News You Could Care Less About and Open Thread

Monday mornings usually bring good news stories. Maybe it's early yet, but here's what I'm seeing:

Vanity Fair puts its copy editors to work on Sarah Palin's resignation speech to show just how poorly written it was. The Boston Phoenix has a five page article on just how much money conservatives will throw at Sarah Palin.

Paula Abdul may not return to American Idol. (694 articles on it according to Google News.) Michael Jackson's mother may challenge the appointment of estate executors, Jackson's doctors may not be charged with murder and lots of people want to raise his kids (1,165 Google news articles).

If you're finding better things to talk about, or want to add to the list of news you could care less about, here's an open thread. I'm off to work and will be back later.

< Oral Arguments Weds. on FISA Re-Write Law | Hearing Tomorrow on Release of Dick Cheney Interview in Valerie Plame Case >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Here are a few (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 10:31:04 AM EST
    Baby badgers (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by lilburro on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 10:55:50 AM EST
    are adorable.  Wonder what it's like to give birth to a hedgehog though!  As if birth was fun to begin with.

    Aren't badger babies just (none / 0) (#21)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:05:42 AM EST
    precious.  Then they grow into an adult badger.  Sort of like people that way :)

    I came for the free beer (none / 0) (#15)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 10:55:06 AM EST
    Sounds wonderful to be able to taste a microbrew before you order.  My husband has spoken about the animal loss in Iraq, too bad Australia is so far from Iraq.  Of course in the chaos and death many people may have lost their resources to keep camels.  My husband said that there were a lot of burros in use too, and many killed.  I wonder if a "feral" camel can be persuaded to act a bit domesticated?  Are they like horses in that respect?  Baby Marmosets are adorable.

    Squid Story (none / 0) (#17)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 10:58:15 AM EST
    Here. I posted thinking of your son... if you have not seen it already.

    We had not seen this portion of the story (none / 0) (#20)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:04:28 AM EST
    oculus put up a link when the squid were beaching themselves.  We monitored that for the day.  Didn't know that the story had evolved and this portion of it is much more fun than the squid dying.

    Camels are... (none / 0) (#52)
    by Fabian on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:34:08 AM EST
    probably the least friendly of any domesticated beast of burden - including donkeys, burros and llamas.  IOW - I'd only keep a camel if I absolutely needed one, not out of the emotional connection.

    Especially (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:36:28 AM EST
    When they will trample anything that gets in their way during a drought.

    Did you see in the article that Australia plans to cull almost 700,000 of them in the next four years??


    Con law exam this evening, so wish me luck (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by andgarden on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 10:33:02 AM EST
    I am expecting an indefinite detention fact pattern.

    I have to say (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by eric on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 10:37:27 AM EST
    that I do not envy you taking Con Law after the Bush Administration.  Good luck.

    heh (none / 0) (#6)
    by andgarden on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 10:39:41 AM EST
    My perspective is that Bush didn't really win many of his vast executive power claims when they were dealt with by the Court. But he often only lost 5:4 or 6:3. . .

    Not only (none / 0) (#27)
    by eric on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:11:45 AM EST
    that, though.  Remember that now, despite what the Constitution might say, it isn't necessary for the House and the Senate to pass identical bills.

    The Vice President isn't part of the Executive Branch anymore, apparently.

    Also, there is apparently the Second Amendment contains an individual right to own a gun within the District of Columbia.

    Things have changed since I was a law student...


    Well, (none / 0) (#35)
    by andgarden on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:16:38 AM EST
    I doubt your first point will have much future relevance. The Court hates funny smelling separation of powers problems, even when they're meant to produce a useful end.

    As to the VP, I think it's common ground that he isn't exclusively executive. He is the President of the Senate, after all, and he breaks ties there.

    Heller was an atrocity, though/


    Good luck! (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 10:40:02 AM EST
    It could be worse (none / 0) (#10)
    by Steve M on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 10:45:14 AM EST
    When I was in law school, one of the con law professors decided to give a midterm to the first-years.  Our school wasn't big on midterms, so even for the first-years who weren't taking it, this was their very first glimpse of an actual law school exam.

    The topic was... SECESSION.  You know, that thing that is by definition extraconstitutional?  350 law students wetting their pants, thinking "this was the warm-up?"


    Yikes (none / 0) (#12)
    by andgarden on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 10:52:11 AM EST
    I'm not sure how I'd tackle that, but I'd probably start at "we the people" (not "we the states") and work from there. McCulloch would have to do a lot of work, and thereafter lots of discussion of custom.

    Good luck!!!! (none / 0) (#93)
    by ruffian on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:43:47 PM EST
    Thought I'm sure you don't need luck!

    RNC Chair Soils Himself (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 10:34:21 AM EST
    Michael Steele, chairman of the RNC, doesn't seem to know the basic terminology of the health care debate.

    In a Q&A at the National Press Club just now, Steele was asked if Republicans support an individual requirement to get health care (also known as an individual mandate).

    "What do you mean by an individual requirement?" he asked the moderator. After she explained, he dodged the question.

    "Again, that is one of those areas where there is different opinions...I don't do policy," he said. "My point in coming here today was to begin to set a tone, and a theme if you will."

    Steele was taking questions after giving a speech on health care reform, in which he characterized President Obama's plan as a "reckless experiment" that's "too much, too fast, too soon."

    Rachel Slajda (TPM)

    So?????? (1.00 / 0) (#11)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 10:46:02 AM EST
    The "individual requirement," if I understand it, is the lynch pin of Obama's plan to require each and every person have health insurance.

    As such it is not an individual requirement but a requirement of Obama's plan since many polls show people not wanting insurance.

    In other words, it is newspeak, a phrase invented that infers it means something that it does not.

    BTW - Remember, I am for a single payer NHC plan designed to cover everyone, not a plan to ration health care and covertly destroy our current system.


    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by Steve M on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 10:52:53 AM EST
    The "individual requirement" means that each individual would be required to carry insurance.

    Good for Michael Steele for fighting back against this highly, highly misleading newspeak.


