home

Tuesday Night Open Thread

I'm busy with work and will be until Thursday.

Of interest: Oral arguments today in the Supreme Court over the 10th Amendment.

The Sentencing Project has released a report on the state of sentencing in 2010. It begins with some sobering facts:

Today, 7.2 million men and women are under correctional supervision. Of this total, five million are monitored in the community on probation or parole and 2.3 million are incarcerated in prisons or jails. As a result the nation maintains the highest rate of incarceration in the world at 743 per 100,000 population.

NACDL and the Brennan Center for Justice have submitted an FOIA request for secret documents pertaining to changes in the Justice Department's policy on Miranda Warnings. Are the feds creating a terrorism exception to Miranda?

Looks like Rahm Emanuel is the next Mayor of Chicago. While I feel for Chicago, I'm glad he's off the national radar for a while.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< GOP Govs Running Shy On Union Busting Bills | Supreme Court Holds State Tort Suit Not Preempted By Auto Safety Standards >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Kind of a generality. What should (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by oculus on Tue Feb 22, 2011 at 09:28:52 PM EST
    be done re people who are convicted of murder, child molest, armed robbery, rape, etc.?

    No souls in prison... (none / 0) (#29)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 09:38:07 AM EST
    should be the ultimate goal...though likely unattainable.

    They type you allude to...hardened violent dangerous people who literally give us no choice, they should be the only souls in cages...pending evolutionary leap.  Rough guesstimate, 1 out of 10,000?  I find it hard to believe any more than 1 in 10,000 is hopelessly & utterly violent.

    The rest can be dealt with in a humane manner, lest we the people become the ultimate violent criminal, as we are today.  The "civilized" world's # 1 kidnapper and torturer.

    Parent

    Real figures on housing (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 07:59:53 AM EST
    are finally available and drowning out all the BS housing market recovery noise that the administration spins constantly.  It won't be long now, it is going to have to crash more before they move, but soon the super wealthy will be buying up everything "wonderful".  They can secure themselves in forms of wealth that will preserve their social status and maintain their positions as "the rich".  The rest of us are phucked.

    Another Fox News Lie (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Harry Saxon on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 08:37:37 AM EST

    On Fox & Friends, co-host Brian Kilmeade claimed, along with an on-screen graphic, that a recent USA Today/Gallup poll found that  "61 percent" of Americans are in favor of taking away collective barganing rights from public unions. In fact, Fox aired the results of the poll completely backward: the Gallup poll found that 61 percent of Americans are opposed to taking away collective bargaining rights.

    Click or Media Matters Me

    Apparently (none / 0) (#25)
    by Harry Saxon on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 09:31:54 AM EST
    this Brian fellow on Fox and Friends apologized for misstating the Gallup poll results, so I post this to reflect that fact.

    Parent
    some people say he is a wife beater (5.00 / 3) (#26)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 09:35:26 AM EST
    I would never say he is a wife beater and I apologize if anyone thought I was saying he is a wife beater.


    Parent
    Cash for Kids (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 08:39:15 AM EST
    Dad plants paraphernalia, son gets busted, judge takes bribe from private jailer, son gets 6 months, son commits suicide after release.

    Judge gets busted for racketeering.

    http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/father-of-suicidal-man-in-kids-for-cash-case-i-basically-framed-him -1.1109221#axzz1EnAyP0ub

    Two judges busted for taking bribes to get private juvenile facilities filled with kids.  One judge got 135 years and ordered to repay the bribes, not sure what happened to bribers.  IMO the money should go to the families who were on the receiving end of this non-sense, not back to the company that benefited from the bribes.

    More (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 09:08:13 AM EST
    Kid gets boot-camp for trespassing on vacant building.

    Another kid gets 9 months for stealing change.

    Kid sent to wilderness camp for mocking principle on MySpace.

    Detention camp for 5 month for steeling DVD's

    Mid Atlantic Youth Services Corp. still in business, owner claims he had no idea.

    http://articles.cnn.com/2009-02-23/justice/pennsylvania.corrupt.judges_1_detention-judges-number-of- juvenile-offenders?_s=PM:CRIME

    Parent

    You can't even be a kid anymore (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 10:47:28 AM EST
    I feel much differently about how people who don't mature brains should be treated and what happens to them.  I also lost my job as a probation officer long ago to a privatized facility that was supposed to take care of our "problem" kids for a fee that would be less expensive and it wasn't.  It ended up costing the community a ton more money in the end.

    The private facility also made a load of money before they were shut down.  They were supposed to have some sort of school on the grounds, but it consisted of a few hours a day and nothing of quality.  Then the kids spent the majority of their hours daily refinishing furniture that the privatized facility sold for a profit. And they also came up with decking system that was made out of scrap wood and the kids would construct these squares out of scrap lumber all day that the place would sell too.

    When it was finally shut down we had kids who had been there for years that could not pass tests to get back into the grade they were supposed to be in because they hadn't been to school in years.  The facility gave them a dollar something an hour for their work, and they could buy cigarettes with the money that they were allowed to smoke so I guess they could smoke their blues away.  Kids are complicated, they are difficult, they are messy and unpredictable on their way to adulthood....and our current society hates them the minute they don't look cute on the cover of Parenting magazine.  I'm ashamed of this selfish country for that.  If today's laws existed for kids when my dad was a kid, my father would have probably been a criminal instead of a contributing member of society after they were done with him.

    Parent

    Similar discussion... (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 11:12:27 AM EST
    over Mom's birthday family dinner & cake on Sunday.  The convo wandered to the times the police brought my pops home instead of to jail, and the times the same humane courtesy was extended to my older bro...long gone by the time me and my younger bro came of age and got into a little mischief, all of a sudden it was "go to jail, go directly to jail" for little minor stuff when a warning is more than sufficient.

    When and why did common courtesy, common decency, and common sense die in regards to authority?  Ya know, the whole "protect and serve" concept?  And can we bring it back to life?

     

    Parent

    The master plan (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by mmc9431 on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:25:44 PM EST
    Maybe that's the plan. Limit their ability to think  and break their spirit of adventure when they're young and they'll be easier to control as adults.

    I'm just glad I'm not a twelve yr old trying to figure out life today! We haven't done this up and coming generation any favors.

