home

Monday Morning Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 07:37:53 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Court and then back on a plane this evening for me. I think Jeralyn is swamped as well.

Talk to you tomorrow.

This is an Open Thread.

< Sunday Open Thread | Monday News Update >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Monday Morning Open Thread | 84 comments (84 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Not good for Reid (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by jbindc on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 08:08:50 AM EST
    Is it really about him, or is the Obama magic gone?

    WASHINGTON -- During his whirlwind visit to Las Vegas two weeks ago, President Barack Obama mentioned U.S. Sen. Harry Reid by name four dozen times, gave him a big hug and talked him up as if he was a long-lost brother.

    In remarks that could not have been more laudatory, Obama repeatedly characterized the veteran Democratic leader as a man "made of very strong stuff" who was making the right decisions for the state back in the nation's capital.

    But as Reid faces an uphill path to win re-election to a fifth Senate term, Obama's enthusiastic endorsement does not appear to have improved the Senate majority leader's standing among constituents, according to a new poll conducted for the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

    Reid got no bounce from Obama's visit on Feb. 19, when the president spoke highly of him at Green Valley High School and to business leaders at CityCenter, polling indicates.

    A larger percentage of voters surveyed (17 percent) said they would be less likely to vote for Reid following the president's visit than said they would be more likely to vote for him (7 percent). Seventy-five percent said Obama's visit would have no effect on how they vote.
    Heavy coattails. (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by observed on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 08:30:20 AM EST


    Parent
    Interesting take on bipartisanship (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Cream City on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 10:47:45 AM EST
    overheard the other day, a conversation among younger voters.  They still like bipartisanship.

    The thing is, the way they read that is that it doesn't matter whether we have -- whether they vote for -- Republicans or Democrats.

    And they think that they got that message from the top, from Obama.  

    (And they did, actually.  A muddled message.)

    Parent

    Making Reid Majority leader (5.00 / 3) (#49)
    by Socraticsilence on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:53:32 AM EST
    was a mistake to begin with- not because of his skills which are underrated, but because of his electoral situation- he's from a solidly purple state, one would think that after Daschle Dem's would have learned, I mean for heaven's sake you don't see Repubs making an Olympia Snowe or a Gordon Smith (now Scott Brown) minority leader and with good reason; in a state with balanced institutional support said leader will always be forced to be moderate and even then will risk losing his/her seat- make the Majority/Minority leader a Boxer (not in terms of hobbies) or a Schumer or heck Feingold (Wisconsin's the closest to swing I'd go) and then this crap wouldn't happen.    

    (On a side note: man in two decades the GOP is going to be hosed if they don't find a way to oust the Tancredo wing- I mean what exactly is their Congressional much less their Presidential strategy when Demographics turn Texas and Arizona Purple, and Nevada Blue- its one of the few areas where Bush/Rove were right on the GOP has to reach out to minorites, especially Latinos or it will become a permanent opposition party).

    Parent

    Tough times ahead (none / 0) (#23)
    by mmc9431 on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 10:29:44 AM EST
    Being an incumbent is a dangerous position this election cycle. As poor of a leader as Reid has been, the prospect of a McConnel leadership is even more terrifying! I hope Harry can turn his fortunes around. If not we're going to be in for a very rough two years.

    Parent
    Skilling of Enron could be set free (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Saul on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 09:26:51 AM EST
    If the SC rules that the law used to convict him is unconstitutional.  I heard on NPR the SC is going to make a decision on the law used very shortly.  

    Our justice system values are (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by observed on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 10:24:01 AM EST
    so skewed. Skilling should be in jail for life, morally speaking. Perhaps the law doesn't work that way, but he should.

    Parent
    Learn from mistakes? (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by mmc9431 on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 10:37:12 AM EST
    I'm more upset at the people that swept the whole disaster under the rug. Maybe if we had implemented stricter oversight after that, we could have avoided a lot of what we're dealing with now. The whole premise of leaving business alone to do business is ridiculous. Business has no conscience. The sooner DC realizes that the better off we'll all be.

