Monday Morning Open Thread

Open Thread.

< Obama's 1937: Eating The Present | Keynes Rejected >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Gotta love Tom Tomorrow... (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by Anne on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:56:27 PM EST
    I'm with Mr Tomorrow (none / 0) (#42)
    by brodie on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:27:16 PM EST
    on Obama. Mr Middle of the Road, Mr Go for the Bronze, Mr Don't Rock the Boat (or Too Much).

    But is there something especially politically symbolic or meaningful about the form-fitting white hood he's wearing, or is it just Tom's idea for outfitting Obama the cartoon figure?


    I have no idea about the white suit... (none / 0) (#49)
    by Anne on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:38:08 PM EST
    seems fresh from the Super Bowl halftime show, minus the lights, lol.

    That pretty much (none / 0) (#85)
    by cal1942 on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:14:32 PM EST
    nails it.

    BTD, have you read the (none / 0) (#1)
    by Anne on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 01:43:30 PM EST
    Noam Schreiber piece on Geithner?

    Take a few deep breaths first and put all sharp objects out of reach...

    And yet, at the midway point of Barack Obama's first term, Geithner is the lone remaining member of the president's original economic team and arguably the administration's second-most valued official. Indeed, that the White House was willing to let him face down Issa is only the latest sign of a rather remarkable transformation. (Issa ultimately blinked.) Geithner owns the economic portfolio with China and has been tasked with confronting Republicans over the nation's debt limit. He has taken the lead on corporate tax reform and overhauling Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. With his former lieutenant, Gene Sperling, now running the National Economic Council, Geithner will no longer form part of the multiheaded "war cabinet" that included Sperling's predecessor, Larry Summers. He is set to play the first-among-equals role of a traditional treasury secretary.


    For all the turmoil he'd kicked up in the outside world, the striking thing about Geithner's early days in Washington was how popular he was within Obamaland itself. "From the inside, it didn't feel like he ever lost his footing," says one transition staffer. With the cable dial still squawking over his tax mishaps, a group of incoming White House aides unofficially voted him "best all-around Cabinet member," high school yearbook-style. Daily White House staff meetings featured a joking banter between Geithner and Axelrod over such topics as his apocryphal tour at Goldman and the approximate date of his future firing. (Sample Geithner response: "I hope they do it soon.")


    Perhaps most important, Geithner was scrupulously attuned to the temperament of the boss. Like Obama, he evinced a strong aversion to blather. During meetings with the president, he would say little, and usually not until the end, when his opinion was solicited. "I thought [Geithner] got the president really well," says a former administration official who interacted with him on nonfinancial matters. "When he was in trouble, I said to someone, `He just needs to hold on. He'll be fine with Obama. Once they get to know each other, they're like the same person.'"

    It's a long article, and reading it didn't change my mind about Geithner, and I'm pretty sure it's not going to change yours, either...

    So: Geithner is a sycophant (5.00 / 0) (#2)
    by Towanda on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 01:56:48 PM EST
    is what I get from this; you?  And that works well for him.  And the administration.  Just not for us.

    Well, I guess you always have to know (none / 0) (#25)
    by Anne on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:31:46 PM EST
    how to play the game, know who you can work and who you can't, which side your bread is buttered on - that he apparently plays it well is one reason why he's gotten where he is.

    He has a certain view, Obama likes it, agrees with it, and so Geithner speaks for Obama.

    This doesn't surprise me at all:

    He told me he subscribes to the view that the world is on the cusp of a major "financial deepening": As developing economies in the most populous countries mature, they will demand more and increasingly sophisticated financial services, the same way they demand cars for their growing middle classes and information technology for their corporations. If that's true, then we should want U.S. banks positioned to compete abroad.