    Parent

    My generation was on the cusp... (5.00 / 0) (#99)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:31:23 PM EST
    the schools were still pretty good about kids being kids in the 1980's...the zero-tolerance madness was just starting to take hold.

    By my teenage years in the 90's is when the tide really turned for the worse...I really pity the fools coming of age today.

    Parent

    heh (none / 0) (#43)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 11:18:28 AM EST
    I get it and agree.  but thats a pretty funny comment.

    I thought my family was dysfunctional
    :-)

    Parent

    Functioning dysfunctional family... (none / 0) (#47)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 11:28:22 AM EST
    if you please:)  

    Besides, everybody knows it is the quiet Stepford families you really gotta watch out for...the kdog clan are a buncha sweathearts, if a bit rough around the edges.

    Parent

    I have no doubt (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 11:31:40 AM EST
    I know all about rough edges.

    but it was still funny.  

    Parent

    You should hear the stories... (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 11:34:07 AM EST
    I can't post here for fear of some of our authoritarian friends calling child services on my pops out in the ether.

    Parent
    It's not just the "justice system" (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by Zorba on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 01:41:59 PM EST
    The schools have gone completely around the bend with their "zero tolerance" policies.  A kid in Fairfax County, VA committed suicide
    during a disciplinary process that he was forced to undergo after he purchased a capsule of a legal substance.

    Link
    When I think of the stuff that many of my generation pulled in high school, I have to think that many of us would have been either expelled, or in jail.  I knew someone who brought an orange to school injected with vodka to eat at lunch.  Never got caught, but he probably would have been suspended for a couple of days.  Nowadays, who knows?  Expelled?  Arrested?  My dad, too, pulled some stuff as a kid that would have him jailed today.  I'm not condoning such behavior, mind you, and I'm not talking about truly dangerous kids, but come on- they're kids.  How about some counseling, or community service, instead of expulsion or jail for some of this stuff?  Kids have kids' brains.  They're immature and not automatons.  Why ruin their lives?  

    Parent
    It's Crazy (none / 0) (#93)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:22:20 PM EST
    This stuff, nearly all of it, amounts to normal behavior.  Just because it's illegal, doesn't mean a thing, it's normal.  Man did I hate Nacy Reagan and her 'no' non-sense.

    We had a smoking lounge until '87, we could come and go as seniors when we didn't have class.  My little brother by two years, went through hell with all the rules, even the one year we went to high school together.  They had different scheduling, locked down all day, and required to take so many classes, he never got to experience the art room for a good chunk of the day (or smoked weed by the kilns using the super ventilation).

    In Wisconsin, the last state to make the drinking age 21, about a third of the seniors were grandfathered in and could legally buy booze.  To say we drank would be an understatement and I was a sophomore.  If you weren't drunk at a dance, you were in the minority.

    But now, it's like you can't even say F without the school coming down very heavy handed.  I say this as I think about the teachers back home fighting for their livelihoods and it makes me wonder.  On one hand they are suppose to be leading our kids into good educations, on the other, these are the same clowns enforcing these archaic, yet fairly recent totalitarian policies.

    I respect them and hate them is the same thought.

    Parent

    I think the problem is (none / 0) (#101)
    by jbindc on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:33:57 PM EST
    while these zero tolerance policies have gone too far (in some cases), you lose the argument when you use "Back in MY day we did X."  So what?  I'm the same age you are - back in my day kids rode bikes without helmets.  Back in my day (when I was 3), when we traveled across the Ohio Turnpike to Pittsburgh, I used to stand in the front seat (unharnassed) next to my father's shoulder while he drove - the whole way from Detroit.  So I repeat - so what?

    It's the same argument that my mother would shoot down "If everyone decided to jump off a bridge, would you do it too?"

    I would also argue that kids are a little more uncontrollable these days then "back in your day".  My guess is, you didn't have too many kids ready to beat up teachers, pull a gun in class, or kill your classmates. Back in your day, there was still a little more respect for the teachers and if you got in trouble in school, chances are, your mommy and daddy weren't jumping on board to immediately sue (or go down and threaten the teacher for DARING to fail you or discipline you).

    I think you don't have any idea what teachers have to deal with these days, so I don't think going "back to your days" is a good idea either.

    Parent

    Every party needs a pooper... (5.00 / 0) (#115)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 03:25:22 PM EST
    thats why we invited jb.  

    Way to rain on the good old days parade pal...but thats ok, I won't go all zero-tolerance on your unpopular (for this blog) opinions:)

    Parent

    We think because we all lived to tell (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by Anne on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 03:56:43 PM EST
    the stories about all the things we did that are now illegal or impermissible, that that means there was never any need to impose any stricter standards or rules, but that logic doesn't pass muster.

    We lived, but a lot of people didn't, or they lived, but were never the same.  I had a boss whose wife died after she fell off her bike and hit her un-helmeted head.  Many people died in car accidents who would have lived had they been wearing seat belts - if there had been seat belts at all.  I still cringe when I read the report of a motor vehicle-related death that says, "neither the driver not the passenger were wearing seat belts," because I think about the anguish their loved ones could have been spared.  Yes, they were "free" but their families will be imprisoned forever by the grief of an unnecessary death.

    So, before we wax nostalgic about the freedoms of our youth, we really ought to take into account the lives lost that could have been saved by some of the rules and laws we have now.

    That being said, some of this zero-tolerance stuff is just draconian, and has contributed to the ruin of a lot of young lives that deserved a second chance; Zorba linked to a WaPo story about a Fairfax County high school student who ended up taking his own life after running up against one of those zero-tolerance policies; my feeling is that if kids are killing themselves as a result of policies that were originally intended to save them, there's something wrong with the policy, or how the policy is implemented.


    Parent

    Gotta be a happy medium... (none / 0) (#122)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 04:00:22 PM EST
    to be found...this ain't it.

    All I would add is there is more to living than simply being/staying alive...we need to learn to start accepting more risk again, lest the quality of our safer lives suffer too much.