    Too bad Obama (2.00 / 0) (#33)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:15:47 AM EST
    doesn't have the courage to actually introduce a true NHC single payer plan.

    The problem he won't face is "cost."


    Go Back To Sleep (5.00 / 0) (#14)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 10:54:48 AM EST
    "if I understand it"....... You and Seele, sweet like two peas in a pod.

    Your ability to contribute to the (2.00 / 0) (#29)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:13:22 AM EST
    conversation hasn't changed. As you wrote:

    Posted by Squeaky at September 19, 2005 11:19 PM
    Rove never needed proof for his smear machine, why should I.

    Glad To See (5.00 / 0) (#43)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:21:46 AM EST
    That you heeded my request to go back to sleep.

    It's not like those (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by jondee on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:28:28 PM EST
    "Ah-thank-he's-a-Arab" posts Jim puts up at his site are smears or anything.

    Right, Jim?


    The kicker is not the (none / 0) (#133)
    by coast on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:15:58 PM EST
    individual requirement.  The kicker is the tax that one will have to pay if his/her coverage is not deemed to be "acceptable" as defined by the bill.

    I thought the arguement was that people did not have adequate coverage because they could not afford it or could not obtain it.

    So the answer is to tax them???


    Picasso Political Activist (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:18:16 AM EST
    Picasso's cold war career as a highly political painter, peace campaigner and tireless fundraiser for leftwing causes will be revealed in an exhibition at Tate Liverpool next spring that will include letters from world leaders, including Nelson Mandela and Ho Chi Minh, as well as a telegram from Fidel Castro congratulating the artist on being awarded the Soviet Union's international peace prize.


    Even though he lived in Paris after fleeing Spain he was never granted french citizenship because he was a card carrying communist and of course he could never return to Spain because of Franco.

    He may have been a Communist (none / 0) (#44)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:22:44 AM EST
    but he personally never gave away a damn thing after free love :)

    Really? (none / 0) (#48)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:27:16 AM EST
    He was a shrewd businessman, and nasty competitor,  but generous as well.

    Not so good with women, and that is an understatement.


    Generous to whom? (none / 0) (#57)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:37:22 AM EST
    He desired personal wealth.  Not very communist :)

    To Those In Need (none / 0) (#67)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 12:24:30 PM EST
    Even though he was not a member of the French Resistance he provided money and art to those artists who were active. He also was known to help out those suffering and in need.

    The legendary stories about his ruthlessness to Matisse and others are also another side of Picasso.

    He desired compensation for the unbelievable amount of paintings he made. No surprise that he became the richest artist in history ($50 mil) , save for Damian Hirst ($500 mil). Of course these numbers are not adjusted for inflation and Picasso died  at 90 Hirst is only 44. Not bad for two people who started out with nothing..  

    He was commissioned to make a maquette for a huge 50-foot (15 m)-high public sculpture to be built in Chicago, known usually as the Chicago Picasso. He approached the project with a great deal of enthusiasm, designing a sculpture which was ambiguous and somewhat controversial. What the figure represents is not known; it could be a bird, a horse, a woman or a totally abstract shape. The sculpture, one of the most recognizable landmarks in downtown Chicago, was unveiled in 1967. Picasso refused to be paid $100,000 for it, donating it to the people of the city.

    50,000 works that is 2 works a day for 68.5 years. He lived to 91, so let's say 1.7 works for 80 years.

    Picasso was exceptionally prolific throughout his long lifetime. The total number of artworks he produced has been estimated at 50,000, comprising 1,885 paintings; 1,228 sculptures; 2,880 ceramics, roughly 12,000 drawings, many thousands of prints, and numerous tapestries and rugs.[39] At the time of his death many of his paintings were in his possession, as he had kept off the art market what he didn't need to sell.



    I always like Picasso's (none / 0) (#66)
    by brodie on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 12:22:22 PM EST
    brilliant and apropos remark upon visiting the weirdly modernist paintings at the just-discovered Lascaux site:  "We have invented nothing!"

    My favorite.... (none / 0) (#145)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:43:42 PM EST
    ...Picasso quote:  "The three most astonishing things in the past half-century were the blues, cubism, and Polish vodka."

    Al Franken (5.00 / 3) (#47)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:25:54 AM EST
    Is getting ready to introduce his first piece of legislation:

    It costs on average about $20,000 to train a service dog and another $5,000 to place the dog with the veteran. It is my strong belief that a service dog will more than pay for itself over its life, and my bill is designed to determine the return on investment with a pilot program that provides service dogs to hundreds of veterans.

    My bill will help train a statistically significant number of dogs to measure the benefits to veterans with physical and emotional wounds. The program would be monitored and refined over a three-year period to optimize its effectiveness.

    Good Work Al (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:30:14 AM EST
    Iraq war vet and his service dog at work.

    OMG I love him (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:34:29 AM EST
    I had no idea he was even interested in such things.  At the moment I don't have a certified service dog, not since I started focusing on attempting to produce an AKC conformation champion.  Dogs that are certified service dogs though are amazing creatures when it comes to giving aid and comfort to those in need.  And they are so well trained that maintaining them is minimal after feeding and healthcare.  They don't need fences, a leash is not required....they are very confident yet giving members of family and society.  We have several certified service dogs in my local kennel club too who visit nursing homes regularly.

    There's at least one org that is (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by nycstray on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 12:09:42 PM EST
    training service dogs via the prison system.

    My dog is a service dog dropout (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by ruffian on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:42:21 PM EST
    In his defense, fewer than half the puppies make it all the way to being paired with someone! His organization was CCI (Canine Companions for Independence). Click link for a warm fuzzy feeling for the rest of your Monday.

    These dogs do so much good for their people. Good for Al for championing this cause for Veterans.


    Have heard from both my Sens today (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by nycstray on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 12:22:02 PM EST
    on the Public Option.

    From Gillibrand:

    If you believe as I do that offering a not-for-profit public health care plan option to compete with private insurers is the best way to truly lower health costs, improve quality, and ensure access, then please sign my petition and send a clear message to all our elected leaders in Washington that now is the time to act. By offering a Medicare for All approach where Americans can buy in at an affordable rate, we can focus on preventive care, not the emergency based care we have now, and lower costs for everyone.

