Friday Open Thread

Your turn.

This is an Open Thread.

< Slaves To Congress | KS Doctor Acquitted in Late-Term Abortion Trial >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Worth a re-comment.... (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 01:55:33 PM EST
    I threw this on the back end of last nights open thread...have you guys heard about the 14 year old girl who, if convicted, will have to register as a sex offender?  Link

    Even the poor mother whose daughter was the catalyst for Megan's Law is calling this a bunch of bullsh*t...with any luck people will start realizing sex-offender registries are bad news in practice...bueracracy can't be trusted not to tarnish the undeserving with the scarlet letter...it just ain't worth it, no matter how noble the intentions, the results are nasty and unbecoming a supposed free nation.

    Hopefully all charges end up being dropped against this poor young girl, or that she at least doesn't end up with the scarlet letter for life.

    Agree Although (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:02:19 PM EST
    Hearing this girl's parents talk on NPR made me wonder hyst how out to lunch they are. All the prinipal's fault yada yada yada. Is it really ok w/them there daughter is transmitting photos of her nude self?  

    I've heard nothing from the parents... (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:05:08 PM EST
    but yeah, if your minor daughter is plastering herself all over Myspace in this manner, the first place you should look to assign some blame is the mirror.

    Am I the only one who was so horribly (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by vml68 on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:11:02 PM EST
    conscious of her body during her teenage years that I would have hid in my closet forever rather than face anyone who might have seen naked pictures of me.

    I'm a little confused on (5.00 / 3) (#24)
    by MO Blue on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:47:20 PM EST
    who actually distributed the photos.

    The district attorney has asserted that the girls were accomplices to the production of child pornography because they allowed themselves to be photographed. The district attorney has not, however, threatened to charge the individuals who distributed the photos. ACLU Press Release

    To me there is a difference in sending a picture of yourself in your bra or topless to a close friend and mass distributing the photo.  As a parent, I would not like a daughter of mine to do either but I would definitely see a distinction.


    Unless, the teenager is sending the (5.00 / 3) (#30)
    by inclusiveheart on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:01:44 PM EST
    photos to the parents, it is hard to imagine how they would find out that the kid was doing it other than to hear it from the people the pictures were sent to.

    I think it is so interesting how people automatically think that the parents are to blame for everything a teenager does.  Teenagers are complicated and difficult to control critters.  Their whole purpose in life at that point is to test limits and make stupid decisions unfettered by a fully developed frontal lobe.  Many parents do everything that can be reasonably expected of them to keep their teens from making critical errors and they still fail through no fault of their own.

    I give the parents credit for sticking by their kid and trying to protect her from this idiot prosecutor.  Some parents would have walked away and allowed their child to be victimized by his grandstanding.  He's up for re-election apparently.


    Popular culture (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:49:07 PM EST
    aimed directly at teenagers is so intensely hyper-sexualized, it's a totally different world than when I was a teenager and the worst thing our parents could think of was the Beatles' long hair.  I can't even imagine how impossible it must be to be a parent of a teenager nowadays.

    I'm an 80's child (5.00 / 2) (#68)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:11:15 PM EST
    my teen years seemed hyper-sexualized but porn wasn't cool yet.  There sure were a lot of shotgun marriages though in your time considering how nonhyper-sexualized your teen culture was.....and free love and all :)

    I was thinking about it yesterday (5.00 / 2) (#78)
    by inclusiveheart on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:25:17 PM EST
    and I don't think that the world is any more sexualized than when I was growing up in the 70s and 80s.  In fact, I think popular culture now is in many ways far more puritanical than it was when I was growing up.  There is way more freaking out about the human body in this era, but I don't think that is because there is more to freak out about - I think that is because there are more people freaking out.

    I pretty much think this is by far the most socially conservative era in my lifetime.


    I think there's moe sex (5.00 / 2) (#91)
    by Spamlet on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:57:42 PM EST
    and a hell of a lot less joy in sex. Herbert Marcuse is relevant here, with his thoughts on repressive desublimation.

    Well, how could there be any joy (5.00 / 3) (#93)
    by inclusiveheart on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 05:01:41 PM EST
    when a particularly loud bunch of people keep insisting that it is dirty, evil and a purely utilitarian act?

    Remember Carrie's mother?  She'd be perceived as much, much more "normal" now.  That's downright creepy imo.


    Heh (none / 0) (#101)
    by Spamlet on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 05:20:07 PM EST
    I've always enjoyed pointing out to such people that heterosexual intercourse produces homosexuals.

    Yeah (none / 0) (#80)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:28:10 PM EST
    A sort of generational blowback from the sexual revolution, and AIDS.

    In high school in the '60s (none / 0) (#118)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 11:12:33 PM EST
    in free-wheelin' (hah) Boston suburbs, girls had to wear skirts, and they had to be no less than 4 inches below the knee (measured by ruler by teachers).  Boys could not wear jeans or cordurouys.  Hair for boys had specific measurement requirements.  Girls were also forbidden to wear anything but closed shoes-- no sandals or anything that showed even a half inch of the top of the foot.  Etc.

    It felt oppressive and onerous, but kids were not running around in school, at any rate, with bare midriffs and underwear showing and tight thin tops with no bra the way they are today.