    Parent

    Your definition of "happy medium"? (none / 0) (#127)
    by jbindc on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 09:17:21 AM EST
    Not the anarchy... (none / 0) (#128)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 09:45:01 AM EST
    you think I desire...and certainly not 8-12 year olds in handcuffs for writing on desks.  Or automatic suspensions for aspirin or the classic "kick me" sign.

    Trust our educators to use discretion and discipline accordingly...call off the zero tolerance and have some tolerance for childhood mischief and misbehavior, a kinder gentler more understanding system of discipline.  Detention or school service in lieu of automatic suspension/expulsion at the drop of a hat.  

    Parent

    And never ever ever... (none / 0) (#129)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 09:45:43 AM EST
    dropping a dime on a kid to the police unless it is something gravely insanely serious.

    Parent
    I agree with this (none / 0) (#130)
    by jbindc on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 12:13:42 PM EST
    and certainly not 8-12 year olds in handcuffs for writing on desks.  Or automatic suspensions for aspirin or the classic "kick me" sign.

    As I am also not the authoritarian you think I am.  But someone who writes on desks should be made to stay after school and clean desks for a week.  And I don't believe in stay-at home suspensions - it just gives kids a free vacation.  If they do something worthy of a suspension, they should have to come to school and park their butts somewhere for the day where they have to do their schoolwork, can't talk, except to ask questions, no phones or computer games, etc.

    Educators would love to have that trust placed in them, but since the kids know that all they have to do is run home and tell mommy and daddy, then mommy and daddy will be up at the school complaining and threatening to sue (or worse).

    Teachers have very little power.  My mom taught school for almost 50 years - 44 years in kindergarten.  She has a master's degree and mentored young teachers, so I think she would classify as an "expert".  Under state law, even if she determined in her professional opinion that a child was not ready to go to 1st grade, she could not hold that child back if the parent objected.  

    Parents hold all the power, and thus, the responsibility.  Maybe if parents were a little more diligent about what their little darlings were taking to school and ensuring their children followed the rules, we wouldn't have need for some of these crazy policies.

    Parent

    honestly (none / 0) (#131)
    by CST on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 12:40:07 PM EST
    I think the whole "youth is lost/police state" thing is overblown.

    Kids are still kids.  I don't remember it being that bad.  The only people I know of who got in real trouble were the ones doing things you would think might get you in real trouble.  Like dropping acid in Biology class.  Or selling acid to someone who was stupid enough to take it in class and then proceed to freak out.

    Those kids all got second chances in other schools.  And plenty of other kids were doing cr@p that didn't get them in trouble because the school was not out to catch them.

    The key is middle ground.  If you are too soft, kids will see right through you and take advantage. Which can often lead to over-compensating and the second problem - if you are too hard on them, than punishment loses any actual meaning because they'll get it no matter what they do (in the eyes students).  So they just stop caring.

    The problem with your in-school suspension is that it would require significant supervision.  Ideally teachers are there to teach not to babysit.

    Parent

    CST, see my response (none / 0) (#133)
    by Zorba on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 01:04:50 PM EST
    #132.  Yes, the in-school suspension requires supervision, which I would give with specially-trained staff.  Which requires more money- not going to happen in today's economy.  I agree that you can't be too soft on the kids, and that being too hard is terribly unproductive.  But, yes, kids are being suspended and even expelled today for far less serious things than "dropping acid in Biology class."  I have a friend whose daughter was suspended because another kid brought some booze to an after-school activity (without the daughter's knowledge), secretly poured some into his soft drink, and offered her a sip.  She took a sip, made a face, handed it back and told him he shouldn't be doing that.  She (and others) were suspended for not telling the authorities that this kid had booze.  They didn't bring it, they didn't want to partake of it, but they're just as guilty as he is because they didn't "tell."  Another kid was suspended for offering a friend Tylenol for a headache- apparently, you cannot bring a legal, over-the-counter drug into school without a doctor's note, plus it must be kept in the office.  Complete horse manure.  

    Parent
    I agree with (none / 0) (#132)
    by Zorba on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 12:54:16 PM EST
    your thoughts on in-school, as opposed to out-of-school suspension, jb- staying home doesn't do a d@mned thing to teach them anything.  In-school suspension, after-school detention, Saturday school, etc, combined with "making things right" (such as cleaning desks, as per your example), community service in addition to in-school service, when appropriate, plus making them responsible for any missed school work, and with the addition of counseling, if necessary- these are the ways to go for most offenses.  If the student is more hard-core, I believe that alternative classrooms, or alternative schools, with strict behavioral guidelines (having to "earn" their way back to "regular" classes) and well-trained staff are called for.  If the kid is really dangerous or the offense is egregious, then the police may have to be called in (and, let's face it, there are some kids who cannot be around other kids- it may be because of terrible conditions at home, unfortunately, but the safety of the other kids needs to be taken into account).  Having said this- with all the budget cuts facing most school districts these days, I doubt that any of them would have the money (or the will) to design and implement these types of programs.  We're losing too many of the kids who could be saved, with well-planned and humane programs.

    Parent
    Yes to all. (none / 0) (#134)
    by jbindc on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 02:57:48 PM EST
    I think that (none / 0) (#123)
    by Zorba on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 05:42:14 PM EST
    at least some of the "zero tolerance" policies are a result of fear of lawsuits.  Let a kid "get away" with something with little or no punishment and then something happens to that kid (or another kid) as a result, there may well be a law suit.  Let one kid off lightly because of extenuating circumstances and the next kid, with no such circumstances, gets a heavier punishment, they're likely to face that family asking why, possibly with their attorney present.  It's just easier in many way for the schools to announce a "zero tolerance" policy because they don't have to think about it and make individual judgments.  That, plus the times seem to be demanding harsher and harsher punishments.  Look at the "three strikes" laws in many states.  Look at some of the draconian sentences that even many first-time offenders face.  This punitive atmosphere has also filtered down to the schools.  There has to be a better way to punish offending kids (assuming they're not hard-core miscreants) without kicking them out of school or making them so depressed they kill themselves.  As I said previously, counseling, community service- there are other options to help the kids, as well as teach them lessons that they should be learning about proper behavior.  

    Parent
    Anne, fair and balanced! (none / 0) (#125)
    by BackFromOhio on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 08:03:37 PM EST
    to quote George Sanders (5.00 / 0) (#116)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 03:27:34 PM EST
    "you have a point.  and idiotic one, but a point."

