home

Sunday Morning Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 08:20:42 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

A great article on how police brutality became the standard procedure for policing protests.

Open Thread.

< Police Trainer:"I'm looking at standard police procedure" | Ding Dong, The Super Committee Is Dead? >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Sunday Morning Open Thread | 128 comments (128 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    The larger picture is simply that the (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by observed on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 08:54:35 AM EST
    oligarchs are scared---and rightly so.
    The situation as it stands cannot be maintained.
    Of course, since the OWS protests aren't "about anything", they can't influence policy . snort

    The thing I lke best about OWS (5.00 / 5) (#15)
    by scribe on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 11:09:42 AM EST
    is their refusal to state demands.  This works in their favor in at least two ways:

    1.  It gives the 1% nothing to work against.  They cannot engage in a negotiation (good faith or not) where OWS wants X and the 1% offer something less in the hope of winding up somewhere on their respective sides of the middle with a settlement.

    Moreover, in adopting a posture of neither demanding nor resisting, OWS has put the 1% in a position where everything the 1% do further reveals the true character behind the 1%.  Remove the brakes and let them show their true nature.

    2.  It's the equivalent of the classic marital dispute that goes something like this:
    H (1%):  What did I do that so offended you?
    w (OWS):  You know.
    H (1%):  Let me give you [bauble] to make it right.
    W (OWS):  I don't want your things.  You know what you did.
    H (1%):  [Takes a swing at her]
    W (OWS):  Is that all the better you have?

    You've all seen that movie....  Last I checked, that's a fight W always wins in the audience's eyes.

    Let's just remember - the actions of the police (following their 1% bosses' orders - cops are nothing if not exceptionally-good order-followers) are intended to enrage peaceful protestors into striking back.  As emotionally satisfying as it might be to strike back or resist the cops' thuggery, the only way to address it is to not strike back.  Any other response plays directly into the strengths of the 1% - force, violence and authoritarianism - and gives them all the justifications they might need to go even further.  Adopting and maintaining a nonviolent response disempowers the 1%, and that's what makes them wild with rage;  they have long (always) been about temporal power and in lacking it they see there is nothing in their lives and that they have been living for nothing.

    Parent

    Oh, very well said (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by gyrfalcon on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 12:58:38 PM EST
    "It gives the 1% nothing to work against."

    Exactly so.  And it's making them absolutely crazy with rage.

    Parent

    And, like I said, every move they make (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by scribe on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 04:22:39 PM EST
    reveals the blackness at the hearts of their being.

    They live in fear, darkness and rage, cannot abide others not sharing their pathologies and lash out in violence at those who do not and will not.

    We're in for a long, dark ride, but we all will be better for it when we come out the other end, provided everyone remembers to not give in to the 1%'s darkness and violence and to not strike back.

    Parent

    Rich people aren't serial killers you know. (none / 0) (#46)
    by tigercourse on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 04:31:13 PM EST
    Maybe (almost certainly) they're greedy and maybe they're elitists and maybe they're ignorant/indifferent about the conditions some Americans live in but that doesn't mean they're freaking Sauron.

    As I mentioned the other day "black hearted" Mayor Bloomberg gave over 500 million dollars to charity last year.

    Parent

    I hope this was <snark> (none / 0) (#68)
    by NYShooter on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 07:30:51 PM EST
    I'll keep it short:

    The only way people get their billions today is to steal it from the rest of us, the 99%

    When you use your money to purchase a government, and all its accessories, I'd hope you'd understand why I won't be joining you in thanking the moral mutants who stole my money, and my country.


    Parent

    In what way are they stealing their billions? (none / 0) (#80)
    by tigercourse on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 08:50:04 PM EST
    Do you mean by not paying a higher tax rate or something? Or because the product that gets them rich (such as Dell, Microsoft, Facebook, Geico, etc.) is a rip off?

    And no, I don't think being rich automatically makes you evil. I want them to pay higher taxes and employ more people in the United States, not go to prison.

    Parent

    Professor at UC Davis speaks out (5.00 / 7) (#3)
    by MO Blue on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 10:00:02 AM EST
    Militarization of Campus Police

    Regarding Chancellor Linda P.B. Katehi's claim that there was no other option but to ask the police to assist in their removal.

    No other options? The list of options is endless. To begin with, the chancellor could have thanked them for their sense of civic duty. The occupation could have been turned into a teach-in on the role of public education in this country. There could have been a call for professors to hold classes on the quad. The list of "other options" is endless.

    Chancellor Katehi asserts that "the encampment raised serious health and safety concerns." Really? Twenty tents on the quad "raised serious health and safety concerns?" Has the chancellor been to a frat party lately? Or a football game? Talk about "serious health and safety concerns."

    Authors discussion with a doctor who works for the California Department of Corrections, who participated in a recent review of the medical literature on pepper spray for the CDC.

    ...They concluded that the medical consequences of pepper spray are poorly understood but involve serious health risk.......As a result, if a doctor sees pepper spray used in a prison, he or she is required to file a written report. And regulations prohibit the use of pepper spray on inmates in all circumstances other than the immediate threat of violence. If a prisoner is seated, by definition the use of pepper spray is prohibited. Any prison guard who used pepper spray on a seated prisoner would face immediate disciplinary review for the use of excessive force. Even in the case of a prison riot in which inmates use extreme violence, once a prisoner sits down he or she is not considered to be an imminent threat.....
    ....
    Apparently, in the state of California felons incarcerated for violent crimes have rights that students at public universities do not.

     

    This (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Edger on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 10:06:22 AM EST
    "the encampment raised serious health and safety concerns" is the nationally coordinated narrative being pushed out there in 1% controlled media the past two weeks.

    Who is behind it?

    Parent

    It's the standard response of (5.00 / 3) (#27)
    by gyrfalcon on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 01:01:31 PM EST
    the establishment to anything they don't like and can't control, from suburbanites wanting to keep a few backyard chickens to OWS protests.  If they don't like it, it must be DFHs doing it and they're by definition a threat to health and safety.  We must have order!

    Parent
    You know, it's interesting (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Edger on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 01:57:14 PM EST
    I've known a lot of very wealthy people, and a lot of "status quo defenders" - and off the top of my head right now I can't recall any of them who were happy people. Most live in fear and anxiety, as far as I've seen.