    Not to say that nobody had sex.  Of course they did. But far fewer kids in my generation did, and those who did largely kept it a secret except to their closest friends.  The girls, at least, were frankly pretty ambivalent about it and certainly didn't brag about it.

    Our pop culture icons stayed pretty well clothed (Cher showing her belly button on TV was a HUGE scandal), and the hero and heroine in romantic movies didn't fall into bed immediately after the first kiss.

    You simply didn't have the automatic expectation of sex as a teenager that kids today have.  It was perfectly possible, even "normal," to not have sex or anything even close to it as a teenager without experiencing any real pressure to "give."  My crowd, not "nerds" by any means, thought kissing was pretty exciting.


    Very well described (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sat Mar 28, 2009 at 02:45:21 AM EST
    Can you imagine if Gidget had behaved as the teens on 90210?

    True (5.00 / 2) (#67)
    by Dr Molly on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:10:11 PM EST
    The parent-blaming is usually from the libertarian types who don't want any controls on anything and therefore have to place all the blame on parents when anything goes wrong.

    Having great, well-adjusted kids myself, and having lots of experiences with many different kinds of parents and kids - it's very obvious to me that sometimes the best parents can't do anything about the extreme actions of their kids and sometimes regular parents like me luck out with easy ones. Heck, my parents were great and I was a wild, horrible kid that drove them crazy!


    I had my wild horrible kid episodes too (none / 0) (#71)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:14:25 PM EST
    Challenging the school board once, I swear to God though a teacher stood up in front of God and everyone and lied like a rug, he knew it and I knew it and I lost exactly how everyone figured I would......I'd give anyone gray hair back then though.

    Oh, the stories I could tell (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by Inspector Gadget on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:27:17 PM EST
    about bad behavior by teachers and administrators - particularly against the higher IQ boys. Almost had to get a restraining order against a high school band teacher. He received disciplinary action for his behavior, and was sent to a nearby middle school to teach the younger children. Not even tenured, but they chose not to terminate him despite the dozens of complaints.

    I always figured the schools were employed by the people, and they had no authority over me (though they did have responsibility for what was put in my children's heads during the hours in class).


    You're tough. (5.00 / 2) (#86)
    by inclusiveheart on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:48:57 PM EST
    These days they'd be putting you on medications to make you "normal".

    In fifth grade my class apparently drove a teacher crazy.  She checked herself into an institution.  We weren't doing anything dangerous or particularly mean, but we were an independent-minded bunch and she was fragile it seems.

    In second grade I had to have a meeting with the teacher and my parents after school because I wouldn't carry numbers while multiplying.  I simply disagreed with their explaination of how that could possibly be right so I refused to do it. lol  Another teacher explained it to me in such a way that I understood and so I was then able to adopt the practice without feeling like I was betraying my sense of honor.  lol again

    I was less heavy-handed as a teenager, but I did what I wanted.  I had a great relationship with my parents.  We had a healthy and open dialogue, but there were times when I did exactly what I was told not to do.  I was luckily never busted and even luckier that I wasn't born ten or fifteen years later when some of the stupid things we did would have been likely to ruin our lives.  That's the thing that gets me about what it is like now for kids.  There are all these people gunning for them - trying to destroy their entire lives - for stupid things that used to be corrected so as to give the kids a better shot in life - not to close all the doors that might have been open to them.  It is a real shame and likely a huge waste of potential talent.


    Frontal lobes seem to cure sooooo (5.00 / 2) (#92)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:59:59 PM EST
    many ailments.  I was always careful though to not get busted for the major things I did.  I was a slippery little snot.

    teachers (5.00 / 2) (#94)
    by CST on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 05:03:11 PM EST
    that reminded me of a time when my 8th grade art teacher had a mental breakdown in class.

    Some kid in a previous class was being chased around the room by a friend, he tripped, fell, and had to get like 70 stitches in his arm that got sliced open pretty bad.

    Our class just had the audacity to come later in the day, and he'd told us repeatedly in the past that we were his "worst class", so I think just the idea of dealing with us after that made him lose it.

    None of us said or did anything that day, we just watched as he went on a rant and started screaming and crying.

    My sister who was once a pain in the @ss to teachers, is now a teacher herself.  Whenever she complains about her students I just laugh.  What goes around comes around.


    Poor Teacher, OMG (5.00 / 2) (#96)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 05:07:29 PM EST
    I had an art professor who (none / 0) (#102)
    by inclusiveheart on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 05:20:09 PM EST
    was often drunk for our 10am class and explained in almost every class that he was too good to be teaching under graduates.  He was Christopher Hitchens' long lost twin I think.  He went to Yale to teach at their graduate school. lol

    He was the worst art teacher I ever had.  I figured the graduate students were probably better for him since they didn't need so much teaching as we lowly undergrads did.


    New Haven (none / 0) (#107)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 06:47:31 PM EST
    Good punishment for him.

    This is hardly the first episode of such a (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:03:00 PM EST
    thing too, just ask me as I've been down this teengirl road very recently.  What am I talking teengirl, the guys are into it too.  There is this whole exhibitionist thing going on currently with our teenagers and cellphone photos, and somewhat with myspace but I think that has died down some.  It's part of what this generation is challenging....the need for clothing and the need for everyone in your cellphone phonebook to know when you're challenging it :)

    Well, (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by bocajeff on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:14:45 PM EST
    I have no problem with maintaining a list of sexual offenders who, like you know, rape, molest ets...