    Parent
    Really? (none / 0) (#118)
    by jbindc on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 03:34:11 PM EST
    Takes one to know one, I guess.

    Yeah - things were so much better back in the day.  At least you agree with Republicans on that.

    Parent

    it was a joke (5.00 / 0) (#119)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 03:35:53 PM EST
    I actually sort of agree with you.

    school is a very different place than when I was there.  that doesnt mean I agree with the insane zero tolerance policies.


    Parent

    My bad (none / 0) (#126)
    by jbindc on Thu Feb 24, 2011 at 09:16:26 AM EST
    Hard to tell

    Parent
    I Never Made that Arguement (none / 0) (#120)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 03:56:34 PM EST
    I was just tossing in some nostalgia.  The normal behavior comment still stands, all of it normal, not this or that specifically, but getting in trouble and drinking is normal for teenage boys.

    But I will make this arguement, the freedom of being a kid is being stripped away.  I see little kids with so many books they have backpacks with wheels waiting for the bus, school season being extended by a month compared to me, and on and on.

    Anyways, so they keep squeezing and something has to give, I believe this is why they lack respect, none given, none taken.  It's why they are more violent, they are piXXed that they are being boxed in and overworked at the learning level.  And unlike common criminals, their freedoms are being removed w/o cause.  What kids wants to where a helmet, and I don't have kids, but I would like to think that garbage like that wouldn't happen in my home.  No, I know it wouldn't.

    Now it's all these panty-aXXed parents who want to blame everyone because their kid did something stooopid, nellies making their kids where helmets, or doing 5 hours of homework every night, or whatever it is, they either blame someone or cower in corner scared.

    And they keep pushing and the kids keep reacting.

    I can tell you this for a fact, the school I went to hasn't had any worried of guns or shootings of any of the claims you tried to make.  It's the same place with kids pulling the same C, just different, now they go to jail for stuff that needs no police involvement because the people teaching them are too occupied with politically set metrics, they like the kids, don't have the time because someone decided are kids were to stooopid to compete globally.  Yet somehow, Gen X has managed to change the world with our innovations in technology.  The generation we were told was going to ruin the world, yet the baby boomers, the generation that was going to create a utopia, basically invented prescription drugs, made fraud legal at every level, manage to screw up everything they touch, and create a country divided.  Ditto for whatever generation lies between the two.

    I don't even know what my point anymore is, but I do know, the more we push kids, the more a few are going to push back, and the results are usually very messy.

    What this has to do with the original post I will never know.  But I will say this, without Reagan and his love of all things green, money.  These judges, or Wall Street, or all the corrupt motha Fers, wouldn't be putting dollars before lives, every day and all day.  It's sickening to see a man who makes a great living, a judge, get corrupted, and ruining kids lives so he have more and more, it's never enough.  Dito for the facility administrators who wages are tied to incarcerating kids or even adults.  Non-sense.

    Parent

    I wouldn't count on it. (none / 0) (#124)
    by Rojas on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 08:00:39 PM EST
    Richard Vernon:   
    Now, this is the thought that wakes me up in the middle of the night: that when I get older these kids are gonna take care of me.


    Parent
    class warfare (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 09:10:53 AM EST
    thought this was great after the wealth divide discussion yesterday.  from Chris Christie:

    In Wisconsin and Ohio, they have decided there can no longer be two classes of citizens: one that receives rich health and pension benefits, and all the rest who are left to pay for them.


    translation (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 09:23:36 AM EST
    In Wisconsin and Ohio, they have decided there can no longer be two classes of serf: one that receives health and pension benefits, and all the rest of you who are left to pay for them.


    Parent
    serf equality now (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 09:24:10 AM EST
    Quote that sums it all up quite nicely: (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Anne on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 10:17:58 AM EST
    "There are two ways of exerting one's strength: one is pushing down, the other is pulling up."

    Booker T. Washington.

    Just recently came across this quote and I think it's the best way I've seen of describing the struggle; I worry that the "push-downs" are out-numbering the "pull-ups" (and more and more on the Dem side of the aisle), and which side wins is going to set a long-term course for what kind of country this is going to be.


    Parent

    I saw a video of him saying this (none / 0) (#23)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 09:25:54 AM EST
    I shook my head.  The man is so close the falling off the cliff of political and social sanity, he's brushing right up against the safety railing and he seems to be on a roll.  He has been rude and pushy trying to deal with his own budget, and some of it is going to be tolerated because times couldn't be tougher.  But now that other Republican governors are joining him in certain arguments he's on a roll now.  Don't mind me standing here far from the safety rail chanting "Roll baby Roll!"  He's going to trip right over his lying demonizing tongue and roll right over the cliff :)

    Parent
    Who knew... (none / 0) (#24)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 09:30:39 AM EST
    the fat man was a Bob Marley fan:)

    That until there no longer
    First class and second class citizens of any nation....
    Me say war

    The two ton pink elephant in the room...health care & insurance costs.  The problem is not that civil servants get their benefits paid...the problem is it costs so damn much for care and insurance.  And that the private sector can't keep up, because of grift and/or the inability to borrow money to infinity/raise taxes like the state.

    Parent

    bingo (none / 0) (#31)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 09:43:38 AM EST
    if only we could get them to talk about the cost and why it is so high instead of trying to get us all to the lowest common denominator.


    Parent
    they have been so clever lately (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 09:36:09 AM EST
    that one is not even trying

    Yeah (none / 0) (#30)
    by Zorba on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 09:40:11 AM EST
    I guess these guys couldn't find anyone willing to actually read the thread and make a lengthy "comment" before slipping in the spam.    

    Parent
    Did you see how Walker got (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by observed on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 10:51:53 AM EST
    punked by a blogger pretending to be David Koch?
    The guy recorded (legal in WI) a long phone conversation with Walker thinking he was talking to Koch the whole time.
    If I weren't familiar with so many other Republicans, I'd say Walker is the dumbest Republican in the country. The guy says that for him, the defining moment of Reagan's presidency was when he fired the air traffic controllers; according to Walker, this was the first crack in the Berlin Wall (!!!).
    The tapes are featured on the front page of Americablog now.

    very funny (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 11:09:55 AM EST
    the transcript and recording are here.  some real gems.

