Thursday Open Thread

It's a busy day here, so I don't have time to blog about Chelsea Clinton's Saturday wedding (congrats, Chelsea), the no-fly zone over it or Obama not being invited, or tonight's premiere of Season Two of Jersey Shore (no, I won't be watching), whether Ali picked Chris or Roberto or no one (yes, I'm still following the spoilers), or the invitation I received by e-mail to Charlie Rangel's August 11 birthday celebration. (Here's the invite, it's for everyone, and yesterday Rangel tweeted it will be a "go" and there's no deal yet on his ethics charges.)

Here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Federal Judge Removed During Trial After Exclusion of Evidence | Jon Cohn Is Happy So You Should Be Too >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    wow (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 01:08:45 PM EST
    Poll shows opposition to health care overhaul declining

    who could have predicted that fear and loathing would decrease as information increased?

    actually I did.

    The (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by lilburro on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 01:26:09 PM EST
    new health website is rather nifty.  

    there are, in fact (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 01:28:16 PM EST
    many good things in that bill.  when that starts sinking in people will like it.

    it should surprise no one that its taking a while considering the $hitstorm of lies and distortions people were swamped with.


    Amusing to think (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by lilburro on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 02:48:53 PM EST
    there are people running around who still believe in death panels...

    True. (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by dk on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 04:37:51 PM EST
    Also amusing to think that there are people running around who still believe this is the most progressive legislation in generations.

    In a way, though, I sympathize with both groups.  It's all about priorities, I guess, as to what people choose to become informed about.  And we all have different priorities.


    Another possible reasons is that coverage of the (1.00 / 1) (#86)
    by jawbone on Fri Jul 30, 2010 at 06:56:00 PM EST
    Big Health Insurers Profit Protection Plan has lessened. HCR(aka High Corporate Revenues) is just not on people's minds as much.

    Wait for the mandates. And wait for just how high the insurers will jack up premiums by then....

    We coulda had a plan that worked for everybody -- except the fat cat insurance execs making millions. Sheehs, what a wasted opportunity. But so predictable from Corporatist in Chief Obama.


    wowee (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 02:29:45 PM EST
    we just got done hearing what is coming next and I really really really wish I could talk about it.
    hopefully I will be able to soon.
    lets just say, if I sat down and invented the absolute coolest thing, the thing I would most like to do in the world I am working in, this would be it.

    That is just so wrong (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by waldenpond on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:21:37 PM EST
    what a tease.  You've crossed the line. You should be banned.

    I would so (none / 0) (#55)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 05:40:43 PM EST
    love to talk about it.  soon I hope.

    tha'd work (none / 0) (#63)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 07:24:40 PM EST
    coincidentally and not the the two are in any way related but did we see this?

    virtual reality (none / 0) (#43)
    by CST on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:30:19 PM EST
    is my guess.

    Xbox Kinect? (none / 0) (#51)
    by vicndabx on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:57:20 PM EST
    This is too rich... (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:25:18 PM EST
    Goldman Sachs...remember the internal emails calling one of their "products" a "sh*tty deal"?  Well, Goldman is finally gonna do something to rectify the situation....(drumroll)....

    They've banned cursing from company emails...now get back to work slinging "sh*tty deals"!

    a toothache while in central Colombia... (5.00 / 3) (#52)
    by jeffinalabama on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 04:10:42 PM EST
    Went to the dentist, and I need a crown replaced. Think I'll get a better deal here than in the USA?

    Weather's chilly, wearing a sweater, but I look out the window at El Nevado del Ruiz, a beautiful volcano.

    Today I picked fresh guavas to augment breakfast. Lots of seeds but still delicious.

    Little jeffinalabama is fine. Completely bilingual. I'm spending my time teaching him math. We'll be starting algebra by Monday. Pretty good for a 7 year old.

    Otherwise, how are things?

    Hey, jeff, good to hear from you (none / 0) (#53)
    by caseyOR on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 04:20:48 PM EST
    I've been wondering where you are and how you are. IIRC, last we heard from you, you were about to take your dad for a visit to the Gulf coast in hopes of beating the oil to the beach. How did that go? And how's the ankle?

