home

Monday Afternoon Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Mon May 17, 2010 at 01:21:20 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

BTD is in depositions today and I'm busy at work.

As I wrote last night, Bernie Kerik starts his 48 month prison term today. I read somewhere he'll be at Cumberland, MD. It's a medium security prison with an adjacent camp. I assume he'll be at the camp.

As for Bernie and Rudy, in an interview last month Bernie said he hadn't spoken to Rudy since 2006 but "We will be friends for life." Memo to Rudy: Don't even think about running, you'll never live down your association with Bernie.

Here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Civil Liberties Groups Urge Holder and Obama Not to Water Down Miranda | Viva Los Suns! Open Thread >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Monday Afternoon Open Thread | 198 comments (198 topical)
    i'll toot my own horn one more time (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by Dadler on Mon May 17, 2010 at 01:40:04 PM EST
    This last week's SAN DIEGO READER cover story, written by yours truly.

    have a good tuesday, y'all.

    go lakers.

    No segue: care to update re adoption? (none / 0) (#3)
    by oculus on Mon May 17, 2010 at 01:41:40 PM EST


    Parent
    it didn't work out (none / 0) (#6)
    by Dadler on Mon May 17, 2010 at 01:50:35 PM EST
    hate to be so blunt, but it's the only way i can even write about it.  several factors came into play. our son's emotional health, the girl's behavior issues at school (that no one really was truthful about until much too late), and also that my wife's bank, where she is VP, was taken over and sold off last week, throwing us into financial limbo. suffice it to say, i've had the worst two weeks of my adult life. if it weren't for the fact that she was able to stay in a quite idyllic foster home situation, my wife and i would feel much worse we still do.  it was also probably the best decision for our son at this point in his life.

    what can i say? it's been the most emotionally draining period of my adult life. just overwhelming. but we're getting better.

    (on a side note, it would've taken about the equivalent of three or four goldman sachs exec bonuses to keep my wife's otherwise upstanding bank in business -- in other words, it had no business being taken over. too big to fail, they were too small to matter. really sickening.)

    Parent

    I'm so sorry! (none / 0) (#7)
    by jbindc on Mon May 17, 2010 at 01:53:01 PM EST


    Parent
    I second... (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by kdog on Mon May 17, 2010 at 01:55:37 PM EST
    hang in there brother, keep on writing, and don't beat yourself up...you do the best you can and you're trying harder than most...of this I am very confident.

    Parent
    And I third (none / 0) (#16)
    by Zorba on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:08:16 PM EST
    Just keep on trucking, Dadler, you can only do so much, bro'.

    Parent
    And a 4th (none / 0) (#122)
    by BackFromOhio on Tue May 18, 2010 at 01:58:44 AM EST
    Hang in there....

    Parent
    Thanks for the update. I have been (none / 0) (#10)
    by oculus on Mon May 17, 2010 at 01:55:56 PM EST
    thinking quite alot about your situation with your as-content-as-could-be expected older son.  What a tough call.  

    Parent
    Thank you everyone (5.00 / 3) (#15)
    by Dadler on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:06:29 PM EST
    We'll be back.  Sh*t happens.  Amen.

    Parent
    I am conflicted on whether to tell (none / 0) (#19)
    by oculus on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:16:22 PM EST
    my hair stylist your story.  She is the one in the County's adoption class.

    Parent
    If she has no children... (none / 0) (#27)
    by Dadler on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:34:06 PM EST
    ...it will be different. At least IMO.  In our case, it became apparent that it wasn't working, first and foremost, for our son. They were only two years apart in age, but emotionally it was three times that. (The stuff with my wife's bank was also, obviously, a two ton monkey-wrench thrown in.) When we first started this process a few years ago, our son was much younger, and the child we would've been matched with would've been younger as well. It would've been different. This match occurred when we were basically calling to tell the county to put us on hold for a few years.  When our son is a bit older, doesn't need us as much, we'll give it another go. Tough call is right.  Impossible.    

    Parent
    Sorry tho hear, Dadler. (none / 0) (#28)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:36:18 PM EST
    Glad you're thinking of trying again in a few years.

    Parent
    Meet the crazy... (5.00 / 0) (#18)
    by kdog on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:12:34 PM EST
    behind the attempted jesusification and disinformation textbook campaign in Texas...Cynthia Dunbar.

    She might get her wish regarding homeschooling...if anybody gave a kid of mine one of her prefered style textbooks I'd be homeschooling the little f*cker right quick...good lord.

    Relgious extremism (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by MKS on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:19:08 PM EST
    is the engine running the Republican party.....

    You may think the discussion is about taxes, deficits, or global warming--but for the Republican base it is about fanatical Christian conservatism.....

    The Tea partiers talked often of abortion rights and social issues at their rallys....Scratch a tea partier and you get a Creationist.....

    To the Republican base it is a religioius war--that is why they are so impervious to facts.  The truth is contained in the Bible--and that is all you need to know, and anything contrary to the Bible is obviously false....

    If you understand this basic motivation, all conservative politics becomes clear....

    The true libertarians among the Republicans could not elect anyone to dog catcher without the religious extremists...

     

    Parent

    Yeah (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by squeaky on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:22:00 PM EST
    Although it is pretty craven, and a formula. The GOP figured out that a mega preacher could deliver mega votes...

    Ergo all the religious conversions of GOP politicians.

    Parent

    And Bubba had a 30 pound Bible (none / 0) (#92)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 17, 2010 at 05:06:14 PM EST
    he would lug to church.

    ;-)

    Parent

    Bill never read the Bible literally, did he? (none / 0) (#103)
    by MKS on Mon May 17, 2010 at 05:52:22 PM EST
    We talking religious nutcases.....not just those who are somewhat religious....

    Parent
    Well, if you want to I guess we should include (none / 0) (#117)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 17, 2010 at 09:46:36 PM EST
    the underwear bomber, the FT Hood killer and the Times Square bomber...

    I mean if you really want to talk about religious nutcases... We could also throw in the couple of million or so Muslims who rioted when a Danish cartoonist drew a cartoon of Allah.

    Parent

    And the Christian Fascists who bomb (none / 0) (#153)
    by MKS on Tue May 18, 2010 at 01:35:12 PM EST
    abortion clinics and murder doctors.....

    Religious kookery is at the root of much evil....

    Parent

    On the whole I will trust (none / 0) (#163)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:18:52 PM EST
    a Christian over a Secularist any day of the week.

    Parent
    I am not sure what you mean (none / 0) (#164)
    by MKS on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:31:18 PM EST
    by a "secularist."  

    The atheists I have known have been among the kindest, most ethical, most honest people I have met.  Someone who has gone through the effort and self-inventory to come to such a conclusion, and be willing to announce it to others in the face of extreme discrimination, has a certain amount of courage.

    "Christians" come in all flavors.....The atheists would say that many religious types are less responsible because they think they get all kinds of do-overs.....

    So, as to whom would I trust most, a generic "Christian" or self-identified atheist, I think I would take a hard look at the atheist.

