Well, I heard that Netflix rescued The Little Prince movie, but they haven't given a release date yet. I'll look forward to that, and trying to get the new And Then There Were None on DVD in April. In the meantime, I continue to have network problems with my Tivo. I was on the phone with technical support for 40 minutes today before being disconnected. I'll try again when I'm not so frustrated. Couldn't find time before because I have been trying to install curtain rods and shorten some curtains for my windows.
Anyway, Obama nominated Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court, and it disappointed me that he didn't go for a liberal, or someone younger. People say he did it as a clever chess move, nominating the very person that the Republican leaders had previously approved of. But isn't that rather cavalier and risky, with no guarantee that your plan will work? Republicans seem to be slightly waffling in their opposition, but they're still talking about waiting until at least after the election to even hold hearings. Others speculate that Obama will withdraw the nomination later to let Hillary decide. If that's true, it seems like a dickish game to be playing just to score political points. There are important cases to be decided NOW; I can't even get clear info about what kind of justice Garland would be. There was an article posted with a totally BS chart claiming that Garland was far left, but the graph was based on Bill Clinton's record, not Garland's. What a crock! Real nice "analysis" and so-called journalism. This is why we need some confirmation hearings, so we can suss out Garland's full record and define what "moderate" means.