    From Schumer (also Leahy and Durbin):

    That's why, as part of any health care reform plan, we support a public health insurance option that would foster greater competition in the marketplace.
      If you're happy with your current insurance plan, you could keep it.  But a public option would create more choices for consumers -- and lead to lower costs and better quality for all.  Plus, a public option would allow you to always keep your insurance, even if you lose or change your job.

    (bold not mine)

    Republicans 2012 (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by CST on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:33:40 PM EST
    It seems weird to me that none of the top three "conventional wisdom" candidates for the Republican primary (Palin, Huckabee, and Romney) currently hold any political office.

    I guess that makes it easier to claim "outside the establishment".  And it will be easier to make up political positions based on the zeitgeist in 2012.  Still, it seems odd.

    Playing "outsider"... (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:38:20 PM EST
    is a good guess, and maybe they also don't want a recent record they would have to defend...alotta tough choices to be made the next 2 1/2 years with spending, debts, and taxes.

    You'd think (none / 0) (#94)
    by CST on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:46:39 PM EST
    someone would try and seperate from the pack just to say "look at me, I have a record".

    Miss. Gov Haley Barbour (none / 0) (#102)
    by ruffian on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:54:05 PM EST
    will be out there, I bet. Lord help us all.

    Why? (none / 0) (#103)
    by Fabian on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:54:07 PM EST
    It's the perfect opportunity to reinvent yourself without a pesky record or cumbersome history!

    (I mean, really, look at Obama.  A sitting Senator to be sure, but with scarcely any record at all.)


    No record... (none / 0) (#104)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:59:06 PM EST
    is better than a bad one...better to just try and look smart on tv criticizing everybody elses...it doesn't take much to be a right-wing hero, as Joe the Plumber and ex-Ms. California have shown us recently.

    Brand R's only chance is to dumb the whole thing down even further and make it even more of a popularity contest, iow a high school election...and tell ya the truth it just might work.


    Unless you were looking for (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by Anne on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:49:07 PM EST
    a list of things people still care about, just a little - at least enough that they could possibly be able to care less, I think maybe what you really meant to say was, "News You Could NOT Care Less About."  :-)  Little usage glitch that makes me cringe.

    What could I not care less about?

    Michael Jackson, generally, but because I do estate and trust work, the possible Will contest and related wrangling could be quite interesting.

    Sarah Palin: it just seems to be "lather, rinse, repeat," and if I never heard her name again, that would be fine.

    Finally In Her Stride? (5.00 / 2) (#105)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:01:01 PM EST
    Regarding North Korea:
    "What we've seen is this constant demand for attention," Clinton, who is in India, said in an interview that aired on ABC's "Good Morning America" on Monday.

    "And maybe it's the mother in me or the experience that I've had with small children and unruly teenagers and people who are demanding attention -- don't give it to them, they don't deserve it, they are acting out," she said.

    via Laura Rozen

    Oh I love it (none / 0) (#111)
    by Carolyn in Baltimore on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:21:26 PM EST
    No man could have said this and seemed not overly condescending.
    Hillary and the Mom pulpit!

    Well (none / 0) (#113)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:25:02 PM EST
    She's dealt with Congress for a long time too.  Small children / teenagers / most members of Congress - pretty much the same.  They take temper tantrums, mouth off, and generally think the world owes them something.

    Unlikely (none / 0) (#116)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:29:58 PM EST
    North Korea is far enough away to make the case, Senate no way.
    Hillary would have mud splatter on herself, if she went there.

    I somehow missed this last week (5.00 / 2) (#144)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:43:27 PM EST
    Jimmy Carter leaves his church after 60 years.

    And I doubt anyone here will have an issue with his reason for packing it in.

    ...my decision to sever my ties with the Southern Baptist Convention, after six decades, was painful and difficult. It was, however, an unavoidable decision when the convention's leaders, quoting a few carefully selected Bible verses and claiming that Eve was created second to Adam and was responsible for original sin, ordained that women must be "subservient" to their husbands and prohibited from serving as deacons, pastors or chaplains in the military service.

    Can read his entire statement HERE

    If the Left was scared of Palin (2.00 / 1) (#37)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:17:37 AM EST
    they wouldn't be attacking her and her 14 year old daughter.

    Ah How Nostalgic (none / 0) (#41)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:20:33 AM EST
    PPJ and his repeating half truths, acknowledged mistakes and lies.

    Is there an election coming up soon? or is it getting boring at tall cotton.


    Yeah I read (none / 0) (#118)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:40:11 PM EST
    his apology. Didn't believe it.

    Otherwise life is good. The palatial retirement compound is in excellent shape and my copies of your more outrageous comments are still available.


    Are we? (none / 0) (#42)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:20:59 AM EST
    I didn't know

    They are? Call the FBI! (none / 0) (#99)
    by Fabian on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:49:31 PM EST
    Honestly, I hear the same drivel from the left re: Palin that I ever did - and almost all of it is aimed at Palin herself, even if it is sexist, classist and classless.

    Her kids are generally left out of it, unless some psuedo-feminist wants to remind people that Sarah Palin is a MOTHER <gasp!>.


    Ever heard of David Letterman??? (1.00 / 0) (#125)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:56:21 PM EST
    Then you never heard his comment that her daughter should be raped by a baseball player between innings...... Letterman's excuse is that he didn't know the daughter was only 14....

    Guess joking about rape of an 18 year old is okay?????


    Letterman is a Leftie? (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by Fabian on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:04:58 PM EST
    Must be missing all of his blogging and such.

    he is not "a Leftie" (5.00 / 2) (#135)
    by Steve M on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:21:14 PM EST
    he is apparently "the Left," full stop.

    I missed the part where (5.00 / 0) (#134)
    by jondee on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:16:10 PM EST
    Letterman said she "should be", or any indication that he was refering to "rape."

    Talk about disengenuously twisting reality.

    Someone needs to go cold turky from wingnut radio for a while.


    Levi was right (none / 0) (#4)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 10:37:08 AM EST
    She ditched Alaska to cash in, seems to have had nothing to do with her house.  If I didn't know better though, I'd think she had me for a speech writer.