    Parent

    I define a secularist as (none / 0) (#170)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:11:49 PM EST
    someone who doesn't believe in anything so he places his faith in some societal political belief or relationship. He is often surprised when he is betrayed by someone more powerful than he is who has a different agenda or set of beliefs. Since neither has any belief in God they have no bottom. No bedrock.

    These people are largely attracted to politics and the media. They try and exhibit an aura of sophistication by being cynical about religion and the beliefs of others.

    This is why they cannot get their hands around the motives of the radical Muslims. Having no belief themselves they cannot accept that someone can believe so strongly they will commit suicide in an effort to kill others.

    I try and avoid the terms atheist and agnostic because some are one and some the other but both are secularists.

    Parent

    That is not my experience (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by MKS on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:39:43 PM EST
    If you tell me someone is a "Christian," you have really told me nothing about that person.  

    The vast majority of people in this country self-identify as Christian, and there are so many Christians who do all manner of things.

    I disagree with you about the difference between agnostics and atheists....Atheists have made the effort to come to terms with their own existence.  Agnostics just kind of shrug their shoulders, nothing wrong with that.  But atheists have put in a lot of work.  Atheists are very honest people imo--that is why they just don't say I dunno--no, they have a definite, and unpopular, opinion.

    Atheists have a better bottom and bedrock than the average Christian imo.  That is just what I have observed.  Now, one reason for this is probably that the pool of Christians is very, very large, and there are a lot of bad apples out there, and it is so easy to say one is Christian as to make the description meaningless.  Those who self-identify as atheist are obviously a much smaller group, and come to such conclusions after a lot of thought.  So your'e dealing with generally more education and higher intellect, and that gives you a smaller criminal element for example....

    In my personal observation, those who have self-identified as atheist are very moral people--the perpetrators of many fewer deadly sins.  

    You want to make this about religious nuts in the Mideast.  And you say that secularists are unaware of the power of religious extremism?  Really?  They, more than anyone, know about religious fanatacism--being subject to significant ostracism here because they are not believers.  No, I think you have that exactly backwards.  Atheists are accutely aware of the destructive power of religion.  That is why many are atheists in the first place.  

    Parent

    I never defined atheist or agnostic, (none / 0) (#188)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:27:56 PM EST
    merely noted that secularists are one or the other. Please go back and read what I wrote.

    If you don't understand Christianity then when someone is identified as a Christian then I can see that you be like someone who knew nothing about baseball being told someone is a ball player... And yes, since the statistical pool is so much larger then you will find more "bad" people who self identify as a Christian than you will of atheists.

    And I did not say they were unaware of the power of religious extremism. I noted they could not understand it. Big difference.

    And I had no idea that atheists are ostracized. Do they also suffer dunking, the stocks, etc?? And what time does the government bus come back with the guards that make you go to church?

    ;-)

    Perhaps you live in a different world than I but I know of no Christian protesting that you must come to church. I do find a bunch of non-Christians protesting that Christians exist.


    Parent

    Trust (none / 0) (#173)
    by squeaky on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:16:07 PM EST
    Having no belief themselves they cannot accept that someone can believe so strongly they will commit suicide in an effort to kill others.

    That is why ppj trusts them...  hilarious, particularly when god tells some christian wackjob to stick a knife in his back.

    Parent

    Are you on drugs? (none / 0) (#189)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:29:08 PM EST


    Parent
    There are also those (none / 0) (#176)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:32:27 PM EST
    who "believe" in reason and understanding enough to see the limitations in placing too much faith in a political belief or some particular relationship.

    Many of them also use the behavior of suicide bombers, abortion clinic snipers etc as examples of how a simple "belief in God" is, in itself, no insurer against being misled into catastrophically wrongheaded behavior.

    Parent

    A belief in God does not mean that (none / 0) (#191)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:30:58 PM EST
    the person is stupid.

    Really Jondee. You have become simplistic in your arguments. I expect better.

    Parent

    No one said (5.00 / 0) (#194)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:35:02 PM EST
    it did. Only that it's no guarantee in itself of decency and rationality.

    Which should be obvious by now.

    Parent

    As I recall (none / 0) (#167)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:44:07 PM EST
    somewhere he says something about "many will come in may name.."

    and: "by their fruits you shall know them.."

    Then there's the old "negro spiritual" that goes "everybody talkin' 'bout Heaven aint goin' there.."

    Parent

    Yeah (none / 0) (#169)
    by squeaky on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:50:12 PM EST
    Provides cover for your sins... a few nods to god and everything is back in order, after the genocide, that is.

    Great racket for sadists and would be conquers.

    Parent

    Your understanding is as limited (none / 0) (#171)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:13:57 PM EST
    about Christianity as it is broad about smearing someone and making false claims.

    Parent
    True (none / 0) (#174)
    by squeaky on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:18:15 PM EST
    I am not on kool aid, like you..  BTW, are you channeling god at the moment, or god through Herr Rover.

    Parent
    Most people when they know (none / 0) (#185)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:16:48 PM EST
    that they don't don't know what they are speaking of have the common sense to shut up.

    Most people.

    Parent

    and defining yourself (none / 0) (#175)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:20:47 PM EST
    and defending non-Christian theocracies.

    Parent
    One statistic I heard is that (none / 0) (#178)
    by MKS on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:52:21 PM EST
    Christians are better able to shoot others in combat than non-beleivers....I remember how disappointed I was when I heard this years ago....

    The idea is that a Christian fears death less--it is not a forever event and thus of less consequence....

    But, you don't have to ascribe horrible motives to Christians to recognize that they believe in all kinds of second chances....St. Augustine famously prayed for God to help him be chaste but "not yet."  

    For atheists, this is it.  So what happens today is very important--it is all that we have.  There is no magical fairy dust that will make it all better tomorrow.  So, do your best today....Atheists work without a net.  So, if you hurt someone today, there is no magic that will undo it tomorrow....Christians are forgiven, so today is not as important.....You will get a do-over tomorrow.  And don't worry about poverty and deceit and injustice today, for all will be better in Heaven in the end....

    Not true for all, and many thrive on Christian hope.  But for many it gives them a sense of security that they can err and still make up for it.....

    Parent

    "Faith, not works" (none / 0) (#179)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 04:22:09 PM EST
    ..practically the mantra of Robertson, the Swaggarts, Hagee & co.

    Parent
    Faith without works is death (none / 0) (#186)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:19:58 PM EST
    works without faith is death.

    Parent
    Maybe (none / 0) (#190)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:30:23 PM EST
    you need to straighten Pat, Jimmy and John out about that. There's seems to be some difference of opinion or emphasis, over on your side of the aisle.

    Parent
    Since we are not Leftists you will (none / 0) (#192)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:33:08 PM EST
    find that disagreements do not carry the death penalty.

    Parent
    Not disgreements, yet (none / 0) (#196)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:39:15 PM EST
    but that's probably only because you're so sure people who dont believe what Hagee and Swaggart say will all be cast into the Lake of Fire for all eternity.

    Parent
    You have become more and more (none / 0) (#199)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 09:17:35 PM EST
    delusional.

    Parent
    Really??? (none / 0) (#184)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:15:29 PM EST
    I have never heard that Christians are better shots.

    I am beginning to think that you are just another run of the mill Leftie.

