home

Tuesday Open Thread

Here's a new open thread, all topics welcome.

< 1991 and the Racial Justice Act
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Our lame duck president (5.00 / 4) (#14)
    by CST on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 11:12:32 AM EST
    Continues to forge ahead, critics be d@mned.  Link

    "President Obama's Clean Power Plan, announced on Monday, is unquestionably the most important step the administration has taken in the fight against climate change.

    It imposes the first nationwide limits on carbon dioxide pollution from power plants, the source of 31 percent of America's total greenhouse gas emissions."

    I realize that bringing this up may bring out the trolls.  Personally I don't care to argue about established science, so I won't.  Others can act as they choose.  I do just want to say - elections matter.  I know there was a lot of disagreement about the current state of the Dem party, and that's a good thing, we need to push on the issues.  But 7 years late is still a hell of a lot better than never, and this continues to be by far the best end of a presidency I've seen in my lifetime.

    From the NYT editorial August 4, (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by KeysDan on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 12:40:04 PM EST
    on the President's Clean Power Plan:  "And then there is the little matter of the upcoming election.  Even if the courts rule that the new regulations are fully-consistent with the EPA's authority under the Clean Act Act, a future president could rescind or delay them.   Hillary Rodham Clinton has said she support the plan and will carry it out.  Republicans are unanimously opposed."

    Parent
    so many reasons (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by CST on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 12:51:20 PM EST
    we desperately need Dems to win.

    Honestly I think one of the things these last minute actions could do is give disgruntled Democrats a case to support Hillary Clinton.

    Parent

    He is Killing It So Much... (none / 0) (#16)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 11:25:25 AM EST
    ...that I have read two articles about the legal ramifications of him running a third time.

    The short and sweet, there is no enforcement provision in the 22nd Amendment and by the time the courts looked at it, he would already be President and they would never reverse an election.

    Stupid stuff, but I doubt many Presidents can claim their party's popular replacement has lower polling numbers.  Obama has a good chance of leaving office with the highest rating of any modern president.

    Check it out, it's a popular topic getting all kinds of press.  It doesn't hurt that he stated he could win a third term.

    Parent

    His (none / 0) (#18)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 11:32:34 AM EST
    approval ratings are going to have to come up a lot to leave office as the most popular like about 20 points according to Gallup.

    We had this same discussion back in 1999 I believe with the Big Dawg. Funny how nobody ever seems to want GOP presidents to run for a third term anymore.

    Parent

    I don't even want them running for a first. (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 01:32:38 PM EST
    And that's because (1.00 / 1) (#44)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 02:25:55 PM EST
    their supporters know it is illegal.

    Parent
    Baa waa waa (none / 0) (#51)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 03:17:12 PM EST
    Nope. I don't think anybody wanted W to run again even if he could. It's because GOP presidents are really bad, Jim but not that I expect you to admit that.

    Parent
    yea (none / 0) (#27)
    by CST on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 11:53:14 AM EST
    I still have a wishlist.  And I know he has publicly stated a desire to take on some kind of criminal justice reform.  So that would be a big one.

    I'd also really like to see a substantial raise in the minimum wage.  It's so critical right now, while the labor market is tightening, boomers are starting to retire, and wages are still way too depressed.  I can't think of a better time to do it, as the it is less likely to significantly affect unemployment right now and more likely to significantly affect wages.  People are way too broke and that makes me really nervous about the ability of the country to keep the recovery going.

    If the Iran bill passes, that would leave the next (hopefully Dem) president in pretty solid shape to try tackling immigration and healthcare again.

    Parent

    Ignoring the 22nd Amendment ... (none / 0) (#33)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 12:53:35 PM EST
    ... would have very profound serious consequences for our country, given that it was ratified by three-quarters of the states and is thus an integral part of our country's base legal document.

    While it's a lousy amendment in my opinion, given that it was a knee-jerk reaction hastily adopted and in the wake of FDR's four consecutive electoral victories, it's also settled law and would require another constitutional amendment to repeal it.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    I don't get the impression (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by CST on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 12:58:39 PM EST
    Obama wants to be president again anyway.

