is, if you swing at every pitch, you'll not only strike out a lot but hurt yourself.
— Richard M. Nixon (@dick_nixon) July 13, 2019
Road Scholar in reply to Jaybird says:
Weird mix of metaphors, but okay.Report
Kolohe says:
Well, Trump patched up this rift with some really racist flex-sealReport
Jaybird in reply to Kolohe says:
Gaming this out in my head:
"I hope you youngsters read Trump's tweets and realized that you have to stand in solidarity with us."
"What the heck? How in the flying heck did you not read Trump's tweets without realizing that you *BOOMERS* have to stand in solidarity with *US*?"
If I'm wrong about this by Friday, please throw this comment back in my face.Report
In vaguely adjacent news, Beto O'Rourke has announced that he and his wife are descended from slave owners.
Something that we've been talking about in town hall meetings — the legacy of slavery in the United States — now has a much more personal connection. I was recently given documents showing that both Amy and I are descended from people who owned slaves. https://t.co/rGKKLqcoKf
— Beto O'Rourke (@BetoORourke) July 15, 2019
Could have been worse.
Could have been Elizabeth Warren.Report
George Turner in reply to Jaybird says:
Well, I guess now he'll have to have that uncomfortable conversion with the black community in which he explains that he's not actually Mexican.
In any event, I'm surprised that there were any slaves available for his family to own, given Kamala Harris's family's bulk buying habits.
The ongoing circular firing squad will likely get much uglier.Report
Jaybird in reply to George Turner says:
I know that the main joke being made today about Trump's tweets was something to the effect of how he is absolutely desperate to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. The democrats are infighting but his name isn't being used… so he tweets out some racist bullshit which, as Kohole joked, flex-seals up the rifts in the infighting.
So in the wake of Trump tweeting racist bullshit, Beto announces that his ancestors were slave owners.
Can't anybody here play this game?
Luckily, nobody gives a crap about Beto… But if I wanted to pick a worse day to make this announcement, I don't know that I could.
Maybe if Beto won the nomination and he announced this a week before the election. Maybe.Report
DensityDuck in reply to Jaybird says:
It's like that episode of "Beavis And Butthead" where Butthead gets stuck in a sewer pipe and the whole town turns out to rescue him and it makes the news, and the end of the episode is Beavis crawling into the pipe and screaming about how he's stuck.Report
Mark Kruger says:
@andrew – I wonder if you might update this post or post a follow up. You outline the issue so well here. But recent events have driven these two D wings back together in common cause against Trump and his racist arrows. I'm now hearing 2 takes on that:
1) As Jaybird put it – Trump is snatching defeat from the jaws of victory by providing glue for Democratic cohesion in the middle of an implosion.
2) This is a bad thing for Ds because it forces Pelosi to defend her progressive wing and keeps them in the center of attention – and the RNC is thirsty to make the "squad" the center of the 2020 campaign.
For myself I'm not sure – I certainly think when your enemies are sniping at each other that the best course of action is to stand back and let them. But Trump can stand to NOT be the center of attention. 🙂 On the other hand…
What do you think?Report
Andrew Donaldson in reply to Mark Kruger says:
Both points are true. Trump drove them back together with his vile comments, but also you just had a national press conference with 4 freshmen, something not other combination would get break-in news coverage. And not being able to help themselves used it to not only defend themselves but to demand impeachment which Pelosi has avoided like the plague. They will use the coverage to push their agenda, which is what Trump wants. This is symbiotic now and will continue, and get worse. Report
[…] Read More: ordinary-times.com/2019/07/12/the-house-knocks-back/ […]Report
Next story Saturday!
Previous story Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta Resigns Amid Epstein Furor

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


We should impose a complete ban on imported solid waste because we have no obligation to help the West solve their problems.
When every finger is pointed at taxi drivers, does anyone ever think who created all this, or who issued the taxi permits? Were the taxi drivers going too far by asking Mahathir's help?
Mahathir is the ultimate terminator of Umno presidents, and has three in his hit list so far.
No one can tell nor prove that the measures will bring any good to the society but will instead exacerbate the government's financial burden.
Given his obstinacy, it is very likely that Mahathir will press ahead with the project as in the case of the third national car project.
The government should have studied the issue more thoroughly before making a decision whether or not to abolish death penalty.
Travel operators claim that the local tourist industry has been suffering since GE14.