    Anything consensual like the above scenario, or an 19 year old with a 16 year old is different.

    I guess a person who shoplifts a pack of gum is a criminal but he/she ain't Charles Manson either.


    Thats the problem jeff... (none / 0) (#12)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:21:20 PM EST
    what bueracracy on earth could pull it off without royally f*cking it up?  None I've ever seen or known.

    Tarnishing the innocent and/or undeserving is too high a cost for the list..even if just one case.


    Law turned on its head (5.00 / 5) (#10)
    by eric on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:15:59 PM EST
    I am pretty sure the reason that we have laws against child p*rn is to protect children.  The prosecutor is using not using this law to protect children.  Instead, it is being used to punish a child to protect the sensibilities of adults.

    To me this seems (5.00 / 4) (#13)
    by Slado on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:24:31 PM EST
    like the prosecuter is using a law to enforce his/her personal belief that children shouldn't be broadcasting smut of themselves.

    I think we all agree that a girl who regards hereself so little that she'd post naked pictures of heerself has issues but using the law to come down on her, especially this law, is malpractice.

    Why not just charge her for an obscenity charge if the case is justified?

    This is pretty clear cut prosecuter misconduct.

    I agree with what I interpret the presecutors intent is which is that young people today are much to free with their sexuality and are too eager to put themselves out there but Megan's Law is not the tool to reign this practice in.


    Seems the DA's definition of (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by MO Blue on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:35:30 PM EST
    what is smut is pretty broad.

    The district attorney told a group of parents and students in February that he has the authority to prosecute girls photographed in underwear, like the ACLU's clients, or even in a bikini on the beach, because the photos are "provocative." ACLU Press Release

    That explains it (5.00 / 5) (#54)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:51:21 PM EST
    It's the prosecutor who has some pretty serious "issues" around sexuality, not the teenager.  I wonder if anybody's had a look at the pix on his hard drive lately.

    Heh, he does sound like the (5.00 / 3) (#58)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:57:15 PM EST
    "over-the-top-due-to-guilt" type.

    You betcha (none / 0) (#119)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 11:13:47 PM EST
    This guy is far, far too easily titillated.

    personal experience (5.00 / 3) (#11)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:19:44 PM EST
    a member of my extended family was involved in an incident a couple of years ago.  essentially it was two kids - one 8 one 10 - playing doctor.  the father of the girl, a right wing reactionary nutcase and my nephew (a cop) went ballistic and in spite of the fact that the girl admitted instigating it he did his best to have the boy locked up for rape.
    and it almost worked.  we have spent thousands on lawyers keeping him out of harms way and its not over yet.  a hearing is coming up to try to remove him from the sex offender list.
    try to imagine what this has been like for a now 12 year old to deal with.

    messed up (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by CST on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:27:10 PM EST
    This is making me worried about the "bubble bath" photos of me and my sister playing that gasp my friends may have seen.

    We need to stop sexualizing nudity among kids.  The only perverts are the ones who can't get their heads out of the gutter long enough to realize this isn't sick, it's a normal part of growing up.  And what does it say to the girl, that she couldn't possible have thought of this herself and she must be a victim?  Why is it we assume only boys have any impulses?


    Well said... (none / 0) (#17)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:31:29 PM EST
    only perverts and sickos see anything sexually in prepubescent nude photos...I think we all have bathtub pics as babies and toddlers buried in moms picture chest somewhere, I know my mom does, and she's no sex criminal.

    And I tend to think the most rabid anti-child porn people get off sexually on their crusade in some perverse way...I really do.  Like you said, minds in the gutter, and draggin us all down to the gutter with them.


    Oh please (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Dr Molly on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:06:21 PM EST
    I guess you could call me 'rabid anti-child-porn' and it sure ain't becuase I secretly get off on it. It's because, oh you know, it horribly victimizes children.

    you can be (none / 0) (#73)
    by CST on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:16:08 PM EST
    very anti-child porn without being the "most rabid".  We're not talking about people who go after those that actually use and make child porn.  We're talking about people who use child porn as an excuse to go after normal childhood behavior.

    I was responding to kdog's (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by Dr Molly on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:20:25 PM EST
    second paragraph, the gist of which I've heard before here in many different contexts, not to the discussion of normal childhood behavior.

    Count me as unapologetically 'most rabid' against child porn or anything else that exploits or victimizes children.


    I'm talkin' about the people... (none / 0) (#123)
    by kdog on Sat Mar 28, 2009 at 07:10:40 AM EST
    who make child pron their "cause" and go out looking for the stuff to "stop it"...like J. Edgar Hoover and his regular pron crusade back in the day...when I suspect they just enjoy havin' all that pron at their fingertips.

    Of course we are all against victimizing children, but in this NJ case, the DA is the one victimizing the child, all in the name of "protecting" her..I'm startin' to wonder if tha DA, like Hoover, just likes havin' access to the pictures....which makes 'em nearly as sick as the scum who produce child pron.