    And I see that you know very little about the requirements of being a Christian. I think you have watched too many movies about the Crusades.

    Look, if you don't believe that is fine with me, and also with every other Christian that I have known. My duty is towards myself and how I act towards others.

    And being a Christian does not, repeat DOES NOT, mean that you can hurt someone today and skate. That is what society and the law is all about.

    Separation and render unto and all that stuff.

    Parent

    I actually know a fair (none / 0) (#197)
    by MKS on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:49:27 PM EST
    amount about Christianity.  I have posted a number of comments here favorable to religion.

    Jim, since you said you were persuaded regarding the death penalty here, I have made an effort to take you seriously.  

    If I knew nothing about Christianity except what I learned from conservatives, I would know that being Christian means being for low taxes, strong national defense that is not wimpy, use of torture when necessary, etc.

    Conservative Christians rarely exhibit any form of Christian humility or selfless love.  It is more about self-congratulation and beating libruls....

    Parent

    I haven't the vaguest idea what (none / 0) (#200)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 09:29:02 PM EST
    conservative Christians believe and I doubt that you do. My political positions are as a social liberal which is the traditional liberal position in the US.

    I don't want to offend but you exhibit a great deal of hubris about your supposed knowledge about Christians. So far all I have seen are cliches worthy of a college sophomore discussion.

    It is impossible for me to answer you when all you give are broad "...rarely exhibit..." statements. If it is humility you want then I suggest you do not understand that there is a difference between being humble and humility.

    Anyway, until you can do more than write broad statements we have hit the wall.

    Parent

    Read James (none / 0) (#187)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:22:01 PM EST
    Not true for all, and many thrive on Christian hope.  But for many it gives them a sense of security that they can err and still make up for it.....


    Parent
    Nothing wrong with that (none / 0) (#198)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:58:48 PM EST


    Parent
    that was his family bible (none / 0) (#104)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 17, 2010 at 05:54:09 PM EST
    it was so big because mom used to keep her eyelashes in there.


    Parent
    They've also (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by jbindc on Mon May 17, 2010 at 05:22:10 PM EST
    B@stardized religion.

    Parent
    Yeah (none / 0) (#99)
    by squeaky on Mon May 17, 2010 at 05:24:36 PM EST
    The good old days with blood rites, and cross burnings... not to mention wink and a nod to a poke here and there...

    Parent
    Actually, this is a serious concern (none / 0) (#105)
    by Cream City on Mon May 17, 2010 at 06:30:04 PM EST
    that any of you agnostics, atheists, or whatever ought to be doing pushback about -- as comparative religious studies ought to be included in curricula to teach respect and understanding for all faiths and/or for lack of adherence to organized religions.

    It is a great college major; I teach some of the students, one of my children was one as well, and few of them are actually in organized religions themselves.  Some courses are about paganism, after all.:-)

    But for understanding of one of the main reasons why humans have gone to war for millennia, as well as why they sometimes achieve peace, it is a fascinating field of study.  And if every child in this country got a good grounding in the religious history even of just this country, we all would be better off, believe me.

    But instead, the textbooks teach them that fleeing religious persecution elsewhere brought the Pilgrims and Puritans and such to this country . . . and then that religious freedom figured crucially into our country's founding and Constitution . . . but then, religion apparently stopped mattering at all here.

    Wouldn't it be better if they were taught religion's role in the massive social justice movements that characterized the 19th century and changed our Constitution to make this country more inclusionary -- i.e., for the better?  as a model of what religious faiths ought to be?

    And wouldn't it be good if they were taught, on the other hand, how religion also has been perverted then and certainly in the 20th century in this country to make it more exclusionary?

    U.S. historians agreed years ago, in a statement about this, that we desperately need to push back on Texas and get religion -- properly taught as a historical factor -- back into our textbooks.

    Parent

    Excellent point, Cream (none / 0) (#107)
    by jondee on Mon May 17, 2010 at 07:05:14 PM EST
    It's undeniable that religion has had a huge historical influence. But if you think the religious right is blustering now, just wait till schools start trying to approximate something like equal time for the history of ALL major religious traditions, including the aboriginal ones. The fulminating about this country being "founded as a christian nation" and the outcries for more vouchers and charter schools would probably reach the proverbial fever pitch level.

     

    Parent

    Thanks, but catch up! :-) (none / 0) (#110)
    by Cream City on Mon May 17, 2010 at 08:20:36 PM EST
    What you describe is where we already are -- thus the study and statement by history teachers' associations years ago.  But who listens to us?

    Not Texas.  And thus, not the rest of the country.

    Parent

    Theres a reason why (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by jondee on Mon May 17, 2010 at 08:39:49 PM EST
    Im behind: I dont like being constantly reminded that the lunatics have taken over the asylum :)

    Parent
    The lunatics are called tax payers and (none / 0) (#119)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 17, 2010 at 09:52:54 PM EST
    if they don't want to give you total control of what you want to pour into their kids skulls then all I can say is, "Tough."

    Democracy, for better or worse, means the people rule.

    Parent

    Exhibit A: jimakappj (none / 0) (#156)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 01:44:45 PM EST


    Parent
    I plead guilty (none / 0) (#160)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:12:27 PM EST
    I have always been crazy for freedom and democracy. Unlike you I quit trusting politicians and the so-called establishment, be it religion, press, business, military or education years and years ago.

    I think that's where my Jacksonian beliefs came from!

    Parent

    So you trust (none / 0) (#168)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:49:51 PM EST
    Andrew Jackson and Walter Mead?

    And whatever the opposite of "secularists" is?

    I dont remember too many (any) expressions of distrust for "the establishment" from you during the time Bush was President..You were more like the company man's company man then.

    Parent

    Ignorant comment (none / 0) (#133)
    by jbindc on Tue May 18, 2010 at 06:23:29 AM EST
    Most religious people are not the crazy kind.  You choose to use drugs to cope - others choose to pray.  Whatever gets you through.

    Parent
    Ignorant Comment? (none / 0) (#139)
    by squeaky on Tue May 18, 2010 at 12:06:11 PM EST
    Obviously you have never cracked a history book. The magnitude of death, pain and suffering inflicted on the human race based on  the name of religion is astounding.

    Your comment is the ignorant one, drugs, which I hardly use religiously has nothing to do with the bastardization of religion, and the horror it has caused through out  the centuries.

    Your analogy is absurd. Drugs or alcohol, do not provide the comfort and structure many derive from religion, despite religion being called the opiate of the masses. Maybe addiction, has some analogous properties, but recreational drug and alcohol use, no comparison.

    It is true that some religious mystics have used drugs in order to expand their mind so that they can reveal truths to their followers, but they are religious and use drugs as a way to get closer to god. It does not work the other way around.


    Parent

    You don't have to believe everything (none / 0) (#161)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:15:07 PM EST
    that Marx said.

    despite religion being called the opiate of the masses


    Parent
    Who said opiates (none / 0) (#183)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 06:34:10 PM EST
    were a bad thing? Try experiencing the late stages of terminal cancer, or a GOP convention, without them.