Hi, I'm new here but I thought I'd start with this. I recently bought a '63 Gretsch Corvette and have modified it to look like the one Rory used. I installed a Kent Armstrong P90 pickup, a set of Ping tuners and a homemade bridge that looks like the one on his. A set of size 13 strings and a Shubb classic brass capo complete the package. In the interest of authenticity however I have a couple of questions about the type of hardware his has. What tuners are on his (I chose Pings for the shape of the knobs) and what is that bridge from? I searched through thousands of bridges on the internet and the closest thing I found was one for a vintage Hofner but it wasn't a close enough match (especially for the price, $120 US). Can anyone here identify these items? The visual reference I used is the "Rory's Glories" video on Youtube. Mine looks just like his.
Congratulations on your purchase of a vintage Gretsch Corvette guitar. I'm envious. I always look on ebay to see if I could pick up a cheap 60's Gretsch Corvette. Loved Rory's sound and slide playing when he used the GC for Bullfrog Blues. I did buy the modern version of this guitar the Gretsch G5135 CVT Electromatic Corvette about 10 years ago. then sold it a couple of years later. Not being a proper guitarist myself I wouldn't know the technical comparison? My friend though whom is a pro artist Riki Massini said that he enjoyed playing this modern version live on stage once. Yet I'm sure your vintage USA version with the Kent Armstrong P90 pickups, must sound much more authentic and nearer to Rory's vibe, for sure.
Riki Massini playing the Gretsch Electromatic Corvette. Have you a pic of your GC mock?
Here are a few pics of mine. Another mod I did was to remove the dot inlay from the first fret and fill it with a rosewood plug, as Rory's doesn't have one there. The grey box next to the amp is my homemade "Rangemaster Treble Booster".
Very nice. Can you tell us about your treble booster? That sounds interesting too.


Nigerian Disc Jockey "DJ SPICEY' is out with a new song title "NU WAVE" After his previous release " Swaggu Dripping" which featured Rapper Wale Turner .
The Spicey Of Tha Party "DJ SPICEY' joins force with "YUNG6iX" X TERRY APALA & MALEEQ SOULS" to deliver this love tune.
The Video of this hip-hop jam is already shot and would be released in few weeks from now.