    Koch: Well, not the liberal b*stards on MSNBC.

    Walker: Oh yeah, but who watches that? I went on "Morning Joe" this morning. I like it because I just like being combative with those guys, but, uh. You know they're off the deep end.

    Koch: Joe-Joe's a good guy. He's one of us.

    Walker: Yeah, he's all right. He was fair to me...[bashes NY Senator Chuck Schumer, who was also on the program.]

    Koch: Beautiful; beautiful. You gotta love that Mika Brzezinski; she's a ...

    ...

    Koch: [Laughs] Well, I tell you what, Scott: once you crush these b*stards I'll fly you out to Cali and really show you a good time.

    Walker: All right, that would be outstanding. [* Ethical violation much? *] Thanks for all the support...it's all about getting our freedoms back...



    Parent
    Lie and lock up (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by waldenpond on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 11:18:31 AM EST
    I like best how he's going to lie to get them back and then lock them down.  I picture people handcuffed to chairs.  Pricelessly police state.

    Parent
    Amazing. BTD, this oughta be a post (none / 0) (#50)
    by Towanda on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 11:35:27 AM EST
    as a governor reveals planning to charge legislators as felons, plant infiltrators among protesters, and more.  Amazing.

    Parent
    DOMA (5.00 / 3) (#45)
    by Tony on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 11:26:56 AM EST
    Obama declares the DOMA unconstitutional, and orders the DOJ to stop defending it in court.

    !!!

    halleloooya (none / 0) (#46)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 11:28:14 AM EST
    !! Wow. (none / 0) (#52)
    by lilburro on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 11:46:13 AM EST
    Crazy.  That's great!

    Parent
    look! (none / 0) (#72)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 01:15:29 PM EST
    out the window

    a pig just flew by.

    Parent

    Now we get to see (none / 0) (#81)
    by lilburro on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:03:07 PM EST
    who our friends are.  Shocker, Boehner is not one of them!

    BTW, the first google instant suggestion you get for Boehner is "crying."

    Parent

    Your comments today (none / 0) (#82)
    by Towanda on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:06:34 PM EST
    are cracking me up.  Another one even more, and I meant to post that then, but I got sidetracked.

    So now I have to go click through all of your comments and crack up again.  

    Parent

    This is great news. (none / 0) (#58)
    by Anne on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 12:08:02 PM EST
    I was gratified to read the whole statement, as it makes clear that their decision not to defend DOMA will not be confined to the Second Circuit:

    Consequently, the Department will not defend the constitutionality of Section 3 of DOMA as applied to same-sex married couples in the two cases filed in the Second Circuit.   We will, however, remain parties to the cases and continue to represent the interests of the United States throughout the litigation.   I have informed Members of Congress of this decision, so Members who wish to defend the statute may pursue that option.   The Department will also work closely with the courts to ensure that Congress has a full and fair opportunity to participate in pending litigation.  

    Furthermore, pursuant to the President's instructions, and upon further notification to Congress, I will instruct Department attorneys to advise courts in other pending DOMA litigation of the President's and my conclusions that a heightened standard should apply, that Section 3 is unconstitutional under that standard and that the Department will cease defense of Section 3.

    This is definitely a step in the right direction.

    Parent

    Yup, (none / 0) (#74)
    by andgarden on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 01:33:05 PM EST
    there's less to the substance than meets the eye. But the headline is a big deal.

    Parent
    just saw this on another blog (none / 0) (#75)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 01:39:21 PM EST
    The legal beagles here will recognize that the feds accepting the "heightened standard" argument for gay/lesbian discrimination is a really big deal.


    Parent
    Embedded in the decision (none / 0) (#78)
    by andgarden on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 01:49:06 PM EST
    is the implication that DOMA has a rational basis. And that could be hugely damaging.

    Like I said, weak sauce substance. But the headline matters.

    Parent

    It won't surprise you to know that (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by Anne on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:12:53 PM EST
    I've gotten to the point where I don't necessarily trust the headlines or even the immediate media responses to these kinds of decisions, since there is often contained in those decisions and statements language that, when parsed, reveal some level of wiggle room.

    I mean, have people just forgotten that these are lawyers we're talking about...

    :-)

    Parent

    A truism I live by (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by andgarden on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:15:47 PM EST
    that my mom taught me is that the newspaper always gets the story wrong on a subject you actually know something about.

    Parent
    not a lawyer and dont play one here (none / 0) (#85)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:15:32 PM EST
    but what about the point you responded to?

    no big deal?  big deal?  wah?

    Parent

    I am not (yet) a lawyer, (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by andgarden on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:19:03 PM EST
    I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice. That said. . .

    It is a really bad idea to give up plausible legal arguments pointing to your desired outcome. In court I would be prepared to argue that there is no rational basis for DOMA.

    Parent

    and that (none / 0) (#92)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:21:01 PM EST
    is related to this?

    "heightened standard"


    Parent
    Yes (none / 0) (#95)
    by andgarden on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:25:11 PM EST
    thanks (none / 0) (#98)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:28:36 PM EST
    I always learn something here

    Parent
    Another take (none / 0) (#111)
    by christinep on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 03:16:55 PM EST
    It is a "big deal" Captain...and, not just because of the political implications, etc. Changing a standard of judicial review and/or shifting the burden, more often than not, is the key to the outcome in the big legal controversies.

    Parent
    thanks (none / 0) (#112)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 03:18:50 PM EST
    the guy who said it is no dummy

    Parent
    Great news (none / 0) (#65)
    by MO Blue on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 12:55:05 PM EST
    Past time to ensure that constitutional rights apple to everyone.

    Parent
    Hopeful but hesitant (5.00 / 2) (#79)
    by mmc9431 on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 01:55:40 PM EST
    I'm crossing my fingers. With the Supreme Court we have, I'm not betting on anything.

    I never cared whether I was "married" or not. My partner and I have been together for 27 years. Now we're getting close to retirement age and it is beginning to matter! Pensions and S.S. begin to enter into the picture.

    Seeing as our house is now worthless, these things take on a whole new meaning.