    Parent
    You go first. (none / 0) (#195)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:36:50 PM EST


    Parent
    There are libertarians amongst... (none / 0) (#58)
    by kdog on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:36:45 PM EST
    the Republicans?  Who knew?...:)

    Parent
    As if the Demos (none / 0) (#62)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:43:57 PM EST
    had no nuts?

    lol

    Parent

    The question is who is in control (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by MKS on Mon May 17, 2010 at 04:39:57 PM EST
    I doubt that you would find many here who would say that the Democrats are controlled by the far left--or even the left.  The Democrats' nuts--to the extent they are even heard--have no real influence.

    Religious conservatives, on the other hand, dominate the Republican party......Their wackos run the show over there....

    Parent

    Sorry (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 17, 2010 at 05:03:15 PM EST
    but that doesn't pass my BS filter

    The nuts on both sides have a fair amount of influence in determining the agenda including who are the nominees. I give you Obama and all the far Left programs he claimed to have wanted.

    That he may have fibbed to you folks is an internal problem.

    ;-)

    And I agree when you say...

    I doubt that you would find many here


    Parent
    The "Far Left" (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by MKS on Mon May 17, 2010 at 05:15:25 PM EST
    would want single payer and out of Afghanistan right away....Obama always said he was not in favor of either...

    The Left has little influence in the Democratic Party...

    The Right runs the show on the other side....

    Parent

    PPJ's Propaganda (none / 0) (#96)
    by squeaky on Mon May 17, 2010 at 05:22:04 PM EST
    PPj was too busy calling Obama by his middle name "Hussain", alleging that he was a Manchurian candidate trained in a Madrass,  and to preoccupied with questioning his citizen status, to really pay attention to what he was actually saying.

    Parent
    I actually called him worse (none / 0) (#193)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:34:48 PM EST
    and he has lived down to my expectations.

    Parent
    Comrade Obama has pulled (none / 0) (#101)
    by jondee on Mon May 17, 2010 at 05:27:58 PM EST
    the wool over all your eyes!

    None Dare Call It Conspiracy..

    Parent

    Not true, but I can accept your bias (none / 0) (#118)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 17, 2010 at 09:48:40 PM EST
    none of us is perfect.

    Parent
    THe "left" would also want no part of (none / 0) (#123)
    by BackFromOhio on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:04:42 AM EST
    "faith based initiatives Obama supports; the left would want strict adherence to separation of church and state.

    Parent
    Did you read? (none / 0) (#131)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:57:37 AM EST
    That he may have fibbed to you folks is an internal problem.

    Actually quite a few on the other side find him to be the Pope of Secularism.

    Parent

    "The Pope of Secularism" lol (none / 0) (#158)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:06:36 PM EST
    your social liberalism is slipping again.

    But dont forget those secret plans your Posse Comitatus group stumbled across - that Obama      never told us about - to use U.N Security Forces to herd us all into collective farms guarded by The Nation Of Islam for the purposes of indoctrinating everyone with a hybrid of Sharia Law, Marxist-Leninism and Deep Ecology..

    Parent

    "The Pope of Secularism" lol (none / 0) (#159)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:07:47 PM EST
    your social liberalism is slipping again.

    But dont forget those secret plans your Posse Comitatus group stumbled across - that Obama never told anyone about - to use U.N Security Forces to herd us all into collective farms guarded by The Nation Of Islam for the purposes of indoctrinating everyone with a hybrid of Sharia Law, Marxist-Leninism and Deep Ecology..

    Parent

    I see that you are so excited (none / 0) (#172)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 03:15:28 PM EST
    you are stuttering.

    lol

    Parent

    What exactly were the "far-Left" (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by jondee on Mon May 17, 2010 at 05:19:11 PM EST
    programs Obama wanted?

    Let us know when he starts meeting with pinwheels who say we need to bomb Iran in order to bring on the Rapture.

    Parent

    You Know (none / 0) (#98)
    by squeaky on Mon May 17, 2010 at 05:22:48 PM EST
    All that social liberal cr*p... lol

    Parent
    Glad you asked (none / 0) (#120)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 17, 2010 at 09:58:55 PM EST
    Link

    Parent
    Apparently all you (none / 0) (#162)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:15:41 PM EST
    supposedly well informed liberals missed that two minute snippet from a public speech that gave the entire game - including secret plans - away..

    Parent
    Obama's aunt (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by CST on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:23:40 PM EST
    can now legally stay in the U.S. Link

    Surprise! (none / 0) (#106)
    by prittfumes on Mon May 17, 2010 at 06:41:42 PM EST
    Surprise!

    Parent
    Is it safe for her to go to AZ now? (none / 0) (#141)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 12:11:37 PM EST


    Parent
    heh (none / 0) (#145)
    by CST on Tue May 18, 2010 at 12:21:24 PM EST
    well she was legally here on a temporary basis while waiting for a trial.  I'm wondering if she still lives in my neck of the woods.

    Parent
    Holy Bat BJ! (3.50 / 2) (#44)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:58:49 PM EST
    Bat fellatio causes a scandal in academia

    University College Cork in Ireland is coming under international pressure to lift a punishment meted out to one of its academics. Dylan Evans, a psychologist at the university's school of medicine, has been saddled with a two-year period of intensive monitoring and counselling after discussing a scientific paper with a colleague. The title of the paper? "Fellatio in fruit bats prolongs copulation time".

    As part of what he says was an ongoing discussion on human uniqueness, Evans showed a copy of the fellatio paper to a female colleague in the school of medicine. "There was not a shred of a sign of offence taken at the time," Evans says. "She asked for a copy of the article."

    A week later he got a letter informing him that he was being accused of sexual harassment. Evans says the whole case is "utterly bizarre".
    Well I am pleased to see (none / 0) (#66)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:48:23 PM EST
    the boundaries of human knowledge is being pushed ever forward by such important research.

    Parent
    actualy the story (3.50 / 2) (#70)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:53:13 PM EST
    was more about americas new "offended class".
    the fastest growing group in america it seems.


    Parent
    I think I had a dream (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by jondee on Mon May 17, 2010 at 04:21:36 PM EST
    about that last night..except it was batgirl and an Irish researcher..and Maria Callas.

    Parent
    Actually, no. It's about Ireland (5.00 / 2) (#135)
    by Cream City on Tue May 18, 2010 at 08:55:52 AM EST
    for one thing, not America.  And it's about academics on both sides of the pond coming to the guy's defense.

    Sorry, better go seek another story to support your argument.

    Parent

    I wondered how it could have escaped (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by Anne on Tue May 18, 2010 at 09:13:50 AM EST
    the original commenter's notice that this all took place in Ireland, but then I realized that since he gets bored after reading more than a sentence or two, didn't get much past the headline and the fact that someone was punished for offending a colleague.  Ireland?  America?  What difference does that detail make?  It was more an excuse to post something with the word "fellatio" in it than to start a substantive discussion.

    Gee, what a surprise.

    Some days I feel like these threads are constantly being interrupted with breaking headlines from TMZ.