    Well (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by squeaky on Sat Mar 28, 2009 at 01:26:06 PM EST
    We know that J Edgar was a pedophile and a twist case, but more recently we have Edwin Meese, who was obviously king of pron a veritable junkie.

    Sex education in schools begins (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by Inspector Gadget on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:30:03 PM EST
    as early as 4th grade.

    The clinical approach to teaching this subject gives some students an attitude that puts it in the category of no big deal.

    This topic has been on the news plenty and some schools are finally beginning to teach the consequences students can expect for "sexting" and sharing nude photos of themselves. There are schools that claim they have a majority of their students who have sent and/or received these messages. Wasn't an entire cheerleading squad ended for this recently?

    I used the instruction with my kids that if they ever hoped to achieve something really big in their lives, that every mistake they made will be sold to the highest bidder by the witnesses of their acts, so to keep that in mind when they were struggling with whether to go along with an idea that doesn't feel right. Didn't always work, but the mistakes were few and nothing that would shake the world.

    I oppose school sponsored sex education because of what I saw with the my kids and their classmates, and I can't imagine what possesses prosecutors to pursue this stuff rather than let the parents deal with their own children.

    These kids are going over the top to flirt, but they are hardly sexual predators.



    Wins Votes (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:33:16 PM EST
    I can't imagine what possesses prosecutors to pursue this stuff

    Makes it look like they are keeping kids safe and thus appeals to killer instinct in parents. Really disgusting and opportunistic carreer tactic, imo.


    You think that really? (5.00 / 3) (#50)
    by Inspector Gadget on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:40:11 PM EST
    Any parent who has or had a teenager would/should be terrified of this kind of legal nutcase.

    There's a point when even the most uptight have to see that the punishment far exceeds the "crime".


    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:48:57 PM EST
    Obviously you can see through the BS instantly, but these creeps prey on parents promising to keep their children safe from sexual predators, tough on crime, etc.

    They never mention that they are putting away children. That little detail gets lost in statistical sauce.


    Those are really out of touch parents, then (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by Inspector Gadget on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:11:31 PM EST
    I was always amazed at how many parents just trusted the word of the teachers and administrators when their kids got "in trouble" at school (the big stuff....talking, laughing) and punished their kids without even listening to the one person they knew. My son knew he was wise to be the first to tell me about his day if there was any chance a call would be coming in from a teacher that evening.

    It was very obvious what these "authorities" could do to our children if they wanted to.


    I also know of a similar case (none / 0) (#16)
    by eric on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:28:17 PM EST
    where it wasn't age but mental disability that got a guy in trouble.  In short, he was mentally disabled and so was she.  They got caught in bed and he is being charged with sex abuse of a mentally disabled person.  It was all fully consensual.  Now, again, I am all for protecting disabled people, but can the mentally disabled not have sex?

    The good news is that this guy is SO mentally challenged that he isn't competent to stand trial, so he probably won't go to prison.


    thats f'ed up (none / 0) (#22)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:41:03 PM EST
    this kid (the boy) is an normal as they come.  fortunately he is also a sports star - which may explain his cousins fascination, so he has had a lot of support from his friends as well as his family.
    the really tragic part is what it has done to my sisters family.  it has literally been torn apart.
    personally I was gleeful for this particular family to stop coming around I hated all of them, including the children, but it has been very very hard on my sister.
    she only has two children and now they or their families wont share the same room.

    Yes, worth it (none / 0) (#2)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:01:21 PM EST
    as among the many dangers is that these lists will become worthless.  (But we will keep paying for them to be maintained -- and btw, I have read that even correcting errors may not erase them in the case of so many of these lists that now are online.)

    Of course, most of concern -- and we see this in my area, too -- is that young people's lives are ruined by this misuse of the law.  And it's a law that is supposed to protect them.  Arrrggghhh.


    Yeah. It's one of the lead stories (none / 0) (#31)
    by scribe on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:04:14 PM EST
    From da link: (none / 0) (#64)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:08:11 PM EST
    "Passaic (puh-SAYK') County, N.J., "
    It's puh-SAY-ik.

    Unemployment Top Ten (or eleven) (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by CoralGables on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:25:44 PM EST
    Final numbers from February by state:

    1 MI 12.0
    2 SC 11.0
    3 OR 10.8
    4 NC 10.7
    5 CA 10.5
    5 RI 10.5
    7 NV 10.1
    8 DC 9.9
    9 FL 9.4
    9 IN 9.4
    9 OH 9.4

    My beloved SC is still #2... (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by coast on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:50:59 PM EST
    we'll catch you yet MI!

    That should be (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by indy in sc on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:06:53 PM EST
    our state slogan "We're #2!"  Sanford can continue to tout how he won't take any stimulus funds cause his state can't afford it and the unemployed are on their own.

    Thanks (none / 0) (#20)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:36:39 PM EST
    and so much worse in some communities.  My state isn't on the list above; it looks like it would be in the top 15 or so.

    But -- the top-3 most suffering cities in my state all have higher rates than those above, ranging up to 18%.  (And unemployment is up in 71 of the 72 counties.)  So in the states above, imagine how hard-hit some communities must be.  


    Armando the dog grows difficult (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:35:46 PM EST
    Really seems to think he ought to run this household lately.  This is what happens when you take an Armando to the big city I suppose and they give him a medal :)

    Maybe You Should Have (5.00 / 0) (#23)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:42:48 PM EST
    Chosen a different name.... he seems to be living up to it.... lol.