    "I don't have any enthusiasm for ... trying to shrink the relative importance of the financial system in our economy as a test of reform, because we have to think about the fact that we operate in the broader world," he said. "It's the same thing for Microsoft or anything else. We want U.S. firms to benefit from that." He continued: "Now financial firms are different because of the risk, but you can contain that through regulation." This was the purpose of the recent financial reform, he said. In effect, Geithner was arguing that we should be as comfortable linking the fate of our economy to Wall Street as to automakers or Silicon Valley.

    "More and increasingly sophisticated financial services" is a phrase that ought to worry people, but I wouldn't expect anything less from someone with his background and resume, and that he thinks the financial "regulation" passed is enough to contain the kind of risk inherent in "sophisticated financial services" is just too disingenuous for words.

    But that's his worldview, and he's sticking to it - and Obama's sticking with him.


    Yes, it's possible that Geithner (none / 0) (#92)
    by Towanda on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:30:14 PM EST
    persuaded Obama, who admitted that he had little preparation in economics, as I recall.  However, Geithner seems the type of smarmy sort I have seen all too often, a corporate chameleon who constantly adapts to whatever the boss wants.  So -- I dunno.

    It's a pretty narrow worldview (none / 0) (#96)
    by esmense on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:36:19 PM EST
    The financial industry and "our" now global corporations are doing just fine, thank you. Its the American consumer market (which those interests now feel free to write off) that is lying in ruins and the broader part of the American population that is, as a consequence, suffering -- and in desperate need of protection, support, and smart economic thinking.

    When W was elected, I anticipated his economic policies knowing that his view of "the economy" was severely limited by class and self-interest. Perhaps that explains Geithner's blinkered view too.

    But what explains Obama's?


    what explains Obama's economic views? (none / 0) (#99)
    by The Addams Family on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:49:23 PM EST
    When W was elected, I anticipated his economic policies knowing that his view of "the economy" was severely limited by class and self-interest. Perhaps that explains Geithner's blinkered view too. But what explains Obama's?

    my guess would be fundamental ignorance of economics & thus dependence on "experts" like Geithner

    that & the fact that Obama has always been in Wall Street's pocket


    An embarrassment (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:29:52 PM EST
    for Scheiber.

    What a joke.


    No kidding (none / 0) (#47)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:34:42 PM EST
    Lost upon the author and the man being written about are a few somethings like ethics, and rule of law.

    I adore the partn where Timmeh (none / 0) (#50)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:39:29 PM EST
    says that he subscribes to the view that the world is on the cusp of a major "financial deepening".  It is getting pretty deeper, it is getting deeper and deeper by the minute via Timmeh. What an inflated puff piece about all the virtues of pretend and extend.  The author is correct about one thing, time will tell.  Nobody is going to like how this story ends though.

    Josh is home with type A flu (none / 0) (#3)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 01:59:55 PM EST
    He has been sick since Friday, I had to go get him from school mid day.  I have it as well but it is pretty mild for me.  Can't imagine how bad it would have been without a flu shot.  Spouse got a flu shot too and has not come down with it at all so far.  Last year with no flu shots before we were exposed, it went through the household, we all got it and responded to it about the same.  Husband was not here though, daughter and Zoey were.  Our daughter was pregnant and she was vaccinated because of that the minute they had vaccine available before it went through the area.  Zoey got it though with Josh and I.

    This year everyone got flu shots and response is all over the board, wonder if it would have been a lot worse for Josh without a flu shot?  It has only been because we have set an alarm clock at night to make sure he gets Ibuprofen though that we have been able to keep him hydrated.  If his fever comes up even a little he starts to vomit and it is very difficult to get on the other side of it.  If I wasn't so diligent about making sure his fever stays down I'm certain he would have ended up at the hospital at some point for an I.V.

    We are watching The War of the Roses.  Josh is fascinated.  He just watched Oliver sawing all of the heels off of his wife's shoes and he says to me, "Mommy...mommy, he's doing the worst thing a man can do to his wife :)"

    which is funny (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:10:20 PM EST
    because he also sawed off Turners heels in Romancing the Stone

    Is that an imbd category? (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by oculus on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:11:29 PM EST
    Biggest Understatement of movie (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by cal1942 on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:14:00 PM EST
    "I don't recommend the fish."