    Yeah (5.00 / 0) (#19)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:02:43 AM EST
    I see the similarity, but if she had you writing for her she would be even more scary... lol

    With you all I have to do is (2.00 / 0) (#45)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:22:52 AM EST
    quote you.

    I have no idea what you are implying here either (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:28:16 AM EST
    If you would follow the nested (2.00 / 0) (#95)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:47:28 PM EST
    comment line up to my comment and then read up the thread before commenting you would discover that I noted squeaky's contributions to the general discussions by quoting him.

    Posted by Squeaky at September 19, 2005 11:19 PM
    Rove never needed proof for his smear machine, why should I.

    It was followed by even more defining statements:

    ppj does as ppj does (none / 0) (#30)
    by squeaky on Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 09:58:35 PM EST
    So because Rove is doing wrong, it is okay for you to do wrong?

    I have no problem with alleging that Rove's grandparents were Nazi's. Even if they were not, he uses Goebbels' propaganda techniques as a bible and may as well be a born and bred Nazi.

    You see, when someone boldly declares they don't care if a claim is factual it is hard to take them seriously there after.

    No charge for the education.


    Yup (5.00 / 0) (#109)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:05:25 PM EST
    No problem. Rove worked from Goebbels' playbook, with or without nazi blood running through his veins.

    Thanks for the blast from the past. Glad to see your stale losing hand is the best you have.  


    Glad to show everyone who you are! (none / 0) (#127)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:57:49 PM EST
    Glad to help out anytime.

    Feel Free (5.00 / 0) (#153)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 05:24:32 PM EST
    You never seem to have a problem with looking foolish.



    So one time is okay??? (none / 0) (#159)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 09:47:39 AM EST
    I never knew that.

    Not scary (none / 0) (#23)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:07:53 AM EST
    poor grammar

    Nah (none / 0) (#51)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:32:06 AM EST
    Editors take care of the grammer..  It is the rambling fire you sometimes indulge in that reminds me of her.

    The rambling fire? (none / 0) (#55)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:35:58 AM EST
    You often misunderstand me too

    Not Likely (none / 0) (#59)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:49:46 AM EST
    I am just a fan of your writing, especially when you go off and write those looooong paragraphs with little or no breathing until the end..

    I express my fire porely (5.00 / 0) (#63)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 12:13:53 PM EST
    when I'm all bubbled up :)  I am Palinish in that respect.  I lose commas, repeat myself, can't spell.  One thing I would like to know about her, and maybe she has answered me already by ditching the state of Alaska as she now has to feed upon Republican "gifts", does she intellectually understand most of what she signs up to be the fiery poster child for?  I don't think she does and now I believe that she doesn't care to either.  Ditching your public service you asked for, and was then voted in to do, in favor of riches is not the action of someone who cares about the general well being of the population.  I did proofread this.

    And Repubs love her (1.00 / 1) (#8)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 10:40:48 AM EST
    And the Left is scared spit less of her.

    As a progressive... (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by gtesta on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:12:21 AM EST
    I'm scared spitless of her.
    Mostly because if she is the nominee in 2012, then it will be Obama in an absolute cakewalk.  I can foresee no realistic scenario (especially after increased Dem. gains due to 2010 census) in which she would be competitive.  And to me, that means that I will lose a great deal of leverage to try to move Obama to the left.

    I would like an opposition party too (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:16:13 AM EST
    And we ain't gettin one any time soon

    My mouth stays spitfull when I think about (none / 0) (#18)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:00:31 AM EST
    Palin.  I don't think it is correct to think the Left is scared spitless of her.  Most of the Left has no respect for her, and I usually have some respect for the things I fear.  The party she represents has imploded on itself, and the consuming fires rage on daily.  There are still dollars to vacuum up though because nobody serves unbridled corportions running wild like Republicans, and governor Palin hasn't recently cheated on Todd so she's still marketable for now.

    Palin and the Republicans (none / 0) (#78)
    by daring grace on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:11:02 PM EST
    I found this interesting (from the London Times) via The New Republic's 'Plank' blog.


    There is no more eloquent statement of modern Republicanism than resigning office with time still on the clock. Mrs Palin has chosen to talk about power, rather than exercise it. She would rather write a book and give lectures about being a governor than actually be a governor. And her party has made the same choice.

        It has cast itself, deliberately, as the opposition, the angry outsider, and it is more comfortable in this role than it is as the party of power. As Rick Perlstein describes in his book Nixonland, being the party of the angry outsider began as an election strategy. Richard Nixon wanted to mop up votes that went to urban machine "law-and-order" Democratic mayors such as Richard Daley in the North and populist rabble rousers such as the segregationist Democrat George Wallace in the South.

        Yet the anger of Nixon's coalition has never quite left it, even after years of huge political success. They see themselves as the eternally frustrated rebels knocking on the barred doors of Washington DC, when they have been on the inside themselves for years.

    Ya sure thats love... (none / 0) (#22)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:05:49 AM EST
    and not lust?

    You're so bad! (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:10:42 AM EST
    I think this is why Coulter has the following she does to.  Seems to me nothing goes over as swell with rightwing followers than a decent looking woman packing venom.

    It might be as simple... (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:06:20 PM EST
    as not too many decent-looking women spouting conservative ideology, so when one comes along it gets conservative dudes acting all ga-ga like junior high school boys.

    Lefties are used to good-lookers spouting liberal views, so its no novelty.


    Name me one (2.00 / 0) (#79)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:12:00 PM EST
    Pick just about any hollywood starlet.... (5.00 / 0) (#85)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:36:07 PM EST
    or hunk for an example of good-looking liberal advocate...ladies love Clooney:) And I'm partial to that Rosario Dawson.

    Oh I thought you meant one that (2.00 / 0) (#90)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:40:15 PM EST
    actually had brains...

    Brains (none / 0) (#155)
    by jondee on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 06:14:00 PM EST
    like Sarah Palin.