I was wrong when I thought all that matters to Glan is its pristine white sand beach. You can't blame me. The famous Gumasa Beach where Sarangani Bay Festival is held every year is located in this town and this six-kilometer stretch of white sand is said to be among the finest in Mindanao. So, if someone talks about Glan, the first thing that comes to mind is Gumasa Beach.
But there's more to Glan than its coastal wonders. Being the oldest municipality in the whole SocCCSKSarGen Region, Glan is a heritage town that played a significant role in shaping the whole region's vibrant history. Forget about those white sand beaches, Glan's substantial historical value makes this coastal town the most interesting place to discover in Sarangani Province. And those who come here to search for nature and pure pleasure find themselves more fascinated when the olden charms of Glan that are frozen in time are laid before their eyes. For some, they even call this beautiful place a little museum town.
Glan's Heritage of Yesteryears, Today's Treasures.
In 1914, Don Tranquilino Ruiz from Alegria, Cebu was appointed by Gov. Gen. Francis Burton Harrison as Superintendent of Agricultural Colony No. 9. It was one of the Agricultural Colonies sent to then Moro Province now called Mindanao thru Colonization Law of Don Sergio Osmena, Sr., then Speaker of the House of Representatives. Don Tranquilino Ruiz together with other 16 Cebuanos were among the first Christian settlers who came to Glan on October 8, 1914. They were welcomed by the natives and together created a harmonious and progressive community. As town's tribute to this first meeting of Christians and natives, this town's foremost historic structure, the Colono Marker, was erected. If you happen to meet any local, ask him and he'll probably name those in the structure.
If you stroll around Poblacion, your eyes will surely be glued to the ample rows of ancestral houses standing still and resilient with time. Mostly built in the 1920's, these colonial homes still house stunning collection of antiques and priceless heirlooms handed down from generation to generation. Some of these houses were originally constructed by those Colonos who came to Glan carrying with them furniture pieces and stuff from Cebu. Some of these houses now are occupied or maintained by either third or fourth generation of the family. If you're lucky, owners will allow you to come inside their homes and let you take a glimpse of its colorful past. But even viewing them from the outside, you'll absolutely be mesmerized by their high balconies, canopies, capiz shell windows, calado embroidered walls and wide wooden staircases. Take your time. Lavish your eyes with such vintage sight you can only see in Glan.
Perhaps the most visited and most photographed ancestral house in Glan is the E. Alegado Ancestral House. It was constructed in 1949 after the Japanese-American with both Spanish and American architectural influences. Emilio Alducente Alegado, the one who built it, was the first elected Municipal Mayor of Glan. He was endeared to his people that not just a street but also a barangay in Glan was named after him. Visit this home. It is now occupied by Councilor Martin Alegado, grandson of the late E. Alegado and you'll surely be amazed by the intricate calado embroidered walls that abound inside. Of course, antique collections of the family can be seen everywhere.
Walk around the town proper and you will see several century old trees lining up along the streets, in schools and town plazas. At one glance, they almost resemble like those talking Ents in the Lord of The Rings. These trees are as old as the early Christian settlers of this quaint town and they're undeniably the mute witnesses of how Glan becomes what it is now. Take a brisk walk under these trees or maybe sit on a bench under their shades, it will make you feel the antiquity of this rustic town and somehow would make you wonder how it was like living here 100 years ago. Honestly, I've never been to any town or city in this country with this number of century-old trees thriving like in the real forest. While some towns and cities in the country are cutting their heritage trees in favor of modernization, here in Glan they're taken care of. They're well-preserved for they too are part of the town's heritage.
It may not be as old as baroque or stone churches in the Visayas where Christianity was first introduced, Santa Catalina de Alexandria Church, the Parish Church of Glan is worth a visit. The Catholic Faith in this part of Mindanao was brought by Christian Settlers who came to this town from Cebu. Majority of them came from the town of Carcar where Santa Catalina of Alexandria is the patron saint. This explains further why the patron saint of Glan is the same as that of Carcar. Though Christians Cebuanos migrated to Glan in 1914, the Santa Catalina de Alexandria Church was built in 1949. It is now 65 years old and considered a built heritage. When you visit there, never miss saying a prayer for Santa Catalina or St. Catherine. Just so you know, she is the patroness of philosophers and preachers.
There's no one in town who doesn't know this walking encyclopedia of Glan. His name is Dr. Jose Tranquilino "Dodong" Ruiz III and he is the grandson of no less than the great Don Tranquilino Ruiz. He is a current Municipal Councilor and physician by profession. More than that, Dr. Ruiz is an antique collector and lover of something that has historical value. His museum-like home houses his family memorabilia which he prudently preserved over the years. Most of these antique collections speak about the history of his hometown. Over the years, Dr. Dodong Ruiz has built a reputation as the greatest local historian with his collection of antiques, local stories and personal account of his town's heritage. And so when you visit this rustic town, drop by the Ruiz House to fully appreciate the history and legacy of Glan.
Like most of those who came to Glan, your visit to this coastal town is not complete without visiting Gumasa Beach. After luxuriating yourself with your heritage tour at the town proper, hit the beach and surrender yourself to the town's tropical allure. Gumasa is the priced beach jewel of Glan. It is nestled amidst the turquoise waters of the Sarangani Bay with long stretch of powdery white sands beaches and coves favorite among locals and foreign tourists. After engaging yourself all day beach bumming or suntanning, you can settle down and lounge by the seashore and gaze at the glorious sunset setting in the waters of Sarangani Bay. It is the perfect thing to do to end the day in Gumasa.
Today, Glan remains to be the home of proud Glanians who take pride of their roots and their rich heritage. They are warm people and they welcome everyone to their beloved town with warm smiles. True that the sights and sounds of modernity have established their presence in the town but they cannot drown the stillness and elegance of the past as embodied by century-old trees and colonial houses of Glan. The town and its people may have opened themselves to rapid change but they have not sacrificed the bountiful wealth of their heritage. They chose to protect it, conserve it for their next generation of Glanians to see, appreciate and preserve.
This is GLAN. Its Yesteryears' Heritage is Today's Treasure.
This coming October 8, Glan will celebrate its 100 years as a town – the oldest town in the whole Region 12. This will be the most celebrated event to be staged in the whole town where every Glanian from all over the world looks forward to. Thus, the celebration is made even bigger and grander. COME VISIT GLAN and join the Glanian celebrating its 100 Years Legacy of Great Heritage and History. For more details, please like and follow GLAN100 on Facebook to get updates about this Centennial Celebration of the Oldest Town in SOCCKSARGEN.
A thank you shout-out to Ms. Lodar Dagoy Escobillo, the ever energetic Tourism Head of Glan for making this Heritage Tour possible.
This blog post has indeed helped me to understand more of the history of Glan. I'm currently working on my thesis about architectural documentation of the ancestral houses found in the town. Kudos to you, Sir!