    Parent
    I read that Enron's traders (who laughingly (none / 0) (#31)
    by esmense on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:03:55 AM EST
    boasted they had "stole all that money from Grandmas in California") were in high demand on Wall Street after Enron collapsed. The lack of ethics and conscience that shocked chumps like me were (are) highly prized in the financial world. So, in fact, the same people were behind both collapses -- and did very well for themselves as a result.  

    Parent
    Swept Under the Rug? (none / 0) (#44)
    by coast on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:37:24 AM EST
    One of the largest, and at the time one of the most respected, accounting firms in the world is destroyed and a whole new industry segement is created from the regulations (SOX) that were passed.  The cost, in both cash and hours, to companies to comply with the new regulations has been staggering.  I would not phrase that as being swept under the rug.  What we are dealing with now had nothing to do with what Enron was doing (variable interest entities).

    Parent
    There are parallels (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by mmc9431 on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 12:10:56 PM EST
    When California complained to the Feds about Enron's tactic, the Bush administration didn't do anything.

    The parallels are that Enron skated around shoddy oversight, loop holes, and a wink and a nod from the government, just as the banking industry did now.

    Enron should have been a warning shot that "too big" can be too bad for the country. We should never allow any company to grow to the point where they can hold the entire country up for ransom.

    Parent

    Let us be fair (none / 0) (#66)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 01:29:43 PM EST
    In CA they regulated the consumer side and locked the retail price.

    Then they deregulated the wholesale price.

    Think you could run a business like that?

    The result was a perfect situation for the crooks to show up.

    Parent

    Damn right it's skewed... (none / 0) (#27)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 10:42:11 AM EST
    different rules for different fools...but I can't get down with your life sentence idea...nobody should go to jail for life without a murder/rape/molestation victim(s) to be found.

    Parent
    Skilling caused far more suffering (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by observed on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 10:55:45 AM EST
    than many violent criminals. Statistically speaking, he probably caused a death or two, and certainly shaved years off of many peoples' lives. Heck , he's even worse than the local dope dealer, in my book.


    Parent
    Obviously... (none / 0) (#33)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:08:40 AM EST
    worse than your local friendly neighborhood dope dealer, the president is worse than that guy.

    I hear ya...lets just not forget caging and chaining human beings is a crime too, and not to given out like candy.

    Parent

    Except that (none / 0) (#34)
    by jbindc on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:10:08 AM EST
    No, it's not.

    Parent
    Of course it is... (none / 0) (#36)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:14:59 AM EST
    try chaining and caging somebody in your basement, and see what charges follow:)

    Parent
    Might consistent, long term (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by oculus on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:18:17 AM EST
    injestion of high quality Marijuana lead to unrealistic distrust of U.S. system of justice and all law enforcement?

    Parent
    Spoken like a prosecutor! (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by observed on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:21:03 AM EST


    Parent
    Who you callin'.... (none / 0) (#41)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:21:14 AM EST
    unrealistic:)

    Seriously, if you're not at least a little distrustful, you're on stronger dope than I.  Or you're on the payroll and od'ing on power:)

    Parent

    I am "a little" distrustful. But my (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by oculus on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:26:26 AM EST
    reporting position is not that the justice system is corrupt and all law enforcement pre-ordained abusive.

    Parent
    Prepare to become a little more... (none / 0) (#43)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:33:18 AM EST
    distrustful...Miami City Council wants to ban "unauthorized" feeding of the homeless...for the homeless own good of course, and to prevent litter.

    I sh*t you not.

    Parent

    And another one for ya... (none / 0) (#69)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 01:48:00 PM EST
    If you wanna cop a plea, let me cop a feel.

    Parent
    There are those who (none / 0) (#46)
    by MKS on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:40:32 AM EST
    are released from Death Row every year because of DNA....

    Awhile ago I spent two or three days reviewing the calendar of a local (former municipal court) courthouse....they prosecute mainly misdemeanors but do have felony arraignments......All including past charges are now online.

    It was eye opening.   They had trials scheduled for prostitution.  I saw two pending charges for possession of drug paraphanelia--not as ancillary charges but stand alone charges....