    That's the thing about the showring (5.00 / 3) (#26)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:53:43 PM EST
    The judges can't help but notice the Armandos of the world strutting about.  Dogs that strut take home the prize, they call it presence and expression :)  The name really suits him well.  And his father's name is Othello and the judge who loved him is Alberto.  It all sounds so passionate :)

    Lots of As and Os (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:10:22 PM EST
    In the right places. Seems like you have a winning system and a winner dog.

    Does Othello exhibit (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:26:37 PM EST
    irrational jealousy?

    Armando doesn't wake you by (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by scribe on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:12:04 PM EST
    howling in his sleep, does he?  If he doesn't, you don't have much to complain about....

    The other night - about 3 AM - my beloved setter had some kind of dream going or something.  Rather than the pretty-normal whimpery talking in her sleep 'cause she's dreaming about chasing something, she decided that this dream merited letting out a long, long, coyote/wolf howl.  She never makes that noise while awake.

    She was sleeping on the floor next to the bed where I had been sleeping until this.  I rolled over and looked down and, there she was, sleeping soundly.  Of course, now I could not get back to sleep as this brought up memories of a camping/fishing trip in Yellowstone, coincidentally during a full moon, during which we were awakened when the wolves decided it was time to sing.

    There are few things that will make the hair on the back of your neck stand up as quickly as that.


    Hilarious! (5.00 / 0) (#75)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:19:30 PM EST
    Armando mistook my husband for a stranger the other night and barked at him so my husband stalked into the backyard and really riled him up for fun.  Armando finally figured out it was him but he's ticked now.  Barks at him everytime he steps out of the house now and my husband hollers back, I feed you......I own you :)

    MIZZOU (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by mogal on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:19:14 PM EST
      Hey, didn't anyone seen what the Tiger's did last night? 102 points and on to the Big 8.

    As long as (none / 0) (#40)
    by eric on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:20:09 PM EST
    UConn beats them, the damage to my bracket is minimal.

    No ethical quandry (none / 0) (#104)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 05:25:50 PM EST
    That U Conn may have cheated in recruiting?

    Teresa thanks you (none / 0) (#77)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:20:41 PM EST
    Active Military on it's way to Fargo (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 06:18:12 PM EST
    Here's hoping all the people power and hard work wins.

    New subject: India (none / 0) (#5)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:09:47 PM EST
    & the Metropolitan Museum. A superb collection; entirely undiscovered by moi until yesterday.    

    Are you talking about (none / 0) (#8)
    by vml68 on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:15:15 PM EST
    their permanent collection? I haven't heard of any new exhibition.

    PermM colllection (none / 0) (#49)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:37:23 PM EST
    And special exh.:  Living Line:  Selected Indian Drawings. Also fine sculptures from Angkor era in Cambodia

    Thanks Oculus..... (none / 0) (#55)
    by vml68 on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:51:46 PM EST
    the company my BF works for gives them free membership to most of the major museums, zoos, botanical gardens and other attractions so we try to make the most of it and go as often as we can.

    If you have some time and don't mind the ride (none / 0) (#9)
    by andgarden on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:15:44 PM EST
    hop a train to Philly and visit the art museum there. They have a new Cézanne exhibit that I hear is superb.

    I did the train once to (none / 0) (#65)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:09:09 PM EST
    See the Barnes pre-move. I would like to see the Barnes again and Cezanne plus first look @ Phil. Museum of Art. But that is a different trip. Dedicated to Gergiev/LSO/Prokofiev this time.

    The Barnes is an amazing institution (none / 0) (#82)
    by andgarden on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:38:09 PM EST
    and will be even better in its new Parkway location--minutes by foot from my family's house.

    But the Art Museum is a worth a visit by itself. I enjoy it at least as much as the Met, and it's usually less crowded.


    What further encouragement (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 05:22:00 PM EST
    Do I need!

    Ahhh...the Barnes Museum (none / 0) (#108)
    by Anne on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 07:28:04 PM EST
    Went maybe 10 years ago(?) - was really fascinating, but at one point I got the giggles imagining Mr. Barnes arriving home from yet another trip abroad to announce, "honey, look what I brought home!" and Mrs. Barnes just reaching for the Scotch...wondering where in the hell she was going to find room for the latest acquisitions...

    And, no joke, between the stuff we have accumulated since my uncle's death 4 years ago, my mother's move to the retirement community and this latest closing down of my aunt's house, our home is taking on a distinctly Barnes-ian ambience.


    Unlikely Scenario (none / 0) (#110)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 07:46:11 PM EST
    Barnes had a very specific idea of how to hang artwork, and as amusing as your hypothetical is, it is quite unlikely that his wife would have either complained or wondered where to put a new work.

    Barnes as a collector was not typical in anyway and passionate about education. He hated the art institutions and museum folk who preached an academic version of art history.