    It was an intentional dig at the leaders in Africa who won't give up the power.  

    But it's worth a debate that he could.  That for all the people who hate Obama, good policy = good politics.

    Parent

    Frankly (none / 0) (#37)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 01:00:38 PM EST
    I think he's looking forward not being president anymore. He has never seemed to really enjoy the job that much unlike other people who seemed to relish having the job.

    Parent
    Only person I know that relished the job (none / 0) (#47)
    by CoralGables on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 02:36:12 PM EST
    in the last 50 years was Bill Clinton.

    Parent
    I doubt it (none / 0) (#63)
    by jbindc on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 04:54:27 PM EST
    This is one of those posturing statements that he can put out there to be cocky and drive Republicans nuts, because, obviously, it will never happen or be true.  I can unequivocally state that I will be the next Queen of England, but that doesn't mean it's true.

    His approval ratings are around 50% (his average, as of this week, according to RCP, is 45.3%, and none of the major polls taken recently have him above 48%).  Good, but he's gonna have to perform miracles if you think he's going to have the highest of all time.  Eisenhower ended his second term with an average approval rating of 60.5%, Reagan had 55.3%, and Clinton had 60.6%.

    Parent

    Your Reply... (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 11:13:41 AM EST
    ...kinda shots your notion right in the foot.

    GD.

    How much earlier, jim? Should he (5.00 / 3) (#20)
    by Anne on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 11:36:42 AM EST
    have just fired into the car - BOOM! - as soon as he shined his light into it?

    Look, you seem to be under the impression that the life of this police officer is not being appropriately valued, and that's not what's going on here.  I don't think there's a person here who is cheering for the loss of life, or who doesn't care that a family has lost a loved one.

    Anyone who signs on to be a member of law enforcement has to know that our streets are flooded with guns.  Law-abiding people have them, criminals have them - they're all over the place.  Not a day goes by that some little kid doesn't find one under a bed or in a drawer and either shoots/kills someone or kills him- or herself.  Not a day goes by that someone doesn't make a bad decision that involves a gun - and as much as you don't want to hear this, cops make bad decisions, too.

    We all know that there are many times when police use their weapons appropriately, when they are defending their and others' lives.  We all know there are many times when police use Tasers and nightsticks appropriately, as well.

    But it cannot be denied that there have been too many times, not all of them publicized in screaming headlines, when the decisions that cops make cost people their lives who didn't have to die.  Did Mike Brown have to be shot?  Tamir Rice?  Did Eric Garner need to be choked to death?  Did Sandra Bland need to be threatened with a Taser and put in jail for failure to signal a lane change she made to get out of a police car's way?  

    No, no, no and no.

    Do police departments need to look like substations of the National Guard armory?  Do American streets really need to have APC's rolling through them?  

    No and no.

    Police departments and the police have become overly-militarized, with an all-too-prevalent mindset not of serving the public, but of making the public acquiesce to their orders, regardless of whether those orders are justified, constitutional or appropriate.  

    There are a lot of good cops out there, we know this.  The bad ones are hurting the brand, assuming the brand isn't what the bad ones have made it.  These bad cops need to be shown the door, or, they need to be put into some kind of intense training to overcome their bad habits and bullying, tyrannical attitudes.

    No one knows anymore if they're going to be stopped by a rational, intelligent, civic-minded public servant, or end up dead on the side of the road because they have a broken tail light.  Cops want to feel they will be safe while doing their jobs?  Then stop the bullying, stop escalating minor situations into life-or-death struggles, THINK! - treat people with some respect.

    As for you and your never-ending, non-stop BS... oh, never mind.  

    anne, I answered you very specifically (none / 0) (#77)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 10:08:11 PM EST
    by quoting Repack, Scott, Donald and Mondriggian. Jeralyn deleted it because, and I don't know why, she doesn't believe we should quote things written in previous threads by commentators.

    So go back on this link, start at comment 113and read downward.