    My wife (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by eric on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:53:21 PM EST

    venom (none / 0) (#60)
    by Carolyn in Baltimore on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 12:08:52 PM EST
    That's because to right-wingers venom is natural in a woman. Even the women who don't spew venom get it manufactured for them: Hillary, Sotomayor, Pelosi for example.

    It seems to me that reality based speaking (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 12:29:12 PM EST
    or debating is considered full of female venom if a woman took part in such thing, in the rightwing opinion. But standing alone on a stage while being female and repeating Republican talking points while displaying contempt for anyone thinking otherwise is intelligent and even sexy.  I have to admit though, it is a great way to discourage original thought among your women!

    Is it better to spew left wing talking points? (5.00 / 3) (#71)
    by cawaltz on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 12:53:49 PM EST
    Frankly, both sides posture.

    I'm going to repeat this again very slowly so the ideologues can understand. Sarah Palin went back to her state and increased spending on Head Start and low income health care. Since when is that something a right wing ideologue would do? It isn't. You can google Cato institute and see what the right wing ideologues position on Head Start is.

    A right wing ideologue would have used the opportunity two pro choice judges offered to posture and send them back as unacceptable. Palin didn't do that. Despite her personal convictions she appointed a pro choice justice to the bench in Alaska. A right wing ideologue would have used legislation that would have discriminated against same sex marriage as an opportunity to disparage a minority group. Palin didn't do that either. Instead, she vetoed a measure that would have discriminated against same sex couples as "unconstitutional."

    Heck at this point she appears more "liberal" than the guy you all placed in office. I certainly don't see her filing briefs on behalf of DOMA or appointing someone to the bench who is officially on the record as believing the government has the right to spend tax dollars in support of the anti choice position.


    Sloooow Talk (3.00 / 3) (#83)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:32:38 PM EST
    Well maybe you should speed up. What Palin did for her constituents in AK, was good for Palin back then. Since her VP run she is championing wingnut causes and appealing to her most conservative base.

    Making women pay for rape kits? Pro life even when rape is involved?

    Take it somewhere else. Palin is the face of the GOP.


    I think I'm with squeaky on this (none / 0) (#160)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 10:33:12 AM EST
    I believe that Palin is smart enough to know when the Republican party has destroyed itself and if she shifted gears, she did it for herself and nobody else.  And if she really meant her constituents well why didn't she stay and serve them?  Instead she chose to cash in, the Republican party is willing to pay for her face right now...they have nobody   If she wants to excite me, she should change party affiliation.  If any Republican politician wants me to believe that any one of them cares about my rights as a women, it's going to take more than a couple of tokens tossed my way.  It wasn't that long ago when outspoken members of the Democratic party were talking crap about how I needed to lose my rights to save the party.  I won't be easily sold out to anyone these days.  Markos himself did a lot of damage to the liberal netroots stand on women's rights.

    On any given Saturday night... (2.00 / 0) (#39)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:19:08 AM EST

    We're not (none / 0) (#31)
    by eric on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:14:35 AM EST
    scared or angry, we're laughing.

    If indeed that is the case (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by cawaltz on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 12:54:29 PM EST
    I would stop, it makes you look moronic and clueless.

    Here's a great clip (none / 0) (#9)
    by Steve M on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 10:43:00 AM EST
    I'm not much of a reality TV guy, but how could I miss the sight of my 74-year old barber dancing on America's Got Talent.  He may not be Susan Boyle, but this is classic stuff!!

    Anybody noticing... (none / 0) (#24)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:08:35 AM EST
    the internets behaving strangely today?  Our network here on the job keeps booting people, some of our manufacturers online order entry is down, and some webpages don't wanna load for sh*t...what gives?

    Are the N. Koreans f*cking with us again or something?

    Ours was booting people yesterday (none / 0) (#32)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:15:01 AM EST
    and the day before.  My husband worked on our browser software last night.  Seems to be doing better so far.

    The interweb (none / 0) (#36)
    by eric on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:16:52 AM EST
    is operating fine for me.

    They have been for years (none / 0) (#40)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:20:23 AM EST
    ..........one way or the other...'

    My guess is too many people playing on line poker..


    Perhaps the gods... (none / 0) (#46)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:22:59 AM EST
    ...of the interwebs are Phillies fans and have it out for the followers of the Metropolitians?

    Somebody has it out... (none / 0) (#58)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:44:59 AM EST
    for the Metropolitans...thats for damn sure.

    When does training camp start again?


    You can officially start... (none / 0) (#64)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 12:18:11 PM EST
    ...you adoration for Mark Sanchez on July 27th.



    I was actually wondering... (none / 0) (#70)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 12:51:34 PM EST
    when the Jets will begin sucking the life out of me and crushing my sportsfan soul utterly and completely.

    Lol... (none / 0) (#73)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:04:13 PM EST
    ...I'm sure the Donkey's will do the same thing to us this year.  Quarterback, we don't need no stinking quarterback!

    If only the Rockies could play San Diego every game from here on out, we might have something to look forward to.


    Not a Kyle Orton fan... (none / 0) (#80)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:19:55 PM EST
    I take it...he's got an all-pro beard!

    Nope... (none / 0) (#88)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:37:54 PM EST
    ...and he's even an Iowan, so you know I'm serious about it!

    That neckbeard of his is just gawd awful.


    Prediction: Wade Phillips gets canned (none / 0) (#142)
    by easilydistracted on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:41:45 PM EST
    mid-season and the Donkey's former coach, Shanahan, is hired by the Boys?!

    And it will be all... (none / 0) (#147)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:49:51 PM EST
    ...Jesse's fault for making Tony break-up with her on her birthday?

    Definately sounds like Shanny wants back in the game.


    Got to blame somebody. (none / 0) (#150)
    by easilydistracted on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:57:22 PM EST
    Yep, Mike wants back in the game but he'll probably keep his mansion in Denver and merely commute somewhere.

    It is a nice little shack. (none / 0) (#152)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 04:17:58 PM EST
    I can actually see him going to Houston instead of Dallas.  After all, his system is already in place and he could keep his son on the staff.  

    Oh, and if Jesse needs a shoulder to cry on, I've got two.  The door to Casa de MileHi is always open...