    Parent

    Have you read "Whoredom in Kimmage"? (none / 0) (#144)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 12:20:12 PM EST
    Rosemary Mahoney

    Parent
    No -- but I will now (none / 0) (#149)
    by Cream City on Tue May 18, 2010 at 01:11:57 PM EST
    as I add another Oculus rec to my reading list for  summer, when I get to wallow in current events.  I've clicked around on reviews now and really look forward to this.  (When there, I certainly noticed -- as she does -- the vast difference in lives of urban vs. rural women.  Reminded me so much of my state, the same size in geography and population . . . and in the differences from city to country.)

    Sounds like a marvelous companion to the historical study of my foremothers, Hasia Diner's classic Erin's Daughters.  I saw my Gaelic-speaking great-grandma between those lines, and it explained so much about my grandma and mom -- who continued to marry Irish men.  My Irish sister-in-law explained the inevitable result to me.:-)

    Perhaps companion pieces for the day when I finally find the time to create yet another course I've been wanting to teach, on Irish-American history.  Or perhaps a larger-scale course on the Irish diaspora worldwide from the famine.  Nope, too huge.  Maybe at least Irish-North American history, as so coffin ships were not allowed in the U.S. and had to go to Canada -- as did my famine-ridden forebears.  It will be my homage to the Canadians who saved them and millions more.

    Btw, I've already had the fun of guest lectures on Irish-American immigrant songs.  So lovely.

    Parent

    One of the Catholic churches in (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 01:16:13 PM EST
    Montreal was built as a direct result of pressure exerted on the Diocese by Irish Catholic immigrants.  

    Parent
    St. Patrick's Basilica (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 01:20:02 PM EST
    link

    My daughter, who lived in Dublin off and on for about 10 years, read the book, lived around the corner from a women's org. discussed in it, checked out the information in the book with her Irish-born and bred colleagues.  Rang true.  

    Parent

    Ah, yes -- I've been in that basilica (none / 0) (#152)
    by Cream City on Tue May 18, 2010 at 01:33:54 PM EST
    but decades ago now.  I will have to return; I have been telling the spouse that I miss Montreal. . . .

    And Dublin!  How marvelous to live there.  I had only a few days there, but what days they were, including St. Paddy's Day with the parade that went for hours, the massive ceili in St. Stephen's Square, and so much more.

    And I got to achieve my number-one goal in going to Dublin:  This booklover got to see the Book of Kells.  Amazing.

    Parent

    Did you buy the CD? (none / 0) (#165)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:38:16 PM EST
    I love the Long Room Library at Trinity College. link

    Parent
    Did you buy the CD? (none / 0) (#166)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:38:43 PM EST
    I love the Long Room Library at Trinity College. link

    Parent
    I see that my attempt at sarcasm (none / 0) (#93)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 17, 2010 at 05:08:49 PM EST
    slipped right on by...

    But I agree that everybody has gotta get in da act...

    To steal a phrase from Jimmy Durante!

    Parent

    All so-called scientific (none / 0) (#84)
    by jondee on Mon May 17, 2010 at 04:31:20 PM EST
    has been a fraud anyway; ever since the radicals took over and banned ID research and Noah's Ark expeditions..

    Parent
    Well, gee (none / 0) (#83)
    by Zorba on Mon May 17, 2010 at 04:27:48 PM EST
    Who knew bats gave bj's?  And who paid for this outstanding research?  Not that I necessarily object to the findings......it just seems that there are more worthy topics of research dollars.   ;-)

    Parent
    I have to weigh in on this subject (none / 0) (#100)
    by ZtoA on Mon May 17, 2010 at 05:25:06 PM EST
    tho I should probably know better.

    There is a great bat house at local zoo and when I was there with my young daughter I watched a bat give himself a BJ. Bats are extremely well endowed and very bendy. It was quite a show. And worth a research paper!

    Parent

    yep (none / 0) (#102)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 17, 2010 at 05:40:15 PM EST
    the original video is sort of old news.  I have posted it before.  and you are correct all around.

    Parent
    Well alrighty now.... (none / 0) (#109)
    by ZtoA on Mon May 17, 2010 at 07:55:44 PM EST
    didn't know there was such a thing as an original video of bat fellatio. Is this a project of yours? Posted to YouTube? Thank goodness for YouTube - laughing babies and bats getting off. :)

    Parent
    Question: Can there be harrassment between (none / 0) (#130)
    by BackFromOhio on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:24:24 AM EST
    equals?  Isn't the basis of harassment claim that the harasser has some power over the victim?

    Parent
    Answer: The laws are different there (none / 0) (#136)
    by Cream City on Tue May 18, 2010 at 09:02:00 AM EST
    I suspect, from reading the documents now.

    The investigators did not apply the standard used here, it seems to me.  The investigation absolved the guy based on determining that he did not have the intent to be offensive.

    However, if the behaviors (and the journalistic fun with a study of bat fellatio leads to a superficial story; the documents allege a long series of behaviors, and involving more than one colleague) did occur, the guy did repeatedly offend colleagues and others.

    The university president seems to have based his decision on the collective behaviors -- and probably wisely so, as it is a conservative country in many ways.  And the guy was only a lecturer, a pretty precarious position.

    Parent

    Lecturer Obama did pretty well. (none / 0) (#143)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 12:17:15 PM EST


    Parent
    The exception (none / 0) (#147)
    by Cream City on Tue May 18, 2010 at 12:33:15 PM EST
    to every rule, it seems.  

    (Ask Michigan and Florida.:-)

    Parent

    And if it was in America (none / 0) (#137)
    by jbindc on Tue May 18, 2010 at 09:12:53 AM EST
    You can be harassed by a co- worker, a supervisor, a client, even a subordinate.  It's all about a "hostile work environment".

    Parent
    Israel immigration official bars (none / 0) (#2)
    by oculus on Mon May 17, 2010 at 01:40:44 PM EST
    Chomsky from entering West Bank via Jordon:  NYT

    Especially interesting to me after seeing "Golda's Balcony" yesterday.

    Yeah (none / 0) (#5)
    by squeaky on Mon May 17, 2010 at 01:48:21 PM EST
    So much for The Law of Return
    (Hebrew: חוק השבות, ḥok ha-shvūt) is Israeli legislation, enacted in 1950, that gives Jews, those of Jewish ancestry, and their spouses the right to migrate to and settle in Israel and gain citizenship.


    Parent
    Great timing: I just got a request from (none / 0) (#37)
    by oculus on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:49:37 PM EST
    the theatre where I saw "Golda's Balcony" yesterday.  Please fill out this survey.  The only question which provided for a comment was:  why would you recommend/not recommend/don't know if would recommend this play to a friend.

    Parent
    He's too "self hating" or something (none / 0) (#71)
    by jondee on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:53:14 PM EST
    interestingly (or not) I once almost had the crap beat out of me in a bar Belgrade because I was too self hating to say I hated Croats..

    Not that it takes any deep insight to realize that SOME Serbs you have sympatico with, and SOME Croats you have sympatico with..

    Parent

    The ACLU has filed its suit (none / 0) (#8)
    by Peter G on Mon May 17, 2010 at 01:53:45 PM EST
    in federal court, as predicted, to block the Arizona "show me your papers" law from going into effect.

    Yep (none / 0) (#17)
    by Zorba on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:10:56 PM EST
    I just got my email from the ACLU to that effect.  Good for them.