    He first showed his collection in his factory for the workers and deeply believed in arts humanizing effects. I am sure that he is rolling in his grave now that his enemies have control of his collection. It is tragic, imo. Barnes was smart to never trust museums, although they are getting the last laugh.  


    squeaky, I have the utmost respect for (5.00 / 2) (#113)
    by Anne on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 08:16:59 PM EST
    what Barnes did, and the passion and devotion he had for teaching and nurturing that passion in others.  And I am well aware that there was a method to his arrangement of the pieces in the collection - something that ultimately led to the litigation that will move the collection into the city of Philadelphia.

    It was, frankly, stunning to consider the depth and breadth of the collection, and it may have been the magnitude that ultimately led me to have an inappropriate case of the giggles.

    As someone who was an art major in college and has, for the last 30 years been involved in the area of estates and trusts, the confluence of Barnes' collection with the litigation seeking to amend the trust created under Barnes' Will, was fascinating.

    Please pardon my sharing of a light moment.


    You Are Pardoned (none / 0) (#116)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 08:24:58 PM EST
    Glad to know that you are on board with Barnes. For those who do not know about him, I felt obligated to dispel the notion that he and his wife were typical in any way. Certainly not a touch of the bourgeoise, which your quip implied.

    More on Barnes (none / 0) (#111)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 07:58:25 PM EST
    In 1923, the collector Albert C. Barnes agreed to show some of his recent acquisitions at the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts. There were paintings by Matisse and Derain, Soutine and Modigliani, Picasso, Utrillo, de Chirico and Laurencin, as well as sculptures by Lipchitz. It was the first time that most Philadelphians had seen or heard of French Impressionist art. The reaction was immediate and devastating.

    "These pictures are most unpleasant to contemplate," said one critic. "It is debased art in which the attempt for a new form of expression results in the degradation of the old formulas, not in the creation of something new. . . . It is hard to see why the Academy should sponsor this sort of trash." Others questioned the mental states of the artists, calling them "morbid," "emotional," "diseased," and "degenerate."

    Deeply angered, Barnes would never again present a public exhibition. Instead he housed his impressive private collection--one of the most extensive in America--in Merion, a suburb of Philadelphia, where entrance to the gallery was by invitation only. He also created an educational institution he called the Barnes Foundation.

    People interested in seeing the collection had to seek written permission personally from Barnes. He could be generous or capricious with his response. Blue-collar workers were always welcome; elite members of the art world were usually not.

    Albert C. Barnes
    The Medici of the New World
    By Caroline Kim

    Worth a read.


    And Bonnard Late Interiors? (none / 0) (#21)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:40:25 PM EST
    Must see, imo. And if you are interested in Walker Evans and photography, that show is great too.

    The Met is one of my favorite museums, coin toss between that and the Prado. Probably Prado wins out, but hard to say.


    Skipping Bonnard Did enjou (none / 0) (#56)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:51:47 PM EST
    Walker Evans. Note to self:  learn to artfully crop photos. Will visit Photo Museum Sat.or Sun.  So many museums. Neue, Guggenheim, and MOMA all have special exhibitions I am interested in seeing.

    Skipping Bonnard????? (none / 0) (#66)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:09:58 PM EST
    Oh well, too bad he is one of my favorite artists of all time. Amazing, utterly gorgeous paintings...

    And the Walker Evans is mostly his collection of other peoples post cards. His cropping was almost always done in the camera, although there are some pictures that he later cropped, very few though.

    Evans is also one of my favorite artists of all time. He could take two pictures of a house that look the same except the trees are moved around. A true genius..  


    I saw an Ansel Adams exh. (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:15:18 PM EST
    In San Francisco. Uncropped photos juxtaposed w/his cropped choice. Very enlightening. DonKt neeed all of the landzape in every photo.  

    Not A Fan (none / 0) (#74)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:17:24 PM EST
    Of Ansel Adams. Overly technical calender pics, imo.  Boring.

    Just saw the Bonnard (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 05:15:37 PM EST
    Exh. Beautiful. Thanks. Now time to leave the (emple of Dendur and start hiking South.

    The Temple (none / 0) (#100)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 05:18:18 PM EST
    And all the Egypt stuff is amazing too...  Usually I am rushing past it while being herded out. A few weeks ago I was late in arriving and spent all my time in Egypt... pretty wild stuff.

    I wish I could take Joshua to see it (none / 0) (#112)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 08:16:12 PM EST
    He seems very absorbed in anything to do with Egypt.

    OMG (none / 0) (#114)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 08:21:54 PM EST
    The only problem is that you would not be able to get him out of there. Here is a taste

    I suppose we ought to (none / 0) (#115)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 08:24:45 PM EST
    arrange a summer vacation up there.

    Yes, you should (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by Amiss on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 11:49:23 PM EST
    It would be great fun for all of your family from what I have heard of them here.

    Prado: Sorolla exh. opens (none / 0) (#62)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:03:57 PM EST
    End of May.

    March 25, 2009 (none / 0) (#27)
    by SOS on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:54:44 PM EST
    WASHINGTON -- Most food manufacturers and distributors cannot identify the suppliers or recipients of their products despite federal rules that require them to do so, federal health investigators have found.


    hm (none / 0) (#28)
    by connecticut yankee on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:55:36 PM EST
    According to Huffingtonpost a rapper named Method Man meant to pay his back taxes but got high instead.

    I wonder if the IRS give any points for honesty?

    No (none / 0) (#29)
    by SOS on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 02:59:26 PM EST
    they don't.

