Friday Open Thread

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

< Obama Interview on ISIS, Iraq and Syria
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Congrats to Dadler Jr. and his band (5.00 / 4) (#1)
    by Dadler on Fri May 22, 2015 at 11:07:03 AM EST
    My man Eli... (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by kdog on Fri May 22, 2015 at 11:52:59 AM EST
    It's awesome that he's sticking with the music D...I expect to see him one day in the horn section on the circuit!

    And good to see you off hiatus.  Hope all is well.


    I guess the Christian right will (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Anne on Fri May 22, 2015 at 11:28:22 AM EST
    have to find a different family to be the poster children for purity and perfection, now that it has been revealed that Josh Duggar, one of the "19 Kids and Counting" Duggar family, sexually molested underage girls (who, from the reading of the police reports, appear to have been his own sisters), and his family covered it up.

    It's giving me a serious case of the creeps.

    Josh, (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by KeysDan on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:52:46 PM EST
    Well, I'm sure his parents (none / 0) (#3)
    by Zorba on Fri May 22, 2015 at 11:43:39 AM EST
    Forgave him.  And, most importantly, I'm sure they all sincerely believe that God and Jesus have forgiven him.  (Don't know about the victims, though.)
    Ugh.  And he has kids of his own, doesn't he?  I'd be more than a little nervous about that, if I were his wife.    
    I'm creeped out, too.

    Well, it's practically beyond question ... (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:43:36 PM EST
    ... that God has forgiven Josh Duggar, because Josh himself attested to that yesterday in his announcement that he's resigning his position as lobbyist for the Family Research Council. Maybe he and the Rev. Matt Maleka, the gay-bashing gay pastor who was outed the other day, can get together and form a new organization.

    (Sigh!) So many right-wing Christians, but so few lions.


    What do (none / 0) (#30)
    by FlJoe on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:53:00 PM EST
    have against lions? Those meat puppets are rotten to the core, suitable only for rat poison at best.

    "Get that for me... (none / 0) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 22, 2015 at 11:47:25 AM EST
    .....would ya Deidre?"

    Never seen the show.  No idea what their affiliation is, doubt it's Catholic.  But every time I see a reference to that show I think of the above.

    Personally anyone who wants 19 kids is a red flag.


    They are some kind of Protestant Evangelicals (none / 0) (#6)
    by jbindc on Fri May 22, 2015 at 11:53:45 AM EST
    Who are part of the Quiverfull movement.

    And while his behavior cannot be excused, the media reporting on this makes it was even creepier and suggest these things occurred while he was an adult, while in fact, he, too was underage (he was 14-15).


    The worst (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:05:39 PM EST
    part is the dad withheld the information though I guess it would be hard to accept that your child did this kind of thing.

    There is so much, it is hard to (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Anne on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:34:06 PM EST
    rank which is the worst, but notably absent from much of what I've read is any indication that these young girls got any help dealing with being molested by their brother.

    One detail that just makes my stomach hurt is this:

    Jim Bob told police in 2006 that when Josh returned home in 2003, Jim Bob, accompanied by some of his church elders, took Josh to Arkansas State Trooper, Jim Hutchens. Jim Bob knew Hutchens personally. Hutchens did not take any official action and instead gave Josh a "very stern talk." As In Touch magazine reports exclusively in this week's issue, Hutchens is now serving 56-years in prison for child pornography. He took no action on the Duggar case.

    Makes me fear for Joh Duggar's children, too.


    Wow (none / 0) (#32)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 22, 2015 at 01:09:29 PM EST
    that's even worse that what I have read granted I did not read deeply on this subject. I thought he had withheld the info for a year before turning in his son. According to that it was almost a decade.  I seriously doubt the girls will get any help unfortunately.

    Hard to accept (none / 0) (#13)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:07:50 PM EST
    or ........

    Just sayin.


    Yeah (none / 0) (#16)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:12:31 PM EST
    I know. Evangelicals need to start cleaning up their ranks for sure. I have to wonder if they ever check anybody out. They seem really gullible to me.

