home

Saturday Morning Open Thread

At Sports Left, Jeralyn is writing about the X-Games, and I am writing about the Senior Bowl (a/k/a the Time Tebow Bowl) and the Australian Open.

Coming up, a riff on Bill Simmons' latest colum and his newly refined Levels of Losing.

This is an Open Thread.

< Friday Night Open Thread | The Case For Progressive Taxation >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Posted this in last night's thread (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by jbindc on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 02:00:33 PM EST
    But since it's a law/politics site, it bears repeating

    Yoo and Bybee basically cleared by DoJ

       For weeks, the right has heckled Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. for his plans to try the alleged 9/11 conspirators in New York City and his handling of the Christmas bombing plot suspect. Now the left is going to be upset: an upcoming Justice Department report from its ethics-watchdog unit, the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), clears the Bush administration lawyers who authored the "torture" memos of professional-misconduct allegations.

        While the probe is sharply critical of the legal reasoning used to justify waterboarding and other "enhanced" interrogation techniques, NEWSWEEK has learned that a senior Justice official who did the final review of the report softened an earlier OPR finding. Previously, the report concluded that two key authors--Jay Bybee, now a federal appellate court judge, and John Yoo, now a law professor--violated their professional obligations as lawyers when they crafted a crucial 2002 memo approving the use of harsh tactics, say two Justice sources who asked for anonymity discussing an internal matter. But the reviewer, career veteran David Margolis, downgraded that assessment to say they showed "poor judgment," say the sources. (Under department rules, poor judgment does not constitute professional misconduct.) The shift is significant: the original finding would have triggered a referral to state bar associations for potential disciplinary action--which, in Bybee's case, could have led to an impeachment inquiry.



    Uh oh... (none / 0) (#1)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 10:45:28 AM EST
    ...Phil's in trouble.  

    The golfers' decision to squeeze through the loophole hasn't sat well with many of their peers. "It's cheating, and I'm appalled Phil has put [the grandfathered club] into play," Scott McCarron, a three-time Tour winner, told the San Francisco Chronicle. "All those guys should be ashamed of themselves for doing that ... As one of our premier players, [Mickelson] should be one of the guys who steps up and says this is wrong."

    Not a good start to a year where he should take advantage of Tiger's absence.  

    It isn't cheating. What he's doing is legal (none / 0) (#5)
    by Angel on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 11:20:57 AM EST
    and is within the rules, and there are at least three other golfers at Torrey Pines using the same clubs.  McCarron needs to call all the others cheaters, too, if he's to be consistent and really cares about the 'spirit of the rules' blah blah blah.  Sour grapes from someone who didn't make the cut.  

    Parent
    Rather silly (none / 0) (#15)
    by CoralGables on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 02:57:39 PM EST
    of McCarron since the rules say the club is legal. In fact, calling him silly is probably being too kind.

    Parent
    Nance called it... (none / 0) (#25)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 08:40:08 PM EST
    ...a firestorm on-air today.  Nick Price said that all players should be using the same equipment so there's a level playing field.  

    There's a player's only meeting early next week followed by a PGA review.  

    Might be silly, but it has some legs.  

    Parent

    Just read something about Phil saying he's been (none / 0) (#27)
    by Angel on Sun Jan 31, 2010 at 11:18:22 AM EST
    publicly slandered.  I have to agree with that statement.  Also, McCarron is 'backtracking' and now saying that players using the Ping are "bending the rules."  Well, he said Phil was "cheating" and now he's just "bending the rule."  Heh.  He knows he said something naughty.  And the meeting you reference was already on the calendar.  Here's a quote from the article I just read, a statement from the PGA Tour Commissioner:  

    "Under the Rules of Golf and the 2010 Condition of Competition for Groove Specifications promulgated by the USGA, pre-1990 Ping Eye 2 irons are permitted for play and any player who uses them in PGA Tour sanctioned events taking place in jurisdictions of the USGA is not in violation of the Rules of Golf. Because the use of pre-1990 Ping Eye 2 irons is permitted for play, public comments or criticisms characterizing their use as a violation of the Rules of Golf as promulgated by the USGA are inappropriate at best."

    I think this says it all. It's fair, it's legal....and I think Phil's attorneys need to go after McCarrnon.  Tiger who???  lol  

    Parent

    For the real political geeks (none / 0) (#2)
    by jbindc on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 10:58:45 AM EST
    Something to watch in November - Proposal 1 on Michigan's ballot would authorize a state constitutional convention to be called to overhaul the state's constitution.  Apparently, this measure comes before the voters automatically every 16 years, but it was rejected in 1978 and 1994.

    No NY trial for KSM (none / 0) (#3)
    by jbindc on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 11:02:46 AM EST
    No official announcement, but it looks like a done deal.

    The Obama administration on Friday gave up on its plan to try the Sept. 11 plotters in Lower Manhattan, bowing to almost unanimous pressure from New York officials and business leaders to move the terrorism trial elsewhere.


    More (none / 0) (#4)
    by jbindc on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 11:11:26 AM EST
    The jury pool? (none / 0) (#6)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 11:47:42 AM EST
    Back to military tribunals. But, if merely (none / 0) (#7)
    by oculus on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 12:02:35 PM EST
    a venue change for federal criminal trial, finally U.S. citizens could travel to Cuba.