    Hey (none / 0) (#74)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:04:46 PM EST
    try being a Detroit Lions' fan

    At least you have... (5.00 / 0) (#77)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:08:55 PM EST
    The Red Wings and Pistons consistently competitive...I'm a Met, Jet, Knick, and Islander fan...4-headed monster of sports misery....and no shortage of payroll except in the case of the Isles.

    Talk about the whammy (none / 0) (#139)
    by easilydistracted on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:28:58 PM EST
    'bout the only one with worse luck, kd, is Roy Munson.

    Oh well... (none / 0) (#143)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:42:13 PM EST
    ya can't win 'em all Easy D...I'll take lucky in life and health and unlucky in inherited sports loyalties anytime...got a steak defrosting to eat tonight so thats another good day in the books:)

    I hear ya. (none / 0) (#148)
    by easilydistracted on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:51:18 PM EST
    I had a 22 oz porterhouse this past Friday. Even that old dalmatian dog of mine got a bit of a treat when I was done with that one.

    Need photo of (none / 0) (#154)
    by nycstray on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 05:58:22 PM EST
    that old dalmatian dog of mine

    Mine cleans up after dinner every night  ;)


    I'll upload some and give you (none / 0) (#161)
    by easilydistracted on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:27:37 PM EST
    a link. Give me a couple of days.

    Her name is Haley. We rescued her from an abusive environment about ten years ago. She was two. Man, I get a bit misty-eyed when I report that she has been really showing her age over the past couple of months. Arthritis and hip problems are starting to take a toll. I've tried everything to help her because I don't want her on Rimidyl. I'm running out of options.

    I'm starting to get a bit sad because I know there's a tough, real tough, decision for me in the future. Haley's the third Dal that we've been fortunate enough to share our life with.  


    New Reality Show (none / 0) (#26)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:11:22 AM EST
    Artists at work or something like that..

    Produced by Sarah Jessica Parker, the show, which doesn't have a title or a broadcast date, will try to do for the contemporary art world what the cable channel has done for the worlds of fine cuisine ("Top Chef") and fashion ("Project Runway"): discover young, or maybe even middle-aged or old, unknowns with the talent to command the attention of both a television audience and a serious audience in the creative field to which they aspire.


    I can give watching this a go (none / 0) (#30)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:13:34 AM EST
    I could, too (none / 0) (#81)
    by sj on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:20:09 PM EST
    But I wonder how they would determine elimination criteria?  Design and cooking have some basic principles as well as creativity.  "Pure" art is more open than that.

    Mostly just Cronkite (none / 0) (#54)
    by brodie on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 11:35:49 AM EST
    and the 40 yr anniversary of the Moon Landing on our minds this weekend and today.

    There was a well-done one hour tribute by CBS last night to WC, and it offered some news for this observer.  

    I wasn't aware of his friendships with a few high-profile celebs, his being a DeadHead, and I'd forgotten that his Evening News in late 63 had been the first news outlet to report on the Beatles phenomenon (somewhere I seem to recall that Jack Paar sometime in this time period had also done a feature on the group on his weekly show and months before they appeared on Ed Sullivan.

    A surprising but important snippet of film was shown from Cronkite's 1965 visit to Nam, where at the outset of LBJ's buildup WC appeared on camera gung-ho for our military effort there.  That visit, and the MSM's flag-waiving coverage of the crucial early yrs of Nam, was an issue this morning on Amy Goodman's show.  Worth checking out for the discussion and the longer clips of Walter in Nam in the early stages.

    Another random thought about Cronkite is the little-recalled radio call-in show(s) he did in 1977 with Pres Carter.  My memory is that it was very successful, as it enabled JC to personally connect with the public and show his knowledge and understanding, while Carter was also able to benefit from the association with a highly esteemed public figure.  

    Dunno who pulled the plug or why -- one story I've seen is that the phone company, Ma Bell, complained that its system became overloaded during the show and so unilaterally decided to withdraw its technical support.  

    A real shame Carter and his handlers couldn't find a format thereafter to effectively connect with the public as he did early in 77.  

    Cronkite (none / 0) (#62)
    by CST on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 12:10:30 PM EST
    I learned an interesting family fact this week.

    My grandfather was a delegate at the 1964 Dem Convention (probably the only one to stay in a tent instead of a hotel), and he took my mother one day with an extra floor pass.  She got to see Walter Cronkite in person.


    Well, he was there in (none / 0) (#69)
    by brodie on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 12:31:01 PM EST
    Atlantic City -- but only to do his Evening News from that locale.

    It seems that CBS decided to replace him for convention coverage for the Dems after the fairly disastrous earlier Repub convo, where apparently the producer had unilaterally made some major technical changes to the set from what WC had been used to, which badly put him off his normally seemless on-air stride.  Roger Mudd (and someone else, I forget), co-anchored from AtlCty.  

    Needless to say, Walter was none too pleased about being replaced.  And it would be the last time, until his retirement, that he wasn't there at a convention anchoring the action.


    He wasn't the anchor (none / 0) (#76)
    by CST on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:07:09 PM EST
    but he did report from the floor.

    Did not know (none / 0) (#121)
    by brodie on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:45:27 PM EST
    that.  It must have been humbling for him to go from anchor to mere reporter in just a few weeks.  Oh my.

    Would love to see some extensive clips of some of those 60s conventions (and maybe a few from the 70s), but whenever I check for something, it's the same old few minutes of the usual stuff I've seen already.  

    E.g., Goldwater's 64 acceptance in SF.  What I'd like to see also is Ike's speech -- the one where he had a line about that darned librul media, and how all the commentators and fancy talkers on the teevee really didn't have the Republican Party's best interests at heart.  At which point the Goldwater delegates stood up, turned around to look up at the networks' anchors sitting behind their glass booths, and began angrily shaking their fists.

    Sounds like Ike nearly caused a riot.

    Also the 68 Dem convo -- that one would be worth spending many hours of my time reviewing if only the internet/youtube had all those unedited hours of teevee coverage which the networks seem to only release in small snippets.  The action both inside the convention (the roughing up of Dan Rather for instance) as well as outside.