    You either pay up (none / 0) (#32)
    by SOS on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:04:31 PM EST
    or go to the slammer or a tent city.

    This reminds me (none / 0) (#33)
    by CST on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:04:51 PM EST
    of a song from a movie that method man starred in.

    Afroman!...n/t (none / 0) (#48)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:35:57 PM EST
    Sorry KDog, looks like Method Man (none / 0) (#36)
    by coast on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:09:15 PM EST
    stole your thunder.  I know you were waiting to use that excuse when the IRS came knockin'.

    Even I know better.... (none / 0) (#47)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:35:10 PM EST
    than to f*ck with the IRS...besides, I'm not in Method Man's league...my taxes are taken, not paid.  

    Method Man.... (none / 0) (#45)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:32:26 PM EST
    gone forgot something else, we don't value honesty, we value sneaky.

    He once rapped C.R.E.A.M....Cash Rules Everything Around Me...but he's gonna learn the Wu Tang Clan ain't got nothin' on the IRS, where cash really rules.


    apropos of nothing (none / 0) (#35)
    by Bemused on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:08:39 PM EST
      Talk about being between Scylla and Charybdis:


    So the guy (none / 0) (#39)
    by eric on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:19:15 PM EST
    snitched and he didn't even get a deal out of it?  Moron.

    Hard to tell from the article how it went down (none / 0) (#53)
    by Bemused on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:50:11 PM EST
     but he went to trial, so whatever deal he was offered probably did not appeal to him. I would guess because any deal might have involved agreeing to testify against Hell's Angels.

      About the time you lose 30 kilos of the Hell's Angels cocaine, the good options dissipate



    In other rapper news (none / 0) (#41)
    by CST on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:23:47 PM EST
    T.I. was sentenced to a year and a day.

    Sounds like he's been going above and beyond in his community service, and based on his music, he has certainly had a change of heart and mind recently.

    I imagine he'll serve his time without trouble and keep doing his thing.

    Just glad to see a rapper talk about his mistakes as mistakes, and try ending the violence instead of trying to get more "street cred" by talking it up.

    NY Special Election March 31 (none / 0) (#43)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:28:45 PM EST
    Very close but looking good...
    According to the poll of 917 likely voters, conducted by the Siena Research Institute of Siena College, Murphy now leads Republican Jim Tedisco, the minority leader in the state assembly, by a margin of 47 to 43 percent. The poll's margin of error is 3.2 percent, meaning Murphy's slight lead is just outside the margin.

    The result was striking considering Murphy, a businessman and venture capitalist making his first run for office, was down by 12 points when the campaign began in earnest one month ago.


    Very Funny - How they determine who to bailout (none / 0) (#57)
    by SnoDad on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 03:53:11 PM EST
    Are you confused how Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Federal Reserve Chairman Dr. Ben Bernanke determine which firms get bailed out and which firms are allowed to fail? Why was Lehman Brothers allowed to fall into bankruptcy, yet AIG was bailed out with over $180 billion in U.S. Taxpayer's money? -


    While it's fun to make fun (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by CST on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:03:01 PM EST
    of bailouts, and southpark has always had avery funny and direct way of getting their point across, I think it's pretty clear that AIG got $180 billion because of what happened when they let Lehman Bros. fail.  Right or wrong, I don't doubt that motive.

    Neocon Vampires aka PNAC 2.0 (none / 0) (#59)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:02:52 PM EST
    They are back in the saddle cooking up new plans for world domination.
    Vowing to counter what it calls "neo-isolationism" on both the left and right, a new advocacy group, the Foreign Policy Initiative, has been launched. Its cofounders, former Iraq Coalition Provisional Authority spokesman Dan Senor, Weekly Standard editor William Kristol, and national security writer Robert Kagan of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, are experienced Washington veterans for making the case for a more activist and hawkish U.S. role in the world.

    Laura Rozen

    Sham-wow guy busted (none / 0) (#81)
    by scribe on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:30:46 PM EST
    In Miami.  The allegation is, generally speaking:  he met a woman in a bar and they hooked up.  Back at the hotel room, a monetary transaction to facilitate the sex.  Money paid, he kisses her.  She bites down on his tongue and won't let go.  He hits her (the police report mentions "facial fracture(s)") until she lets go.

    For a guy who makes his money fast-talking you into buying crap you might not need, this might well be seen as a really dangerous to his way of life.


    You cannot make this crap up.

    The link button is not working.  Go to gawker.com for the story and the smoking gun.com for the police report.

    Never seen this guy before in my life. (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:46:20 PM EST
    But some of the comments are priceless:

    Who kisses hookers?

    $1,000? for straight sex?

    The real story here is someone picked up a female hooker in a Miami club and she turned out to be a female.


    You don't watch enough late night (none / 0) (#89)
    by scribe on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:54:10 PM EST
    obscure-channel cable TV.  Here's one of his ads.

    Along with that Billy Ray guy, Mr. Sham-wow is one of the preeminent faces on TV - more exposure than [name a newsman].  I count literally dozens of parodies of his ad....


    Let's see if the link button works now (none / 0) (#90)
    by scribe on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:56:36 PM EST
    The gawker article, and

    The police report, courtesy TSG.

    This time it worked....