    Very perceptive kid. Wait til H swings (none / 0) (#4)
    by oculus on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:02:13 PM EST
    from the chandelier.  What a movie.

    I love this movie (none / 0) (#6)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:06:54 PM EST
    I love the start where Oliver has no clue how deeply in trouble he is.  When his wife wants to tell him that she finally knows why she didn't go to the hospital he says to her that it is late, he is tired and he just wants to put the day behind them.  Is this not exactly how most men act when you are fuming, steam is rolling out of your ears, and you can't sleep and they are in deep deep trouble that they may not be able to recover from :)?

    Saw "Barney's Choice" yesterday. He is (none / 0) (#8)
    by oculus on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:10:25 PM EST
    equally clueless or stubborn.  Poignant.

    on movies (none / 0) (#34)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:57:36 PM EST
    over the weekend I saw Let Me In.  the americanized version of Let The Right One In (which I loved).

    I did not hate it as much as I expected to but it is a pale shadow of the original.  
    what I was hoping for with the american version was that it might do well enough to justify a "prequel".
    about the "girl" in the story and her long previous life.


    and this is funny (none / 0) (#37)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:04:59 PM EST
    this is funny because if you dont know how (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:31:06 PM EST
    pervasive this is google "disney subliminal"

    this is how bad it is.  when I worked there I was giving a talk at a college. a college mind you not a high school.  and one of the first things I said was something like "it my job to place all the subliminal sexual messages".

    unphased they all nodded with great interest and wanted to know more about how they are chosen.


    My husband wants Myth Busters (none / 0) (#57)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:45:54 PM EST
    to address the fable of Rapunzel.  He wants to know if a man can really climb a tower on his loves thick long locks.  He'd probably use my hair to rig a hairness too, he's can be extremely industrious when it comes to self preservation when he's using MY resources. I told him to stop flapping his lips and send it in.  Typical man, always trying to give some poor woman a headache :)

    my new co-worker (none / 0) (#76)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:02:58 PM EST
    came from that movie.  all you have to do to change her mood from up to down is say "hair"

    It hasn't done very well has it? (none / 0) (#77)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:05:52 PM EST
    I get to see what hits home again (none / 0) (#78)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:06:56 PM EST
    since Zoey is now three....Finding Nemo is still huge.

    I don't think we have a copy (none / 0) (#80)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:09:12 PM EST
    of the Lion King anymore.  I should probably work on that since that was also such a huge hit with all kids.  They'd watch it over and over.

    almost 200 mill (none / 0) (#81)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:09:49 PM EST
    domestic.  not to shabby.  

    I haven't seen it yet (none / 0) (#83)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:13:08 PM EST
    I bought a doll for Zoey for Christmas though because it came with a brush and lots of barrets.  She's a very girlie girl and loves all that stuff already.

    I hear it is pretty (none / 0) (#87)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:20:03 PM EST
    if you would like an animated movie you can also enjoy get "The Illusionist".  its nominated for an oscar in the animated film category.  it wonderful.
    by the guy who did "The Triplets of Belleville" which is one of the best animated films ever made IMO.

    Thanks for the tip Captain (none / 0) (#93)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:30:39 PM EST
    You are always 100% up to speed on this stuff

    especially Triplets (none / 0) (#94)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:31:37 PM EST
    if you have never seen it I think you would absolutely love it.

    the (none / 0) (#95)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:33:31 PM EST
    illusionist (none / 0) (#97)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:37:32 PM EST
    You must have missed the episode... (none / 0) (#79)
    by magster on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:07:06 PM EST
    where Tori Grant and Kari were testing the myth of prisoners using hair, toilet paper and bedsheets to escape repel to freedom.