    Bill Hicks commented on it in It's Just a Ride.

    Douglas Adams also commented on it in the prologue to his book Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy...

    "This planet has - or rather had - a problem, which was this:  most of the people living on it were unhappy for pretty much of the time.  Many solutions were suggested for this problem, but most of these were largely concerned with the movements of small green pieces of paper, which is odd because on the whole it wasn't the small green pieces of paper that were unhappy."


    Parent
    The unhappiness of the privileged (none / 0) (#63)
    by gyrfalcon on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 07:01:31 PM EST
    is an amazing thing to behold and to contemplate.

    Parent
    It never has (none / 0) (#66)
    by Edger on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 07:18:09 PM EST
    struck me as much of a privilege, really.

    I think they're using the wrong measuring stick, or something...

    Parent

    Are you suggesting the usual conspiracy? (none / 0) (#5)
    by christinep on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 10:28:55 AM EST
    Are we copying the conspiracy theories approach of the right, hmmm?

    Parent
    You really should start paying attention (5.00 / 4) (#6)
    by Edger on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 10:44:58 AM EST
    Your obvious trolling would look a lot less foolish and amateurish if you were better at doing your homework.

    A well-known Washington lobbying firm with links to the financial industry has proposed an $850,000 plan to take on Occupy Wall Street and politicians who might express sympathy for the protests, according to a memo obtained by the MSNBC program "Up w/ Chris Hayes."

    The proposal was written on the letterhead of the lobbying firm Clark Lytle Geduldig & Cranford and addressed to one of CLGC's clients, the American Bankers Association.

    CLGC's memo (PDF) proposes that the ABA pay CLGC $850,000 to conduct "opposition research" on Occupy Wall Street  in order to construct "negative narratives" about the protests and  allied politicians.

    MSNBC today: Exclusive: Lobbying Firm's Memo Spells Out Plan to Undermine Occupy Wall Street

    Parent

    Cut the namecalling. (5.00 / 0) (#24)
    by christinep on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 12:52:55 PM EST
    I'm not a troll, and you know it. OTOH, your writing suggests a conspiracy or master plan==usually involving President Obama--behind about number of matters.

    Although I am not a troll, I am a Democrat. Never hide that. From what you often say, it sounds a lot like that other party. Please enlighten if that is not the case.

    Or maybe...like other "couples" who have polar opposite takes on some issues...we will simply disagree.

    Parent

    Enlighten you? (3.50 / 2) (#28)
    by Edger on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 01:13:08 PM EST
    You're a waste of time.

    Parent
    Thats a nice one (5.00 / 0) (#37)
    by christinep on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 03:57:44 PM EST
    You don't like something...well, say things like "You're a waste of time." Too funny.

    As for the proposal that MSNBC spoke about & you alluded to above: I did not see that it was accepted. There are a lot of off-the-wall "proposals" out there.

    Parent

    This is reasoned discussion? (5.00 / 0) (#95)
    by MKS on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 01:06:38 AM EST
    Just trying to shut up someone?

    You are a liberal/progressive?

    Terrible comment.

    Parent

    Christine isn't a troll (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by sj on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 03:49:56 PM EST
    Just the proverbial "company man" albeit a woman.

    Parent
    sj: Thank you...sorta (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by christinep on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 04:00:48 PM EST
    I'm awaiting the time when you might realize that I've never been a "company man" or "company woman." But, I'm not complaining....

    So, thanks for the support.

    Parent

    FWIW Christine... (5.00 / 3) (#114)
    by kdog on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 11:44:22 AM EST
    although I might side closer to Edger and Rojas' opinions onchange from outside vs. change from inside, I don't doubt for a second our hearts are in and around the same place.

    And Edger & Rojas...love your passion, love your spirit...but Christine is not the bad guy.  Our mutual adversaries thrive on such divisiveness.

    When it comes to this fine blog at least, I give you all the wise words of Dave Mason....

    "There ain't no good guys, there ain't no bad guys, there's only you and me and we just disagree."

    Parent

    The uninformed are bad, though (none / 0) (#116)
    by Towanda on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 12:01:43 PM EST
    for the cause of informed discussion, the only way to truly advance our society.

    To be uninformed about the clear evidence of collusion/conspiracy/whatever by Dem mayors is not useful to understand and advance discussion of the future of OWS -- and of all of us.

    Parent

    Christine admitted... (none / 0) (#118)
    by kdog on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 12:52:30 PM EST
    there is obvious coordination, she just has a different view of how deep the rabbit hole goes than others here, including myself.

    I just see no need for the vitriol...I think we're all in agreement the authorities actions are deplorable.

    Parent

    Of course, there is not need for vitriol (none / 0) (#121)
    by Towanda on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 01:37:03 PM EST
    (and thus, I didn't use it), but I was moving beyond that basic point to a larger one.

    I am awaiting the rise of a new party that, on another blog, has been named the Facts and Logic Party.  The conspiracy/collusion/coordination of mayors and others moved from being the suspicion of many of us, seeing what we saw on the same night, to now being a fact, with the evidence.  To then resort to quibbling about the correct term, i.e., conspiracy or collusion or coordination, is not useful except to those who have been caught doing any or all of the above.

    Parent

    I hear ya... (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by kdog on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 01:58:38 PM EST
    I could be wrong but Christine doesn't strike me as the intentionally obtuse type...she just still believes in the Democratic Party and our system of government.  

    I think it is rotten beyond repair, radical change required or we sink like a stone.

    Parent

    Agreed on all counts. (n/t) (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by Towanda on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 02:12:32 PM EST


    Parent
    kdog: your comments on this thread (none / 0) (#127)
    by christinep on Tue Nov 22, 2011 at 12:21:33 PM EST
    are much appreciated. (Now, I know one Libertarian that I like...because he understands what we all talk about: mutual respect. Thanks, kdog.)

    Parent
    Who loves ya baby:)... (none / 0) (#128)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 22, 2011 at 12:53:32 PM EST
    we all should appreciate a little food for thought and questioning of our beliefs...its healthy.

