<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for Michael_Markman</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/Michael_Markman/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/Michael_Markman/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Jan 2022 13:50:34 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: ‘The Gift of Room Tone’ featuring Martin Scorsese, Roger Deakins, Cristopher Walken, and More</title><link>https://www.theblackandblue.com/2021/01/01/gift-room-tone-criterion/#comment-5678102516</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Visually brilliant. The track, however, (as many people noted) is an egregiously wrong choice. What were you thinking? You promised a gift of room tone—and you failed to deliver. Can we have an honest mix?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 06 Jan 2022 13:50:34 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Kiss Me, Stupid / The Dissolve</title><link>http://thedissolve.com/reviews/1384-kiss-me-stupid/#comment-4035469950</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Yes.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 12 Aug 2018 00:04:57 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Kiss the good times goodbye</title><link>http://www.autonews.com/article/20171105/INDUSTRY_REDESIGNED/171109944/kiss-the-good-times-goodbye#comment-3604203858</link><description>&lt;p&gt;What tracks? Autonomous vehicles travel on today's roads. The only tracks mentioned in the article are specialized public and private tracks for people who want the nostalgia of driving non-autonomous vehicles.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 2017 03:59:33 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: If Hillary truly loves this country, she would stand by this president</title><link>http://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/352110-if-hillary-truly-loves-this-country-she-would-stand-by-this-president#comment-3533989343</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Click-bait. Nicely done. But no.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 24 Sep 2017 22:09:41 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Imperfect Power of &amp;lt;br&amp;gt; &amp;lt;em&amp;gt;I Am Not Your Negro&amp;lt;/em&amp;gt;</title><link>https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2017/02/i-am-not-your-negro-review/515976/#comment-3150386633</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Exactly so. I jumped to the comments to make that point.. but you got here first. I just saw the film today. It's not a biography of James Baldwin. And it doesn't pretend to be. It's a withering and relentless presentation of Baldwin's insights into race in America. One of the most powerful films on the topic that I've ever seen.  If someone else wants to make a film about Baldwin's sexuality and  call it "I am not your homosexual," let them go for it. But that's not this movie. This film is shattering. I, for one, am happy not to see if diluted with a side trip into Baldwin's sexuality.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2017 22:56:30 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What If Donald Trump Were Covered Like Hillary Clinton?</title><link>http://www.wbur.org/cognoscenti/2016/09/16/the-medias-role-in-trumps-rise-steve-almond#comment-2906462359</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Les Moonves, head of CBS was very clear and open about this back in February: "It may not be good for America, but it's damn good for CBS... Man, who would have expected the ride we're all having right now? ... The money's rolling in and this is fun... I've never seen anything like this, and this going to be a very good year for us. Sorry. It's a terrible thing to say. But, bring it on, Donald. Keep going,"&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 20 Sep 2016 09:16:05 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Hillary Clinton's Democrats are America's Next Republicans</title><link>https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2016/05/hillary-clintons-democrats-are-americas-next-repub.html#comment-2715210086</link><description>&lt;p&gt;This is how the Constitution locks out third parties: It requires an absolute majority of electoral votes to win the presidency. Failing a majority, the choice is thrown to the House. That creates an insurmountable barrier. Nothing explicit in the Constitution prohibits third parties. In fact, the framers didn't want to see parties at all. But the rules they set up make it impossible for third-parties to win the White House. Unintended consequence, perhaps. But a consequence, nonetheless.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2016 15:00:50 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Hillary Clinton's Democrats are America's Next Republicans</title><link>https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2016/05/hillary-clintons-democrats-are-americas-next-repub.html#comment-2678959992</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Didn't say I'm cool with it. Just pointing out that changing it is a very heavy lift because it's baked into the Constitution.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The irony is that the founders originally didn't want political parties. They were idealistically imagining that the political parties would simply be about who is the best person (well, let's be true to the time, the best man) for the job. But once parties reared their ugly heads, the provisions in the Constitution worked to drive everything to two dominant parties with other parties pretty well locked out of national elections.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Given the system we have, voting for a third-party candidate for president is risky and potentially dangerous. While not everyone agrees, it's likely that Ralph Nader on the ballot threw the election to George W. Bush.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 16 May 2016 16:08:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Hillary Clinton's Democrats are America's Next Republicans</title><link>https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2016/05/hillary-clintons-democrats-are-americas-next-repub.html#comment-2677312827</link><description>&lt;p&gt;The "more parties" approach is constantly thwarted by two provisions of our Constitution. First, the requirement that the President be elected by an absolute majority of electoral votes. (You can win a state's electoral votes with a plurality, but the losing parties disappear in the electoral vote tally.) Second, the requirement that in if nobody wins an absolute majority of electoral votes, the decision moves to the House of Representatives.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 15 May 2016 15:45:39 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Steve Jobs the movie</title><link>http://scripting.com/2015/10/09/steveJobsTheMovie.html#comment-2312105841</link><description>&lt;p&gt;The movie opened in my town yesterday. You are so right about Kate Winslet. With most of the players I couldn't stop thinking, oh there's Jeff Daniels, there’s Michael Fassbender, there’s Seth Rogan. But with Winslet, I was thinking, wait, isn't Kate Winslet supposed to be in this movie—where is she? And then, I had no idea Joanna Hoffman was such a good actor.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;There’s a big piece of Steve that's missing from the film. To watch this, you'd come away thinking that he built Apple and the Mac simply by browbeating people. And it is certainly the case that he could make folks feel incredibly bad when they disappointed him. But it is also the case that he could make people feel incredibly good about doing work that met or surpassed his expectations.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 17 Oct 2015 10:49:16 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Inside American Experience . American Experience . WGBH . Walt Disney Comes to American Experience in September | PBS</title><link>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/blog/2015/6/4/walt-disney-comes-american-experience-september/#comment-2258935160</link><description>&lt;p&gt;And people who actually knew how to draw that mouse.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:03:39 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Foxs Tucker Carlson Contrasts Himself From Jorge Ramos Who Is "Advocating For A Certain Point Of View"</title><link>http://mediamatters.org/video///205235#comment-2226889950</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Always looking for symmetry. Rather than address the issue, deflect to some mythical, unreported hypocrisy that may exist on the left.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 30 Aug 2015 18:54:37 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why you must watch BoJack Horseman</title><link>http://scripting.com/2015/08/30/whyYouMustWatchBojackHorseman.html#comment-2226720364</link><description>&lt;p&gt;OK. I'm in.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 30 Aug 2015 16:52:51 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What's good about Trump</title><link>http://scripting.com/2015/08/10/whatsGoodAboutTrump.html#comment-2187239174</link><description>&lt;p&gt;This is a Survey Monkey poll, so take it with a heavy dose of skepticism. In it, Fiorina has jumped to fourth place among all candidates, moving from 2% support to 8%. What’s more, she scored highest of all paricipants on “best job in the debate,” out-pointing even trump.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;22% scored Fiorina as best, while only 2% said she had done the worst job. By contrast, Trump was rated best by 18% and worst by 29%.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Polling with more rigorous methodology will be out in a day or so. It's a good bet they will corroborate, if not the magnitude of her shift in standing, at the very least the direction shown here.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.pdf.investintech.com/preview/33f7458c-3ec9-11e5-9555-002590d31986/index.html" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.pdf.investintech.com/preview/33f7458c-3ec9-11e5-9555-002590d31986/index.html"&gt;http://www.pdf.investintech...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2015 15:11:38 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What's good about Trump</title><link>http://scripting.com/2015/08/10/whatsGoodAboutTrump.html#comment-2186843073</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I'd love to see the Venn diagram of Bernie’s and Donalds’s “much the same thing.” So far, I have single-payer in the overlap. What else?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2015 11:42:28 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Talking to Eddy Cue and Jimmy Iovine about Apple Music</title><link>http://www.loopinsight.com/2015/06/30/talking-to-eddy-cue-and-jimmy-iovine-about-apple-music/#comment-2117363799</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Looks like customers of Beats Music will get a much smoother transition into Apple Music than customers of iTunes Radio. The stations I built in iTunes Radio have simply vanished without a warning. They live on (for now) on AppleTV. But my iPhone can't see them. Neither can my Mac.