    Parent
    Apparently (none / 0) (#45)
    by jbindc on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:03:16 PM EST
    There are Republican legislators in Minnesota, Nebraska, Utah, and Michigan are attempting to get the same kinds of laws passed.  At least in the case of Michigan, even her Republican colleagues are saying "No way - not gonna touch that with a ten foot pole."

    Parent
    One has been introduced in PA as well. (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by Peter G on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:18:24 PM EST
    It was referred to the appropriate committee of the state House of Representatives, of which the chair is a liberal legislator from Philadelphia.  The committee chair issued a statement that she intended to give the proposed legislation "all the consideration that it deserves."  

    Parent
    Very well put (none / 0) (#52)
    by jbindc on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:23:38 PM EST


    Parent
    One is being planned for (none / 0) (#59)
    by Anne on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:39:35 PM EST
    MD, as well; what does it tell you that I knew before I heard it which delegate was planning to introduce it in the 2011 legislative session?

    Republican Patrick McDonough.

    First, though, he's going to take a survey to see how much interest there is.

    McDonough has also tried to sue the local PBS station because it has a Spanish-only channel; if Spanish is being spoken in MD, McDonough is hot on the trail to make it stop. This is America!  We speak English!

    Parent

    Hey McDonough... (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by kdog on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:59:28 PM EST
    this is America, we speak whatever the hell we want...even Klingon.

    Parent
    It amazes me how tone deaf (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by MKS on Mon May 17, 2010 at 04:45:46 PM EST
    the Republicans are.   Their mantra is that they are not bigots, they just want the immigation laws enforced.....

    But it's not really enforcement of the law they seek--they really want Latinos to stop "invading" their communities--to disappear.  

    They can't stand to hear Spanish being spoken--it really drives them nuts....It is not about immigration....It is about biggoted white Americans feeling ovewhelmed by the pace of change in our society....

    They feel like they are losing something the more Latinos they see being Latino....  

    Parent

    You said it (5.00 / 2) (#108)
    by ruffian on Mon May 17, 2010 at 07:25:20 PM EST
    Have no idea who they think they are fooling.

    Parent
    run run run away (none / 0) (#11)
    by ruffian on Mon May 17, 2010 at 01:56:19 PM EST
    h/t Atrios

    {http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/05/bob_schieffer_white_house_priv.html WH Braces] for Specter loss.

    I never would have dreamed  years ago that this would not be cause for universal joy in Dem circles.

    Things can change, htere's always changes...
    - Joan Armatrading, from a previous thread.

    Interesting review. Warning: classical music. (none / 0) (#12)
    by oculus on Mon May 17, 2010 at 01:59:12 PM EST
    NYT

    Unlike most of the historical era it covered, the marathon emphasized international cooperation: fitting for the youthful St. Petersburg ensemble, founded in 2002 by Jeffery Meyer, an American conductor. A conventional orchestra at home, it was represented here by 21 string players augmented with American guests.
     [Italics added.]

    Woody Allen... (none / 0) (#13)
    by kdog on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:03:14 PM EST
    pining for some Big Brother...what a maroon.

    But he also sd. Polanski has (none / 0) (#20)
    by oculus on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:18:08 PM EST
    "paid his dues."

    Parent
    Yeah, cuz he is a credible (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:28:08 PM EST
    opinion on such issues.  Electra rolled over in her grave when Woody did what Woody did.

    Parent
    The young woman Woody married was (none / 0) (#30)
    by oculus on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:40:08 PM EST
    22-years old and he was neither married to her adoptive mother, Mia Farrow, nor had he adopted the person in question..

    Parent
    So he never acted in a fatherly capacity (5.00 / 2) (#111)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 17, 2010 at 08:38:56 PM EST
    toward her?  What licensed family counselor would condone what he did?  It was an emotional violation to any of the other children that were in the family as well.  Just because what he did wasn't illegal doesn't make it emotionally damaging to the family and other children in that family.

    Parent
    Nice (none / 0) (#34)
    by squeaky on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:46:35 PM EST
    Glad to see that you are not jumping on that bandwagon...  

    Parent
    And they're still married... (none / 0) (#40)
    by Raskolnikov on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:51:56 PM EST
    ...for what its worth.  "The heart wants what the heart wants"

    Parent
    I know what you mean. (none / 0) (#42)
    by Dr Molly on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:58:00 PM EST


    Parent
    Isn't the age in question (none / 0) (#124)
    by BackFromOhio on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:09:57 AM EST
    the age at which he started sleeping with her, not her age at marriage?

    Parent
    We were waiting with baited breath... (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by Dr Molly on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:42:11 PM EST
    for Woody Allen's pronouncement on Roman Polanski, weren't we? How surprising!

    Parent
    I heart Michael Douglas. (5.00 / 3) (#33)
    by oculus on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:43:30 PM EST


    Parent
    Yup. (none / 0) (#43)
    by Dr Molly on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:58:40 PM EST


    Parent
    Why's That? (none / 0) (#49)
    by squeaky on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:19:25 PM EST
    Because he was know to be quite the ladies man, or that he would not sign the petition urging the US to free Polanski?

    Parent
    The latter. He isn't all that good an (none / 0) (#65)
    by oculus on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:48:12 PM EST
    actor.

    Parent
    What... (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by kdog on Mon May 17, 2010 at 04:00:32 PM EST
    thats Gordon Geko you're talking about!

    And the sequel is getting good reviews over in Cannes.

    Parent

    Acting Skills (none / 0) (#72)
    by squeaky on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:55:02 PM EST
    Not sure what his acting skills have to do with it...  I only mentioned his rep for being a ladies man, or his decision not to sign the "Free Polanski" petition, as a potential reason you may fancy him.

    ....unless there something about acting skills, and your... um, preferences... lol

    Parent

    How's come you insert extraneous (5.00 / 3) (#76)
    by oculus on Mon May 17, 2010 at 04:04:48 PM EST
    rationales for my comments but diss me for doing the same?

    Parent
    Because (none / 0) (#80)
    by squeaky on Mon May 17, 2010 at 04:14:16 PM EST
    I did not understand why you mentioned his acting. You said you love Michael Douglas, I asked you whether it was because of his reputation as a ladies man or about Polanski. You responded Polanski, and that you did not like his acting.

    I guess your view about his acting was just a non-sequitur.

    Parent

    It was . (none / 0) (#89)
    by oculus on Mon May 17, 2010 at 04:55:09 PM EST


    Parent
    Why's That (none / 0) (#35)
    by squeaky on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:48:22 PM EST
    Is 22 the new 13? Or you just can't help yourself when it comes to moral crusades?

    Parent
    I think it is because I've seen the damage (5.00 / 2) (#113)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 17, 2010 at 08:44:33 PM EST
    that comes from mommy's boyfriend deciding to have the daughter next when I was a probation officer.  She never was his "emotional" equal in the situation he decided to seduce her in, but I'm sure it was quite heady and flattering.

    Parent
    And she was much younger (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by BackFromOhio on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:11:48 AM EST
    when they started seeing & sleeping with each other.  22, or her age at marriage, is misleading....