    I saw a couple of instances where someone had been arrested multiple times over a 12 month period for such things as loitering...The cops just wanted this guy off the streets.

    And the parole violations.  Unreal.  So many going back to jail or prison for ticky-tacky parole violations.  One guy had been cited--and jailed--for not having his license on him.  No big deal?  But, hey, laws are laws.  But it was not a drivers licences for motor vehicles.  It was a bicycle license.  The local cops and DA put him jail for a couple of weeks for not having his biycyle license on him when riding his bicycle....

    With the new law in California mandating early release of non-violent inmates, the local DA and Sheriffs went nuts....The state was unleashing hardened criminals upon society...The new rule  allowed 1 day credit for each day served instead of the previous 1 day credit for two days served.  Those who got out early were subject to electronic monitoring.

    And who were these hardened (non-violent) criminals let out early?  Well, the bicycle guy--the guy without a license--got out two days early....On average, many got out of jail a couple of weeks early.

    Skewed values....The penedulum has swung way too far in the prosecution's favor....Too many Javerts running the show now.

    Parent

    You have to have a bicycle license? (none / 0) (#81)
    by nycstray on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 08:07:38 PM EST
    I did not know that. I was planning on getting a bike when I got to CA as my new 'hood actually looks like a good riding place . . .

    Does CA also have the 3 strike law?

    Parent

    Fight the power stray... (none / 0) (#82)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 02, 2010 at 08:03:53 AM EST
    don't get the bike license...thats ri-god damn-diculous.

    And yes, CA is the home of three strikes, WA was the first state to pass that joke of a law.

    Parent

    My aunt (none / 0) (#83)
    by jbindc on Tue Mar 02, 2010 at 08:32:30 AM EST
    Got a ticket at Penn State in the early 80s for riding her bike the wrong way down a one way street.

    Same kinda thing, I think.

    Parent

    Could be a local ordinance (none / 0) (#84)
    by MKS on Tue Mar 02, 2010 at 02:00:44 PM EST
    like having a dog license...

    Parent
    Let's be real here (none / 0) (#53)
    by Socraticsilence on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 12:11:28 PM EST
    if "the President is worse than that guy" because of say the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, than as citizens of a democracy we're also liable- and what then- when have we been innocent:
    Carter: Armed the Mujahadeen
    Reagan: Armed, Trained and Publicly supported Death Squads and Nun Rapists
    Bush: Invasion of Panama, Iran-Contra, Stuff we don't know about as CIA head
    Clinton: Bombing of Serbia and Iraq, Sanctions against Iraq
    W Bush: Gitmo, Iraq, Afghanistan
    Obama: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan

    When you're the head of the most powerful nation in the history of the world you're going to be responsible for some terrible things, heck, you also have the inactions were the decison to withold American power and Support led to Thousands if not Millions of Deaths

    Carter: Cambodia
    Reagan: Basically all of Central America where not directy/indirectly complicit as well as much of Africa

    Bush: Haiti, Somalia, the Congo
    Clinton: the Congo, Rwanda, the Balkans
    W Bush: the Congo, the Sudan
    Obama: the Congo, the Sudan

    Parent

    I agree... (none / 0) (#56)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 12:50:01 PM EST
    we're all guilty as sin.

    George Carlin used to say there is no such thing as an innocent victim, we're all guilty the day we are born.  

    Parent

    See that's just it though (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Socraticsilence on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 12:56:47 PM EST
    would the US sitting back and not influencing World Affairs be any more moral- is it moral to avoid bloodshed in the Sudan, was it moral for Bush to do so in the Congo or Clinton in Rwanda- how is sitting back and doing nothing more more moral than acting even with the attendant human costs?

    Parent
    Heavy questions.... (none / 0) (#61)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 01:05:48 PM EST
    personally, I think the sin of causing harm is greater than doing nothing to prevent harm...but it's a fine line.