text:
50 days until 2018 FIFA World Cup Russia
2018 FIFA World Cup Russia™, the most sensational show in sports and soccer's greatest stage, kicks off in 50 days.
Seven weeks and 24 hours from now, the wait will be complete and the matches will be on as the world's 32 best teams battling to lift the coveted Jules Rimet Trophy.
As the days tick down, we're gearing up and doing everything possible to make sure you're ready to enjoy the festivities.
SOCCER.COM is your home for everything you'll see on field, in the stands and everywhere the beautiful game is watched this summer — from jerseys to boots to official match balls and everything in between. We've put together our top 18 items and much more.
This summer isn't just about enjoying the best of the game today. It's a seminal moment in our sport's history that will define who's next.
The jerseys
Apart from the Group Stage draw, to us, there's no surer sign that the FIFA World Cup is approaching than the release of the official match jerseys. We're still eagerly awaiting several, but adidas, Nike, PUMA and New Balance have lifted the curtain on many must-haves already.
Some have shown up on field in friendlies, while others have become instant icons of street fashion. You can dive deep on each of them and shop for your favorites using the below links.
adidas is bringing old school vibes with new school flavor. Go in and get full detail straight from the designers on their drops for Germany, Mexico, Russia, Argentina, Colombia, Spain, Belgium and Japan.
The Mexico strip, a stylish El Tri colorway with a graphic on the ribs lifted from the 1994 event, is an easy favorite, and available in a women's cut.
Nike also was inspired by the past for their designs to be worn by Australia, South Korea, Poland, Croatia, Brazil, Portugal, France, England and Nigeria.
All will look just as good on you as they do on Cristiano Ronaldo.
PUMA's shining star Uruguay was graced with a kit paying homage to the sun in the center of its national flag.
The German-based brand opted for a unified away design joining La Celeste with Switzerland and Senegal.
New Balance, who sponsors Costa Rica and Panama, have released a shirt for Los Ticos wrapped in national pride and primed to make another glorious run this summer.
The ball
2018 FIFA World Cup Russia™ will mark the 13th straight tournament with an official match ball from adidas.
For this one, the Three Stripes looked back to the first in 1970 and made a modern Telstar. For the first time since 1994, the ball is black and white. It's pixelated as a nod to Russian urban landscapes.
While the Telstar 18 is very retro in style, it's very futuristic in performance. A revolutionary six-panel thermally bonded design makes sure it flies true, while a textured design creates a supple touch.
Learn more about the ball and see how it plays on field with our Play Test.
The players to watch
In and among the pageantry, the national pride, the sportsmanship, the fans and all that contributes to the FIFA World Cup the most watched event in sports, players are the true standouts.
The most famous names and accomplished athletes in our game will all be there. With 50 days to go, it's a good time to familiarize yourself with legends jockeying for the Golden Ball like Lionel Messi, Cristiano Ronaldo, Neymar Jr. and Mohamed Salah, as well as stars of the future fit for the Best Young Player honor like Kylian Mbappé, Gabriel Jesus and Marcus Rashford.
Click through and see why they're our favorites and soon to be yours as well.
The matches
To us, every FIFA World Cup match is a must-watch, but the draw created some greater than others. We put together a Top 10 list of our most anticipated contests so you can make them appointment television.
The ones to certainly circle include Portugal facing Spain on June 15 in a contest pitting CR7 against his Real Madrid teammates, Germany playing Mexico on June 17 as the reigning champions compete against the kings of CONCACAF, and England squaring off against Belgium on June 28 as English Premier League superstars fight to top Group G.
Don't miss them.
Not only do we offer the largest curated collection of FIFA World Cup products, we're doing everything possible to spread the spirit this summer.
Customers can take advantage of two great deals today to celebrate 50 days until the event:
-Free shipping on any all of the jerseys mentioned in this story and bound for the Cup with promo code FSWC18.
-All of the Telstar balls, from the official match ball to the replicas and minis are Buy One, Get One 50 percent off with code WCBALL50.
The SOCCER.COM Campaign
The World Cup isn't just about what happens in Russia, it's a launching pad to inspire the next great generation. That's why we're challenging our audience to answer this call: Are you the player who can become "the next" in 2022?
In the coming weeks, we'll launch a national campaign #CELEBRATENEXT challenging our followers to post a photo or video to Instagram showing us how you celebrate the game and using that hashtag, #celebratenext, for a chance to win a $2,018 SOCCER.COM Gift Card.
Stay tuned. There's much more, including daily prizes, to come. We can't wait.
Remember, shop all things FIFA World Cup and get set for the big event at SOCCER.COM.
What are you most excited about this summer? Who are you tipping to win the tournament? Let us know in the comments section.
Countdown to 2018 FIFA World Cup Russia™