    I know you love the lands to our south, so i have to ask, are you coming back?


    Hi Casey, and kdog, and everyone. (5.00 / 2) (#62)
    by jeffinalabama on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 07:24:34 PM EST
    Quick message tonight, hope to be on longer tomorrow.

    Long story short, back in about three weeks. However, the longer I spend here the more likely I'll take much earlier retirement. Vida es buena here. Spending time with my 7 year old here... don't get to see him often since he lives here. Brought him Captain Underpants series-- he's enchanted with them!

    The beach trip was bittersweet with my father. No oil at that time, but we all know it was probably his last trip to the beach. He never made it to the water's edge, but that didn't seem to bother him.

    Ankle front-- better. Glad the doctors didn't listen to me and amputate. It's still painful, and I still use crutches and or a cane, but there's potential for more.

    Kdog, I still have a few weeks to decide about returning... I've had a lot of folks ask me to give English lessons...

    And salsa or classical on the radio all the time. When I got off of the commuter from Bogota, the airport had the radio stationed tuned to classical, and the overture to Tannhauser was playing. In the wonderfully green mountains, at about 7,000 feet, it seemed appropriate.

    More to follow in other open threads.

    Hi Jeralyn, Hi Armando, and everyone else!


    Sadly, my whole idea of Colombia (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by caseyOR on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 07:58:29 PM EST
    has been informed by our insane "War on Drugs." I find that I have to make myself stop and consciously remember that there is so much more to that region and that country than what we see on the nightly news.

    How great that you are having such a good visit with your son. It would be so completely understandable if you decided to stay in Colombia and have a more day-to-day life with him.

     Although I would dearly love to, I have never had the opportunity to travel outside the US. I've tried to compensate a little bit by reading as widely as I can about other countries, and by reading foreign authors. That last is, of course, limited by my need for books translated into English. If I won the Lottery I would travel for the rest of my life.


    "Vida es buena"... (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 30, 2010 at 08:47:24 AM EST
    sounds like that's the answer jeff...one should live where the living is good.

    And if you don't stay this time, I'll drink to your earliest possible retirement.  


    You'll have to change your moniker to (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jul 30, 2010 at 12:26:51 PM EST

    As we discussed previously, I spent some time there in my mid 20's. Wonderful people, and as I fondly remember from my single days, stunningly beautiful women.

    I remember being on a bus on a longish ride to Cartegena which happened to also have a bunch of college kids on it as well and they introduced me to Aguardiente.

    They thought it very funny that when they first mentioned it I was very confused as to why they were talking about "water teeth."



    I bet you're gettin' a sick deal... (none / 0) (#58)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 06:53:55 PM EST
    and enjoying the hell out of yourself...green with envy over here.  Live it up amigo!

    Top Chef anyone? (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by NJDem on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 06:16:17 PM EST
    andgarden?  Anne?

    I want to talk about this pea puree incident.  I definitely think Alex took it from Ed--he didn't even know what he was making the night before!  But wouldn't it have been on tape?  And if his dish is going to be on the Palm menu, doesn't he need the recipe for it?  Thoughts?

    Also, is anyone watching Work of Art?

    I agree 100% (none / 0) (#68)
    by CST on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 10:20:50 PM EST
    and I also have thought for a while now that Alex was out of his league.  As for the tape, I wondered the same thing.  But then they should have him making it too if that were the case.  Maybe there are fewer cameras there than I thought.  It's not like a "real world" type show where every waking moment is on tv.

    As for the palms... I don't know, I wondered that as well.

    Tonight was my night to catch up on tv competitions.  Started with top chef, so you think you can dance, and now watching project runway.  No work of art though.  For some resaon I have a hard time picturing judges telling me what to like in that arena.  I know that's a random line to draw, but I feel that type of art is a lot more personal and subjective than any of the other ones.


    what, I have to check my puzzle (none / 0) (#1)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 01:05:34 PM EST
    but, its just a puzzle.