    Parent

    Hope things work out in your favor (none / 0) (#110)
    by MO Blue on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 03:14:53 PM EST
    Any couple together for 27 years should get the benefits of their union. Lord knows people in the lower 98% need something to help them keep the wolf away from the door.

    Parent
    and in related news (none / 0) (#69)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 01:09:08 PM EST
    Same-sex marriage bill advances in Md.

    The Senate advanced the same-sex marriage bill on a preliminary vote of 25 to 22. A final Senate vote on the bill, which is likely to mirror the preliminary vote, has been scheduled for Thursday. A vote tally will be posted shortly.

    If the bill passes the Senate, it moves to the House, traditionally the more liberal chamber on social policy. Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) has said he will sign the bill.



    Parent
    As the legislation has gotten closer (none / 0) (#77)
    by Anne on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 01:47:04 PM EST
    to passing, the nightly news reporters have taken pains to advise all of us Marylanders that in all likelihood, there would be a petition to send the bill to referendum, so the people can have the opportunity to decide.

    Not only would there have to be enough signatures on such a petition, but they would have to be gotten within a certain time period - I think a date in June was mentioned - and those signatures have to match what's in the poll books; if you are not a registered voter, your signature would not count.

    I expect to be seeing nightly reports on how that petition effort is progressing - but I'm sure it will end up on the ballot, where it will also have the effect of getting people out to vote.

    Now, if we could just get the legislature to repeal the death penalty...

    Parent

    how do you think (none / 0) (#83)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:07:08 PM EST
    the people will vote?

    Parent
    Well, the only reliably blue jurisdictions (none / 0) (#87)
    by Anne on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:17:20 PM EST
    in Maryland are Baltimore City, Prince George's and Montgomery Counties - the rest of the state is pretty red (although Baltimore County went Democratic in the last gubernatorial election, kind of a slap-in-the-face to his opponent, Bob Ehrlich, who is from the county).

    I think it could be close; I'll have a better idea when I see how the anti-marriage contingent mobilizes and what response is generated among the public.

    I expect lots of polling...

    Parent

    MD is majority Dem, but not majority liberal (none / 0) (#91)
    by andgarden on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:20:33 PM EST
    We could really use the President's support on this (likely) ballot measure.

    That would involve substantial political capital, though. . .

    Parent

    that didnt take long (none / 0) (#88)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:19:02 PM EST
    11:30 update (none / 0) (#90)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:19:54 PM EST
    The challengers asked that the stay be removed on the grounds that the California Supreme Court is going to delay the case roughly another year and that even President Obama has said bans on gay marriage are unconstitutional.


    Parent
    27 hours on the legislative floor now (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by Towanda on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 03:01:09 PM EST
    . . . and still going, the Wisconsin Assembly debate on Walker's budget-repair (aka union-busting) bill.  The Dems have more than 100 amendments.  The Assembly is about number 20.

    This is the body ruled by Repubs who illegally rammed the bill through last Friday by meeting ahead of the schedule that they told the Dems, who -- in some glorious improv speeches about democracy -- made the Repubs pull it back to the amendment stage.  And the Assembly Dems (in matching t-shirts then and ever since) spent the weekend coming up with most of the 100 amendments (they had a few in the hopper last Friday that never were taken up, part of the illegality by the Repubs), while the Senate Dems are still working away in Illinois.  And probably watching the live-streamed Assembly pseudo-filibuster, too. . . .

    Koch brothers get in-your-face (none / 0) (#3)
    by Towanda on Tue Feb 22, 2011 at 11:13:39 PM EST
    in Wisconsin, blatantly opening a "lobbying shop" in Madison, close to the Capitol.  Is this good timing?  (see madison.com)

    Strangers are coming to pack my sh*t tomorrow (none / 0) (#4)
    by Dadler on Tue Feb 22, 2011 at 11:49:46 PM EST
    Well, not all of it.  Even though it's paid for, and they're supposed to just walk in and pack everything in the house without us doing a thing, I couldn't have anyone facing the various closets and corners of utterly confused crap we've piled up.  No one making less than a mil a year should have to make sense of the inside of a dysfunctional person's mind masquerading as a heap of largely useless/forgotten stuff.  So...I made a little sense of it for them.  My wife is more "Pfft, they'll pack it all, why worry?"  God bless her.

    Never had anyone pack for me.  Move furniture, yes, actually box and label everything in the house, not even close.  

    Been a long year for our family, very emotional and draining, and now we're looking at a new life in a new city.  

    But...before that, there's the SDSU/BYU matchup at 11 a.m. PST, broadcast nationally on CBS.  Biggest game in SDSU history, and the same goest for the Mtn West Conference (hidden from the nation by their idiotic network) it's the biggest ever by far, and probably BYU as well -- though they played in some pretty big games back in the Danny Ainge days.  Aztecs will get revenge for their only loss, and they'll hold Jimmer under 30 -- I think long and leaping and quick Billy White would be the best choice for guarding Fredette.  Just my two cents.

    And that night, I'll conclude my San Diego residence by attending the USD/Gonzaga game at the Slim Gym (Jenny Craig Pavilion).  My Toreros upset St. Mary's last week, I'm hoping they have one more miracle in them for a longtime season ticket holder galloping into the SoCal sunset headed north.  

    Hoops to the last drop.  

    I think it is to your benefit (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by ruffian on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 08:17:31 AM EST
    to make sense of the stuff before it gets packed. It was my experience that the packers do not attempt to make sense of it, beyond wrapping the fragile stuff. They swoop in and start emptying cabinets and drawers and shelves into boxes, and that's it. No organizing beyond what you have already done. And they don't wait for you to tell them 'put this with this and that with that'. Basically you stand back and let them go. It is a marvel to watch!!!

    Good luck with everything! I know it is a stressful time, no matter how much you are looking forward to the end result.

    Parent

    If we are not moving ourselves (none / 0) (#20)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 09:18:18 AM EST
    I always pack my own fragile things.  They packed my husband's RC helicopters, things that cost several thousand dollars a piece that he used to do "before children" and it was really destructive.  And the insurance paid crap :(

    So I pack all my heirlooms, artwork, anything fragile and we even move the stuff that is very dear in one of our cars.

