Scharpling's a good man.

About the Mafia? Curious choice. Be interesting to see what a dramatization of that lifestyle is like.

In my weird world, CarbonYeti! In mine!

Carter ran as a moderate in the party but was considered the most conservative Democrat since Cleveland when in office by many. Hence Kennedy's primary challenge from the left in 1980. He wasn't a fanatical neoliberal, just very unimaginative on economic policy and fixated on austerity. His reputation for being…

AT LEAST SOMEONE NOTICED.

It couldn't have seemed more staged to me if Stone Cold had come out and given them all stunners afterward.

Nancy Reagan: Ohh.. tell me I'm the best, Frank! Tell me I'm the best!

Fair enough. I agree that some of them are ambigious and rather less than 'jaw-dropping'.

It seems like most of them are, in fact, based on gender. Hopper's own does strike me as the most ambigious and trivial. But if you're simply pointing out that most everyone is treated poorly in the industry, regardles of gender, I wouldn't doubt that. And in some instances, sexist motives may well be wrongly…

I suppose, but I think what people who want this would want is for him to not merely ask the questions, and respond to things said to him, but insert himself into the discussion and be funny and so on, which wouldn't be appropriate. And, incidentally, the last time he had Clinton on his show, where he could have…

Moderating means faciliating a discussion by others. He wouldn't be able to break in and give his take on it, you dunderheads.

Why you little scamp!

Balthazar in "Au Hasard Balthazar". The bear's mom in "The Bear".

Clinton-Greenspan era surpluses were a chimera created through austerity, the effects of which were offset by financial liberalization which shifted public debt to private debt and created the conditions of the crash in 2008, wiping out whatever illusory gains were made during that era.

I suppose that's not unreasonable.

I didn't make any claims about the safety or lack thereof of GMOs, only that I see no justification (which Monsanto's profits don't constitute) for consumers not to know how what they ingest was produced.

I'm sure that any cost for that would be borne by the public and not Monsanto.

Assuming that's true, is there a public-interest justification for their being so hell-bent in their opposition to the appropriate labeling of food so that consumers can make their own informed decisions? They'd appear more credible when decrying alleged misinformation if they didn't spend millions trying to suppress…

Same place as the Horace Silver one. Music isn't this site's strongest suit.

So he developed low taste to agree with Simon Cowell's low taste, which is great taste that almost destroyed his higher taste, and he's an amateur at having low, great taste.