    BTW liked your comment on the focus group. Beltway sure is out of touch for sure.


    Quiverfull (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 22, 2015 at 11:59:01 AM EST
    Learned a new word

    Quiverfull is a movement among some conservative evangelical Protestant couples, chiefly in the United States, but with some adherents in Canada,[1] Australia, New Zealand, Britain and elsewhere.[2] It promotes procreation, and sees children as a blessing from God,[2][3][4] eschewing all forms of birth control, including natural family planning and sterilization.[5][6] Adherents are known as "quiver full", "full quiver", "quiverfull-minded", or simply "QF" Christians. Some refer to the Quiverfull position as Providentialism,[7] while other sources have referred to it as a manifestation of natalism.[8][9] Currently, several thousand Christians worldwide identify with this movement,[5] although entire Christian sects hold many beliefs correlative to those who self-identify as Quiverfull adherents.


    That explains a lot


    Interesting I think (none / 0) (#56)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 22, 2015 at 04:11:15 PM EST
    think of children as weapons.  Or ammunition.



    "Pull!" (none / 0) (#59)
    by Mr Natural on Fri May 22, 2015 at 06:37:57 PM EST
    It's good to be the king.

    The article Anne linked to (none / 0) (#14)
    by sj on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:08:34 PM EST
    makes his age clear.

    But that actually brings up another issue: very often abusers (especially young abusers) have been abused themselves. Where does this particular chain start, I wonder, and how far back does it go?

    Actually, I don't really wonder. It's more of an idle thought, and a reflection that this is all just so sad. And probably so much bigger for that family than it seems to be now.


    Perhaps the delay in this (none / 0) (#17)
    by nycstray on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:16:59 PM EST
    Being reported isn't helping with the media. Also, the family was less than truthful in admitting this, so several reports I've read need adjusting. I believe it was officially reported in 2006 by Harpo Productions, so that could add some age confusion. Still, at 14 you do not touch your sisters, especially the 4 yo  and not reach total creepy factor.

    Children who molest other children (none / 0) (#21)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:32:43 PM EST
    Often have been molested themselves.  There is no evidence yet one way or the other in this particular case, but it is worth noting,

    While he was underage, as well, (none / 0) (#25)
    by Zorba on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:40:01 PM EST
    Does anyone know the age of the victims?
    And most fourteen-year-olds, while still very immature themselves, would know enough not to fondle girls younger than they are, or even their age, if the girls were unwilling.
    The thing that makes it even creepier is how the family "handled" it.

    jbindc: "And while his behavior cannot be excused, the media reporting on this makes it was even creepier and suggest these things occurred while he was an adult, while in fact, he, too was underage (he was 14-15)."

    FWIW, the story I read in the Los Angeles Times said right up front that Josh Duggar was not yet an adult at the time.

    From what else I've read, apparently Daddy Duggar failed to report sonny boy's actions to the authorities for over a year, and the statute of limitations thus expired before they could finish their investigation and consider possible charges.

    Onward, Christian soldiers.


    Of course I do (none / 0) (#35)
    by jbindc on Fri May 22, 2015 at 01:13:46 PM EST
    The irony being, that around here among some commenters and authors at least, if we were talking about a 14 or 15 year old being put in jail or prison for their crimes - not the child of evangelical Christians - there would be more hooting and hollering about how the adolescent brain isn't fully developed, how we should try therapy not prison to save these youngsters instead if ruining their lives forever, yadda yadda yadda. (See Michael Brown, Joran van den Sloot, Trayvon Martin, Dzokhar Tsarnaev, etc.) I mean, there's even a whole section of this blog that is devoted to it.

    I have always maintained, that barring an extremely low IQ, or some sort of brain damage, that yes, 14 and 15 year olds know the difference between right and wrong, especially in clear cut instances such as this. I've been mocked for it and received scathing commentary, but now because it's a Duggar it's shocking that nothing was done.

    Delicious irony (or hypocrisy - your choice).