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#140)
    by squeaky on Tue May 18, 2010 at 12:10:52 PM EST
    Good thing that only people like you have gotten damaged from the illegal activities Woody Allan's you  alleged. Seems to me he and his wife are doing just fine. Hope you have a spare fainting couch, as it sounds like you wear them out quickly.

    Parent
    I have said absolutely (none / 0) (#181)
    by BackFromOhio on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:53:03 PM EST
    nothing about legal or illegal.  

    Parent
    Prosecutor Much (none / 0) (#21)
    by squeaky on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:22:59 PM EST
    Impeach the witness by associating two random utterances...

    nice.  

    Should we now call you anti-semite, using your logic...

    And to tell you the truth, I would not mind if the GOP were sent on a nice vacation for a couple of years, which is pretty much the essence of what Woody Allen said.

    Parent

    Seems to me Woody... (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by kdog on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:26:36 PM EST
    believes in the concept of a benevolent dictator...and I think that's the epitomy of crazy dangerous thinking.

    Besides...what Obama is he talking about to think the guy is a socialist and would even wanna do what Woody thinks needs doing?  I think he believes in fairy tale Obama.

    Parent

    Reading the link (none / 0) (#39)
    by Peter G on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:50:12 PM EST
    it is not Woody Allen who refers to Pres Obama a "socialist"; it is the right-wing blogger who picked up the Woody quote (stupid though it is) from a Spanish newspaper.

    Parent
    You right Pete... (none / 0) (#41)
    by kdog on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:56:05 PM EST
    I was assuming Woody is down with socialism...and thats not fair, I don't know.

    All I know is I wouldn't trust myself to be dictator, much less anybody else.

    Parent

    Just FYI (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon May 17, 2010 at 08:48:42 PM EST
    socialism does not equal dictatorship.  It is not necessary to have a dictator to have a socialist state.  Technically, communism doesn't even require a dictator.  It's always worked out that way, but the concept does not at all include a dictatorship (except for "dictatorship of the proletariat," which means democracy, really, it's just that none of these bozos was every willing to actually trust the proletariat).

    When I was in Russia just after the Soviet Union imploded, the joke among Russians went like this: "Capitalism is a system that rests on the exploitation of man by man, but communism is the exact opposite!"  Heh.

    Parent

    Nice joke... (none / 0) (#134)
    by kdog on Tue May 18, 2010 at 07:58:22 AM EST
    reminds me a little of Bukowski comparing democracy and dictatorship...

    The difference between a democracy and a dictatorship is that in a democracy you vote first and take orders later; in a dictatorship you don't waste your time voting."

    I know there is such an animal as democratic socialism, the US practices it on a limited scale...so many farkin' rules it only feels like a dictatorship:)

    Parent

    Ha. Random association. I am well- (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by oculus on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:38:46 PM EST
    acquainted with commenters who do this.

    Parent
    Check out Melissa's wickedly good (none / 0) (#51)
    by Dr Molly on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:22:08 PM EST
    takedown today of Woody's pronouncements. Hilarious as usual.

    Parent
    There's dialog in one of Woody's movies (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by BackFromOhio on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:15:40 AM EST
    where he, for a change, is playing a brilliant, struggling writer, and two women are conversing about him. One woman says to the other, something along the lines of:  "I guess, when you're so brilliant, you're allowed to write your own morality."  I am paraphrasing, but this was the gist. Don't recall which movie.

    Parent
    oh my (none / 0) (#14)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:04:28 PM EST
    Miss America is an ARAB?  what next the president?
    oh wait . . .

    Dearborn's Miss Michigan wins Miss USA pageant

    Michelle Malkin is not happy:

    Fakih's cheerleaders are too busy tooting the identity politics horn to care what comes out of her mouth...
    I heard but one thing... (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by kdog on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:23:55 PM EST
    come out of the young Lebanese-American outta NY's mouth, and she's already made more sense than Malkin has made in her entire pundit career.

    Parent
    Allahu Akbar !! (none / 0) (#56)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:30:29 PM EST
    Miss USA's Sexy Stripper Scandal Begins Less Than Day After Crowning

    Parent
    Scandal? (none / 0) (#60)
    by squeaky on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:42:07 PM EST
    Hardly... From what I understand her Miss USA outfits were more revealing than her so called stripper career. Evidentially she never took off any of her clothes, not that it should make any difference, except for the puritans... and hypocrites...

    But then again, where there is a buck to be made the tabloids are front and center...

    Parent

    I like her more and more... (none / 0) (#61)
    by kdog on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:43:35 PM EST
    as the day goes on...if the Phelps-esque bong pics come out I'm gonna fall head over heels:)

    Parent
    more Michelle (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:51:36 PM EST
    Meanwhile, Miss Oklahoma lost out after expressing support for Arizona's immigration enforcement law and celebrating states' rights.


    Parent
    She claimed to be a supporter of states' rights. (none / 0) (#127)
    by BackFromOhio on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:17:16 AM EST
    Too bad she doesn't know what the term means. I doubt even John Calhoun would agree with AZ's law.

    Parent
    that was awesome (none / 0) (#69)
    by CST on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:52:11 PM EST
    if only because it clearly strayed from the "lazy pot-head" stereotype.

    imagine the lung capacity he'd have if he DIDN'T smoke.  Kripes.

    Parent

    Woulda been more awesome... (none / 0) (#73)
    by kdog on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:56:15 PM EST
    if he refused to apologize for having a good time and enjoying his success....but I get, gotta keep the sponsors you didn't lose happy.  Honesty is for suckers.

    Parent
    obama appointment to oil spill team (none / 0) (#23)
    by ahazydelirium on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:26:15 PM EST
    obama, in a bid to assemble the greatest scientific minds to assist with the oil spill in the gulf, has appointed a self-describe "proud homophobe," ableist and climate change denier to a panel of scientists.

    The question is.... (none / 0) (#91)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 17, 2010 at 05:04:22 PM EST
    Is he smart?

    Parent
    i can't picture a climate change denier smart. nt. (none / 0) (#115)
    by ahazydelirium on Mon May 17, 2010 at 09:10:39 PM EST


    Parent
    Well, I can't picture a global warming (none / 0) (#116)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 17, 2010 at 09:41:35 PM EST
    believer as smart.....

    So, now that we have settled that... is the scientist smart?

    Oh, you don't know.

    Okay.

    Parent

    But then.. (none / 0) (#155)
    by jondee on Tue May 18, 2010 at 01:42:38 PM EST
    you thought Bush was smart. And Terri Schiavo was lucid.

    Parent
    You Decide Mr Brainiac (none / 0) (#157)
    by squeaky on Tue May 18, 2010 at 01:51:31 PM EST
    Once news of the team spread, some of Katz's writings were discovered at his university website, including one titled, ''In Defense of Homophobia.'' In the essay, dated May 13, 1999, he wrote about the ''rationalist'' and the religious person's views of homosexuality.