    My husband always says, "Don't leave a sandwhich on plate laying around either cuz they'll wrap, pack it, and ship it.  He claims to know someone that it happened to.

    We moved ourselves last time, and bought a huge fancy new bedroom set with the money that the Army paid us.  It helped to dehoarde too.

    Parent

    Basketball Saturday, to clarify (none / 0) (#5)
    by Dadler on Tue Feb 22, 2011 at 11:52:01 PM EST
    Stuff packed tomorrow, loaded Thursday, wife and son leave Friday morning, I hang around for a couple days to finish up the last stuff.  Then gone like the wind.

    Parent
    Welcome to my neck-ish of (none / 0) (#7)
    by nycstray on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:13:01 AM EST
    the woods :)

    I'm going on one year of my move and still traumatized on the packing/moving aspect. OY.  {special circumstances apply here, still dealing with them}

    But I will say, the area up here really helps soothe the move trauma :) Coming from SD, you should have a fairly smooth transition.

    moving is interesting ;)

    Parent

    Another judge upholds the health care law (none / 0) (#6)
    by fuzzyone on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 12:32:25 AM EST
    Nice decision by Judge Kessler from the District Court for the District of Columbia.  (h/t TPM)  She handily dismisses the various silly arguments against the laws constitutionality and avoids political blather.  Very straightforward and well written opinion I think.

    A bloged a little about it at Fair and Unbalanced.

    Buju Banton convicted (none / 0) (#9)
    by observed on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 03:27:46 AM EST
    of possessing 5kg of cocaine with intent to distribute. Blames his financial troubles on gays (his songs exhort listeners to murder gays),and says he is  "at war with the faggot". Boom-bye,Banton boy. Good look on that "war" in prison.

    Yeah, that should go well (none / 0) (#14)
    by ruffian on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 08:18:55 AM EST
    Libya (none / 0) (#17)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 09:01:52 AM EST

    Obama's timidity on Libya is embarrassing.

    Perhaps because there are still American (none / 0) (#28)
    by Harry Saxon on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 09:37:38 AM EST
    citizens in Libya, he doesn't want to say anything that would cause retaliatory measures against them by Ghadaffi:

    WASHINGTON -- With hundreds of U.S. citizens trapped for now in Libya, the Obama administration is responding cautiously to leader Moammar Gadhafi's brutal attempt to suppress a rebellion, fearing that the wrong move might bring retaliation against Americans, U.S. officials said Tuesday.

    The fate of about 600 U.S. citizens, along with 35 non-essential Embassy staff, whom the State Department is trying to evacuate, puts President Barack Obama in an excruciating diplomatic bind.

    Despite the regime's ongoing massacres that have killed hundreds of civilians, and executions of security personnel who refuse to take part in the atrocities, Obama hasn't called on Gadhafi to leave. That's a striking difference from his role in easing Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak from power after a much less bloody revolution earlier this month.

    Click or Miami Herald Me

    Parent

    funny (none / 0) (#33)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 09:48:56 AM EST
    See Proof That The King's Speech Was Filmed on a Gay-Porn Set

    To be fair, Speech and U.K. Naked Men both used the same distinctive set in their separate productions, but it kinda makes you wonder how Lionel Logue paid the bills before the stammering king came along. Many more NSFW pics at the source.

    probably NSF most works.

    but not really so bad.  (and then maybe Im watching to much Spartacus)

    We only do p0rn or p*rn here, CH! (none / 0) (#38)
    by observed on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 10:52:31 AM EST
    tsk, tsk.

    Parent
    no one ever (none / 0) (#39)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 11:00:37 AM EST
    told me that

    Parent
    It's so the site doesn't get blocked at work (none / 0) (#62)
    by observed on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 12:34:53 PM EST
    sites, do to filters.

    Parent
    I know the reason (none / 0) (#63)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 12:44:31 PM EST
    I was just never told you know what was a banned word

    Parent
    Ah, gotcha. (none / 0) (#66)
    by observed on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 12:56:17 PM EST
    heh (none / 0) (#42)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 11:16:35 AM EST
    Dems Learn Wrong Lessons from 1995 Government Shutdown

    A divided Congress, a mild-mannered Republican speaker, a competitive media environment and growing public concern over debt all add up to a tougher environment for Democrats to profit politically from a shutdown.

    Mark Twain told us that "History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme." If Democrats rely too heavily on the 1995 model for the current budget battle, they may find themselves out of tune.

    then why do they look so worried?

    this seems a bit like them giving democrats advise on how to win elections.

    a clue about this (none / 0) (#51)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 11:37:40 AM EST
    the first soldiers wife who shows up on tv who did not get a paycheck and its all over.


    Parent
    will the SS checks go out? (none / 0) (#53)
    by nycstray on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 11:48:37 AM EST
    even better (none / 0) (#55)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 11:50:34 AM EST
    yeah (none / 0) (#56)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 11:53:56 AM EST
    my old man was a piece of work too.  stories I dont even want to tell.
    but some good ones.  I was the youngest child and my parents used to like to "go out".  like dancing and stuff and they would take me when I was about 12 or 13.  I loved it.

    Coulda been my pops... (none / 0) (#57)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 12:02:15 PM EST
    rebel breathren, right down to the Camels in the sleeve!

    One of his classic set of tales is when he kinda stumbled into the Greenwich Village beatnik scene in the early 60's...he had a friend with a party pad there, and he'd arrive Friday night and stay till he left for work Monday morning...drugs, orgies, you name it...debauchery I could only dream of.  

    So anyway there was this old Mick cop who walked that beat, and he would plead with my pops and his buddy..."Fellas, I can smell the pot from around the corner.  I like you boys , I don't wanna bring you in, I got 6 months till I collect my pension, put a lid on it till then will ya?".