    The INTIMIDATOR PUZZLE PISTOL is is a single shot 45 caliber muzzle loading pistol; a unique offering for personal self defense.

    now with laser site.

    The Sara Palin Legal Defense Fund (none / 0) (#3)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 01:12:26 PM EST
    for protection (none / 0) (#4)
    by jondee on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 01:24:24 PM EST
    from relentless, frivolous lawsuits from left wing extremists. And the parents of teenage Don Juan's who are relentless in breaking down the resistance of hockey moms in bowling ally parking lots.

    it just say (none / 0) (#6)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 01:26:41 PM EST
    help her defend her family from relentless attacks.
    it doesnt say legal attacks.  maybe they mean like for building higher fences or something so that mean ole journalist cant peep over any more.

    The Rangel legal defense fund (none / 0) (#7)
    by BTAL on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 01:26:48 PM EST
    But who's ultimately paying Rangel's legal bills? Mostly corporate and union political action committees along with individual lobbyists. Over the past six months, PACs and lobbyists have accounted for a majority of the money Rangel's campaign has raised this year, not counting transfers from Rangel's other fundraising operations (more on them below).

    In turn, Rangel funnels his campaign cash into his legal defense. In 2009, three-fourths of Rangel's $2.16 million in campaign spending went to legal fees.

    K Street goes to the defense of Charlie Rangel


    I suppose the difference (none / 0) (#9)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 01:29:15 PM EST
    would be that Rangle actually has a reason to have a defense fund.
    rather than shopping I mean.

    Google is your friend (none / 0) (#10)
    by BTAL on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 01:32:28 PM EST
    The suits and other actions against the Palins are easy to find.

    If individual's choose to support her with their money, that's their business.

    Rangel's actions clearly show why he is in the mess he is in.  Using political contributions is a scam.  Why doesn't he establish a straight up and public legal defense fund?


    clearly (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 01:34:26 PM EST
    he is a threat to freedom.

    also (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 01:35:34 PM EST
    it might be worth remembering that Rangle has, in fact, done a lot of good in his long career.  and I am not surprised he would have friends

    Ok but why is he diverting campaign (none / 0) (#13)
    by BTAL on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 01:38:01 PM EST
    funds instead of a transparent and above board legal defense fund?   All those friends could then donate to help him.

    like this (none / 0) (#14)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 01:41:59 PM EST
    That means any politically savvy donor who cut a check in 2010 to Rangel's reelection knew the donation was, in part, a contribution to Rangel's legal defense

    Scam? (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 01:49:08 PM EST
    That is disinformation, unless you are arguing that IOKIYAR.
    DeLay has assembled a substantial legal team to fight back, and he has a defense fund -- financed largely by corporations with business before Congress -- that contained more than $600,000 at the end of last year, based on the cumulative record of its receipts and contributions. But contributions to the fund dropped from $318,000 to $181,500 between the third and fourth quarters of 2005.

    DeLay also is entitled under federal election rules to convert any or all of the remaining funds from his reelection campaign to his legal expenses, whether or not he resigns, is indicted or loses the election. Election lawyers say one advantage of bowing out of the election now is that the campaign cash can be converted to pay legal bills immediately, instead of being drained in the course of a bid to stay in office.

    WaPo via TL


    Delay was wrong and deserved eveything (none / 0) (#20)
    by BTAL on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 02:11:35 PM EST
    he got.  So is Rangel.

    It is not a partisan issue but an ethical issue.


    Legal Issue (none / 0) (#23)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 02:15:33 PM EST
    Stop disseminating BS. There is no ethics violation in using campaign contributions for legal defense.

    Beyond using campaign funds (none / 0) (#28)
    by BTAL on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 02:52:59 PM EST
    of the three law firms he is using for his defense, at least one is a lobbying firm.

    Reread the earlier post, it is acceptable provided none of the paid representation deals with personal issues.  His IRS charge is purely a personal issue.


    BS (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:08:23 PM EST
    There is no indictment. He has been fighting charges from the House ethics committee for two years. That is entirely related to his job.