    ''The religious believer may see the hand of God, but both he and the rationalist must see a fact of Nature. The human body was not designed to share hypodermic needles, it was not designed to be promiscuous, and it was not designed to engage in homosexual acts. Engaging in such behavior is like riding a motorcycle on an icy road without a helmet,'' Katz wrote. ''It may be possible to get away with it for a while, and a few misguided souls may get a thrill out of doing so, but sooner or later (probably sooner) the consequences will be catastrophic. Lethal diseases spread rapidly among people who do such things.''

    sound like something you would say, if you could write...

    but then again, it turns out he is not a global warming denier at all:

    ''The conclusion that anthropogenic emissions [those derived from human activities] of these gases will likely warm the climate has been generally accepted for a century. It is a consensus, but it is not emerging or new. It has been there all along. Only a panicky fear of the consequences is new.
    ''

    But it appears that the real reason he is no longer on the team is that he really did not think he could be useful. This before the homophobe scandal arose:

    But Katz's major research focus has been astrophysics, and in an interview Friday with a St. Louis paper, he didn't seem confident that he had been much help with the mission. "I was honored to be invited and enjoyed the experience," said Katz. "Did I have anything much to contribute? I think I have some ideas for how to prevent this kind of thing from happening in the future, but I don't have anything very specific to offer on the present problems.

    TPM

    Parent

    Well perhpas this person has a high IQ (none / 0) (#128)
    by BackFromOhio on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:20:33 AM EST
    but who cares?  All these panels and commissions is another way to sweep the problem under the rug.  I fear that this oil spill may bill the nail in the coffin of LA and other Gulf Coast economies. Why is no one out championing their needs?  I love how the right can get out the rallies, etc. to support AZ's law, but can't get people out to reveal the devastation that is still NOLA and worse since the spill.  

    Parent
    Popes not goint to like this (none / 0) (#26)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:33:45 PM EST
    Sex will not be used to have babies in just 10 years, as couples turn to IVF

    Couples will stop having sex to conceive babies within a decade and use IVF instead, scientists said yesterday.

    See what happens when people stop (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by oculus on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:42:01 PM EST
    reading real books?  <snk.>

    Parent
    Maybe more rich couples... (none / 0) (#36)
    by kdog on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:48:35 PM EST
    but not poor slobs, I think the scientists are way off.

    They say 30-somethings will increasingly rely on artificial methods of fertilisation because natural human reproduction is 'fairly inefficient'.

    Perhaps "inefficient", but a heckuva lot more fun than a trip to the doc for some IVF...wouldn't y'all agree?

    Parent

    Have there been any longitudinal studies (none / 0) (#129)
    by BackFromOhio on Tue May 18, 2010 at 02:22:33 AM EST
    of women who've used IVF?  They are pumped so full of hormones....  I wonder if they don't, over time, have a higher breast cancer rate than women who either have not had children or have them the old-fashioned way.  


    Parent
    But don't women who have never (none / 0) (#142)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 12:13:13 PM EST
    had children have a higher rate of breast cancer than those who have had children?

    Parent
    No. (none / 0) (#146)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 12:32:20 PM EST
    Mayo Clinic

    Parent
    Although "yes" as to endometrial (none / 0) (#148)
    by oculus on Tue May 18, 2010 at 12:34:49 PM EST
    cancer.  Mayo Clinic

    Parent
    I would imagine that (none / 0) (#180)
    by BackFromOhio on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:51:41 PM EST
    the real answer may lie in info as to whether women who have and have not had children have taken synthetic hormones in form of birth control pills or hormone replacement or IVF.  Would be interesting to see that info.

    Parent
    Oh (none / 0) (#182)
    by squeaky on Tue May 18, 2010 at 06:28:41 PM EST
    Just innuendo and general character assassination from the morality squad?

    Parent
    Wow (none / 0) (#38)
    by squeaky on Mon May 17, 2010 at 02:49:52 PM EST
    Wonder if there will be an age limit for this sort of thing, in either direction...

    Parent
    Is it possible to have too many (none / 0) (#46)
    by oculus on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:11:05 PM EST
    Kumeyaay pots?  Not yet.  I just bought two more (smallish) at Indian Market yesterday.  Current total is eight.  Love 'em. Each one is a different shape, size, and pit fire.

    Face It (none / 0) (#54)
    by squeaky on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:24:40 PM EST
    You have become a collector.

    Parent
    For sure. If I could buy directly (none / 0) (#63)
    by oculus on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:46:43 PM EST
    from the potters in situ I would.

    Parent
    The Wheels Are Turning (none / 0) (#64)
    by squeaky on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:48:09 PM EST
    No pun intended....  

    Parent
    APs float in the big gay parade (none / 0) (#55)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:29:14 PM EST
    Should we ask if Supreme Court nominee is gay?

    sa-weet (none / 0) (#57)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:34:13 PM EST
    "I have been told on background that the White House is preparing for a Specter loss here, and that the president doesn't want to be associated with that," Schieffer said.
    0 for 4 (none / 0) (#67)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 17, 2010 at 03:49:52 PM EST
    He can run but he can't hide.

    Parent
    Except in this case (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by jbindc on Mon May 17, 2010 at 04:05:50 PM EST
    The WH machine backed the conservative candidate who us going to lose to the more liberal one.

    Parent
    Maybe (none / 0) (#132)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 18, 2010 at 05:59:05 AM EST


    Parent
    AP on Social Security "tweeks": (none / 0) (#78)
    by oculus on Mon May 17, 2010 at 04:06:40 PM EST
    link

    Ahy oh why is this info always (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by oculus on Mon May 17, 2010 at 04:08:23 PM EST
    buried or omitted?  

    The Social Security trust funds have built up a $2.5 trillion surplus over the past 25 years. But the federal government has borrowed that money over the years to spend on other programs. The government must now start borrowing money from public debt markets -- adding to annual budget deficits -- to repay Social Security.
     [AP.]


    Parent
    I like Kohl on this (5.00 / 2) (#81)
    by ruffian on Mon May 17, 2010 at 04:19:59 PM EST
    I'm glad the committee is not coming out with drastic recommendations. These things are on the same scale as what was done in the 80's. I myself would lean toward tax increases rather than raising the retirement age, but that debatable, and that is where the debate should be, not on killing SS or anything more draconian.

    Parent
    this has to be an (none / 0) (#85)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon May 17, 2010 at 04:35:16 PM EST
    evolutionary adaptation to constantly being blamed for them:

    Puppy and the Fart Machine

    Nah (none / 0) (#87)
    by squeaky on Mon May 17, 2010 at 04:39:59 PM EST
    My dog, the silent but deadly type, would always give herself away because she would do the same thing when she farted, as if it was a big surprise, but I think she really just liked the smell.

    Parent
    Fakih Miss USA Crown Secure (none / 0) (#154)
    by squeaky on Tue May 18, 2010 at 01:42:30 PM EST
    Trump not getting in the fray. Of course this was all tabloid driven to increase their readership. This about sums up the faux "scandal":

    "They couldn't tell us what their intentions were and we didn't want to give them anything that might cause her to relinquish her crown," he said.

    Spike called the inquiry "ridiculous" because "she's wearing more clothes in the photos on our site than she was in those photos for the pageant."

    He said the contest was run by actual strippers, but the contestants did not strip. "They're not naked. They're encouraged to wear comfortable clothes," Spike said.

    abc

    Monday Afternoon Open Thread | 198 comments (198 topical)