    They only made (none / 0) (#149)
    by CST on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:53:54 PM EST
    that mistake once.

    You may want to check out youtube.  A quick google search came up with a bunch of stuff there (although I can't watch at work).


    Dems threatening a filibuster (none / 0) (#82)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:32:24 PM EST
    to Sen. Thune's amendment to allow licensed handgun owners to carry their weapons into states that have similarly carrying laws.

    Schumer: "This amendment is a bridge too far, and could endanger the safety of millions of Americans. Each state has carefully crafted its concealed-carry laws in the way that makes the most sense to protect its citizens. Clearly, large, urban areas merit a different standard than rural areas. To gut the ability of local police and sheriffs to determine who should be able to carry a concealed weapon makes no sense. It could reverse the dramatic success we'vie had in reducing crime in most all parts of America. In the past, the gun lobby has had as its rallying cry, `Let each state decide.' With this amendment, they are doing a 180-degree flip. Whether you are pro-gun or pro-gun control, this measure deserves to be defeated. We will do everything we can to stop this poisonous amendment from being enacted."

    That's crazy (5.00 / 0) (#110)
    by Steve M on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:10:12 PM EST
    I am pro-Second Amendment but you can't just go preempting everyone's laws like that.

    That said, it's not licensed handgun owners who are going to cause a gigantic crime wave.


    Why not? (none / 0) (#126)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:56:31 PM EST
    the flipside of the coin is state law is preempting individual liberty.

    I'm anti-gun myself and ain't thrilled about red state tourists bringing their concealed pistols up yankee way, but thats freedom, let that sh*t ring.

    If nothing else it might give cabbies pause before they try the 200 dolla cab ride trick on a tourist with a drawl:)


    Look at it this way (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by Steve M on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:23:09 PM EST
    States have the inherent police power to control what comes into their jurisdiction.  If a state bans the possession of marijuana, they can't very well be expected to make an exception because someone wants to bring in a stash that was legal wherever they bought it.

    ...wait, I'm starting to realize I probably didn't pick the example that would be most persuasive to you.  Let me give it some more thought...


    Wait a second... (none / 0) (#138)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:28:35 PM EST
    I'm tentatively planning, if finances allow, a quick jaunt over to the 'dam in the fall, you mean to tell me I can't bring nothing back?...:)

    Curse you John Law...curse you!!!!


    I didn't know Chuck was (none / 0) (#129)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:01:58 PM EST
    such a state's rights kinda guy.

    Political friends (none / 0) (#86)
    by joze46 on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:36:11 PM EST
    Well a slight breakthrough happened for me

    While watching MSNBC commenting on the Federal Reserve was striking the other day. Finally, one of the guests mentioned that in our system the Federal Reserve has not been audited for ninety seven years, basically since its inception. I rolled over laughing and giggling to myself for the insanity of it all. Sheesh, after all these years in my old age, finally, is realizing how stupid things are in the American economic system.

    Then on "Money Talks" with Bob Brinker ABC hate radio Sunday afternoon Bob has a phone in superbly timed that suggested Paul Volker to replace Ben Bernekie as Federal Reserve Board Chairman. Volker is old time money. This being the most powerful position in the United States says Brinker. Also commenting that there is a serious thought to give back the money supply control to Congress, but of course that would be horrible, and "the game" would be over.  But doing a Google on Bernekie I came across


    by  Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) speaking on the House floor, yikes now the Federal Reserve is indeed criminal as addressed by Bachmann. The bankers are going insane. Now we might know why America had people like Capone or Bonnie and Clyde, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance kid. Or, Bill Bonnie, Billy the kid and the regulators.  

    Just this past year, or so, learning about the Federal Reserve, how it works, and what it does, gives me the creeps. Finding out about the year nineteen thirteen President Wilson signed into law a federal reserve banking system after a secret meeting held on Jekyll Island by all the big American and Foreign bankers. Sounds like a Cheney special energy meeting way back when.

    Then, reading about it in article over the Internet rings true. This is a private organization that no one knows where the money has gone in the past ninety seven years. No audits!!! It must look real ugly, so ugly, hot sexy immoral CIA related ugly, full of money crazy corruption ugly, political favorites ugly, disgusting above the law ugly done in the name of national security secrets for family fortunes with our tax money free and no return for almost a century. Talk about primer irresponsibility.

    We wonder why Americans dis-trust the media and Journalism. To me it seems the people that are above the law include not only Presidents but the Journalist that report the news on them. Time for change for sure.        

    Faith (5.00 / 0) (#92)
    by squeaky on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:43:08 PM EST
    Money requires tremendous faith on the part of the users to remain credible. An audit is scientific, not good for faith based products.

    Remember the wizard of oz. His magic ended when toto threw a wet blanket on suspension of disbelief


    It's so ugly... (none / 0) (#96)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:47:41 PM EST
    where the hell do we even start when it somes to the criminal travesty that we call the Federal Reserve?

    Infowars (none / 0) (#106)
    by eric on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:02:06 PM EST
    and Michelle Bachmann?  Surely you realize that these people are nuts.  Don't take this Fed stuff so seriously.

    This is the same conspiracy crap that has been around forever.  It used to be isolated to the John Birch Society types, but now it has gone mainstream, it seems.


    This is not (none / 0) (#107)
    by eric on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:03:45 PM EST
    to say that I like the Fed.  I do think that it has too much power and I don't care for the way it exercises that power.  But the crazy conspiracy theories involving the Fed, the Bilderberg Group, the Rothchilds, etc. is getting into whacko land.

    Is it not true... (none / 0) (#108)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:05:02 PM EST
    that no independent auditor has looked at the books at the Federal Reserve since it was founded?  I've never heard anyone in our govt. refute it.

    I think that is right (none / 0) (#112)
    by eric on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:22:14 PM EST
    I haven't heard anyone suggest that it was audited.  But I wonder, what would they audit?  The Fed invents money, we know that.  What is there to audit?  I am not trying to be flip, it is an honest question.

    I have a friend that is really into the infowars conspiracy stuff.  A good bit of this "audit the fed" comes from people like him that listen to Alex Jones and his infowars conspiracy theories.  It is some really, really wild stuff.