    I'm less concerned about 14 year old (5.00 / 3) (#36)
    by CST on Fri May 22, 2015 at 01:25:26 PM EST
    Josh getting his come-uppance as I am about the fact that his parents covered it up for him, that it happened repeatedly, that he didn't receive therapy, that as far as we know nothing was done for the girls (regarding therapy), that the man they reported it to was involved in child pornography, and that he now uses his position to argue that gays must be kept away from people because they are child-molesters.

    There's a whole lot of reasons to be disgusted by this case, that have nothing to do with Josh's lack of a jail sentence.

    For that matter, I haven't seen anyone say that he should've been sentenced to prison or tried as an adult (which is what the majority of the people here are against in these types of cases).  And excuse me, but not a single person here suggested Tsarnaev didn't deserve prison.  And as far as Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin are concerned, I believe the issue is that they were killed.  So just stop it with the freaking straw person.  


    No straw man - just calling people out (none / 0) (#37)
    by jbindc on Fri May 22, 2015 at 01:50:09 PM EST
    1) It's perfectly fine to call the Duggars out on their hypocrisy and level of involvement.  But what about the other girls?  What about their parents?  Did they get any help (if they needed it?)

    2)I know you're smart can use your  brain and extrapolate things like using their age and defining their behaviors and what should be done about them. In many cases, folks around here want to make excuses - except when it deals with people they don't like.

    If you don't like the examples I provided, just comb through the hundreds of comments you and others have made here in relation to any juvenile who is in trouble with the law.  I provided a link to one post here, and there's a whole section here.


    and it's all about how juvenile's (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by CST on Fri May 22, 2015 at 01:59:06 PM EST
    shouldn't be tried as adults.

    Which no one is arguing against in this case.  Not a single person is suggesting that 14 year old Josh had the mental capacity of an adult.  So continue your crusade if you want, but I'm not buying it.

    And feel free to comb through all of my comments, but you won't find what you're looking for.


    IMHO, I think it's a little premature to ... (none / 0) (#43)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri May 22, 2015 at 02:19:29 PM EST
    jb: "In many cases, folks around here want to make excuses - except when it deals with people they don't like. If you don't like the examples I provided, just comb through the hundreds of comments you and others have made here in relation to any juvenile who is in trouble with the law."

    ... "call people out" when in this particular instance, nobody here has thus far offered the sort of argument which you're attempting to rebut.

    Further, comparing this issue to Michael Brown, etc., is rather a stretch, and nobody thus far has done that, either, except for you.

    So, whether you realized it or not at the time while you were typing your replies, you've not only contructed a classic strawman, you've also managed to move the goal posts from Mt. Si High School to Juvenile Court.




    Oops! Never mind, jb. (none / 0) (#44)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri May 22, 2015 at 02:29:35 PM EST
    I accidentally conflated two entirely different sub-threads. What you've said makes perfect sense regarding the Duggars issue. I don't know why I thought I was still in the Mt. Si subthread.

    My bad, and my apologies.

    That should be my hint to disengage, and finish our packing. The movers are coming this afternoon at 3:00 p.m. to load up our stuff, so that we can ship it out on tomorrow's barge to Hilo.

    Aloha. ;-D


    Indeed, jbindc, you make a good point here (none / 0) (#41)
    by christinep on Fri May 22, 2015 at 02:11:24 PM EST
    Certainly, this 14 year old was well past the age of reason.  I don't excuse the wrong; and, I'm guessing that you do not condone the alleged actions either. The other obvious thing about this situation, tho, has to be the real and (possibly) presumed role of the father ... a role that could go toward mitigation.

    We all have a bit of the inconsistency--and, maybe, hypocrisy--in our human selves, don't we? So, that people might almost relish when those who preach intolerance are shown to have a dark, ashen double-life is a fact of life and fiction.  That is why Hawthorne's "The Scarlet Letter" is durable in our society.  It is natural, after all, to vent and say "ah ha" when the tables turn.  That urge is heightened in the case of those who preach the loudest and most vehemently against what they consider immoral behavior being caught in behaviors universally held to be wrong.