Servus Credit Union is the third largest credit union in Canada and the largest credit union in Alberta, serving nearly 390,000 members from over 100 locations.
We are very proud to announce the launch of Servus Credit Union, the custom-made mobile application for Servus Credit Union members.
Servus provided us with the branch & ATM details very quickly, which helped speed up development. From start to finish, the app took about one week per platform to complete!
Since debuting on the app stores, Servus has become one of the top downloaded credit union mobile apps!
Try it for free on iPhone, Android, BlackBerry, or Windows Phone.


text:
Cecil Ralph Thompson, mais conhecido como Tiny Thompson (31 de maio de 1903 - 11 de fevereiro de 1981), foi um jogador profissional de hóquei no gelo canadense que atuava como goleiro. Ele jogou 12 temporadas na National Hockey League (NHL), primeiro pelo Boston Bruins e, posteriormente, pelo Detroit Red Wings. Vencedor do Troféu Vezina quatro vezes, Thompson foi introduzido no Hockey Hall of Fame em 1959. Ele era membro de uma Stanley Cup equipe vencedora, como um novato na temporada 1928-29 com o Boston Bruins. No início da temporada 1938-39, depois de dez temporadas, com total de Boston, ele foi negociado com o Detroit Red Wings, onde ele terminou a temporada, e jogou um outro completo antes de se aposentar. Durante sua carreira, NHL, ele gravou 81 shutouts, sexto maior do que qualquer goleiro. Depois de se aposentar de jogar, treinou equipes da liga menor antes de se tornar um profissional scout observou. Thompson ajudou a popularizar a técnica de captura do disco como um método de fazer um salve. A puckhandler competente, ele foi o primeiro goleiro na NHL para gravar um auxiliar , passando o puck com o seu stick de um jogador do companheiro.

Ligações externas

Jogadores de hóquei no gelo do Canadá


Detailed information about Hotel Rochat on PensionHotel. You will find the hotel description, prices, location, number of beds, available services, attractions. The hotel can be booked directly through the contacts or use the booking form. Before booking see availability Hotel Rochat.
This hotel in a historic listed building in the old town of Basel enjoys a central and very quiet location, close to the university and the cantonal hospital. Hotel Rochat offers 50 rooms with 95 beds and features a cosy garden. 2 conference and banquet rooms for up to 200 people are available for trainings, conferences, exhibitions and various private occasions.
During their stay, all guests can benefit from free usage of the public transport in Basel with the mobility card, which will be provided after check-in.