    As to your questions re Brown, Rice, Garmer and Bland. I have never commented re Rice and haven't followed it closely. It looks bad but I have no opinion.

    As for the other three...they made their own problem.

    Parent

    National Geographic Photo Contest (5.00 / 4) (#25)
    by Anne on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 11:50:33 AM EST
    winners have been announced.

    Here's a gallery of photos that might be a nice change of pace.

    Wonderful. (none / 0) (#39)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 01:22:13 PM EST
    Beautiful (none / 0) (#41)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 02:07:49 PM EST
    thanx for the link

    Parent
    It felt like climbing out of the (none / 0) (#49)
    by Anne on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 02:56:36 PM EST
    swamp of election politics and law enforcement violence and finding a pool of pure, cool water.

    Parent
    The Talented Mr. Lindsey. (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by KeysDan on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 11:52:03 AM EST
    The conservative hawk. presidential wannabe, and US senator who sits on the Senate Appropriations, Armed Services, Budget, and Judiciary Committees, is, also, a "battle-tested" leader"   An

     At least, he feels that he is.  In a self-evaluation, Lindsey says "I think Colonel Graham did a pretty good job, quite frankly, given the constraints of my day job and my abilities in terms of time."

    However, an article by Craig Whitlock of WaPo shows that though Senator Graham did very little in the reserve (leaving the Air Force active duty in 1989),  he rose in rank to colonel and retired just last June entitled to a monthly pension of $2,773. His private retirement party included Biden, Petraeus, and, of course, McCain.

    Lindsey, has peddled an embellished and at times "inaccurate" narrative of his service in the reserve.  His war zone tours consisted of specially arranged tours that lasted two days, and coincided with trips to Iraq and Afghanistan, recalling his stroll through a Baghdad market with McCain, proclaiming peace and safety thanks to Bush's war, and his find of five rugs for five bucks.

      Graham's official biography said he served as senior instructor at the Judge Advocate General's School at Maxwell AF Base in Alabama, Bult, Mr Graham told the WaPo that he never set foot at the base or taught there.  He just never took time to change it, but he acknowledged that he probably should have.

    Not a one time lapse.  In 1998 he claimed he was a veteran of the Persian Gulf war , even though he never deployed as part of that campaign.  During a ten-year period (1995-2005) he put in 105 hours of training, or about a or so each year on average.

    Lindsey has never seen a bomb he did not like.  And, of course, the deal with Iran is bad.  It could be better.  True, a better deal would be better. And, Colonel Lindsey, the president, would make it happen.  Let's all celebrate with a mint julep on the veranda


    Lindsey need not worry (none / 0) (#29)
    by CoralGables on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 12:12:39 PM EST
    about making those decisions. In the most recent South Carolina poll for the republican nomination which was released yesterday:

    Trump 34
    Carson 10
    Bush 10
    Walker 10
    Rubio 6
    Huckabee 5
    Graham 5

    This was done by Gravis Marketing, a Republican operative polling firm.

    Parent

    As if ludicrously continuing to call (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by jondee on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 12:43:19 PM EST
    human-influenced climate change a "hoax" here weren't baiting, trolling, abusing a guest's privileges, and flippantly wasting bandwidth..

    Former President Jimmy Carter, (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by KeysDan on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 03:19:59 PM EST
    had a "small mass" removed from his liver at Emory University Hospital at Atlanta.  Mr. Carter completed his book tour this past Saturday for his newest book, "A full-life, reflections at  90."

    Few details have been released other than that a full recovery is expected.   This means, in the most cautious prognosis, full recovery from the surgical procedure.   No information was available as to the nature of the mass.  Hopefully, the mass was benign and Mr. Carter can continue will his good works for a long time yet to come.

    really not (none / 0) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 09:13:19 AM EST
    A picture is worth a thousand words... (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 09:16:43 AM EST
    But...

    An editorial cartoon is worth a thousand editorials.