    They are (none / 0) (#8)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:02:33 PM EST
    independent fundamentalist Baptists which many people myself included consider a cult. Their 19 kids and counting family reminds me of some kind of Warren Jeffs freak show.

    Apparently the attraction (none / 0) (#15)
    by Repack Rider on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:10:49 PM EST
    ...of a show featuring morons is that practically anyone can look at them and feel better about themselves.  There are a plethora of such shows,
    Swamp People, Phil Richardson, the Duggars, the stupid wives of whatever, etc

    Of course, if I were to look at them at all, I would feel bad about myself for doing so.


    Ha (none / 0) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:17:28 PM EST
    ive been saying this for years about reality shows.  I have found that people can be surprisingly unaware of their own movivations and unappreciative of having it pointed out.

    Well (none / 0) (#19)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:30:26 PM EST
    speaking for myself only as someone who used to watch the Real Housewives I found it to be a replacement for soap operas. Then one day I realized that the whole thing was a farce and soap operas had actual story lines and character development and all these jokers did was encourage the cat fight culture in the media.

    Funny (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Repack Rider on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:31:41 PM EST
    I reached all your same conclusions just by HEARING about the show!

    You apparently (none / 0) (#34)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 22, 2015 at 01:11:41 PM EST
    were not as bored as I was at one time. LOL

    Heh (none / 0) (#53)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 22, 2015 at 03:53:29 PM EST
    speaking only for me.

    There is no degree of boredom that would have me watching Real Housewives or any soap opera.

    I would rather be bored in peace.


    It get's way creepier (none / 0) (#22)
    by CST on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:32:48 PM EST
    "When Jim Bob finally did turn Josh in, he took him to Arkansas state trooper Jim Hutchens who failed to report the case. Hutchens is now serving a 56-year sentence in prison for child pornography"



    This made me laugh (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 22, 2015 at 04:09:05 PM EST
    Ex-Staffer: `I'd Rather Go to Iraq than Work for Carly Fiorina'

    Twelve ex-Fiorina campaign workers told Reuters that, if given the chance to work Fiorina again, they'd rather not. One anonymous senior staffer reportedly said they'd prefer to be sent to Iraq. Ouch.

    Hypocrisy.... (none / 0) (#9)
    by kdog on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:04:38 PM EST
    NYC is abuzz over the rip-off artist selling 30 dollar dirty water dogs to gullible tourists near Ground Zero.

    Dude's a piece of sh*t, but just inside the 9/11 Memorial they're selling polo shirts for 175 dollars.

    Pot meet kettle.  And they both ain't got nuthin' on the Wall St. hustle!

    So much for sacred ground, eh?  Like Chris Rock said, there ain't nuthin' this country won't commercialize.  We're a few years away from 9/11 sales at Macy's.

    ... which has long been considered hallowed ground by many Americans. (In fact, the USS Arizona Memorial is the single most visited site in Hawaii.) But then, you want to see hucksters, hustlers and overpriced kitsch and chachkies, all you have to do is go seven miles east to Waikiki. There, "tacky and garish" is an art form.

    re speech suppression and "Tinker" (none / 0) (#10)
    by zaitztheunconvicted on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:04:44 PM EST
     I mentioned in previous open thread the situation with the suppression of the hot-or-not contest via facebook page re girls at Mount Si Hs near Seattle Washington. . . .

    the asst principal called me back and said that she regarded and/or the school regarded the H-r-Not contest as disruptive and therefore suppressible per Tinker.

    Agree or doubt?   If you agree or doubt, do you wish to indicate if you are a lawyer, law student or have legal training?

    I have no strong view . . . it is simply less obviously suppressible than the usual things . . .

    I wonder if they should simply have some legal bikini competitions instead . . .

    Speaking only for (none / 0) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:06:51 PM EST
    my non legal self,  more information please.


    You can use tiny url


    Part of the issue is (none / 0) (#23)
    by jbindc on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:33:15 PM EST
    All or most of the girls (it isn't clear from what I found) didn't consent to this and are trying to stop it.  Seems that alone would be enough for the school to claim a "material disruption" under Tinker.