    As for mutual respect, whatever you could do to get your party to stop criminalizing my way of life is much obliged:)  

    Parent

    Tsk, towanda (none / 0) (#126)
    by christinep on Tue Nov 22, 2011 at 12:17:43 PM EST
    While trying to pull back from this one, nonetheless, I must respond to someone saying "The uninformed are bad...."  I don't want to nor will I overreact on that, yet it gives one chills because one obvious way to read such words in a heading--which is how I took it--is that "Ve must make you see...you will see...etc." Shades of a purge.  To disagree about things is not to be uninformed or anything like that.

    I did not expect that coming from you, towanda.

    Parent

    not a troll (5.00 / 0) (#94)
    by MKS on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 01:01:19 AM EST
    You guys are examples of reasoned discussion.

    Ad hominem.....is not discussion.

    Parent

    Neither are random (1.00 / 0) (#108)
    by sj on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 10:39:15 AM EST
    downratings.  
    Ad hominem.....is not discussion.

    Not that I care, but I find your posturing and [p]outrage more than a little hypocritical.

    Parent
    Just commenting on the ad hominem. (none / 0) (#115)
    by MKS on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 11:59:24 AM EST
    And so you call me hypocritical?  

    More ad hominem.  That deserves a .....

    Parent

    BTW, "Company man" (none / 0) (#117)
    by MKS on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 12:12:52 PM EST
    is a pejorative, no?

    .....But you say not a troll.....

    Hmm, so, not a "1," but a "2."

    Not random at all......

    Parent

    Christine understood (none / 0) (#120)
    by sj on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 01:28:38 PM EST
    exactly where I was coming from.  If you'd bothered to read her comments you might have understood that.  

    She and I have had many exchanges from a former "company man" (me) to a current "company man" (her).  She didn't agree with the term, but as shorthand, it works.

    You, otoh, understood nothing.  And still felt free to pass judgement.  Yet you're not a troll, either.  Just quick on the button and a hypocritical.  Also a stalker.  Which can escalate to trollish.  We'll see if it happens this time.

    Parent

    Actually, MSNBC uncovered a document (5.00 / 7) (#7)
    by scribe on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 10:49:01 AM EST
    from a Beltway PR management firm pitching how to eliminate the Occupy threat through strategic messaging (or some similar twaddle) for the nominal fee of about $850k.

    FWIW, a bunch of cities (Oakland and NY among them) deciding to crush the encampments in their cities on the same day (night, actually) was no accident.  The Oakland mayor admitted (to the BBC) to being on a conference call with 18 mayors of cities under occupation, in which resolving the occupations was Topic #1.

    People say "conspiracy" to mock the actuality of coordinated action.  It's a long-time Rethug meme and one you should be wiser than to use.

    Parent

    This needs to be repeated IMO (5.00 / 4) (#9)
    by MO Blue on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 10:52:43 AM EST
    People say "conspiracy" to mock the actuality of coordinated action.  It's a long-time Rethug meme and one you should be wiser than to use.



    Parent
    Have you considered Christine (5.00 / 4) (#23)
    by Rojas on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 12:04:12 PM EST
    that perhaps you are the right? And before you pull out your trusty credentials, just consider that your unquestionable support for the status quo in all things related to democrat politicians really wears thin. We all know what it means to be company men but at some point you gotta say "yes I understand that change to the process would really improve the bottom line but some of our employees are going to get cancer if we do that".
    Your DLC and its minions has been a cancer eating away at the BORs for most of my adult lifetime. We could all pretend that the militarization of our police forces is a post 911 aberration but the fact of the matter is this snowball really picked up steam in the 90s. It's architects include our most tenured senators, congressmen and vice president.

    Of course conspiracy theorist was a standard put down for those who spoke out, the black helicopter crowd. And then there were the bleeding hearts, the misguided, criminal coddling folks from NACDL or the ACLU who would have our children sharing a bed with pedophiles such as our blog host here.

    Quite frankly, I'm shocked that anyone is shocked at the level of violence used against those who dare to challenge the status quo. Shame on you is right or more precise Shame on Us.

    Parent

    I will show my credentials, rojas (5.00 / 0) (#26)
    by christinep on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 12:58:41 PM EST
    Because I have them. You?

    Look, I have stated over & over my support for Occupy. From the start. Where I start to question anything...and it is not the awareness that Occupy has brought us all...is the area of violence. My response started on this latest matter with the belittling exhibited against oculus when she appeared (like a good lawyer) only to be asking for info & clarification. My concern then: Lets not get into the "man the barricades" routine & the on to the Bastille routine to quickly--as some would urge at every opportunity...lets push with calm, measured steps.

    BTW, the Davis situation has resulted in two of the police officers involved in the spraying incident being put on administrative leave. A good start in response to a rotten act.

    Parent

    By all means lets do (4.00 / 3) (#53)
    by Rojas on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 05:58:05 PM EST
    Since this is the Internet how 'bout we just drop trou. Here, I'll go first and make it easy for ya'. Damn, this water sure is cold...
    Now it's your turn.

    We've all seen you post your "liberal" CV about a hundred times and quite frankly it's like being at the VFW and listening to the loudest SOB in the room claiming he stormed Normandy all by himself.

    As to your new specific complaint, no bona fide liberal that I know of has to consult the use of force continuum to speak to the morality or more specific lack thereof of what we saw yesterday, good lawyer or not.

    Parent

    Where is the substance in your comment? (5.00 / 0) (#58)
    by christinep on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 06:34:12 PM EST
    Dropping trou? Put downs? Jealous or envious are you?

    Not interested in a p***ing match, rojac. Suffice to say, I do know whereof I speak. It isn't "dropping trou" to note that my first case was as a rep for the ACLU in a matter against a state university concerning freedom of speech & censorship.  Responding with some emotion to your misplaced comments, I'm tempted to list my own sit-ins & lay-downs in front of trucks on behalf of unions, challenges to the Dem Party in Chicago in 1968--for starters.... Now, other than your dropped trous (an unnecessary attempt at diversion) where are you other than casting aspersions.  

    Your apology will be accepted when you wake up and figure out where you are. Thanks again...& I'm always open to talk/discuss/debate issues whenever you are.

    Parent

    Good Example (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 07:15:49 AM EST
    Of reasonable counter arguments being met with projections of evil, bad intent, ignorant following of the status quo etc.

    if you read this chain,  christenep is making points about an issue and her opponents are trying to make points about her.