    Parent

    Depending on whether or not (none / 0) (#3)
    by CoralGables on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 09:28:07 AM EST
    Fox uses decimals, your top ten for Thursday will be:

    Trump
    Bush
    Walker
    Huckabee
    Carson
    Cruz
    Rubio
    Paul
    Christie
    Kasich    

    If they drop decimals, add Perry and make it 11.

    There could be one more poll added as the day progresses, but if so all that could be decided is adding Perry or dropping Perry. The other ten look to be in.

    Every poll has Trump solidly in front. There are no outliers here.

    5 is supposed to be the deadline (none / 0) (#8)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 10:09:55 AM EST
    i guess they announce after that.

    Parent
    What these polls really show is (none / 0) (#17)
    by CoralGables on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 11:28:00 AM EST
    not necessarily who the top ten really are but rather that Trump is not a fridge candidate anymore. Trump is a strong republican candidate going forward who is now favored to win 2 of the first 3 states on the GOP calendar.

    Parent
    If Trump's not a fridge candidate, (5.00 / 4) (#21)
    by Anne on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 11:39:08 AM EST
    can we at least say that he's a refrigerator magnate?

    [Sorry - that was terrible.]

    Parent

    I thought that a "fridge candidate" (5.00 / 5) (#28)
    by Peter G on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 12:07:59 PM EST
    was one who would rapidly rot if left exposed to sunlight for long.

    Parent
    I thought it was the candidate... (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by kdog on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 02:27:35 PM EST
    in General Electric's pocket.  The Fridge Candidate, the Credit Default Swap Candidate, the Oil Rig Candidate, etc. etc. etc.

    Or William Perry was running for office;)

    Parent

    That was (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by sj on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 02:22:24 PM EST
    the best terrible pun I've heard in a while :)

    Parent
    Ha (none / 0) (#24)
    by CoralGables on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 11:47:45 AM EST
    which just goes to show spell check isn't as good as the old fashioned eye check.

    Parent
    Just goes (none / 0) (#19)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 11:34:14 AM EST
    to show what a reality star can do to the GOP in short order and vacuous and devoid of leadership the GOP is.

    Parent
    Memphis police officer's killer (none / 0) (#4)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 09:53:03 AM EST
    is arrested.

    This wasn't Wilborn's first experience with the law.

    Wilbourn was free on supervised release stemming from a bank robbery conviction, FOX13 reported. His lawyer argued during sentencing that Wilbourn was persuaded by his uncle to join the robbery to help him with his finances and "he was awaiting news regarding a possible college scholarship based on his athletic ability."

    Wilbourn was sentenced to more than 10 years in federal prison and released on probation in July 2014. He used marijuana in December and was ordered to undergo mental health treatment July 7, according to federal court documents released Monday. It's not clear whether he was ever evaluated.

    Officer Bolton was the third officer killed in Memphis in the past three years.

    Williams believes the most recent shooting can be traced, at least to some degree, to the fury over police treatment of African-Americans in incidents across the country. Williams estimates that the Memphis police force is around 60 percent African-American, roughly reflective of the city's overall population.

    "I think officers are becoming hesitant to react," Williams said. "They don't want to end up in court, or plastered all over the national news.

    In a previous comment about this killing I noted:

    When we think of cops and why they shoot, sometimes too quickly, perhaps there are reasons  besides them just hating. Maybe they are scared.

    Several of you have noted that the cops should quit if they are scared. Scott claimed

    ...are you suggesting it's OK for cops to shoot unarmed black people because they are scared to do their jobs ?... If he was genuinely scared for his life, he should seek serious counseling right after he resigns.....

    As usual, Scott takes many liberties with what is written so he can make false claims.

    No Scott, I didn't suggest it was okay for cops to shoot unarmed PEOPLE because they are scared. I suggested that since they are scared they may act too quickly.

    The flip side is:

    "I think officers are becoming hesitant to react," Williams said. "They don't want to end up in court, or plastered all over the national news.

    Scott further writes:

    FYI, this was over a 'drug deal' of $25 of weed.

    Actually we don't know the value of the transaction or if indeed there was one happening. Paraphernalia may have been there from other sales.