    Today, there would be a battering ram and flash grenades and a swat team...progress it is not.

    one story (none / 0) (#59)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 12:12:06 PM EST
    when I was in high school I worked for a brief time in the sheriffs office.  I guess he took a liking to me.  he was the typical crooked as a snake country sheriff but he was an ok guy.

    then some time later when I was out of high school and was being a merchant seaman a buddy of mine and I were getting off the boat at the same time and wanted some pot.  so I called a girl I had been seeing who was in high school, at the high school, and asked her to get us some.
    well.  the school secretary, remembering me to well, listened.
    we got about a mile from the school and Ray the sheriff showed up behind us with lights flashing.
    he made Rick and Tommy (that was the girls name, Tommy - ironic huh)sit in the car and took me alone back to his car.
    he sits there for a minute sighs deeply and says "what am I going to do with you?"
    I shrug.  "Tommy ate the joints" I say.
    he says tiredly "dont do this again?"
    we go on our way.

    Parent

    Funny you should share that one... (none / 0) (#64)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 12:49:14 PM EST
    what brought on our family discussion was my nephews first arrest...mj possession.  No take the reefer and scold the boys, no ride home to mom and dad...straight to the precint for interrogation and trying to get the boys to rat on their supplier.  My brother, his father, was lucky not to be locked for the piece of his mind he gave the pigs when he bailed him out.

    It is really appalling behavior on the part of the state...infuriating.

    Parent

    I am pretty sure that would not (none / 0) (#67)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 01:02:49 PM EST
    happen there now either.


    Parent
    The odds of catching a break... (none / 0) (#70)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 01:10:18 PM EST
    or some compassion have never been longer, at least in this particular arena.

    Damn proud of the boy...didn't panic, didn't rat...passed this rite of passage with flying colors, and has learned to be smarter/sneakier.  And thank goodness he works and helps his parents pay for his tuition to college...if he was on financial aid he coulda been royally f*cked by this tyrannical incident.

    Parent

    he woulda just got a ticket here :) (none / 0) (#68)
    by nycstray on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 01:09:06 PM EST
    if they even bothered, that is . . .

    Parent
    Rub it in.... (none / 0) (#73)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 01:21:42 PM EST
    East Coast flat-leaver:)

    For all its enlightened liberal street cred, NYC is in the dark ages in regards to simple mj possession...we lead the nation in slapping the chains on our people.  140 people a day placed in temporary bondage over possession of small personal use amounts.

    Gotham, we have an addiction problem....addicted to chains.

    Parent

    heart breaker for you I know (none / 0) (#100)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:32:14 PM EST
    Jimmy McMillan -- of "The Rent Is Too Damn High" fame -- has talked of a 2012 presidential run (even saying that he could beat Obama) and, despite having recently run for New York governor as a Democrat, he now calls himself a Republican.

    say it aint so

    Parent

    He is still Jimmy... (none / 0) (#102)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:34:47 PM EST
    and I still love him...but he's gotta just forget about putting one of the scarlet letters after his good name.

    Parent
    Here's Jimmy (none / 0) (#103)
    by jbindc on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:39:27 PM EST
    jimmy (none / 0) (#104)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:40:53 PM EST
    looks like he is about to pass a brick.
    understandable

    Parent
    M-Bach... (none / 0) (#113)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 03:20:15 PM EST
    will rue the day she tried to steal Jimmy's thunder!

    Parent
    HA (none / 0) (#80)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:01:15 PM EST
    question to Newt in U of P on tuesday:

    "You adamantly oppose gay rights ... but you've also been married three times and admitted to having an affair with your current wife while you were still married to your second," Isabel Friedman, president of Penn Democrats, said to Gingrich. "As a successful politician who's considering running for president, who would set the bar for moral conduct and be the voice of the American people, how do you reconcile this hypocritical interpretation of the religious values that you so vigorously defend?"

    tried to cut off the question.

    "I'll bet almost everybody here can gather the thrust of your question," he said. "I appreciate the delicacy and generosity in the way it was framed. ... I hope you feel better about yourself."




    LOL (none / 0) (#108)
    by sj on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 03:07:32 PM EST
    Because Newtie is himself the very picture of delicacy and generosity.

    Pity journalists aren't asking the same questions.  Don't need to use the same words, but the effort would be appreciated.

    ...um... is there video?

    Parent

    lulz (none / 0) (#109)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 03:13:12 PM EST
    Just as the element of surprise transforms the physical act of love into something beautiful, the anguish of a laughed-at victim transforms lol into lulz, making it longer, girthier, and more pleasurable.


    Parent
    heres some money (none / 0) (#94)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:24:11 PM EST
    a couple of days ago (none / 0) (#97)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:27:43 PM EST
    I was watching 2012 on cable.  dreadful movie but one scene made me laugh out loud.

    the saudi king is reading the report of the impending disaster and proposed solution that involves him paying a lot of money for every person he want to take on the big boat ride:

    "you must understand Mr. . . ."
    "Issacs"
    "you must understand Mr Issacs, I have a very big family.  one billion dollars is a lot of money"
    "Im afraid the amount is in Euros you grace"


    Parent

    here we go (none / 0) (#105)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:44:11 PM EST
    or not (none / 0) (#106)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 02:44:57 PM EST
    update

    Indianapolis-area TV station WLFI reports that the Indiana deputy attorney general "is no longer employed by the agency."


    Parent
    another judge rules for the mandate (none / 0) (#114)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 03:24:30 PM EST
    and the wingnuts are not happy

    from the ruling


    As previous Commerce Clause cases have all involved physical activity, as opposed to mental activity, i.e. decision-making, there is little judicial guidance on whether the latter falls within Congress's power....However, this Court finds the distinction, which Plaintiffs rely on heavily, to be of little significance. It is pure semantics to argue that an individual who makes a choice to forgo health insurance is not "acting," especially given the serious economic and health-related consequences to every individual of that choice. Making a choice is an affirmative action, whether one decides to do something or not do something. They are two sides of the same coin. To pretend otherwise is to ignore reality.

    um, yeah

    the wingnuts say no


    Our thoughts are now actions. There literally is nothing the federal government cannot regulate provided there is even a hypothetical connection to the economy, even if the connection at most is in the future.


    Libya (none / 0) (#117)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Feb 23, 2011 at 03:33:57 PM EST
    check out the pics from this article and tell me these guys are not being inspired by Obama.

    and
    get ready for the democracy backlash

    (Reuters) - Regardless of what comes next in Libya's lethal political standoff, the OPEC country's oil sector is nearly certain to suffer, bringing long-lasting supply disruptions or even permanent damage.