    Parent
    They probably should (none / 0) (#51)
    by Socraticsilence on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 12:03:50 PM EST
    but its only because the laws currently in place are basically written to shield Skilling types- its crap, yes the prosecution probably overstepped their bounds and yes that's serious enough to free the guy, but White Collar criminals basically write the freaking laws, the guy did more damage and stole far more money than a convenience store robber and in the end he's going to do less than 5 years and get a freaking apology from the court (oh and he'll probably sue for wrongful imprisonment or something). Seriously, I think we need to balance white collar laws and sentencing- bring them in line with blue collar laws, who does more damage the kid on corner slinging rock or the guy in $2000 dollar suits who loots 40,000 workers pension funds (and in the case of Skilling, et al made the initial money via mass extortion). Between this and the Exec. Comp for Medical CEOs I'm thinking a Chinese approach (sans Capital Punishment) might work better- start grading crimes on straight monetary value- say an extra decade for every half a million- that way draconian punishment is not dealt out to the Junkie who holds up the 7-11, but the guy who rigs the system and destroys the economy never see's a day of freedom.

    Parent
    Closing ceremonies (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by DancingOpossum on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:17:56 AM EST
    Loved'em. It was gloriously cheesy and oh so Canadian (I mean, I think--I'm no expert on the culture of our nearest neighbors to the North). But it was a fitting end to a wonderful Olympics. Well done, Canada!

    When it rains, it pours (none / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 07:39:17 AM EST
    Bill Halter is again against Blanch Lincoln, and Frank Lautenberg is heading back to the Senate this week.

    To bits of good news.

    Oh, and I'm crazy busy too. So it goes.

    Reefer madness (none / 0) (#2)
    by observed on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 07:59:21 AM EST
    You've been warned
    Actually the findings sound pretty serious.
    We'll see... (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Realleft on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 08:31:21 AM EST
    It looks like they could just as easily say, people with schizophrenia are twice as likely to smoke pot on a regular basis. Well, more people with schizophrenia smoke cigarettes too, but it's pretty rare to see headlines suggesting tobacco causes schizophrenia.  The implied causation of pot -> schizophrenia looks like some headline-grabbing on the part of the investigator and journalist.

    Parent
    The dose-relatedness (none / 0) (#7)
    by observed on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 08:35:04 AM EST
    of the effect rules out your hypothesis, IMO.


    Parent
    It needs (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by Zorba on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 09:49:50 AM EST
    a lot more study and a lot more data.  The dosage effect could just as easily happen because, the more prone you are to develop schizophrenia, etc, and the closer you are to observable symptoms, the more likely you are to seek out stronger and stronger drugs.  Except for childhood schizophrenia, the onset of symptoms tends to happen in late adolescence or young adulthood- which is when most people begin using cannabis.  It could be a form of self-medicating.  As your perceptions start to show changes and your thoughts start to become disordered (and it may not be bad enough for other people to observe changes in your behavior yet), you may want to try anything you can to alleviate this.  There is a genetic component, as well- first degree relatives of schizophrenics are many times more likely to develop schizophrenia than the general population.  

    Parent
    sure, but the dose-relatedness (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by observed on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 10:17:55 AM EST
    really is a counter to that idea.
    Of course the study is only suggestive.

    Parent
    How do you figure? (none / 0) (#32)
    by Realleft on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:05:02 AM EST
    It's all correlation.  Dose-response is a term used by the investigators, but it is still a correlation from what I read in this report.  It could equally be that cannabis helps those experiencing psychotic symptoms to feel calmer, and the more symptoms, the more use.  I'm not following your logic that this term shows anything in contrast to that.

    Parent
    The longer they used the drug, (none / 0) (#35)
    by observed on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:10:46 AM EST
    the more likely they were to develop psychosis later in life. This does not suggest self-medication as much as an effect.
    Look, people don't want to believe pot can have bad effects---that's not a reasonable attitude.
    Every drug has harmful side effects in high enough doses. This study gives some idea what "high enough" means for marijuana.
    No, that's not a pun.

    Parent
    I smoke it... (none / 0) (#38)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:18:11 AM EST
    more than anybody here (I'd guess)...I admit there are negative side effects to excessive use...thats obvious.  There are negative side effects to excessive anything...drinking too much water is bad for ya.

    I just think the benefits far outweigh the negatives...though that is for each individual to decide for themselves.