    If and when federal charges are brought, the Federal Election Commission will rule as to what he can spend campaign funds on and what he cannot spend campaign funds on.


    Ethics violation (none / 0) (#37)
    by waldenpond on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:18:15 PM EST
    It may be solely a political issue.  It isn't settled yet.  He may simply re-do his taxes and pay fines, but it can be a serious ethics violation.....  which means he is legally ok in spending political funds.

    this parts good (none / 0) (#15)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 01:45:31 PM EST
    Alaska is perhaps the only state in the U.S. where the Attorney General does not routinely represent the governor when accusations and complaints are filed against the governor under the operative ethics statutes. This means that the governor has to personally pay for her or his own defense.

    Not only was Sarah Palin required by law to respond to each and every lawsuit filed against her by left-wing activists, but she also had to personally foot hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal bills to defend herself.

    That's money the Palins simply didn't have.

    how much do you think a fox news anchor makes?


    Using political contributions is a scam. (none / 0) (#16)
    by vicndabx on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 01:45:47 PM EST
    Not exactly:

    Otherwise, legal fees are a legitimate use of campaign cash because "the protection of a Member's presumption of innocence in such actions is a valid political purpose," the guidelines state.

    From your same article.....


    Correct, and we will all see (none / 0) (#21)
    by BTAL on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 02:12:56 PM EST
    how much of the allegations deal with official actions and how many may deal with personal issues.  If any cross the line into the personal, he is then in violation.

    Moral of the story kids... (none / 0) (#22)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 02:13:09 PM EST
    never ever ever give politicians money!

    Of course, like BTAL said, whatever makes you happy...but I think you're all bonkers:)


    I see from the sidebar that Shirley (none / 0) (#18)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 01:55:57 PM EST
    Sherrod says she plans to sue Breitbart for defamation:

    ABC News reports, "Speaking Thursday at the National Association of Black Journalists convention, (Shirley) Sherrod said she would 'definitely' sue over the video that took her remarks out of context."

    ABC also noted, "Sherrod said she had not received an apology from Breitbart and no longer wanted one.

    'He had to know that he was targeting me,' she said."

    Would love to get the lawyers' input on whether they think this will go anywhere.

    Although what Breitbart did (none / 0) (#29)
    by itscookin on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 02:57:33 PM EST
    Was underhanded, what he published was something she actually said, if taken out of context. Wouldn't she have a better case against the government for firing her or the NAACP for calling her a racist?

    sue'em all (none / 0) (#31)
    by NYShooter on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:06:52 PM EST
    let the jury allocate to who, and how much

    Donald, it appears that your (none / 0) (#60)
    by BTAL on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 07:07:04 PM EST
    partisan slip is showing.

    •  As previously posted in this and earlier threads, Breitbart was not the first to post the "edited" video.  A simple search on YouTube for Sherrod Jul 19, 2010 shows at least 2 previously posting of the said video. One even has an editorial commentary about Sherrod, no different than the Breitbart biggovernment.com commentary.

    •  Beck (disclaimer:  I don't watch or support him/his show) was the first to defend Sherrod on July 20th.  Google it.

    •  The Carol Burnett comments are a strawman argument.

    •  The subsequent job apologies and job offers from the administration significantly cuts the knees out of any damages claims.

    Thank you for those (none / 0) (#72)
    by BTAL on Fri Jul 30, 2010 at 08:48:48 AM EST
    well balanced comments.

    BTW, your grandmother's advice brought a smile.



    She'll get Breitbart on the record about this -- (none / 0) (#85)
    by jawbone on Fri Jul 30, 2010 at 06:43:49 PM EST
    under oath, right?

    Seems worth it to me.


    INAL but there are at least (none / 0) (#30)
    by BTAL on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:03:30 PM EST
    two other copies of that video on YouTube published the day prior to Breitbart's article on BigGovernment.com

    Internet harassment (none / 0) (#38)
    by waldenpond on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:19:55 PM EST
    I wasn't aware, but there are actually internet harassment laws.  Seems she will be able to get him on this if nothing else.  I'm sure right-wingers will pay his fine.

    Big settlement... (none / 0) (#19)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 02:11:33 PM EST
    in the Sean Bell civil suit against NYC...7 million for the victims.

    Insult to injury, the president of the Detectives Endowment Association thinks it's a joke.  There's a joke being played allright Palladino, but you obviously don't get it.

    Is it odd (none / 0) (#25)
    by republicratitarian on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 02:38:56 PM EST
    that three officers faced trial, there is a $7,000,000 settlement and the Feds say they won't file civil rights charges because of insufficient evidence?

    I like the line  "prompted the city to change some of its policing procedures. Those include alcohol testing for officers in any shooting in which someone is injured, as well as improved firearms training"

    Alcohol testing? LOL Was there an issue? I guess that's similar to regular companies drug testing an employee if they get injured.

    Oh, and Palladino's response is predictable.


    There's an issue allright... (none / 0) (#27)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 02:51:21 PM EST
    boatloads of issues.

    Who coulda thunk it a bad idea to let men with badges and guns do undercover work in a strip club and let them drink on the job to "blend in"...what could possibly go wrong?

    Oh well...you can't keep the sex out the champagne room without a little collateral damage.


    Maybe (none / 0) (#32)
    by republicratitarian on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:07:57 PM EST
    they should install a breathalyzer ignition on cop cars, hehe.

    Or better yet... (none / 0) (#35)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:11:11 PM EST
    on their glocks!

    Now this was just stupid (none / 0) (#34)
    by BTAL on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:09:18 PM EST
    Local Woman Convicted of Drug Fraud Joins Obama at the Podium

    President Barack Obama posed with a Charlottesville woman at a White House event on July 19. What we didn't know - and what the White House may not have known - is that court records show she's been found guilty of prescription drug fraud.


    Plus she had a previous larceny (grand reduced) conviction in 2007.

    Even being on the other side of the aisle, I just don't understand how the WH staff could have let this happen.

    What's the problem? (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:16:47 PM EST
    she is still an American, aka one of Obama's bosses.  She is one of the unemployed, the reason for the photo-op.

    So she has a record...1 in 31 Americans is in a cage or on parole for goodness sake...having a record in this day and age is hardly a scarlet letter, it just makes you normal.  


    If this had happened during the last admin (none / 0) (#44)
    by BTAL on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:31:51 PM EST
    this would have resulted in a long piling-on media blitz from the left.

    It was a poor choice and even worse staff work.


    Hoo hah (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by christinep on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:43:33 PM EST
    I guess when you are trying to find something (anything, please? anything?) to throw at your opposition, well this is as good as anything...hmmm, BTAL. You are funny. Especially when the clear objective is to play games at all costs.

    Haaaa haaaa (none / 0) (#49)
    by BTAL on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:51:04 PM EST
    Trivial, like the left's ridiculing of GWB's pronunciation of nuclear?  

    What was the objective of that game?

    Stones and glass houses.


    The basic literacy (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 11:09:11 PM EST
    of our president is actually a matter of legitimate concern.  If all he'd ever said was "nukular," that would just put him in Jimmy Carter's category.

    But anybody who can repeatedly say things like "I know how hard it is to put food on your family" has some pretty basic wires crossed in their head.


    literacy (none / 0) (#70)
    by jondee on Fri Jul 30, 2010 at 12:13:49 AM EST
    schmiteracy, the primary thing for 2/3 of his supporters was that he was seen as - or packaged as - standing up for those who believe homosexuals and women who refuse to "be fruitful and multiply" are damned, poor people are immoral and the impending millennium is at hand. "Elitists" who know all those fancy words and rely overly much on reason cant be counted on to be channels for the Almighty; who knoweth what we need before we ask for it. If Bush had publicly spoken in tongues at all times, it wouldn't have mattered; as long as he was smiting the heathen in the Holy Land and sanctifying the "blessings" of the primary recipients of his tax cuts..