    It's ridiculous that arguments can't be made without claiming that those who disagree are evil or robots or ignorant.

    christenep is better than I am at taking the high road.  unfortunate she has to.

    Parent

    A very high road indeed (none / 0) (#98)
    by Rojas on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 08:04:30 AM EST
    I began with calling Edger a provocateur in another thread, moved in here with allegations of conspiracy theorist an of course culminates with the insinuation that he's a republican.
    Yes, a very high road.

    Parent
    "It began" (none / 0) (#99)
    by Rojas on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 08:06:50 AM EST
    I however, reserve the right to use those insults in the future.

    Parent
    You might be right, Christine (5.00 / 4) (#34)
    by sj on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 03:49:03 PM EST
    Calling it "conspiracy theory" implies that it's done secretly.  Maybe it should more properly be called open collusion.  Or maybe just a "therapy session".

    There.  That's a left sounding term, amiright?  

    Refusing to call out coordinated efforts because you don't want to be viewed as a "conspiracy theorist" is ... I don't even know what to call it.  Willfully blind, maybe?

    Parent

    Hey sj, I'll surely acknowledge (5.00 / 0) (#44)
    by christinep on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 04:19:54 PM EST
    that there is evidence of coordiation; and, since Mayors have phones (maybe not "smart" ones) I'll deduce that some coordinated.

    Here is the difference with my take and those who might suggest that the coordiantion reached a top-down, static, unified closure operation. My experience with federal & state officials is that most find it hard enough to have minimum coordination, let alone a plan for several significant cities. Yet, as with the National Mayors Conference & associated workgroups, they normally have interaction and discuss common interest matters (undoubtedly, like this one.)
    Is that a distinction without a difference that I describe? No...the difference is important.

    Whereas some would & have suggested--here & elsewhere--that there was a plan that is made to sound like a plot to put down all the Occupiers, that kind of suggestion carries what we do know several steps too far. And, that matters because if we really come to believe that there is a national plot at all significant municipal levels against us, we really undercut the ability of Occupy to negotiate locally/regionally (see the Boston mediation situation that CST described a few days ago.) It seems to me that we would be better off being aware of the obvious general communications that mayors often have while directing specific negotiation/resolution efforts toward the individual situations.

    Parent

    The kind of coordination I think you (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by sj on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 04:41:38 PM EST
    are referring to here:
    My experience with federal & state officials is that most find it hard enough to have minimum coordination, let alone a plan for several significant cities.

    is typical when discussing sharing of resources or coordination of calenders.  This isn't that kind of collusion.  Although I was no fly on the wall in that conference call, I feel fairly certain that what was being shared were tactics -- which include messaging.

    Maybe they just thought of it as "brainstorming" or "problem solving", but make no mistake: the multiple raids in the middle of the night weren't all thought up independently.  They have received "advice" from the FBI and DHS, and if that isn't federal ... something... what is?  What does it take to become evidence of a national "plot" (when did coordination become automatically become a "plot", BTW)?  I think Presidents since Nixon have learned about having the smoking gun tapes going when having discussions so you're unlikely to get the kind of hard validation that would satisfy you.

    So listen, read, think and extrapolate.  Those are the tools are our disposal.  Our own ability to critically think and challenge our own assumptions.  

    Have I challenged mine?  Oh, yeah.  Based on my experience with Denver police (including family members) leaves me with an ingrained distrust.  OWS reminded me that I was using too broad a brush and that they, too, are the 99%.  They've also challenged in a big way my belief that our society was too "medicated" and complacent to spring to life this way.  I was sure wrong there, wasn't I.  Thank heavens.  Thank you, OWS.

    Parent

    Thoughtful remarks. (none / 0) (#51)
    by christinep on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 04:49:09 PM EST
    You are probably correct about the type of "brainstorming" & tactical how-tos. Sure looks that way.

    There is upbeat evidence of local resilience--fitting the counter moves to local needs--with the planned drum circle around Mayor Bloomberg's residential area.

    Parent

    Apparehtly (none / 0) (#106)
    by sj on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 10:32:00 AM EST
    my stalker is back.

    Parent
    Or even "apparently" (none / 0) (#107)
    by sj on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 10:32:25 AM EST


    Parent
    Well, the State spends more on inmates (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by scribe on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 11:45:04 AM EST
    keeping and feeding them and so on, than they do on students, so it's unsurprising that they let the inmates have more rights.  They're more valuable to the State than students....

    More to the point - Joe Paterno got fired in less than a week despite following the law.   This wench Katehi should be so fortunate.

    Parent

    I'd be surprised if Dept. of Corrections (none / 0) (#62)
    by oculus on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 06:43:14 PM EST
    & Rehabilitation (!) adopted this recommendation.  

    Parent
    There is no need for such (none / 0) (#122)
    by Towanda on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 01:40:42 PM EST
    a gendered term, and it makes the motivation suspect.  That is too bad for you, not for her, as it is the cost of your credibility in the call for her to resign/be fired.  I think that you have  good reasons for any campus leader with a p*nis to be let go after such an incident, no?

    Parent
    There were some who were astonished (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by scribe on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 10:53:18 AM EST
    at the size of the canister of pepper spray the campus pig used on the protesters at UC.  I did a quick (two minute) shopping trip on the web (did you know there's a store called pepperspray[dot]com?) and found some law enforcement vendor pitching these - 30 one-second shots in a single bottle plus refilling equipment.  I think the refill bottle is a gallon of pepper spray.

    And they also sell decontamination stuff, too.

    Note also, some of the pepper sprays are advertised as containing a UV dye, which enables later identifiation of people sprayed with it.

    See video below. More than one (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by oculus on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 10:58:49 AM EST
    officer had such a canister.  Looks like one officer in front was getting info via a cell phone.  He and another officer moved out of camera range.  Officer approached and talked to a member of the seated group a couple of times.  Then the Lt. used the canister on the group.  Then the officers physically removed members of the group.  Didn't see any officer or EMT provide water for those sprayed to wash out their eyes.  Which is what police are supposed to make sure happens.  

    Parent
    I should be fairer (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by scribe on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 11:38:31 AM EST
    than to call the campus cop a pig.

    Here's why.

    He's faced with a set of competing demands.  On the one hand, the bosses are demanding he crush the offending occupiers and the bosses hold his job, pension and future in their hands.

    On the other hand, he can see the evidence of his own eyes that these kids are just sitting there, doing nothing.

    He is compelled to use violence against nonviolent people - a most inconvenient situation and one of profound cognitive dissonance.  He either does it, or else.

    Do not discount that the bosses will have placed those cops most inclined to go over to busting heads "with pleasure" over out of the picture where they won't get the chance.  (Yet.)  This is for two reasons, one salutary and one nefarious.  First, the bosses know that excessive head busting - which the thuggish will perpetrate in spades and with pleasure - will cause a lot of results negative to what the bosses want, i.e., a quick and easy end to the occupation.  Excessive force and violence exacerbate problems so they keep the real thugs off the line, for now.  

    On the nefarious side, the more cynical of bosses will recognize that this is an opportunity to break or mold (depending on who you ask) the friendly, protect-and-serve Officer Bob - the non-thug - into a more loyal servant of the 1%.  If Friendly Officer Bob balks at busting heads, he's (at best) unreliable and (at worst) insubordinate.  Either of those enables the boss to cut his payroll be getting rid of (or not promoting as quickly) Friendly Officer Bob.  Thugs move up, the same as Rummy and Deadeye sieved out the non-torturers.  If Friendly Officer Bob busts nonviolent heads, OTOH, he's had his integrity broken (and you don't recover from that) and he might quit (a budgetary saving) or, if he sticks around, he will no longer have any credibility with the campus population. "Yeah.  He makes like your friend and then knocks your teeth out."

    And, by keeping the thug-it-up "with pleasure" cops off to the side, the bosses ensure the little pressure cookers inside them wanting to bust heads will be even more violent when the time comes to unleash them.  Dangle a dripping steak in front of a mad dog....

    In either situation, it's a one-way ratchet toward more thuggish police behavior.

    But the individual cops are only to blame insofar as they decided to become cops and, once this disclosed itself as the model for policing, decided to stay cops.

    Parent

    Glenn Greenwald posted this YouTube (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by oculus on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 10:55:44 AM EST
    video, which is a more complete view of yesterday's protesters and police @ Davis:  link

    Glenn Greenwald (5.00 / 6) (#14)
    by MO Blue on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 11:00:31 AM EST
    The intent and effect of such abuse is that it renders those guaranteed freedoms meaningless. If a population becomes bullied or intimidated out of exercising rights offered on paper, those rights effectively cease to exist. Every time the citizenry watches peaceful protesters getting pepper-sprayed -- or hears that an Occupy protester suffered brain damage and almost died after being shot in the skull with a rubber bullet -- many become increasingly fearful of participating in this citizen movement, and also become fearful in general of exercising their rights in a way that is bothersome or threatening to those in power. That's a natural response, and it's exactly what the climate of fear imposed by all abusive police state actions is intended to achieve: to coerce citizens to "decide" on their own to be passive and compliant -- to refrain from exercising their rights -- out of fear of what will happen if they don't. link


    Parent
    What's your opinion now (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 02:01:20 PM EST
    Is this the information you needed?

    Why not explain your position now?


    Parent

    Sure. If you will answer my previous (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by oculus on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 06:28:26 PM EST
    question.  

    I think there were more people sitting on the pavement and standing around the officers than the no. of officers, but none of the civilians appear to threatening to the officers.  Looks like one law enforcement officer spoke to one of the seated group twice b/4 anyone was pepper sprayed.  One officer appears to be listening to a cell phone, then he and the officer next to him walked off camera.  When the returned, the Lt. deployed the pepper spray.  Again, assuming law enforcement had discretion to remove the seated people from that place, and assuming the officer who talked to one of them in that group asked them to disperse and they didn't, the officers could have tried to physically remove the students.  Probably should have.  If the students resisted and bystanders got involved, officer had discretion to pepper spray.  But, law enforcement is then responsible for making sure the eyes of the people they pepper sprayed were cleaned ASAP with water or a special solution.  

    From a legal standpoint (alleged federal civil rights violation) the question is, would ANY reasonable officer have deployed pepper spray under those circumstances at that time.  I think the answer is "yes."

    But I question deploying law enforcement to remove the people sitting peacefully in the plaza.  Didn't see any tents in either video.  No one throwing rocks, shoes, molotov cocktails or anything else.  The only possible reason the univ. police present may have felt afraid is because they were outnumbered if the on lookers are counted.  

    Parent

    I don't think so. (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 10:27:31 PM EST
    It appears the 9th Circuit would not agree with you either.  

    HEADWATERS FOREST DEFENSE v. COUNTY OF HUMBOLDT

    Parent

    This is the case in which law enforcement (none / 0) (#87)
    by oculus on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 10:48:28 PM EST
    rubbed the spray in the corner of the protestors eyes w/q tips.  

    Parent
    The opinion is silent as to... (none / 0) (#88)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 10:54:32 PM EST
    ...the method of application.  

    We concluded in our prior opinion that, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the protestors, a rational juror could conclude that the use of pepper spray against the protestors constituted excessive force and that Lewis and Philip were liable for the protestors' unconstitutional injury. 240 F.3d at 1199-1209.   This analysis is consistent with Saucier's first inquiry:  viewing the facts in the light most favorable to the protestors, Lewis and Philip violated the protestors' Fourth Amendment right to be free from excessive force.
    [Emphasis added.]

    Parent
    I anticipate we'll find out soon enough. (none / 0) (#89)
    by oculus on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 11:04:29 PM EST


    Parent
    I want you to read... (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 11:25:08 PM EST
    this interview with one of the victims and take a long, hard look at the faces of these students and think about not only the legality, but the morality and humanity (and/or lack thereof), of these events.  

    Parent
    My previous question to BTD: (none / 0) (#56)
    by oculus on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 06:30:37 PM EST
    link

    Parent
    The least forceful possible (none / 0) (#59)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 06:34:33 PM EST
    I judsge pepper spray to be more forceful than lifting them, which they did afterwards anyway.

    I find the whole operation to be disgraceful, but that's in the administration, not the cops. That's why the chancellor has to go.