    Parent

    I'm at 15 years... (none / 0) (#8)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 08:38:49 AM EST
    of rock-steady use...am I psychotic or delusional?

    Actually don't answer that:)

    Parent

    You're a Libertarian. (none / 0) (#9)
    by observed on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 08:46:52 AM EST
    Need I say more?

    Parent
    Freedom... (none / 0) (#13)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 09:07:45 AM EST
    the greatest buzz of all:)

    Parent
    Juast avoid skunk, (none / 0) (#10)
    by jeffinalabama on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 08:51:46 AM EST
    according to the article. I originally typed 'skink' but I don't think they burn very well.

    Parent
    Now you're delusional jeff...:) (none / 0) (#14)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 09:21:14 AM EST
    avoid skunk?  Skunk (or better) is what I seek...I avoid the schwag...like the plague.

    If you're gonna do it, do it right:)

    Parent

    go for the better than skunk... (none / 0) (#45)
    by jeffinalabama on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:37:47 AM EST
    according to the report, better was all right... hash was fine, just not skunk, lol.

    Parent
    I see... (none / 0) (#48)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:50:07 AM EST
    I only skimmed the article, I'll have to see what makes skunk varieties so special.

    Hash glorious hash...so hard to come by consistently by me, not conducive to the quick buck this side of the Atlantic.

    Great article in this months High Times about the Moroccan hash trade...still making it the way they have for centuries, but adding new Western strains to their crops...wild stuff.  Can't seem to find it online though...you'll have to hit the newstand if you're interested.

    Parent

    I just hope the effects are not like (none / 0) (#65)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 01:26:02 PM EST
    tobacco.... where it takes years for them to show up.

    Parent
    Tommy Chong... (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 01:31:34 PM EST
    still appears sane enough...his persecutors, not so much:)

    Parent
    I was thinking more of diseases like cancer, COPD, (none / 0) (#80)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 06:36:47 PM EST
    heart attacks, etc...

    Tobacco is most likely the worst of all drugs just because the effects takes years.

    Will pot do the same?

    Parent

    Its like the Aspartame (none / 0) (#54)
    by Socraticsilence on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 12:12:38 PM EST
    studies, the amounts used are so high that correlation is hard to link to normal usage.

    Parent
    Ruh-Roh Reorge.... (none / 0) (#63)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 01:12:52 PM EST
    Look what I found in todays paper, kinda ties in to this topic...Bipolar lady gets stoned with her friend and stabs 'em to death.

    Parent
    Oh, brother (none / 0) (#73)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 02:55:58 PM EST
    a "marijuana-fueled rage."

    You know how angry you get when you smoke weed, right, Kdog?  Right?  Right?


    Parent

    Dont set him off (5.00 / 2) (#74)
    by jondee on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 03:07:38 PM EST
    the man's just a ticking time bomb :)

    Parent
    Yeah.... (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 03:33:03 PM EST
    I plow through that bag of sweedish fish with furious anger.

    Parent
    Notice the difference (none / 0) (#75)
    by nycstray on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 03:17:27 PM EST
    in how they wrote this one? Must not have had any evil weed at that party . . . .

    Parent
    Plenty of wholesome booze... (none / 0) (#76)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 03:32:01 PM EST
    at that Queens shindig I'm sure, no need to mention that though...lol:)

    Parent
    Closing Ceremonies (none / 0) (#4)
    by jbindc on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 08:19:59 AM EST
    Canada wins gold  - for the cheesiest closing ceremonies of all time.  Now the Canadian press is saying how wonderful it was because Canadians can poke fun at themselves.

    Honestly, I was embarrassed for the country just watching it - between women dressed as maple leaves hanging from the ceiling, inflatable beavers, William Shatner, Michael J Fox and Catherine O'Hara attempting to be funny (and falling flat), a giant game of table hockey, and fur trappers in canoes dancing - it was a pretty horrid show.

    What a shame.

    Really? (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by dk on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 08:53:41 AM EST
    I thought it was fun.

    To each his/her own, I guess.