    If there were a similar site (none / 0) (#26)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:40:03 PM EST
    where the female students divided the boys into "Hunks or Skunks", there would've been lawyers calling up the school district faster than you could say Jack Robinson as soon as they appeared on Facebook.

    But some parents believe (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by jbindc on Fri May 22, 2015 at 12:44:37 PM EST
    "Boys will be boys".

    Might have missed it but, (none / 0) (#75)
    by NYShooter on Fri May 22, 2015 at 11:40:27 PM EST
    what's "Tinker?"

    And to expound on that, ... (none / 0) (#38)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri May 22, 2015 at 01:52:39 PM EST
    ... the activity in question is exclusive to the Mt. Si HS student body, and further its clearly stated and intended target is Mt. Si female students. Those facts should give school administrators the requisite authority to put a stop to it, in the face of student and parental complaints.

    Personally, I'm of the opinion that the First Amendment does not exist simply for its own sake. Rather, it is part of a larger whole that is our Constitution, a document which preserves for us always our right to exercise sound judgment in accordance to not only the law itself, but also our own common sense.

    I believe that "Hot or Not" is a form of bullying and as such, it should not be considered as protected speech -- especially since we're talking about the victimization of underage kids.



    of course it's a form of bullying (none / 0) (#76)
    by NYShooter on Fri May 22, 2015 at 11:45:50 PM EST
    and the "scoring" is done in public, for only one purpose; to hurt girls' self-esteem, and just to hurt.....period.

    For what it's worth, (none / 0) (#40)
    by Zorba on Fri May 22, 2015 at 02:11:16 PM EST
    TMZ is reporting that TLC has pulled the Duggar's  show from their line-up, but:

    Sources familiar with the situation tell TMZ, the fate of the show is uncertain, but there's now so much heat in the wake of Josh Duggar's molestation confession ... the network had to make the decision.
    We're told they absolutely have not made a long-term decision, but it's clearly a bad sign for the show.
    And there's this ... a rep for General Mills tells TMZ, they have already blacklisted the show and removed it from their company's current advertising schedule.

    Take it in what sense thou wilt.  This is TMZ, after all.

    Well (none / 0) (#42)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 22, 2015 at 02:18:13 PM EST
    TMZ can be no more or less accurate than a lot of the other media these days. Usually they have decent Hollywood sources but not always. I would imagine that this is probably true. I would think they have one potato on their hands and are pulling it while they are trying to figure out what to do.

    I know several people who watch the show.


    Well, you're correct about (none / 0) (#45)
    by Zorba on Fri May 22, 2015 at 02:56:33 PM EST
    the "accuracy" of a lot of the media now.  Sadly.
    If the General Mills part is accurate, what is most likely to influence TLC (IMHO) would be if a lot of their advertisers pull out.
    After all, "money talks."
    That is also sad, but it's true.

    Yes, (none / 0) (#46)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 22, 2015 at 03:15:37 PM EST
    unfortunately money will probably be the deciding factor.

    I have to wonder about TLC though? Do they not do some extensive research on people before they sign these contracts? You would think TLC would have an army of lawyers so they didn't have this kind of thing happen.


    I'm sure it's a calculated risk on the network's (none / 0) (#47)
    by ruffian on Fri May 22, 2015 at 03:31:53 PM EST
    part. They made plenty of money on advertising on this show over the years. If the money goes away now, it is just a lot sooner than they expected, but they have not actually lost anything unless they were stupid enough to guarantee the Duggars a certain amount of time on the air.

    Well (none / 0) (#52)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 22, 2015 at 03:47:13 PM EST
    what I really was talking about was before they even put the show on the air. I mean the show started in 2008 two years after the molestation was found out.

    In the case of companies sponsoring a TV (none / 0) (#48)
    by ruffian on Fri May 22, 2015 at 03:36:11 PM EST
    show, I don't find it sad that money talks. That is how shows get on the air on network and non-subscription cable TV.

    Not saying you are doing this, but I have seen many friends insisting sponsors should keep paying to keep shows on the air after some scandal the person personally disagrees with - Don Imus for example. No company is required to keep advertising on any show they find offensive.