    As someone who has repeatedly argued for our drug laws to be changed and make MJ legal, I can see the useless violence and death associated with them.

    But until they are changed shall we tell the police to just ignore them? Shall we tell the police to ignore traffic violations?

    The officer had seen a car that was illegally parked and pulled in front of it, illuminating the vehicle with his spotlight. Bolton then approached the car and was confronted by a passenger.

    What other laws shall individual segments of society not have enforced?

    Bank robbery?? Fraud? You name it, folks.

    Because that is exactly the way in which we are heading.

    "I think officers are becoming hesitant to react," Williams said. "They don't want to end up in court, or plastered all over the national news.


    So if We Use Your... (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 11:08:30 AM EST
    ...litmus test:
    When we think of cops and why they shoot, sometimes too quickly, perhaps there are reasons  besides them just hating. Maybe they are scared.

    It would mean the city with the highest lethal force by cops would have citizens maybe, 'shoot(ing), sometimes too quickly, perhaps there are reasons  besides them just hating. Maybe they are scared.'

    The group, the Memphis Black Autonomy Federation, has asked the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate "a pattern or practice" of misconduct by the Memphis Police Department. Memphis police killed 23 people in 2012 and 2013 - the largest number of people killed by police in this time period in America, the federation maintains.
    LINK

    I suspect your statement, like every other one you post, doesn't apply to the other side of the argument.  

    I am in no way making that argument for either side, just pointing out how ridiculous your argument about being scared is.

    Cops killers should go to jail for life, and well as citizens killers, and they do with the exception of the police, who rarely get held accountable for murdering unarmed people.

    Parent

    Memphis is one of the (none / 0) (#75)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 09:51:25 PM EST
    most dangerous cities in America. But so far it has not had anyone killed by a person who has 7 felony arrests and been deported 5 times and released by the police to kill...

    Perhaps your SF "newspaper" could munch on that for awhile.

    Having said that Memphis did have a recent situation:

    MEMPHIS, Tenn. -- A man is dead after being shot by a Memphis Police officer.

    The shooting happened late Friday night after the officer stopped a car in the 5700 block of Winchester.

    The driver was given a citation for a headlight that was out and was released.

    The passenger,19-year-old Darrius Stewart, however, had several outstanding warrants and was put in the back of the officer's car, uncuffed, while the officer verified the suspect's warrants.

    After checking with communications, the officer confirmed that Stewart was wanted for a sex offense in Iowa and had another warrant for a failure to appear in court out of Illinois.

    Police say when the officer opened the car door to handcuff Stewart, he kicked the door and attacked the officer.

    Investigators say during the struggle, the Stewart got the officer's handcuffs and started hitting him.

    The officer shot Stewart.

    As far as I know it is still under investigation.

    But this has been reported.

    The local I-team has uncovered this Iowa City juvenile court complaint from 2009 that charges Darius Stewart with two counts of sexual abuse for committing sex acts on two children under the age of 12.

    The identifying information like his birthdate and mother's name, match up. It also lists Greenwood, Mississippi as his address.  Stewart lists Greenwood as his hometown on his Facebook page.

    We have also confirmed there was a warrant for Stewart out of Decatur, Illinois. That was for failure to appear in court in August of 2009 for an incident at a movie theater.

    Link

    As to why you find it ridiculous that an officer would be scared during a traffic stop I do not know. Time and again bad things happen during them.

    Parent

    FYI... (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 11:41:03 AM EST
    ...my actual quote:
    Good God are you suggesting it's OK for cops to shoot unarmed black people because they are scared to do their jobs ?

    This business where the right is making excuses for cops that have none.  In the last shooting, the cop lied in his report about what happened.  He filed a false police report.  He claimed was scared for his life even though the video evidence clearly shows the only danger he was in was the manufactured danger he put in the report.  If he was genuinely scared for his life, he should seek serious counseling right after he resigns.

    Chopping up quotes to distort what I actually wrote is unethical, its why you are not suppose to do it.

    Parent

    It's simply par for the course for any ... (none / 0) (#35)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 12:57:48 PM EST
    ... self-respecting builder of strawmen.