    Parent

    It was probably a lot more fun (none / 0) (#12)
    by Anne on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 08:57:50 AM EST
    if you were drunk on your a$$, which may have been the case with the Canadian audience after hours of celebrating hockey gold!

    Parent
    Boo hiss (none / 0) (#16)
    by jbindc on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 09:49:36 AM EST
    And to make matters worse, the fact that Crosby got the winning goal frosts my cookies!  I can't STAND Crosby!

    Parent
    It was a tough loss... (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 09:54:39 AM EST
    but if we're gonna lose a gold-medal hockey game, best to lose to Canada.

    It means a lot more to the Canadians than it does to us...took some sting away from the loss to know it means the world to Canada, at least for me.  

    Parent

    Actually (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by jbindc on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 09:56:02 AM EST
    I felt worse than if we had lost to the Swedes or the Finns or the Russians. (The only redeeming value was the Steve Yzerman was the GM and Mike Babcock the coach, and as a Red Wings fan, that's good)

    Did I say how much I hate Crosby??

    Parent

    You're not alone... (none / 0) (#20)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 10:02:55 AM EST
    but I can't join the Crosby hate-fest...my oldest niece, who never cared the slightest for any sports as a kid, has become a hard-core hockey fan as a young lady.  Her favorite team?  The Pens.  And her favorite player?  You guessed it:)

    She was rooting hard for Canada in the Crosby jersey she got for Christmas.

    Parent

    I know it sounds bad (none / 0) (#55)
    by Socraticsilence on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 12:13:33 PM EST
    but I wish it was like the College World series- a true Round Robin- thus we'd play Canada again today.

    Parent
    Are you a Caps fan? (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Anne on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 10:30:19 AM EST
    My daughter's boyfriend is an avid Caps fan - and now that he and my daughter are living with us, I watch a lot more hockey.  Anyway, he hates Crosby with a passion - I thought he was going to lose his lunch when Crosby scored that goal.

    When I was in high school, I dated a guy who had been playing hockey since he was a kid - he played in an amateur league - and that was back in the day when Baltimore had the Clippers, so we were at hockey games all the time.  I'd forgotten what a fun game it is to watch, so really enjoyed this Olympics.

    My husband thinks that having the teams consist of almost all NHL-ers isn't quite in the Olympic spirit (I think basketball has gone the same way).  In terms of watching it, it's like every game is an all-star game m- and that's fine with me!

    I'm with you - I would have rather lost to Russia than Canada - but would have had a hard time rooting against Ovechkin - he's just so good!

    I have a feeling Ryan Miller would trade MVP for gold in a heartbeat - what a great run he had.


    Parent

    Wings fan (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by jbindc on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 10:41:00 AM EST
    And since the Pens needed 6 men on the ice during the Stanely Cup finals last year to score a go-ahead goal, I have no love for Crosby.

    (And we all know that Gary Bettman, the NHL Commissioner, wanted his pretty boy to get a Stanely Cup, right?)

    Parent

    Wings fan (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by jondee on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 12:55:54 PM EST
    say no more :)

    Parent
    The best kind (none / 0) (#62)
    by jbindc on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 01:11:36 PM EST
    For the best team.  :)

    Parent
    I appreciate the way (none / 0) (#68)
    by jondee on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 01:44:24 PM EST
    the Wings play. Extremely smart, disciplined and well coached. Personally, I think a tremendous amount of that their success had to do with that coolness-under-fire mixture of maturity and skill embodied by Lindstrom, Zetterberg and a couple of others. But, I go back to the Gordie Howe days..now there was the prime example of a love-him-or-hate-his guts hockey player, if there ever was one.

    Parent
    Ah Gordie (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by jbindc on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 02:26:47 PM EST
    Terry Sawchuck, Ted Lindsay, Sid Abel, et al...

    But I'm too young for those guys, but loved watching Stevie Y, Brendan Shanahan, Slava Fetisov, Vlad Konstantinov, Sergei Federov, Larry Brown, Darren McCarty, Kris Draper,Igr Larionov, Tomas Holmstrom, Marty LaPointe, Chris Osgood, Nick Lidstrom, and all the guys from the 1997-1998 Stanley Cup winning teams and then the subsequent teams of the 2000s.