    Actually (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by FlJoe on Fri May 22, 2015 at 03:43:00 PM EST
    this is the invisible hand of the free market working as advertised. No brand wants to be associated with haters, hucksters and hypocrites.

    Makes you wonder how Fox manages (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by Anne on Fri May 22, 2015 at 03:45:20 PM EST
    to get any advertising, doesn't it?

    I (none / 0) (#54)
    by FlJoe on Fri May 22, 2015 at 04:08:44 PM EST
    think it was Charlie pointed out that the free hand has a side gig as a proctologist, case in point here.

    Amen (none / 0) (#50)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 22, 2015 at 03:44:37 PM EST
    the talking of money is a very big reason to expect good news from the SC on marriage equality.

    And the reason Indiana and Arkansas right wing pols ran under the porch with their tails between their legs recently.


    So Fox (none / 0) (#57)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 22, 2015 at 06:19:04 PM EST
    news here in Atlanta says TLC pulls Duggar family series amidst accusation of misconduct. ????

    Misconduct covers a lot of things but not this one.

    Hey (none / 0) (#58)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 22, 2015 at 06:27:54 PM EST
    i was thinking about the republican debate dilemma.   I think I have a solution.  

    A cage match.

    It could totally be Pay per View.  I would pay.


    A friend (none / 0) (#60)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 22, 2015 at 06:41:05 PM EST
    and I were talking about how they should do mud wrestling. That could be pay per view too. Maybe the Duggars could join in.

    There may be some bucks in it too. (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by EL seattle on Fri May 22, 2015 at 08:03:55 PM EST
    Organizers of the Mitt Romney v, Evander Holyfield "boxing" match last week probably raised about a million bucks for CharityVision.

    Maybe the participants in every debate could be debating on behalf of a charity (a la Celebrity Apprentice).  Callers could vote for the hopefuls with donations via the same methods they use on The Voice and shows like that, and the winners would advance to something like the "League of Women Voters Round".

    Showbiz! Ratings Bonanza! Everybody wins! (But I guess that maybe I just want to see Carson Daly give Donald Trump a "so sorry" hug after he doesn't make the cut to the final round...)


    A mud wrestling cage match (none / 0) (#61)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 22, 2015 at 06:47:43 PM EST



    My money (none / 0) (#62)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 22, 2015 at 06:52:41 PM EST
    would be on Carly.   She would totally put those wimpy chicken hawks in short pants.

    Baa waa waa (none / 0) (#63)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 22, 2015 at 07:50:44 PM EST
    me too. Did you see today where something like 12 of her former employees came forward and said they couldn't think of anything worse than having to work for her. They said despite her millions she didn't pay them.

    So yeah, baybee Carly would take them all out and then her former employees should show up shortly and take her out.

    It's the DEATH MATCH.


    And here (none / 0) (#67)
    by Zorba on Fri May 22, 2015 at 08:34:27 PM EST
    is the link regarding her ex-staffers.
    One anonymous senior staffer reportedly said they'd prefer to be sent to Iraq.

    Sorry, Howdy (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Zorba on Fri May 22, 2015 at 08:38:04 PM EST
    I posted this before reading your earlier comment #55.
    All credit to the Captain!

    Kids! (none / 0) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 22, 2015 at 08:38:36 PM EST
    i posted this above the origin of this sub thread.  A little credit please.

    See my comment (none / 0) (#70)
    by Zorba on Fri May 22, 2015 at 08:41:37 PM EST
    Mea culpa!

    Ha (none / 0) (#71)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 22, 2015 at 08:43:10 PM EST

    Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the corporate wonder I would say.


    Well, as kids we used to say (none / 0) (#73)
    by Zorba on Fri May 22, 2015 at 08:52:28 PM EST
    "Jinx, you owe me a Coke."  I guess the adult version would be "you owe me a beer."
    So I owe you a beer.   ;-)
    Carly was indeed not any kind of "corporate wonder."

    No, it's a "wonder" (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by NYShooter on Sat May 23, 2015 at 01:03:22 AM EST
    she got as high as "Corporate."