    I did (none / 0) (#82)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:10:35 PM EST
    I admit that Myth Busters blaring away makes me want to leave a room.  I couldn't leave though during that one episode where they made the bridge out of ductape.  Mostly because the bigger guy was so terrified.  I wanted to help him :)

    I love Mythbusters (none / 0) (#86)
    by magster on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:16:19 PM EST
    although I think they are running out of things to test.

    worst thing a man can do to his wife (none / 0) (#5)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:06:37 PM EST
    the innocence of child hood.

    this place is almost shut down because of the flu.  its a ghost town.  I had something.  it took about three weeks to get it, slowly loosing my voice the whole time, then it finally landed and I was sick for a couple of days.

    I got a shot.  almost no one here did even tho the company provides the free.  idiots.


    Josh has the typical needle phobia (none / 0) (#12)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:17:54 PM EST
    that most kids do.  I never asked him to get a flu shot until this new strain that nobody has any immunity to became present.  He was a little bummed that he wasn't fully protected.  I have explained to him though that me with my asthma and him with his challenges, we will be getting a flu shot every year now for a very long while because we are starting at zero having any immunity to this stuff as it does its hourly mutating.

    My husband has only had a headache and sore throat.  He is told when he will get flu shots, it isn't a choice for him and he has had one yearly for years and years.  I'm grateful though, I was really worried about him because he takes a lot of drugs that knock his immune system down due to his RA.  I guess we should all finish our lifetimes out around here getting those flu shots.  I never used to though.

    I guess it hasn't occurred to many people though that most of us have little or no immunity to the type A flu that is probably with us to stay.


    Couldn't pay this idiot... (none / 0) (#43)
    by kdog on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:28:00 PM EST
    to get one of them poison shots...in my immunes I trust.

    A buncha people have been rocking their cubes sick as dogs, but not I said the blind man:)


    can you explain to me (none / 0) (#48)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:34:47 PM EST
    what the fear is.  I really dont get it.

    With me it's not that I'm afraid (5.00 / 2) (#51)
    by ruffian on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:39:43 PM EST
    I just don't like to add anything new to my equation. I don't take any kind of medicine unless I'm desperate. OK, maybe it is fear, but it doesn't feel like fear.

    I'm like you (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by CST on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:59:10 PM EST
    I'm not afraid of what the shot will do, per se.

    I consider flu season a chance to build my immune system naturally.

    Most of that comes from the fact that I'm allergic to all of the common antibiotics and a few of the uncommon ones.  So I have a "hands off" approach to medicine that's been ingrained in my head since childhood.  I tend to avoid taking anything from doctors that I don't consider 100% critical.  And I feel like I really need a strong natural immune system so I don't end up having to take antibiotics for something else later.

    Whether this works out logically, I don't know, but it's just my gut reaction from years spent being a guinea pig for medicinal science.


    but we know (none / 0) (#53)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:41:23 PM EST
    it keeps you from getting sick.  or certainly helps.
    you can not get the flu from a flu shot.  I hate needles as much as the next person but I missed getting one last year and got sick as a dog and swore never again.

    I know you're right (none / 0) (#55)
    by ruffian on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:43:57 PM EST
    I'll get one next year. The purity of my holy temple really is not worth getting sick over.

    my feelings exactly (none / 0) (#60)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:49:59 PM EST
    not that my temple has been all that pure for many decades.

    Eating right and exercising (none / 0) (#62)
    by brodie on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:52:04 PM EST
    daily, adequate sleep and low stress -- best ways to build up the body's own resistance and keep the flu bug away (especially if the diet is paid careful attention and done properly).  

    Haven't had it in a number of years.  Never had a flu shot, don't plan on starting.  Nothing to do with fear of needles, though I'm not always quite convinced by govt pronouncements that the shot is safe.


    whatever (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:56:29 PM EST
    but I bet when the "Stand" strain comes around there will be people saying the same thing.  ah, its just a little Tube Neck.

    I am with you on this one, Ruffian.. (none / 0) (#68)
    by vml68 on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:58:32 PM EST
    I don't take any kind of medication unless I am truly desperate.
    Sometimes I have taken it a bit too far. I had a deeply impacted wisdom tooth extracted a couple of years ago and the dentist advised me to take pain killers before the anesthetic wore off. I decided to ignore that advice and tough it out. I actually ended up passing out from the pain...:-(!

    ha (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:00:26 PM EST
    as opposed to me for example when it was colonoscopy time "Dr, I have a far higher tolerance for drugs than I do for pain.  I do not want to feel this".

    Wow, I thought I was tough (none / 0) (#102)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 07:04:02 PM EST
    but I'm not that tough.  I haven't passed out from pain :)  I had a filling that leaked when I was 18 and thought I was essentially impervious to everything.  It turned out that I needed a serious root canal, I called and made a regular appointment with the dentist and took some aspirins at night when I couldn't tolerate it and couldn't distract myself from the pain enough to get to sleep.  The infection ate a tiny hole in my jaw and created a pocket on the side of my gum though trying to escape the day before I went into the dentist.  It did feel a little bit better at that point.  When I did get into the dentist, he couldn't believe that I wasn't crying and demanding attention when I first called.

    It did hurt terrible, but I had nothing to compare it to to understand that I qualified for emergency care.  I didn't even know you could give the dentist an emergency call.  It took a lot to numb me up though to start the root canal that first day.  I do well remember that :)  It is stored in my memory as worse than childbirth :)


    and (none / 0) (#52)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:39:53 PM EST
    whatever it is it must be shared by about 75% of the people working here.  about 85% of whom are now home sick.

    I guess if I ever got sick I'd get over (none / 0) (#54)
    by ruffian on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:41:48 PM EST
    the shot-notaphobia

    Getting sick from the shot... (none / 0) (#56)
    by kdog on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:44:59 PM EST
    be it the flu or something else down the line from the other crap in there.  If it ain't broke don't fix it.

    I understand taking the risk of the shot if you're high-risk from dying from the flu or something...but for otherwise healthy people I don't see why anybody would wanna take a chance...its just the flu.  Nothing I can't kick in a day or two.  


    You can't get sick from the shot (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by jbindc on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:58:17 PM EST
    Old wives' tale, no matter how many people claim they got the flu after getting the shot.

    Actualy (none / 0) (#88)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:22:09 PM EST
    you can get mild flu symptoms from the shot. My husband had the shot and while not coming down with the full blown flu, he did feel pretty crappy for about a week after having it and refused to have one this year.

    I should clarify (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by jbindc on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:26:32 PM EST
    You can get aches, maybe a mild grade fever or soreness.

    From the CDC:

    Life-threatening allergic reactions are very rare. Signs of serious allergic reaction can include breathing problems, hoarseness or wheezing, hives, paleness, weakness, a fast heartbeat, or dizziness. If they do occur, it is within a few minutes to a few hours after the shot. These reactions are more likely to occur among persons with a severe allergy to eggs, because the viruses used in the influenza vaccine are grown in hens' eggs. People who have had a severe reaction to eggs or to a flu shot in the past should not get a flu shot before seeing a physician.

    But you aren't going to get the flu.


    would bet (none / 0) (#91)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:29:08 PM EST
    the two are unrelated.  everyone in my family gets flu shots.  always have.  I usually do.  most people I know get them.  I have never once heard of one of them getting anything like the flu.  a sore arm for 24 hours? maybe.

    Actually (none / 0) (#101)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 05:43:22 PM EST
    see jbindc above. The CDC says you can get symptoms from the shot.

    clearly you have not had (none / 0) (#59)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:49:19 PM EST
    the new and improved.  you do not get over it in a day or two.  some people here have been out for a week or more and these are people who like their jobs.

    One of our outside salespeople... (none / 0) (#64)
    by kdog on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:55:38 PM EST
    was laid up for a week, puking, the runs, the whole 9 yards...and he came in mid-week to do some sh*t right in the office, right by my desk...I'm unscathed.  

    What can I say Cap...I'm a specimen, super immunes, must be all the cigs, I don't know.  And I'm certainly not gonna let modern medicine screw it up injecting me with sh*t that doesn't give ya a buzz...I'm sorted.  


    it takes a while (none / 0) (#66)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:57:13 PM EST
    dont do a end zone dance yet.

    Healthy confidence... (none / 0) (#73)
    by kdog on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:00:48 PM EST
    like an anti-hypochondriac.

    My husband has a new DOD employee (none / 0) (#71)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:59:40 PM EST
    right now.  No flu shot.  They just had a beautiful baby too, and I got to take the collection and go baby shopping with it.  It just doesn't get better than that.  Anyhow, he tested positive for it too on Friday.  Called here pretty upset, he is sick as heck and will be recovering very alone.  The doctor told him that he could not go home to the baby, he has to stay in a hotel until the 17th.

    Any microbe entering your (none / 0) (#58)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:48:22 PM EST
    body will surely be killed off by an inhospitable pharmaceutical :)

    last year (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:51:01 PM EST
    I was to sick to smoke pot.  I dont actually remember the last time that happened before that.

    Good lord... (none / 0) (#70)
    by kdog on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:59:31 PM EST
    ya musta been on deaths door!

    If I ever got that sick I might have to reconsider my knuckleheaded convictions regarding the shot...I can't imagine being that sick...home sick from work always meant exceeding normal usage for me, not abstaining.


    Im tellin ya (none / 0) (#74)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:01:25 PM EST
    I didn't eat anything on Saturday (none / 0) (#75)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:01:30 PM EST
    just couldn't.  Ate one light meal yesterday.  I've eaten twice today now and treated myself to a yummy glass of Merlot before five o'clock.  I'm sick though, I deserve it.

    Shirley Sherrod (none / 0) (#10)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:12:32 PM EST
    Sues Andrew Breitbart Over Video

    apparently he was served at CPAC

    I was glad to see this (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by esmense on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:29:01 PM EST
    The notion that you can say/publish anything about anyone (with no standard other than whether it is sufficiently outrageous to cause the desired media firestorm) has gone too far. I hope she wins. I hope she wins big enough to make political actors like Breitbart at least a little more circumspect. But I'm not confident that either will happen.

    if she wins (none / 0) (#26)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:32:46 PM EST
    Obama and Nancy my retire and start filing lawsuits.

    yes good thing.  even if she loses IMO.


    I know you're being snarky, but (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by jbindc on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:40:35 PM EST
    Obama and Nancy are public figures, whereas Shirley Sherrod was not.

    Different standard for suing.


    in truth I did not know that (none / 0) (#29)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:44:20 PM EST
    how different?

    but yes I was being snarky.


    I'm not a First Amendment lawyer (none / 0) (#33)
    by jbindc on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:57:27 PM EST
    But, from what I remember of bar study days, generally in defamation cases, a private figure just has to prove that a false statement was made, the publisher knew it to be false, and it caused harm.

    A public figure has the added burden of showing the intent of the publisher was to do actual harm ("actual malice") or with reckless disregard for the truth.

    (Someone please feel free to chime in to correct or to add to this).

    (Now it could probably be well argued that FOX News and pundits of all stripes do this too).

    Defamation against a public figure is extremely hard to prove.


    I don't know who Nancy is, (none / 0) (#31)
    by brodie on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:56:20 PM EST
    but as for Shirley Sherrod, she's a public figure since she worked as a public official at the USDA then injected herself into the issue when coming forward with her defense in the media.  

    So it looks like she'll have a high hurdle of proof to achieve.  Not impossible, just very difficult.


    I don't think so (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by jbindc on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:00:06 PM EST
    "but-for" the fact that Breitbart made these allegations, she would have never been known to the public.  Just because someone becomes famous does not make them a "public figure", and just because someone works for the government does not also make them a "piblic figure".