    Of course, we also have the octopus.  :)

    Parent

    Funny story about the octopus (5.00 / 3) (#72)
    by jondee on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 02:45:13 PM EST
    my wife (God love her) is so pro-animal rights that she was rather appalled when I was chuckling about the fans throwing the illustrious mollusk onto the ice..Just another one of those funny-not-funny scenarios you have to acclimate to in a longterm relationship. I cant even write about it now without almost chuckling, all the while knowing that she'd be mad if she knew what I was chuckling about.

    Parent
    Im a Malkin guy (none / 0) (#57)
    by jondee on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 12:54:10 PM EST
    myself, but it's undeniable that Crosby's a great player. I dont think you can blame him that the NHL wanted to hype the "Sid the kid" wunderkind as a way to regenerate flagging interest in hockey.

    That said, Crosby's no Lemieux. Now, there was a phenomenon.

    Parent

    I live in DC (none / 0) (#64)
    by jbindc on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 01:13:22 PM EST
    Alex Ovechkin is a pretty good wunderkind too.

    I was just surprisd that Crosby got called for a penalty in the first Canada - US game. Apparently the refs didn't get the memo that, short of on-ice murder, he doesn't get penalties called on him.

    Parent

    Well, I'm a Caps fan, too (none / 0) (#78)
    by Zorba on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 04:59:21 PM EST
    But our boy Alex got a bit overly grouchy with a Russian fan.

    Parent
    Shame? Canadiens don't know what that means ... (none / 0) (#79)
    by Ellie on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 06:11:19 PM EST
    ... except when stuff like this happens. (This is also a shoutout to Cream City -- CC, your 'hancesteurs are calling!)

    Twiddle with the low volume, esp. if you're viewing the following Toob'd unofficial Canadian Nat'l Anthem.

    Parent

    Glenn Greenwald today: a riff of (none / 0) (#29)
    by oculus on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 10:53:01 AM EST
    Secretary of Defense Gates chastizing Western Europe for not defending the peace by bulking up their military and another riff on Blanche Lincoln being primaried.  But in the middle is this gem:

    Feel free to use the comment section for whatever reasonable purposes you wish.
    Steny Hoyer (none / 0) (#47)
    by jbindc on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:45:56 AM EST
    Now thinks the House should go first in passing HCR.  Someone got to him.

    h/t Jon Walker

    Given the current state of the Senate, any House member who votes for the current Senate bill should be prepared to defend their vote assuming the reconciliation fix never happens. There are several potential stumbling blocks for reconciliation. Senate Democrats might back out of their promise after their comprehensive bill passes the House. When it comes time to decide the nuts and bolts of the reconciliation bill in the Senate, the negotiations could collapse. Application of the Byrd rule and floor amendment could either leave the reconciliation measure impassable or result in a final product that makes insufficient changes to the comprehensive legislation.


    BTD I have a question (none / 0) (#50)
    by Socraticsilence on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 11:55:32 AM EST
    as native Floridian who moved away for college- is Rubio really going to end up my birthstates next Senator? I mean really? This kind of scares me I was hoping the in-state GOP was moderating after making Crist Gov. and seeing the fruits of Kitty Harris-Senate Canidate.

    Oh my gosh, check out this essay in (none / 0) (#60)
    by esmense on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 12:59:58 PM EST
    The Financial Times. It's about "Identify Economics" as a substitute for the "incentive pay" model that has been so popular over the last quarter of a century. Once upon a time I think we called it "ethics." I guess everything comes 'round again:

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3a8c9e76-217c-11df-830e-00144feab49a.html?nclick_check=1

    For those with Canada withdrawal: Canada jokes, (none / 0) (#70)
    by jawbone on Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 02:22:35 PM EST
    from Teddy Partridge over at FDL.

    You know you're from Manitoba, Canada, when....

    You only know three spices - salt, pepper and ketchup.

    You design your Halloween costume to fit over a snowsuit.

    The mosquitoes have landing lights.

    You have more miles on your snowblower than your car

    More hilarity ensues!

    Monday Morning Open Thread | 84 comments (84 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment