Tuesday Night Open Thread

It's time for El Capo. How will he escape the guerrillas in Colombia?

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< President of Colombia: War on Drugs a Failure
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    When Police State Marketing... (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 08:38:31 AM EST
    goes wrong.  Hysterical. Very well played Tweeters!

    Hey GaDem (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 09:43:20 AM EST
    Just heard (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 10:34:59 AM EST
    Carter voted for it



    Another 'ACA is doomed!' meme bites the dust (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by jtaylorr on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 10:39:07 AM EST
    Looks like Obamacare's impending implosion, now 6 months behind schedule, will have to wait even longer.

    "As of this week, we have good evidence to the contrary. Health insurance premium rates are expected go up just 7 percent--a rate of increase much lower than what critics were predicting. And the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is predicting that premium hikes will be relatively modest."

    "The origin of these critics' argument can be traced to a thinly sourced article in The Hill, which quoted a former Cigna executive saying things like, `My gut tells me that, for some people, these increases will be significant.' The reports about insurance rates possibly tripling, which were widely repeated, appear to come from a single anonymous insurance executive."

    There are those who criticize Obamacare in good faith, rightfully comparing its shortcomings to other international healthcare systems with lower costs and better outcomes, all while acknowledging that we don't live in a vacuum and that ACA is far better than the state of our healthcare system prior to its passage. Then there are the concern/doom trolls who are constantly reminding us that Obamacare is doomed to failure and just a few months away from total collapse, based on nothing more than right-wing talking points and 'gut' feelings. I have no problem with the former (I'm one of them); I have have many problems with the latter. If your arguments are based on nothing but a Hill article (go read the comments on the Hill article to see the company that doom trolls keep) sourced entirely from anonymous insurance officials, chances are you're losing the argument.

    Not that I expect this news to have any effect on the arguments of TL's resident Obamacare doom trolls. The funny/sad part is that setting this high expectation for the law's complete failure makes things like a 7% premium increase seem not so bad, even though any cost rises above the rate of inflation shouldn't be anything to celebrate. Hyperbolic criticism only helps Obamacare, and drowns out more nuanced and well-evidenced criticism.

    Why is the IRS paying any of its (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by oculus on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 11:30:00 AM EST
    employees bonuses, never mind the employees who owe back taxes?  Are any other federal employees except reenlisting active duty military eligible for bonuses?


    Just saw this (none / 0) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 11:32:37 AM EST
    Why don't they put a " kick me" sign on their backsides

    Minimum wage (none / 0) (#1)
    by jbindc on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 06:36:17 AM EST
    The comments are even sadder. (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Anne on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 08:36:53 AM EST
    Disturbing little nugget in the article was this one:

    But this map does succinctly portray dramatic variation across the country in housing costs, and it suggests that proposals to modestly raise the minimum wage won't fully solve this problem.

    I don't know that anyone believes it would "fully" solve the problem, but this is the kind of thing that opponents seize on when all other arguments fail: "it won't actually solve the problem, so why bother?"


    Also doesn't make a lot of sense (none / 0) (#6)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 09:30:50 AM EST
     No single county in America has a one-bedroom housing wage below the federal minimum wage of $7.25 (several counties in Arkansas come in at $7.98).


    Not sure what at means.  The state minumum wage is 6.25.  Not sure when if ever that can be paid.  Possibly for under age workers.  In any case my area seems to be I the 7 dollar color, for one thing there are no "decent one bedrooms".  Apartments are virtually non existent here.  The only ones that exist are subsidized and have very low income requirements.  Other than that rent is not cheap.  When I decided to come here for early retirement I first looked for a house to rent.   I was amazed how expensive it is. The house I bought, that I had to spend a couple thousand bucks to make liveable,  had renters in it paying 450 a month.  I just looked in the local paper and there is not a single thing for rent for less than 500 a month.


    Skydiver almost hit by Meteorite (none / 0) (#4)
    by Dadler on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 09:15:05 AM EST
    oop, now i read... (none / 0) (#5)
    by Dadler on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 09:18:17 AM EST
    ...maybe it was just a rock that was packed in his chute. Who knows.

    Warren for president? (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 09:34:34 AM EST
    hearing more and more talk about this.

    I still think Clinton/Warren would be a winning ticket.

    Just heard some talking head (female talking head) say that the dems would never have a two woman ticket. Why the hell not?

    Clinton/Warren... (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 09:42:15 AM EST
    a no go for me.

    A Warren/? ticket might get me to pull a Brand D lever for the first time in 12 years...Warren is appealing enough a candidate for me to look past her poor choice in party association. I could even look past Clinton as her VP choice.

    Warren/Sanders or Sanders/Warren...now that's a dream ticket!


    Dream for republicans for sure (none / 0) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 09:45:40 AM EST
    I don't know... (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 09:53:08 AM EST
    maybe now is our time to shoot for the moon man, and not settle for oligarchy-light leadership...look at the losers the GOP has in the bullpen, look at the rapidly changing demographics, look at all these people busting their arse running to stand still waiting.  

    Strike the hammer while the iron is hot!


    Don't get me wrong (none / 0) (#11)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 09:53:03 AM EST
    I wish we lived Ina country where W/S S/W could get elected.

    We don't.


    She's been pretty clear she isn't (none / 0) (#13)
    by Anne on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 09:56:53 AM EST
    interested in running, that she feels she can accomplish more on the issues that matter to the middle class - who are the people she really identifies with - by staying where she is.

    That being said, it's hard to read this excellent piece by Charlie Pierce (that he wrote for the magazine), and not see how badly we need more elected representatives like her.


    Obama was saying the same thing (none / 0) (#14)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 10:09:30 AM EST
    At this point.  She sure seems to be considering it.  Personally I think if Hillary did not run she would be there in a second.  VP is a different thing.  Again just MO I am not convinced she could do more where she is.  VP can be a powerful platform it it is allowed to be.  
    I'm curious if some here agree with that "no all women tickets".
    I seriously don't get that.  How can the country be ready for a female CIC and not be ready for a female VP?
    One big historical purpose of a VP pick has been to unite a party.   I can't think of a better progressive unity ticket.

    An all woman ticket... (none / 0) (#18)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 10:52:59 AM EST
    is a non-issue on the Brand D side, imo.  That's something Republican voters might have a problem with, but not Democrats.  If anything it might be an out and out positive.

    I agree (none / 0) (#19)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 11:03:52 AM EST
    But it is suprising how many dem, and even dem women, don't seem to agree apparently

    NYT weighs in on 2-woman ticket:: (none / 0) (#21)
    by oculus on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 11:16:47 AM EST
    I love D (none / 0) (#23)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 11:21:21 AM EST
    But I find this a very odd statement

    "It's certainly possible to have two women," said Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California. "I am not sure it's wise. You want a ticket that represents men and women."

    Dd the hump dreads of years of male only tickets represent women?


    Oh man (none / 0) (#24)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 11:22:02 AM EST
    Hump dreads

    Would be hundreds


    Thanks!!!! Feinstein and Boxer were first elected (none / 0) (#25)
    by oculus on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 11:26:37 AM EST
    In the same election. Strange comment from her.

    You love Diane Feinstein? (none / 0) (#28)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 12:01:51 PM EST
    Diane "Drug Warrior Extraordinaire" Feinstein?

    Damn Cappy your love comes cheap;)  


    Blooming (none / 0) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 10:33:50 AM EST
    Not only can you successfully link, (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by oculus on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 11:18:52 AM EST
    You can successfully link photos. Beautiful.

    Currently BLASTING (none / 0) (#20)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 11:09:56 AM EST