    See New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964).


    Not a 1A or any kind of (none / 0) (#39)
    by brodie on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:10:23 PM EST
    lawyer or expert here, just stating what I believe to be the law.  I invite the legal experts here to weigh in.

    I think the public figure area has broadened since Sullivan, and a govt official, as she was, would qualify as a public figure.  

    Second, as a public official, she was speaking publicly about her experiences in the field and the racial matter, which became the issue that Breitbart took and manipulated.

    Third, there's such a thing as an involuntary public figure, basically someone speaking out publicly in their defense, coming forward involuntarily, using the available media, as she did against Breitbart.


    Lawyer Jonathan Turley (none / 0) (#41)
    by brodie on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:19:14 PM EST
    agrees with me -- she's a public figure.  

    John Dean also agrees:  

    Professor Turley points out the difficulty with respect to Sherrod's succeeding in such a suit: Plaintiffs who are public officials are considered public figures, and held to a different standard. Sherrod appears to be both a public official and a public figure, as an USGA official who has been forced to thrust herself into the spotlight in her own defense.

    Interestingly (none / 0) (#44)
    by jbindc on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:28:18 PM EST
    And even more interestingly (none / 0) (#46)
    by jbindc on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:31:26 PM EST
    A case involving John Stossel may help Sherrod out:

    Price's defamation suit against Stossel was initially disallowed on the grounds that Stossel used the misleading clip to make an accurate point -- that Price is extremely rich. But the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that "the context in which Price's words were presented materially changed the words' meaning." The question now turns to whether Stossel (who now works for Fox Business Network) and his producers knew they were misrepresenting the nature of the clip. If so, Price will be able to argue that their actions constituted "actual malice," something that public figures must establish to prove defamation.

    And this is exactly why vermin like (none / 0) (#89)
    by esmense on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:25:18 PM EST
    Breitbart flourish and our public discourse has become increasingly harmful to our democracy.

    This seems like sophistry to me (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by esmense on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:52:17 PM EST
    but I don't doubt that that is something like the argument that will be made by the Brietbart camp. If it passes muster, it will be a sad day for all. The truth is, few had heard of Ms. Sherrod before Brietbart's lies made her a public figure.

    But, we seem to live in a culture that increasingly finds clever ways to protect the brazenly dishonest and punish any who might speak the truth.  


    The complaint (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by jbindc on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:38:41 PM EST

    An intereseting point:

    To this day, Defendant Breitbart publishes these exact same defamatory statements on his website despite his admitted knowledge of the truth. Indeed, he has subsequently stated that he "could care less about Shirley Sherrod," underscoring that Mrs. Sherrod's reputation was, at the very least, expected and acceptable collateral damage to his agenda.
    (p. 3)

    Her attorneys are attacking the presumed Breitbart et al argument that she is a public figure by arguing actual malice:

    Angered by the NAACP's claims of racism against the Tea Party, Defendant Breitbart used Mrs. Sherrod to further his own agenda of counter-attacking the NAACP with claims of racism. In doing so, he and his associates acted with actual malice, reckless intent and gross indifference to the false and misleading nature of the edited clip posted on his blog and the effects that the posting would have on Mrs. Sherrod.
    p. 25

    ya (none / 0) (#35)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:58:53 PM EST
    I saw her as a public figure.  actually.

    Attorney gets four months in jail (none / 0) (#13)
    by oculus on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:17:58 PM EST
    bor possessing black tar heroin in courthouse/jail.  Pretty easy, huh?  Oh, and "inactive" state bar status.  LAT

    Are either you or Jeralyn looking more in depth... (none / 0) (#15)
    by magster on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:19:36 PM EST
    ... at the BofA, Greenwald, cyberware thing?  I saw you posted a snippet of Marcy Wheeler's post about this story, but with the editor of Salon weighing in implying that they are actively investigating the threat to Greenwald and journalism and whether any crimes were committed, I'd be interested in knowing your's and Jeralyn's take on what crimes or torts have been committed, the hurdles in the way of suing or prosecuting BofA and/or the security firm, whether the fruits of Anonymous' hacking or documents from Wikileaks are admissable in court for Salon's purposes.

