Giuliani way out in front of rivals in latest US presidential poll

[Drake Tungsten]

That's a pretty far cry from Arkansas-style sister-lovin'.

True. Still, marrying a cousin (even a fifth cousin) with the same last name as you seems kind of gross...

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

That's a pretty far cry from Arkansas-style sister-lovin'.

True. Still, marrying a cousin (even a fifth cousin) with the same last name as you seems kind of gross...

Good thing your name isnt Smith, then.

I knew a couple who were both born with the name Katz. Not related, as far as they knew. They got into a fight over whether she WOULD have taken his name, if they had had different names. They ended up splitting up.

[Drake Tungsten]

They got into a fight over whether she WOULD have taken his name, if they had had different names.

I'm sorry they split up, but you have to admit that's a pretty absurd thing to fight about...

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Uh...the Rough Riders attacked on foot. Not enough ships were sent to transport their horses to Cuba.

Lies, all lies!

[Kuciwalker]

@ lotm

[Zkribbler]

Lies, all lies!

From Wikipedia:

Cavalry training was conducted for about a month at Camp Wood in San Antonio, Texas and was highly rigorous. The regiment was then moved to Tampa, Florida, the port of embarkation for the Cuban Campaign. A serious lack of transport resulted in almost all of the unit's horses and four of its twelve troops being left behind.

The regiment landed near Daiquirí, Cuba on June 22, 1898 as part of the Cavalry Division under the command of Major General Joseph Wheeler, of the Army's V Corps. Although officially a cavalry unit, the regiment fought on foot. They immediately began marching towards Santiago, their objective. Two days later, the unit participated in the Battle of Las Guasimas. Slightly outnumbered, the American contingent was nonetheless able to force a retreat of the Spanish troops to the city of Santiago.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by lord of the mark



1. Im not sure Americans hate their cities quite that way. We're along way from the era documented by Hofstader. Most suburbanites now live in or near edge cities that are effectively urban, while many of the cities have reinvented themselves as "theme parks". Folks still hate certain elements identified with cities - like liberal intellectuals, restive minorities, criminals, the urban poor. To the extent Giuliani is perceived as the "white knight" who took on those elements, he may be stronger. Does it matter that he did so directly on behalf of middle class Jews and Italians rather than on behalf of the Methodists from Ohio who come to visit? And of course to what extent does Middle America see gays as part of the hostile urban element?

2. Folksy. As someone who grew up in a neighborhood that was roughly 2/3 jewish and 1/3 Italian (plus smatterings of Irish, Puerto Ricans, and others) and next door to a neighborhood that was 3/4 Italian and 1/4 Jews and others, Rudy seems pretty folksy to me. The question is whether he can sell the folksiness of ethnic middle class New York to the country at large. How much have media images like "The King of Queens", "Everybody Loves Raymond" "Seinfeld", etc created an image of cute, folksy, ethnic, WHITE, New York that resonates?

1. I simply disagree. I've seen repeated studies over the years that show that American suburbanites actually spend less time in their suburbs' cities now than they did 30-40 years ago. Now that workplaces and retail have moved to the suburbs en masse, the suburbs themselves have become self contained demographic entities -- there's nothing "sub" about them. And, overwhelmingly, they do not resemble cities at all, especially in their homogeneity. Frankly, Hofstadter seems more and more prescient every day, and not just on this issue.

2. First, TV sitcoms are not measure of anything except what amuses people -- which, at some level, is what they're willing to laugh at as much as with. It would be foolish to imagine that the public wants the same qualities in a king as in a jester. Second, while I hate all the shows you mentioned (except Seinfeld), I have seen them all, and what strikes me about Raymond, KoQ, etc., is how decidedly un-New York they are; save for the accents, they could all be set in Shaker Heights, Des Moines, or Pasadena. Seinfeld and one or two other shows (Mad About You, maybe Friends) have had a more NY sensibility, but the demographics for all those shows skewed young and urdan -- i.e., Democrat. I'd never argue that blue America isn't willing to accept a New Yorker as president -- but Rudy isn't running, initially, in blue America.

Edit: Besides which, you're probably overestimating the popularity of these shows. In the age of cable, even popular shows have a much smaller audience than they once did. During Seinfeld's heyday, for example, it was frequently observed that in spite of being the most popular TV show in America, a show with a Seinfeld-size audience in the 70s would have been deemed a failure and cancelled.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Zkribbler


From Wikipedia:

LIES!

[Drake Tungsten]

A serious lack of transport resulted in almost all of the unit's horses and four of its twelve troops being left behind.

Eight guys on foot kicked the **** out of the Spanish? Damn, the Rough Riders really were badasses...

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly


1. I simply disagree. I've seen repeated studies over the years that show that American suburbanites actually spend less time in their suburbs' cities now than they did 30-40 years ago. Now that workplaces and retail have moved to the suburbs en masse, the suburbs themselves have become self contained demographic entities -- there's nothing "sub" about them. And, overwhelmingly, they do not resemble cities at all, especially in their homogeneity. Frankly, Hofstadter seems more and more prescient every day, and not just on this issue.

2. First, TV sitcoms are not measure of anything except what amuses people -- which, at some level, is what they're willing to laugh at as much as with. It would be foolish to imagine that the public wants the same qualities in a king as in a jester. Second, while I hate all the shows you mentioned (except Seinfeld), I have seen them all, and what strikes me about Raymond, KoQ, etc., is how decidedly un-New York they are; save for the accents, they could all be set in Shaker Heights, Des Moines, or Pasadena. Seinfeld and one or two other shows (Mad About You, maybe Friends) have had a more NY sensibility, but the demographics for all those shows skewed young and urdan -- i.e., Democrat. I'd never argue that blue America isn't willing to accept a New Yorker as president -- but Rudy isn't running, initially, in blue America.

Edit: Besides which, you're probably overestimating the popularity of these shows. In the age of cable, even popular shows have a much smaller audience than they once did. During Seinfeld's heyday, for example, it was frequently observed that in spite of being the most popular TV show in America, a show with a Seinfeld-size audience in the 70s would have been deemed a failure and cancelled.

1. edge city, homogeneous? Maybe im too blindered by living in NoVa, but here edge city is heavily hispanic and asian, and the older poorer suburbs are checkered with the wealthy ones, at least until you get a couple of miles past the Beltway. Yup, I know lots of folks dont go downtown much, but that seems out of convenience and auto centredness more than out of fear, as compared with 30 years ago.

2. Raymond, etc could be anywhere. Well, er, thats the point. Queens and Staten Island and parts of Brooklyn COULD be anywhere, (in their day to day concerns, if not their commuting patterns) The question is how much out of towners can distinguish the middle class outer boroughs (Giuliani country) from EEVIL Manhattan (and its extension in norther Brooklyn) . I realize the tv shows may not do it themselves - but if Giuliani sets out to make that case, with clever ads, stories, etc he has a preexisting image to play to.

3.yeah sure. I dont watch cable, I dont know what impressions people are getting there.