    I've been a big booster for women in business since way back to my days as a junior executive trainee. ("Mad Men" era) In those days "red-lining" for the purpose of denying credit to certain groups was still legal. And, we were taught that, when hiring secretarial/administrative staff, bringing in good looking, zippy, effervescent young ladies was often more beneficial than hiring for experience/credentials. The idea was that "young babes" would improve/increase office morale, and thus productivity. But, hiring women for potential management positions was so laughable it wasn't even ever mentioned.

    But, even then, when I was in my early/mid twenties, and on the fast track to Corporate Sales/Management, I found that being a contrarian was often very useful. Not for any altruistic, high-faluten moral reasons, necessarily. Just that I remember thinking, "high sales" was my ticket to the "top." And, since women made up the majority of consumers, who better to know why, and/or, what women wanted, and would buy? But then, oh, how the ridicule and laughter came hurtling my way when I ran an ad in the
    paper, "XYZ Company" interviewing ladies for management training positions. (Gender specific advertising in hiring was, also, legal then.)

    Well, you can infer the results that eventually  came my way! Rocket ship to the stars!

    But, I learned another important lesson back then also. Hiring sales & management staff from a subset of women was a great idea. Hiring sales & management staff just because they're women......bad, bad idea.

    Which brings me to today, and Carly Fiorina.

    In every election cycle the Republicans like to do their peacock strut, "look how inclusive we are," and put up some sad-sack, nominal minority. I don't have to go through the list of A.A. Presidential Candidates who embarrassed not only themselves, but the Republican Party even more, in each of the past several elections. With so many qualified black politicians available (some even in the Republican Party I would imagine) how come they always end up with candidates that are embarrassments, especially to the many, thinking black voters out there? Answer? "They," the political strategists want them to lose, and lose big. Their biggest fear is that a qualified black candidate will appear, and make big inroads with the polls. Yikes! They just want a black face, not a black face, and a mind.

    And, since this post is about Carly Fiorina, simply replace "Black" with "Carly" and it all makes sense. And, having made my living in the Corporate World, and the Markets, over these past bunch of decades, I should know. And, I do.

    Carly Fiorina is to qualified women candidates
    Herman Cain was to qualified A.A. candidates.


    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 22, 2015 at 08:17:00 PM EST

    it's all over the right wing web.  Very surprised it has not been trolled here yet.

    Except.  She didn't .

    State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said, "It was not classified at the time. The occurrence of subsequent upgrade does not mean anyone did anything wrong."

    It was classified in the last day or so by the FBI.  It was not classified at the time.  But that hasn't stopped Boner and others from squealing like a pig stuck under a gate.

    Boner today (none / 0) (#66)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 22, 2015 at 08:24:57 PM EST

    see how that works?


    I saw that (none / 0) (#72)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 22, 2015 at 08:49:44 PM EST
    and started laughing. I thought well, at least the reporters will stop whining about her not talking to them and they can get all OCD reading all the emails.

    Can't blame Boehner. Fleecing the rubes has become very lucrative for them. Peggy Noonan has been chastising the GOP base about being so gullible. When you've got Peggy Noonan saying something like that apparently there's a big problem. Yes, obvious to you and I and most people that they swallow this stuff whole and makes us laugh.


    Herman's back (none / 0) (#74)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 22, 2015 at 09:04:23 PM EST
    but 999 is now 666

    The end is coming in January 2017

    A mailing that went out to 2012 presidential candidate Herman Cain's email list Tuesday said that President Obama (along with the Pope)  is secretly leading the United States toward the apocalypse.

    The email was a sponsored message from Nathan Shepard, who identifies himself on his website as a "Bible scholar" who "decided that he must become a survival expert, train and prepare for the worst disaster in human history."

    Shepard says that the United States is actually Babylon in the Book of Revelation, and "the end times" the prophets foretold will come for America in January 2017. He says America will be destroyed by Vladimir Putin's Russia in World War III.
    In this case, it's a $60 discount on a survival pack to help you get through the apocalypse:

    A bargain