    Parent
    Security (none / 0) (#8)
    by jbindc on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 12:10:19 PM EST
    And the fact that many NYers didn't want the disruption for several years.

    As to who would be the jury pool?  Not a clue.

    Parent

    But we have other locations in NY. (none / 0) (#10)
    by nycstray on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 12:58:25 PM EST
    Gitmo seems wrong to me. Especially if the Admins message is they want to show they can properly/fairly try alleged terrorists.

    Parent
    Name a location in NY (none / 0) (#11)
    by Politalkix on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 01:17:00 PM EST
    where the decision to hold a trial will be vigourously defended by Schumer, Gillibrand, Cuomo/Patterson and other Democratic politicians during the 2010 election season. If you cannot name a place, the angst about not holding the trial in NYC will ring hollow.

    Parent
    They mentioned 3 this AM (none / 0) (#12)
    by nycstray on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 01:25:50 PM EST
    on the news*. The "angst" wouldn't be a problem at them like it would in NYC. You know $$$ and making a large chunk of Manhattan a PIA security zone for who knows how long. Most folks aren't too keen having sharp shooters all around their 'hood.

    * can't remember them all as I wasn't properly caffeinated at 6:30 in the AM, but I believe West point was one.

    Parent

    Name a location in NY ? (none / 0) (#21)
    by NYShooter on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 05:28:56 PM EST
    Any place North of Westchester County.

    Prisons are the only growth industry in NYS, and the largest employer. Since manufacturing (Kodak, IBM, Carrier, etc.) left NY, prisons grew exponentially, and the local folk welcome them with open arms.

    A trial would bring in a lot of money, and with all the hunters there, I don't think they'll react like Manhattan Liberals.

    Parent

    Hey! We only get jumpy (none / 0) (#23)
    by nycstray on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 06:28:22 PM EST
    when Con Ed has explosions!  ;)


    Parent
    that's nothing compared (5.00 / 0) (#24)
    by NYShooter on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 07:22:27 PM EST
    to the time the rumor flashed that Starbucks ran out of their "Guatemala Casi Cielo."

    Everyone still remembers exactly where they were that fateful day.

    Parent

    While the American left and right bicker (none / 0) (#9)
    by Politalkix on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 12:51:40 PM EST
    China keeps leaping forward.
    link2

    They just put up (none / 0) (#13)
    by jondee on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 01:31:36 PM EST
    another one of those Chinese Walmart Superstores, to suck the oxygen out of another small community right around the corner from me.

    A lot of us have gone way out of our way to enable, empower (and exploit), this partly-imaginary China that 'we' are supposedly in competition with.

    No Americans, Mexicans, Chinese, Indians -- in fact, fewer and fewer human beings. Just capital ripe for liquidation.

    Parent

    Don't Ask, Don't Tell (none / 0) (#16)
    by MO Blue on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 03:11:00 PM EST
    WASHINGTON -- The Defense Department starts the clock next week on what is expected to be a several-year process in lifting its ban on gays from serving openly in the military.

    A special investigation into how the ban can be repealed without hurting the morale or readiness of the troops was expected to be announced Tuesday by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. link

    A campaign promise in '08, '10, '12, '14. On and on it goes. Where it stops, no one knows.

    Past time to treat our military (none / 0) (#17)
    by oldpro on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 03:28:30 PM EST
    men and women like grownups, demanding their own personal behavior and attitudes meet the espoused standards of the country they signed up to defend.

    Women in the military?  Blacks?  Gays?  Religious nuts?

    Identity shouldn't matter.  Behavior is what matters.

    Parent

    Yep (none / 0) (#18)
    by jbindc on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 03:51:24 PM EST
    And since I love "The West Wing" quotes so much, it's time for this one again:

    Major Tate: Sir, we're not prejudiced toward homosexuals.

    Admiral Percy Fitzwallace: You just don't want to see them serving in the Armed Forces?

    Major Tate: No sir, I don't.

    Admiral Percy Fitzwallace: 'Cause they impose a threat to unit discipline and cohesion.

    Major Tate: Yes, sir.

    Admiral Percy Fitzwallace: That's what I think, too. I also think the military wasn't designed to be an instrument of social change.

    Major Tate: Yes, sir.

    Admiral Percy Fitzwallace: The problem with that is that's what they were saying about me 50 years ago - blacks shouldn't serve with whites. It would disrupt the unit. You know what? It did disrupt the unit. The unit got over it. The unit changed. I'm an admiral in the U.S. Navy and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff... Beat that with a stick.



    Parent
    Indeed. I'm watching reruns (none / 0) (#26)
    by oldpro on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 11:38:57 PM EST
    of West Wing off and on...loving it...along with reruns of Boston Legal, House, Law and Order and old movies.  My whole life is currently a rerun.

    Parent
    $200 million for terror trials (none / 0) (#19)
    by jbindc on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 04:04:58 PM EST
    That's what is rumored to be forthcoming in the 2011 budget.

    Not sure if this number will stand now that trials will not be in NYC...

    Apparently (none / 0) (#20)
    by jbindc on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 04:58:05 PM EST
    This is where my resume has been going.

    Right to privacy (none / 0) (#22)
    by Manuel on Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 05:48:46 PM EST
    This case is interesting.  Where is the line between the right to pivacy and the right of companies to post information online?  Is the line at the front door?  Shouldn't people be able to opt in/out?