    There you go, (none / 0) (#97)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 05:10:27 PM EST
    If he's not on the Golf Channel I'll probably never see him...

    Watched a test recently (none / 0) (#120)
    by Amiss on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 11:45:28 PM EST
    of the products that all of these late nite advertisers pitch. The best performer was the sham wow, believe it or not. It was slow at first but then really soaked up all of the liquid. I was surprised.

    How do you know that? (none / 0) (#109)
    by YesVirginiaThereIsASanta on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 07:44:40 PM EST
    about the kissing hookers? And, don't try to tell me you learned it watching "Pretty Woman" :)

    Well I'm not telling Joshua (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:51:07 PM EST
    He loves the sham-wow guy, tries to imitate him.

    Imagine how he'd feel about the Sham-wow (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:51:49 PM EST
    guy since I'm a criminal for smoking pot in my youth.

    I guess he doesn't live a boring life. . . (none / 0) (#83)
    by andgarden on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:42:38 PM EST
    Lawyers: wanna "Drop-kick your old job"? (none / 0) (#85)
    by scribe on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 04:48:55 PM EST
    Here's the position:

    VP, Legal Affairs - World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. (Stamford, CT)

    Drop-Kick your old job!
    World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. has an exciting opportunity for a Legal Superstar to be the primary attorney responsible for negotiating and drafting agreements and documents and providing advice in the areas of talent relations, creative writing, television production, music and TV clip licensing, and live events. This attorney will supervise a paralegal responsible for assisting with the matters identified above.

    The ideal candidate will have the following qualifications and personal attributes:
    * * * blah, blah, blah * * *
    Experience practicing with a reputable law firm
    * * * blah, blah, blah * * *
    A true appreciation (ideally a passion) for the company's product
    Is a practical, business-savvy lawyer with impeccable legal/business judgment and excellent interpersonal and communication skills
    * * * blah, blah, blah * * *
    Is a team player
    Is a down-to-earth individual who is a good fit for the company's culture
    * * *

    Last I checked, a passion for that company's product was something sanded out of law students by the time they graduated....

    and I gotta wonder what lawyer would be a "good fit for the company's culture"?  I mean, they don't teach "layeth the Smack Down" at Hahvahd Law.

    And, to us lawyers, the folding chair is a place you sit, not a thing you wield.  (Though I have to say there have been times....)

    GOP Filibuster? (none / 0) (#95)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 05:05:39 PM EST
    On March 19, the nomination of Indiana University law professor Dawn Johnsen to head the OLC was endorsed by the Judiciary Committee with every Republican voting against her and Sen. Arlen Spector (R-PA) abstaining. The nomination was to have been brought to the Senate floor for a vote on Monday and then again on Wednesday, but it has been held back. Republican leaders, it appears, are playing with the notion of making Johnsen the target of their first filibuster.

    Scott Horton

    Hope they do not try it. Johnsen is a great choice for head of OLC, which is why the GOP hate her.

    CNN showed Holder taking the (none / 0) (#117)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 09:23:25 PM EST
    Oath this morning. Maybe now he will fight for the U.S. Constitution in earnest.

    Just another sunny Friday (none / 0) (#98)
    by scribe on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 05:11:06 PM EST
    afternoon in NYC, courtesy Gawker, the Times, and some knucklehead driving a crane, which knocked down a road sign on the Whitestone, killing the PM rush hour but apparently not hurting anyone.

    IIRC, this is one of the ways to Shea.  It would never happen on the way to Yankee Stadium.

    "road sign" makes it almost sound (none / 0) (#105)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 05:34:12 PM EST
    trivial, lol!~ I wanna know hard hard they had to hit it to get it to come crashing down.

    Why can't the police stop Gang Vilence? (none / 0) (#125)
    by robert diogenes on Sat Mar 28, 2009 at 01:47:11 PM EST
    The newspaper headline read "Violent Crime on The Rise".   The homicide rate is going up and gun violence is spiking," says Ron Ruecker, head of the International Assoc. of Chiefs of Police.  The increase is primarily occurring in large cities such as Atlanta, Miami, Cleveland, New Orleans, and Baltimore.  What are some cities doing right?  Chuck Wexler head of the Police Executive Research Forum says that cities that are able to  quickly deploy officers to hot spots can cut back on crime.  Preventative efforts and community involvement are  also  key".

    As one of  our senior newscasters would say, "and now the rest of the story".  A recent article in the Chicago Tribune, by Anthony D. Box, may give us some clues.  Anthony served 9 years with the FBI.  He has a bullet in his liver from wrestling with a thug when he was 16.

    He says the most distressing aspect of the rise in violence is the usual bromide by public officials that the POLICE SHOULD DO MORE.  Anthony believes these public officials are "looking thru the wrong end of the telescope".   He also believes that handgun bans are not effective.

    Anthony says the  real challenge is to improve the BROKEN HOMES, BROKEN SCHOOLS. and ECONOMIC DESPAIR that exists in high crime neighborhoods.

    Anthony agrees with Neil Basanko, executive director of the South Chicago Chamber of Commerce, "that it all begins with family".  He quotes Pres-elect Obrama, its time people accept responsibility for themselves, their family, and their community.  Its time> to challenge  men  to quit behaving like boys.

    Problems with the police forces another blog,