    Perhaps... (none / 0) (#46)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:38:56 PM EST
    but I'd feel the same way.

    Sh*t...it would be a good idea to force our leaders to hang out with ex-cons and those with records on the regular...see up close and personal what "tough on crime" does to people.


    I'd think you'd be (none / 0) (#40)
    by jondee on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:23:04 PM EST
    a little more open to the idea of people being forgiven and being entrusted with a clean slate after they've paid their debt to society, BT.

    This makes it look like you're trying to smear and backbite two people.


    another instance of nastiness (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by jondee on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:25:05 PM EST
    and slander in the service of the Lord.

    See the post above (none / 0) (#45)
    by BTAL on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:33:36 PM EST
    It was stupid from an optics position and sloppy staff work.

    o.k (none / 0) (#47)
    by jondee on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:39:01 PM EST
    so that was all that was intended by passing on that

    The way I see it, his supporters (alot of them) are understanding about how things happen in the real world, and you folks are supposed to be forgiving, so what's the problem?


    Too bad they (none / 0) (#50)
    by jondee on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 03:56:15 PM EST
    don't have a font for that drippy lettering they used to use in those old horror film posters.

    How in the H... (none / 0) (#67)
    by desertswine on Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 10:04:27 PM EST
    does this happen?
    Even the sacred dead get screwed. Is yet everything in the US a sham?

    Massive 1.7 billion... (none / 0) (#73)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 30, 2010 at 09:12:56 AM EST
    dollar heist out in Cali...victims detained, suspects free to go about their dirty dirty business.

    It was done to keep it out of (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by BTAL on Fri Jul 30, 2010 at 11:13:04 AM EST
    the BROWNIES....  

    {head desk} (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by nycstray on Fri Jul 30, 2010 at 11:50:57 AM EST
    Oh lord... (none / 0) (#77)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 30, 2010 at 11:51:36 AM EST
    Feinstein strikes again!  A real piece of work that one...a longtime thorn in liberty's side.

    Now we can argue about the brownie/bud disparity like we do the crack/cocaine disparity.  


    Yeah (none / 0) (#78)
    by squeaky on Fri Jul 30, 2010 at 11:53:28 AM EST
    Well when she was Mayor of SF she was pro MJ, now she has decided that being against prop 19 is a vote getter.

    Really? (none / 0) (#79)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 30, 2010 at 12:00:24 PM EST
    Did not know that...High Times has done many write-ups on her over the years, reporting on her loyal service to the war on our own...I thought she was always nuts.

    if you're looking (none / 0) (#81)
    by jondee on Fri Jul 30, 2010 at 12:31:40 PM EST
    for principaled idealists the roach motel of American politics isn't the place to look.

    I'm sure she has some kind of "understanding" with the rather well-organized and powerful corrections and law enforcement community in Prison Nation West.


    another reason they should legalize . .. (none / 0) (#74)
    by nycstray on Fri Jul 30, 2010 at 11:08:08 AM EST
    destroying natural resources instead of using farm land or other growing methods. wonder what the size of the land was?

    Rangel Reprimand Recommended (none / 0) (#82)
    by squeaky on Fri Jul 30, 2010 at 01:45:41 PM EST
    The subcommittee that investigated Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) has recommended that the embattled lawmaker face just a "reprimand," a mild form of punishment similar to that given to Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) when he was rebuked in 1997....

    If the [entire] panel finds Rangel guilty, it could then impose its own level of punishment. But the recommendation of Green and Bonner would weigh heavily on that decision, much as a prosecutor's sentencing recommendation would influence a judge in a criminal trial.


    Double blood boiler.... (none / 0) (#83)
    by kdog on Fri Jul 30, 2010 at 01:56:05 PM EST
    Innocent man spends 27 years behind bars for a crime he did not commit...then, like lemon juice in an open wound, a judge delays his release because he was caged for so long he might "freak out".

    I sh*t you not.

    Ever seen The Thin Blue Line, k? (none / 0) (#84)
    by jondee on Fri Jul 30, 2010 at 05:26:56 PM EST