    The story to me seems terrifying (from the point of view of how big corporations do not fear the courts or the government) and fascinating at the same time.

    GG on Maj Report (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by waldenpond on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:14:31 PM EST
    with Sam Seder this morning..... the DOJ periphery involvement creeps me out but I am not in any way surprised.  After all, it's the govt job to protect/defend BofA from fraud and corruption charges.

    Majority Report.


    Rivals.com (none / 0) (#16)
    by cal1942 on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:19:43 PM EST
    Top 100 football recruits.

    Two thirds from the south (old Confederacy plus Kentucky.

    The rest split between B1G TEN and Pac12 country.

    No surprise for BTD or anyone else who follows college football.

    It shows on the field.

    Nah, I thoght (none / 0) (#19)
    by Zorba on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:24:08 PM EST
    it was rather clever- usually they just post their site.  Or say something along the lines of "Good comment!  See (Spam)."  How much are they paying these people to go through the comments, pick up whole paragraphs, and add their Spam, I wonder?

    if he only (none / 0) (#20)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:24:46 PM EST
    hung out for a while he could probably have gotten away with it.

    That's one thing (none / 0) (#27)
    by Zorba on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:33:27 PM EST
    (thankfully) that they haven't seemed to have figured out yet.  If they just make a few comments over a few days, without Spam, they might be able to get a Spam link in without much notice.  Instead, they just register, drop one or two or three Spam links, and run.

    this is in England (none / 0) (#23)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:30:52 PM EST
    could it happen here lawyers?

    Police have told residents to stop putting wire mesh on their garden shed windows - because they could be sued if a burglar is injured.

    afraid a already know the answer.

    The Caregivers and Veterans (none / 0) (#24)
    by Zorba on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:31:02 PM EST
    Omnibus Health Services Act, which was supposed to be implemented by January 31, is still not functional.  This was the act that was supposed to give additional benefits and respite care to families who were caring at home for grievously injured veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan.  The families are still waiting.  They're caring for vets who would otherwise be in nursing homes or group homes, at a much greater cost.  Plus, they've tightened the requirements even further, meaning fewer families will get help (that is, when the help actually does materialize).  What the heck is the hold-up?  This is such a shame.  

    unbelievable and unforgivable (none / 0) (#30)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 02:48:55 PM EST
    could someone with a spine step up the the microphone please.  honestly WTF.  the tv told me this was a done deal.

    Well, the tv (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by Zorba on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:09:59 PM EST
    lies.  From the article I linked to:

    A week before the Jan. 31 deadline for the caregivers act, the president was joined by Michelle Obama and Jill Biden, the vice president's wife, in the East Room of the White House for an event called "Strengthening our Military Families."

    Addressing the audience, Obama said that "as commander in chief, I am determined to do everything in my power to make sure that we are fulfilling that request from our troops, that we are taking care of their families," citing "more help for those tireless caregivers" among the "major investments" he has made.

    Three days later, Michelle Obama appeared on "The Oprah Winfrey Show" to discuss what the administration has done for military families and what else it plans to do.

    "I was a little shocked," Schei said of the talk show appearance. "They're talking about all these programs they are going to do, but they can't even comply with this law."

    Bragging about something that hasn't been implemented yet.  Talk is cheap. He needs to "walk the walk."


    yeah (none / 0) (#40)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 03:14:35 PM EST
    I read it.  or speed read it.  like I said.  unbelievable.

    I'm watching Anthony Bourdain (none / 0) (#100)
    by jeffinalabama on Mon Feb 14, 2011 at 04:50:55 PM EST
    eating home-made feijoada.

    I want to go back to Brasil!