    What was disgraceful from the cops was the use of pepper spray. That's why the cops and their their have to go.

    Parent

    Can't read the mind of those law enforcement (none / 0) (#61)
    by oculus on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 06:41:31 PM EST
    officers.  But, they were, in fact, outnumbered.  And I am assuming the officer who talked to the one "sitter" asked the group to move several times before using the pepper spray.  Also, you can see the kids locking arms, which would inhibit the officers moving the mass of passive resisters.  But, yes, I think they should have tried to pick up the resisters first.  Don't think that was the only law enforcement option under the circumstances at that time.  

    Parent
    The resisters? (5.00 / 3) (#74)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 07:48:25 PM EST
    You know what any rational person saw in that video?

    A bunch of kids sitting on a sidewalk.

    That they were surrounded on all sides by other people proves that the surroundings were completely navigable.  The kids sitting on the sidewalk, that day in sunny Davis, California, weren't blocking anyone from going anywhere.  

    Parent

    Outnumbered? That allows pepper spray? Really? (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by womanwarrior on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 09:50:57 PM EST
    Here's a blog with an illustration that I think you should look at if you believe that the police were in any way justified in pepper spraying.

    http://blog.bennettandbennett.com/2011/11/buttercup-nation-3.html

    Parent

    Citizens outnumber police officers... (5.00 / 2) (#101)
    by kdog on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 10:06:20 AM EST
    24/7/365 in many a public space...does that mean they have the right to pepper-spray us 24/7/365 if we refuse to obey illegal orders?

    I ain't buyin' this "outnumbered" garbage for a second.

    Parent

    Police are ALWAYS outnumbered (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by sj on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 10:48:01 AM EST
    where crowds are concerned.  At any sort of event.  "Security" is not intended to mean "army".  And thank god for that.

    Parent
    Which question? (none / 0) (#57)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 06:32:18 PM EST
    You write "the officers could have tried to physically remove the students.  Probably should have. [. . .] From a legal standpoint (alleged federal civil rights violation) the question is, would ANY reasonable officer have deployed pepper spray under those circumstances at that time.  I think the answer is "yes."

    No probably imo. Which why I disagree with your assertion that any reasonable officer would have done what they did.

    But I disagree with a lot of things. The question I have is does the question get to a jury? Cuz if it does, the cops lose.

    Parent

    I've handled pepper spray cases. (none / 0) (#60)
    by oculus on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 06:37:09 PM EST
    Depending on the venue, jurors have a lot of respect for law enforcement.  And less respect for people who don't obey the lawful orders of law enforcement.  

    Parent
    Perhaps (none / 0) (#69)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 07:36:36 PM EST
    So it gets to a jury then?

    Parent
    Most judges would deny MSJ. (none / 0) (#75)
    by oculus on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 07:53:53 PM EST
    Material issue of fact.  But not all would.  

    Parent
    What lawful orders? (none / 0) (#102)
    by kdog on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 10:08:55 AM EST
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    I've never seen a more peaceable assembly...in fact the assembly showed amazing restraint to the brutality they suffered...truly amazing restraint.

    Parent

    That's the basic question. (none / 0) (#104)
    by oculus on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 10:24:52 AM EST


    Parent
    Easy as "2 plus 2"... (none / 0) (#105)
    by kdog on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 10:29:11 AM EST
    if ya ask me, but ianal.

    Parent
    FYI: "Richard III" tickets go on sale (none / 0) (#110)
    by oculus on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 10:51:50 AM EST
    today for BAM run.  

    Parent
    Leisure budget... (none / 0) (#113)
    by kdog on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 11:15:58 AM EST
    is hurtin' for certain...I'm looking at self-imposed hermitude eff. Wednesday through Christmas...my darling nieces don't wanna hear no sh*t about the income inequality problem. Dave Alvin & The Guilty Ones is my last hurrah tomorrow night.

    But as always, there's always room in the budget for a pint with my friend.  I wanna hear more detail about these pepper-spray cases you've worked on, and continue your re-education:)

    Parent

    Dave Alvin, nice! (none / 0) (#119)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 01:21:53 PM EST


    Parent
    Exactly what I feared--brain washing!!! (none / 0) (#125)
    by oculus on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 04:05:01 PM EST
    Yes to the pint (or two) though.  

    Parent
    Look ahead and be ready (5.00 / 3) (#16)
    by scribe on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 11:23:35 AM EST
    Looking ahead, we can anticipate some furor to be raised in the mass media just in time for Thanksgiving.  This can take the form of some terror scare, or maybe a pitched battle (created by the government) over alleged tactics to slow down air travel security screenings, or maybe a nasty discussion topic to pollute Thanksgiving dinner tables.

    Think back to the big "ebonics" furor of 1995 or 1996.  How many of you still remember the stupid discussions about that over the dinner table.  That was a manufactured controversy run out of the right wing noise machine (though too few recognized it as such then and those that did were derided as conspiracy theorists) and released just in time to propagate before bursting full-fledged on Thanksgiving.  

    These memes are either running around now (getting put into the public consciousness the Thursday or Friday of last week) or will go out tomorrow (Monday) or, at latest, Tuesday.  No one is paying attention to the news or much other than the weather and traffic on Wednesday, so that's too late to do anything if you want to manipulate the Thanksgiving dinner table discussion.

    I would expect the memes to take the form of a lot of about how violent the Occupy folks are - it's gone well beyond "they're stupid" - and I would not be surprised if the police/government go so far as to create violence in convenient proximity to TV cameras to monopolize the discussion.  It is fair to say that it would not be surprising if the police/government set up situations in which some cops were injured or even killed - they are that desperate to get rid of the occupy ideas, and could easily go that far.

    So, nonviolence, accurate documentation and dissemination of accurate information are the only ways to go.


    Jeeze, scribe (none / 0) (#17)
    by Edger on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 11:33:20 AM EST
    You and your conspiracy theories. Sheesh. ;-)

    Parent
    How many holiday dinners have you attended (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by scribe on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 11:41:58 AM EST
    where some wingnut was barfing out the latest incendiary meme created and nurtured in the bowels of Faux?

    It happens every frickin' year, at least twice a year (Thanksgiving and Christmas).  Once is accident, twice is coincidence, three times is concerted action....