    Beats me man... (none / 0) (#120)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:44:46 PM EST
    low-finance flies over my head, never mind high-finance and the Fed...I just think there should be some kind of independent auditing of everything the government does.  I can only imagine the shadiness the Fed is capable of.

    I like me some Alex Jones too...I know he's crazy but sleep a little better knowing he's out there rabble-rousing for liberty and fighting tyranny in his own crazy conspiracy-theory filled way.  Funny story how I got turned on to him...one day 5-6 years ago I copme home from work and check the mailbox and a VHS copy of Alex Jones "9/11 A Road to Tyranny" is in there, no envelope no label no nothing.  None of my friends would fess up to putting it in my mailbox.  To this day I have no clue how it got there...I like to think it was the Liberty Fairy.


    I've seen (none / 0) (#122)
    by eric on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:53:22 PM EST
    that video, or at least parts of it at my buddy's house.  I am not saying its all nuts, just some of it.  And Alex Jones really weaves a good conspiracy story.

    But I do not believe that the government puts fluoride in the drinking water to keep us complacent.  Nor do I think that contrails behind airplanes are actually "chemtrails", the government spraying chemicals on us from high altitudes.  My buddy does believe these things.  Heh.


    Do me a favor... (none / 0) (#128)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:59:58 PM EST
    and ask your pal if he's been spreading the message to random mailboxes...I'd love to solve the conspiracy of where the hell that tape came from:)

    He must be great fun at parties!


    Okay, I confess. (none / 0) (#130)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:03:46 PM EST
    You're bluffing... (5.00 / 0) (#146)
    by kdog on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:43:42 PM EST
    Jones is way too anti-complex for your tastes my brother:)

    You spotted my "tell?" (none / 0) (#157)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 09:28:17 AM EST

    WH delays budget review (none / 0) (#87)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:37:39 PM EST
    Seems the WH is delaying the release of it's mi-year budget review, one that may show a record-shattering deficit projection. The WH says the delay is caused by normal delays that happen in years when a new president takes office.  Republicans say it's to release the numbers while Congress is in recess to sideline bad news while the WH is trying to get through health care overhaul.

    Repealing the Bush tax cuts for the rich (none / 0) (#98)
    by ruffian on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:49:18 PM EST
    Doesn't that sound better than 'health care reform surtax'?  Good luck selling that, Dems.

    Honestly, just because they didn't nominate Hillary, do the Dems think they have to throw away all her excellent framing of the issues and choices?

    Sure, but I think they are talking about both (none / 0) (#123)
    by MKS on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:54:22 PM EST
    It's the same thing (none / 0) (#141)
    by ruffian on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:41:39 PM EST
    Just two different names for it, one that sounds palatable and one that doesn't. Let's see which one obama uses - I bet he talks about rolling back the Bush tx cuts, not imposing a 'surcharge'.

    Sobering corrections data. (none / 0) (#100)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:51:27 PM EST
    * 1 in 29 adults is under correctional control (compared with 1 in 102 adults in 1982).
      * Colorado spent $625 Million on corrections (nearly twice spending on higher ed)
      * By end of 2007, 30% of correctional population was in prison or jail (in 1982 that figure was 26%)
      * Colorado has 77,635 people in probation (238 federal)
      * Colorado has 11,086 people on parole (954 federal)
      * Colorado has 22,666 people in prison (1,736 federal)
      * Colorado has 13,871 people in jail
      * For every $1 Colorado spent on prisons in 2008, it spent $0.15 on probation and parole.
      * 1 day of prison costs ($76.51) = 6 days of parole or 21 days of probation.
      * Colorado ranks 15th highest prison / corrections population among the 50 states

    You can download the full report by visiting www.pewcenteronthestates.org/publicsafety.

    Emphases added.  Taken from here

    Yet another reason I can't stand cops (none / 0) (#124)
    by MKS on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:55:26 PM EST
    Did the 1982 report... (none / 0) (#132)
    by EL seattle on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 03:12:05 PM EST
    ... include parole figures as part of it's "1 in 102 adults"?

    The Executive Summary in that report says:

    Three decades of growth in America's prison
    population has quietly nudged the nation across a
    sobering threshold: for the first time, more than one
    in every 100 adults is now confined in an American
    jail or prison.

    The number of people "confined in jail or prison" doesn't directly compare to the number that are "under correctional control" does it?


    Don't know about that. (none / 0) (#151)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 04:14:00 PM EST
    I'm still hung-up on the fact that we spend nearly twice as much on criminal justice as we do educating our kids.  

    Now, that's criminal.  


    I couldn't find the breakdown (none / 0) (#156)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 06:35:54 PM EST
    Know how many are violent offenders?  In the federal system, it's more than 50%. It would be interesting to see those numbers for CO.

    I doubt that (none / 0) (#162)
    by MKS on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 05:27:10 PM EST
    Some quality space flicks (none / 0) (#117)
    by brodie on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 02:34:23 PM EST
    on TCM today.

    A very good documentary on Apollo from years ago, For All Mankind.  

    Then, The Right Stuff, which Walter Cronkite apparently hated -- too many cardboard caricatures of Nasa folks, as he saw it.

    Later a somewhat underrated space disaster flick, Marooned, starring Greg Peck, and the guy who a few years earlier had proved his legal innocence, David Janssen.

    Finally, in the middle of the night (natch -- our space agency was probably behind this scheduling), one of my all-time favorites, the great NASA Conspiracy film Capricorn One, starring Elliot Gould (remember him?), a feisty Karen Black, a young Mr Barbra Streisand, a young Sam Waterston, and that other guy (who thankfully has only a few lines).  Also featuring a quality performance playing a NASA bigwig, Hal Holbrooke, the guy who played Deep Throat in that famous Watergate movie from the same time period.

    It;s okay (none / 0) (#158)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 09:46:04 AM EST
    Your feelings of superiority to everyone who disagrees with you are shared by many on the Left.
    It is a recognizable trait.

    Especially after the last eight years (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by jondee on Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 04:02:41 PM EST