    Parent
    Gee, Jim.. (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by jondee on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 12:55:42 PM EST
    you think the fact that there are so many ARMED-and-dangerous people out there in the American streets plays a role in so many cops being prone to shoot-first overreaction?

     

    Parent

    Jim, you know that (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 03:32:33 PM EST
    bringing up other commenters' past comments is not appropriate here. This is a new open thread, stay in the present.

    Parent
    A question about this policy (none / 0) (#65)
    by BTAL on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 06:00:38 PM EST
    Would be grateful if you could explain the policy logic regarding quoting commenters' past comments.

    If a commenter stakes out a position in the lively debates that occurs here, should they not be held to those positions in later discussions?  In the political realm, candidates and elected officials are held to the standard of previous declarations (most current example is the Biden threads).  Why would not commenters' here be held to the same standard?  I understand the difference between public and private individuals but establishing a policy that previous (in many cases heatedly argued positions) are allowed to then be disregarded because they occurred in a different thread seems to defy some basic logic.

    Am not specifically challenging the policy as it is your website, but would like to understand the concept.

    TIA

    Parent

    Sorry, I was trying to be very specific in (none / 0) (#74)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 09:37:32 PM EST
    answering Anne's questions. In the future I will be less specific but just as accurate,

    Parent
    Accurate delusions? (none / 0) (#76)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 09:51:37 PM EST
    Then they shouldn't (none / 0) (#5)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 10:04:43 AM EST
    hired cowards who mistake a lethal weapon as a means of enforcing compliance when dealing with civilians,

    Parent
    The bigger question is (none / 0) (#6)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 10:05:07 AM EST
    ...why was a person like this entitled to own a firearm?

    Parent
    I was about to congratulate him (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 10:09:09 AM EST
    never saw anyone so excited about the death of a policeman

    Parent
    Wilborn, the alleged shooter, had no such (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by scribe on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 10:28:38 AM EST
    entitlement to a firearm.  Said another way, there was no way he could have legally possessed or acquired a firearm.  Being convicted of or pleading guilty to a crime in which the maximum sentencing exposure - not the sentence you got, but rather what you could have gotten - is more than one year disqualifies that person from possessing or acquiring a firearm.  That's federal law.

    If the person has had their civil rights restored after their conviction, then maybe - depending on the scope of the restoration - they can possess or acquire a firearm legally.  But, while there is a provision in federal law which allows for restoring civil rights to persons convicted of federal crimes, for over 20 years Congress has refused to fund and forbidden the use of federal funds to carry that provision into effect.  


    Parent

    Funny how all opposition (none / 0) (#46)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 02:28:47 PM EST
    is interpreted by you as an excuse to hate on the police.

    Charges for Tamir Rice shooting? (none / 0) (#48)
    by McBain on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 02:38:42 PM EST
    I haven't followed the case lately but I thought it was still being investigated?  

    Shorter jim: [............................] (none / 0) (#50)
    by Anne on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 03:00:34 PM EST
    Yeah, there's nothing there.


    ... toward a NNW direction, which will take it well to the north of the Hawaiian Islands if it maintains this present trajectory. While we're still on storm watch, that's good news for us. Guillermo's already bringing big surf in the 6-10 ft. range along the eastern shores of the Big Island, but we'll likely be spared the monsoon rains that were predicted.

    speaking of weather (none / 0) (#55)
    by CST on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 03:48:40 PM EST
    HOLY HAILSTORM just rolled through.  I'm pretty sure it set of every car alarm in the city.  And 20 min later it's sunny again.  Felt like the end of days.

    Parent
    A Boston buddy of mine just posted up some (none / 0) (#56)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 03:58:52 PM EST
    pics on FB. Pretty crazy.

    Parent
    yea it was something (none / 0) (#58)
    by CST on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 04:19:15 PM EST
    Link

    It was hot and sunny all day, and is now hot and sunny again.  But for 20 min or so mother nature let us all know who's boss.

    Parent

    This has been the whole summer here (none / 0) (#64)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 05:11:20 PM EST
    we are supposed to get it again tonight and tomorrow.  

    Parent
    Glad to hear some gooder news (none / 0) (#80)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 11:01:12 PM EST
    I hope it continues to steer away from you and your happy islands. Aloha.

    Parent
    In the previous OT, Mr. Natural (none / 0) (#57)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 04:02:57 PM EST
    pointed to the Hendrix cover of "Watchtower" as the definitive version of that song, which I agree is so iconic that even Dylan couldn't hear it any other way after he heard Hendrix.

    But Watchtower is NOT the baddest, most rockin' Dylan cover ever recorded.  That honor goes to a longtime friend of mine Mike Finnigan, who coincidentally played on a track of Electric Ladyland.

    The Crazed Hipsters were a band called Finnigan and Woods.  This version of Dylan's "Down in the Flood" is the most rockin' Dylan cover of all time, and it ranks among the most rockin' recordings of all time.

    Trust me.

    I loves me some Jimi Hendrix. (none / 0) (#60)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 04:43:34 PM EST
    But ironically, my favorite Hendrix track is arguably his mellowest, "May This Be Love," from his album "Are You Experienced?" That song reminds me of long-ago rainy days in Seattle, when I'd be curled up contentedly inside with a good book.

    Parent
    Does owning a gun make you safer? (none / 0) (#59)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 04:28:44 PM EST
    I've long contended here that it does not, and further that gun violence statistics and studies lean toward the opposite conclusion. David Hemenway, Ph.D, of the Harvard School of Public Health feels similarly:

    "Almost two-thirds of the people in the U.S. population live in homes without guns, and there is no evidence that the inhabitants of these homes are at greater risk of being robbed, injured or killed by criminals compared with citizens in homes with guns. Instead, the evidence is overwhelming that a gun in the home increases the likelihood not only that a household member will be shot accidentally, but also that someone in the home will die in a suicide or homicide."

    Aloha.

    Ted Rall vs LATimes (none / 0) (#61)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 04:46:32 PM EST
    Why Won't The L.A. Times Admit They Were Wrong About Ted Rall

    Ted Rall, the controversial cartoonist who's been a featured author here at C&L, was fired by the L.A. Times last week, in the most publicly humiliating way possible: An open letter to the readers in the pages of the paper, saying Rall lied about an encounter with cops he'd described in several of his cartoons through the years.

    Here's the thing: They were wrong. Just plain wrong, as an enhanced audiotape shows.



    Not all sex offenses are the same (none / 0) (#62)
    by McBain on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 04:53:00 PM EST
    http://tinyurl.com/qdevynl

    I don't even think this should be an offense at all.  The girl admitted she lied about her age. Just another case with a bad prosecutor and bad judge being "tough on crime".

    It matters not at all ... (none / 0) (#67)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 07:54:37 PM EST
    ... whether or not you and I consider Michigan's statutes on statutory rape and / or age of consent to be either a good or bad law. It IS the law.

    And as such, Michigan law assumes that a 14-year-old is legally incapable of consenting to sex, regardless of her intent and whether or not she lied about her age. Therefore, because the defendant was over 18 and a legal adult, the burden was on him to say no, regardless of his paramour's intent, because she's legally precluded by state law from giving her consent. And given the way the law is written, the fact that she lied about her age is legally irrelevant.

    Your opinions about the "bad prosecutor" and "bad judge" are both misdirected and completely irrelevant, since these individuals were bound to follow and apply the law to its letter and intent. They don't have the discretion to just set it aside at their whim if a criminal complaint has been filed. You can direct your ire instead at the Michigan state legislators who crafted this particular law.

    I won't disagree with you that this case is ridiculous, and its consequences are both profound and quite over the top given the actual offense. This is why we wrote a five-year differential in Hawaii's age of consent law, to preclude the criminalization of teenaged sexual activity.