    So, Edger, please take "conspiracy theories", fold it until it is all corners, and you know the rest.

    Parent

    Oops, my bad, says Portland police chief (5.00 / 3) (#67)
    by caseyOR on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 07:27:14 PM EST
    Mike Reese. Last Thursday Reese stated in interviews with local TV reporters that the Occupy protests were such a drain on police resources that just that day a rape victim was forced to wait three hours before an officer could take her complaint. Turns out Reese "misspoke."

    Yesterday Chief Reese released a statement saying that he had spoken without having all the facts, that there was an instance when a rape victim had to wait those three hours, but that it had happened on Nov. 6, not Nov. 17, and the reason was low staffing that day, not Occupy protests.

    Whether he really did make a mistake of fact or was intentionally misleading and only changed his tune when he was found out is unknown. What is known is that his original statement received much wider coverage than this clarification.

    Keep in mind, Mike Reese intends to run for mayor in 2012 and is the candidate of choice with local business community leaders.


    Parent

    I know (none / 0) (#21)
    by Edger on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 11:46:32 AM EST
    They're all over the place.

    Half my family repeats that crap like automatons, too. For them it's an "everybody knows" thing... :-(

    Parent

    Oh cool, the temp is up to 9F (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by observed on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 11:47:01 AM EST
    It was 5 a few hours ago. Tomorrow may be a warm day.

    it seems the plan is to try to provoke (5.00 / 3) (#32)
    by Capt Howdy on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 02:19:52 PM EST
    people to violence as a way to delegitimize the movement.

    ya think? (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by The Addams Family on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 03:51:44 PM EST


    Parent
    on the other hand (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Capt Howdy on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 04:07:41 PM EST
    as Gandhi said "first the ignore you, then they mock you, then they fight you, then you win"

    we seem to be moving from mocking to fighting.

    Parent

    What are we hoping to win? (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by tigercourse on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 04:16:33 PM EST


    Parent
    We don't want nothin. We want it now. (none / 0) (#83)
    by JeriKoll on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 09:54:27 PM EST
    Obviously a definite Win Win scenario.

    Parent
    An excellent speech given at OWS (none / 0) (#71)
    by smott on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 07:43:03 PM EST
    By Naomi Klein

    Worth a read...

    http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2011/10/occupy-wall-street-most-important-thing-world-now

     

    Parent

    Or maybe when you give the average person (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by tigercourse on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 04:09:32 PM EST
    a gun, a stick, a taser and a bunch of pepper spray and give them the authority to use it... they're gonna use it someday.

    Cops aren't saints. I've never met a one of them I'd want to cross. That goes the same for anyone in the possesion of a weapon.

    Parent

    The kids are all right! and so imaginative (5.00 / 2) (#76)
    by Towanda on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 08:16:54 PM EST
    at UC-Berkeley.  See what they did when ordered to not have tents on the grounds:  http://twitpic.com/7fmbla

    The use of balloons in the State Capitol in the Wisconsin protests was wonderful, but this takes it to, well, a new level.

    Geniuses! (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by Edger on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 08:31:33 PM EST


    Parent
    Daliesque, isn't it? (5.00 / 2) (#84)
    by Towanda on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 10:09:59 PM EST
    Amid so much awful news, I am so cheered by this.

    Parent
    It certainly does lend a whole new meaning to (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by Edger on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 10:14:59 PM EST
    Rising to the occasion

    Impressive. :-P

    Let's see them pepper spray that!

    Parent

    They also placed book 'tents' (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by nycstray on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 11:23:49 PM EST
    all over the plaza.  This all happened on the same day as the projections on the Verizon bldg in NYC. Good day for creativity in protesting :)

    Parent
    The Irony of The Katehi (none / 0) (#2)
    by Edger on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 09:15:26 AM EST
    According to wikipedia... "in response to acts of hate and intolerance on campus in 2010, Katehi launched the Hate-Free Campus Initiative to reaffirm the campus's values and commitment to one another. The initiative included creation of "Beyond Tolerance Tuesday," collaboration with the Museum of Tolerance, and the creation of a speakers series and the Civility Project, which began with a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities."

    Walk of shame, indeed.

    Busted out of the WPT Jacksonville (none / 0) (#8)
    by Dadler on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 10:51:22 AM EST
    Late last night.  Half the people at my table were pros, a couple I recognized from TV, and two of whom, when they got talking, discovered that they both had attended, get this, Phillips Exeter Academy.  My jaw kind of dropped, especially considering one of them looked like the biggest redneck on the planet, he looked like Larry the Cable Guy.  Phillips Exeter???  No wonder they have the time and dough to play poker 24/7. At least I lasted longer that a few of them.

    Played well early, went card dead the last four hours, then got busted by, of all things, dueces, which beat my AK shove.  So I get to spend my b-day alone here in FL.  May head to the poker room and play in a smaller tourney today, but I dunno, those phucking ducks are gonna stick in my craw for awhile. As will the old player from Brooklyn seated to my left, probably at least 70, who, within the first half hour, was talking about how bored he was, how he liked cash games so much better, and who then proceeded to simply give up during a hand and ship his entire stack to the young aggressive kid at the table.  Just gave up, said "I'm beat, but I'm giving it to you, I'm going to play a cash game."  Thus the most aggressive player at the table was handed a doubled stack.  We all just sat at the table stunned: WTF?  That kid then proceeded to use his extra chips to work the table like mad.

    Whatever, way it goes.  And compared to what those kids at Davis went through, and all the rest of the Occupy folks across the nation, it ain't a hill of beans.

    Peace, y'all.

    Sorry to hear that (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 02:15:47 PM EST
    But it sounds like you lasted for a good bit. Not bad at all for your first "physically there" major tournament!

    And tournament players have to be like D'backs in football. Forget that you got beat, immediately. Never forget who and how you got beat.

    Regarding the old dude's play. I hope you complained to the tournament director very loudly. There are things they can do, such as publicly banning him for future tournaments in that club. There has also been some discussion re banning from WPT sanctioned events.