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2015 23:39:07 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why the iPhone Wins, and How Google Killed the Smartphone Market for Everyone Else</title><link>http://www.techzone360.com/topics/techzone/articles/2015/06/08/404687-why-iphone-wins-how-google-killed-smartphone-market.htm#comment-2069190670</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I don't remember Microsoft taking the market from Apple with a similar operating system. Windows never beat Mac. There was no need to beat Mac. The reality was worse: DOS beat Mac. If you track the history... Apple was one of several early microcumputer manufacturers—There was RadioShack, Commodore, Atari, etc. Then IBM showed up with a brand that business could respect. The IBM-PC (and clones) running DOS quickly surpassed Apple. By the time the Mac showed up ion 1984, the IBM and compatibles were dominant. Mac was a widely admired novelty... with no hard drive, and virtually no software. Mac made very little headway against the dominant MS-DOS. Microsoft Windows was not an anti-Mac competitor—there was no need for one. Windows beat DOS and the OS/2.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2015 21:54:54 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Men's Health Writer Goes On A Justin Bieber Rant &amp; Calls Singer 'Offensive'! See What He Wrote HERE!</title><link>http://perezhilton.com/2015-03-14-justin-bieber-criticized-mens-health-writer-offensive#comment-1911491583</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I think this misses the point. This cover is part of the Justin Pieber redemption PR campaign. It's not wiitten for Belieberss. It's for people who hae written him off. Justin's people (and maybe Justin himself) want the artical to slam him mercilessly so that he can promise to do better. The magazine is on the stands at the same time as the Comedy Central raost. The whole point is for Justin to allow people to accuse him of all the worst things his detractors believe as a way of expiation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's silly fo take offense. This is exactly the kind of article The lad wanted to see.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2015 07:29:40 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Scientists Are Wrong All the Time, and That&amp;#8217;s Fantastic</title><link>http://www.wired.com/2015/02/scientists-wrong-time-thats-fantastic/#comment-1880552733</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Or when the ignorant spoke out, nobody heard them.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 28 Feb 2015 11:58:03 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Comments?</title><link>http://liveblog.smallpict.com/2015/02/09/comments.html#comment-1868059867</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Of course, Giuliani isn't worth a full-court Internet shaming. He's interesting because of the challenge he poses to other GOP candidates. They will be asked to comment. Scott Walker, for example, is not willing to commit to whether or not Obama loves his country.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.politicususa.com/2015/02/21/gov-walker-obama-loves-country.html" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.politicususa.com/2015/02/21/gov-walker-obama-loves-country.html"&gt;http://www.politicususa.com...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 21 Feb 2015 13:59:22 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Republicans To Define Full Time Work Week As 40 Hours Under ObamaCare | National Federation of Independent Business</title><link>http://www.nfib.com/article/bnews-republicans-to-define-full-time-work-week-as-40-hours-under-obamacare-67195/#comment-1763589944</link><description>&lt;p&gt;That's not from the Washington Post. That's from the Washington Times, a right-wing propaganda organ that makes FoxNews look responsible&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2014 15:56:27 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Ann Coulter Caught Masturbating to CIA Torture Report On Amtrak Train</title><link>http://dailycurrant.com/2014/12/15/ann-coulter-caught-masturbating-to-cia-torture-report-on-amtrak-train/#comment-1748986361</link><description>&lt;p&gt;The Daily Currant is a satire site. They don't need a disclaimer. They are a competitor of The Onion and Borowitz.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2014 14:08:51 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Obamas Reflect on Personal Incidents of Racial Discrimination </title><link>http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=27636612#comment-1748681942</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Glad you are frank enough to identify yourself as a political enemy of the Obamas. We can discount your dismissal of them accordingly.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2014 11:10:21 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: How "dislike" might work</title><link>http://scripting.com/2014/12/12/howDislikeMightWork.html#comment-1739517268</link><description>&lt;p&gt;It's unclear to me what the "Hide" function actually does.It might well be a primitive version of what Dave is talking about. But it's a pretty blunt instrument, isn't it?  You can hide "posts like this" But what does that mean? With advertising, you get some choices to tell them why you don't like about the advertisement, but with posts from friends, what is it about the post you don't like? No way that I've found to signal that. You can hide posts from specific individuals and you can hide links to specific websites, but as far as I know, you don't get the functionality that Dave is asking for.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2014 17:26:20 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why Do Republicans Hate the Beatles?</title><link>http://www.motherjones.com/node/263476#comment-1662460194</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Easy answer: The Beatles sang, "all you need is love." &lt;br&gt;The GOP say, "all you need is _______." &lt;br&gt;a) Discipline  b) Guns  c) Lower Taxes  d) Tighter abortion restrictions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;(If someone played George Harrison's "Taxman," for them, they might come around.)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Michael Markman (Mickeleh)</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2014 23:32:13 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>