    Thus, the defendant in this case is only five years older than the 14-year-old, their liaison wouldn't have been subject to criminal prosecution. However, had he been 20 or 21, or had the girl been younger than 14, it would be considered statutory rape and thus illegal.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Not true Donald (none / 0) (#70)
    by McBain on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 08:32:01 PM EST
    According to this....
    http://tinyurl.com/nd9z87j

    He decided not to give Anderson an exemption for first-time, youthful offenders that would have let Anderson serve time while still walking away with a clean record. He also would not have been required to register as a sex offender for the next 25 years. .

    It seems the judge has a bias against internet dating/hook ups....
    From my previous CNN link...

    In fact, Judge Dennis Wiley, who sentenced Zach, said he was angry that Zach had used the Internet to meet a girl.

    "That seems to be part of our culture now," he said, according to a transcript. "Meet, have sex, hook up, sayonara. Totally inappropriate behavior. There is no excuse for this whatsoever,"

    Sounds like a bad judge to me.  Also sounds like the prosecutor wasn't honest with the defense.  From this post's link...

    Grabel says the prosecutor promised Anderson that the prosecution wouldn't argue for the judge to rule one way or another about the youthful exemption. But Grabel says during the trial, Vigansky did point out several other cases in which judges had denied the youthful exemption.
     

    Overall, I still think we tend to be a sexually uptight, puritan society that pretends good kids don't have sex.

    Parent

    It's a foolish defense attorney who ... (none / 0) (#72)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 09:12:11 PM EST
    ... thinks a prosecutor's prior assurance is worth something. Anyway, it's really of no use to get all incensed on a case-by-case basis, and you're never going to change things by admonishing individual prosecutors and judges, who -- truth be told -- could likely not care any less what you or I think about them.

    If people want to make a change for the better and preclude this from happening again in their own neighborhoods, then they should lobby their state legislatures to change the state law, so that teenaged sexual activity isn't criminalized, and participants aren't branded with a scarlet letter until it's practically time to apply for Social Security.

    We amended our age of consent law out here 14 years ago to include the five-year differential, so it's not like what I was suggesting above is something new. And it works.

    As far as the prudes go, it is what it is and I simply refuse to argue with them about it, which only makes their own hang-ups my problem. People have the right to hold uptight opinions about sex, and while I think that's sad and pathetic, the bottom line here is that they're no more going to stop people from engaging in sexual activity, than they will lasso the sun in place to maintain longer daylight hours during the winter.

    And in that regard, such busybodies need to be told in no uncertain terms to mind their own business, and leave others to tend to theirs.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#66)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 06:56:17 PM EST
    Fox announced who is going to be in the debate not at the kiddie table on Thursday and it is Kasich and above. I'm kind of surprised they didn't find a way to put Fiorina in there. Rand Paul is now in the number 8 position. My how the mighty have fallen when he used to be in the top 3.

    Fox also did one of those GOP focus groups and they all were slinging mud at each other and calling each other names. One guy said Trump was the boss that you had to go around continually cleaning up after. LOL.

    Fox News has decided to mess with Texas (none / 0) (#68)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 08:12:33 PM EST
    Kicking Rick Perry to the curb.  I predict that Fox News viewers from Texas are going to be mad as hell :)

    Remember the Alamo!

    They've moved on to Ted Cruz (none / 0) (#69)
    by ruffian on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 08:17:34 PM EST
    They'll get over old Rick.

    Parent
    They've moved on to Donald Trump (none / 0) (#71)
    by CoralGables on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 08:59:49 PM EST
    They'll get over old Ted.

    Parent
    And I've moved on to Hillary. (none / 0) (#73)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 09:19:58 PM EST
    I've long since gotten over Texans.

    Parent
    Say good night dick (none / 0) (#78)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 10:14:04 PM EST
    I noticed today that my local Walmart has moved Harper Lee's "Go Set a Watchman" to the discount table.

    What a shame that she has damaged her reputation.

    It's (none / 0) (#79)
    by CoralGables on Tue Aug 04, 2015 at 10:35:54 PM EST
     #1 on the NY Times Best Seller List.

    To Kill A Mockingbird never reached #1. Whose reputation has been damaged?

    Parent