    Parent

    Thanks, Jim (none / 0) (#33)
    by Dadler on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 03:41:05 PM EST
    Can't say I played badly, did well early on, just literally got nothing but crap for a hundred hands.  I complained today about the old guy, but truthfully I don't think he'll ever play a major tourney again by choice.  Why on earth would you dump $3500 to enter KNOWING it's a four day event and then just say, oh well, screw it, here's my chips kid.  Really wasn't a good way to start out the day.  But I re-raised some pros and won, bluffed a pro and got away with it, and, of course, made a couple of folds that were probably too conservative -- to the kid with the charity stack from the old guy.  Bah!

    I'll play more live tournies, I'm sure.

    Parent

    Happy birthday, Dadler! (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 04:13:12 PM EST
    Sounds like a great first tourney!

    Parent
    Level 8, saw you on the web... (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by jeffinalabama on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 04:15:00 PM EST
    That's pretty darned good!

    Parent
    Thanks, Jeff (none / 0) (#49)
    by Dadler on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 04:43:03 PM EST
    Did my best, just couldn't get a hand in any position for the last half of my day.  Tried to hang on, but had to make a play at some point to have a semblance of a stack if I made it to day 2.  I'll be back.  Ahem.  

    Fell well, my man, you're always in my thoughts.

    Parent

    Re the old dude (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 04:35:47 PM EST
    Did he pay the full $3500 cash or did he win a satellite?

    I'm not saying this happened but one of the problems in tournament play is two or more guys get in via a satellite and then they "dump" their chips to another player when (and if) possible. Thus giving the remaining player of the group a considerable chip advantage.

    Another problem is "soft" play between friends.

    Anyway, you'll get better! Have fun!

    Parent

    I get the feeling he bought in (none / 0) (#50)
    by Dadler on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 04:44:44 PM EST
    And that he really just wanted to see what it was like, quickly deduced that he hated it and quit.  Very strange and annoying and, really, unfair.  But life is like that.  ;-)

    Parent
    I've seen that move... (none / 0) (#103)
    by kdog on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 10:22:31 AM EST
    guy takes a beat, gets to steaming, and proceeds to give their chips away.

    Or a problem gambler punishing himself, proving his lack of worth.  All kinds!

    Hope ya had a good time, and maybe pocketed some of the expense money.  Now you've got brick & mortar experince for when me, you, Jeff, & Jim form Team TL Poker at the WSOP!

    Parent

    I've had worse Saturdays.... (none / 0) (#12)
    by scribe on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 10:57:08 AM EST
    At least you were doing something you enjoy.  I'm not much one for Texas hold'em.  It seems to me to be more about the player's skill in bluffing and psyching out the opponents while relying on the luck of a turn of a card than about skill play.  More than most poker games, anyway.  But when I play, I play for fun with a bunch of folks in the basement over beers, chips and cigars.  $40 is a big night's investment....

    Parent
    On another note (none / 0) (#52)
    by sj on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 05:15:08 PM EST
    I am totally charmed by this.  Courtesy of the Always Wonderful Avedon Carol.

    the links (none / 0) (#79)
    by NYShooter on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 08:37:00 PM EST
    on her blog are simply priceless. You go there, and it's like quicksand, you can't get out:)

    Parent
    I know, right? (none / 0) (#82)
    by sj on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 09:52:20 PM EST


    Parent
    has something happened to Corrente? (none / 0) (#54)
    by The Addams Family on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 06:22:50 PM EST
    where is lambert?

    every time i try to go to Corrente i get a DNS error

    this has been happening for 2 or 3 days

    ????

    I can't get Corrente to load, either. (none / 0) (#65)
    by caseyOR on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 07:14:01 PM EST
    No error message; it just won't load. Been going on for the last three days.

    Parent
    Yup me too (none / 0) (#70)
    by smott on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 07:41:12 PM EST
    AN error retrieving the DNS.
    Could be as simple as Lambert hasn't paid the bill, dunno.

    Have not had time to check a few related blogs to see what might be going on.


    Parent

    Not sure (none / 0) (#72)
    by waldenpond on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 07:45:25 PM EST
    He was on NC today.  I saw a cryptic comment at NC that led me to believe it doesn't seem to be an accident.  I am wondering if some have rigged the complaint system to get his site taken down.

    Parent
    Aha..... (none / 0) (#73)
    by waldenpond on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 07:47:58 PM EST
    In typical lambert fashion....

    [The bug is (if the God(ess)(e)(s) Of My Choice, If Any, are willing) temporary.]

    Should be back soon.

    Parent

    Try here.... (none / 0) (#78)
    by Edger on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 08:33:31 PM EST
    http://correntesbl.blogspot.com/ - latest post is today Nov. 20

    I don't know what happened to correntwire.com - there is no response to pinging it - the domain name is still registered but is not pointing to an active web server anywhere.

    Parent

    Edger, I don't think that is Lambert's (none / 0) (#92)
    by caseyOR on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 11:34:15 PM EST
    place. No relation to CorrenteWire at all as far as I can tell.

    Going by Lambert's comments about the inability of anyone to get on CorrenteWire, my suspicion is that some sort of vile bug has attacked Lambert's place, and he is trying to get rid of it.

    Parent

    Saw lambert's comments about this (none / 0) (#93)
    by caseyOR on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 11:35:26 PM EST
    at Naked Capitalism. He has been filling in for Yves over there this week.

    Parent
    ok, well (none / 0) (#96)
    by Edger on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 04:47:11 AM EST
    the ip address of the site is 69.16.233.15
    (see IP Information for 69.16.233.15)

    but I get no response typing that IP into my browser - and no response pinging that ip

    Parent

    Casey... (none / 0) (#100)
    by Edger on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 09:14:40 AM EST
    Links 11/21/11
    By lambert strether, Corrente

    Parent
    Wow (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by sj on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 10:56:33 AM EST
    That is chockful of good stuff.  I better not open anything right now or I won't get anything done...

    Parent
    yeah... (none / 0) (#112)
    by Edger on Mon Nov 21, 2011 at 11:00:16 AM EST
    it's the real lambert ;-)

    Parent
    Haven't been for a few days (none / 0) (#64)
    by sj on Sun Nov 20, 2011 at 07:11:00 PM EST
    But I just tried and I got an error, too.

    Sunday Morning Open Thread | 128 comments (128 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment