Mannix & Co.; Plus, Noah's Ark Explained
Neely Tucker precisely captures the lower-middle-brow appeal of Mannix. I remember that Mad magazine used to make fun of how Mannix was always getting beat up. Bruised, tie unkempt, a Scotch in his hand: Yep, that's our Mannix. Who knew that there was a Mike Connors fan site? Great to see a reference to Lalo Schifrin. Here is the theme music -- but I warn you, it'll get stuck in your head.
The graph that jumped out was the list of TV detective dramas of the 1970s:
'....the rest of the gang has been pretty much rescued from oblivion by DVD, that pre-"Hill Street Blues" generation of stand-alone cops and anti-hero private dicks who bend the law to save the day: "Kojak," "Columbo," "Banacek," "Baretta," "Police Woman," "Starsky and Hutch," "Mission: Impossible," "Hawaii Five-0," "The Rockford Files," "Ironside," "The Streets of San Francisco" and, coming this Christmas, "The Mod Squad." (Peggy Lipton, we love you!) '
The collapse of the Laurentide Ice Sheet released a deluge of water that increased global sea levels by up to 1.4 metres and caused the largest North Atlantic freshwater pulse of the last 100,000 years. Before this time, a ridge across the Bosporus Strait dammed the Mediterranean and kept the Black Sea as a freshwater lake. With the rise in sea level, the Bosporus Strait was breached, flooding the Black Sea. This event is now widely believed to be behind the various folk myths that led to the biblical Noah's Ark story. Archaeological records show that around this time there was a sudden expansion of farming and pottery production across Europe, marking the end of the Mesolithic hunter-gatherer era and the start of the Neolithic. The link between rising sea levels and such massive social change has previously been unclear.
Friday in my post-debate blatherings I said that the questions from the CNN journalists were designed to provoke as much conflict as possible. Well, I went back and looked at the transcript. Right again! Maybe conflict is what we want in a debate, but note that the questions are really about process, and truthfulness. Here are the first questions asked of the candidates:
Campbell Brown: "You stumbled on an important question involving illegal immigration. But your opponents are saying that that's really part of a larger pattern with you, that you often avoid taking firm positions on controversial issues. And one of your opponents on this stage calls this "the politics of parsing." How do you respond to that?"
BLITZER: Let me bring in Senator Obama, because you've been among those critical of Senator Clinton. You've suggested she's triangulating, whatever that means, on some of the key issues. She's running a textbook Washington campaign, you've suggested that. I want you to explain, if you don't mind, Senator: What do you mean by that?
BLITZER: Senator Clinton, you want to respond?
BLITZER: I want Senator Edwards to weigh in. Because you have spoken about the politics of parsing in your criticism of Senator Clinton. I want you to explain what that means.
BLITZER: Senator Clinton, I'll let you respond because there was a direct charge made against you.
BLITZER: I want Senator Biden to weigh in.
SEN. JOSEPH BIDEN (D) DELAWARE: Oh no, no, no, no.
BLITZER: Senator Biden, I want you to weigh in.
BIDEN: Don't do it, no! Don't make me speak!
Rudy likes NASCAR? I don't think so.
Here's Garance on the decelerating Edwards campaign (gosh, those commenters are nasty).
Murder rate is up in the nation's capital:
"There's turf issues, arguments over girls, arguments over something that may have happened that nobody can remember." Thirty-eight homicides this year are blamed on arguments.
[more to come...]
The comments to this entry are closed.