Friday Afternoon Open Thread

It's opening day for the Colorado Rockies. They are playing the Arizona Diamondbacks. It's a beautiful, sunny 70 degree day here. Go Rockies!

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< NY Federal Judge Blasts Mandatory Minimums in Drug Cases | Saturday Morning OpenThread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Highlight of the week: (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by andgarden on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 08:25:48 PM EST
    Kosher for Passover Coke Classic from the supermarket available today. It's the only time of year I allow myself to drink the Real Thing. Coke sweetened with sucrose!

    Nothing compares.

    Iowa House passes 20-week abortion ban (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by desmoinesdem on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 05:38:52 AM EST
    It's a very poorly written law that will put women's lives at risk. Modeled on a Nebraska law aimed at shutting down Dr. Leroy Carhart's Omaha clinic (he was a former colleague of Dr. Tiller in Wichita).

    I hope the bill will die in the Iowa Senate Human Resources Committee. If it comes out of committee it will probably pass the chamber (26D-24R, but several of the Ds are anti-choice and none of the Rs are pro-choice).

    19 week ultrasound (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by diogenes on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 07:50:06 AM EST
    "A friend of mine once faced a choice similar to Danielle Deaver's. At a routine 20-week ultrasound, she learned that the baby she was carrying had no chance of life outside the womb because of major anomalies..."

    So I bet that they will do ultrasounds at 19 weeks now instead of "routinely" at 20 weeks.


    Don't you think it might take (none / 0) (#81)
    by Harry Saxon on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 02:32:56 PM EST
    more than a week for a woman to get an abortion, doc?

    Who knew J is a Rockies' fan? (none / 0) (#1)
    by oculus on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 04:38:32 PM EST

    PHillies lose their opener, (none / 0) (#5)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 05:29:48 PM EST
    but Halladay looked excellent (of course). Braves one up in the win column... or is it too early to be counting?

    Right now I think the magic number is, oh, 100 or so.


    Maybe closer to 160 for (none / 0) (#6)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 05:31:01 PM EST
    the magic number for the Braves...

    I think you're mistaken about the Phillies, Jeff (none / 0) (#8)
    by Peter G on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 05:42:03 PM EST
    ... unless this local coverage is an April Fool's joke.

    I must have slept through the end (none / 0) (#9)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 05:46:57 PM EST
    and dreamed of the outcome. Darn. Magic Number at 161.

    Today's my second endorphine day for baseball (none / 0) (#10)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 05:52:00 PM EST
    I developed a 'cough' and had to come home to watch the Phillies-Astros, now watching Boston-Texas, and later, Braves-Nats. Two triple headers in a row.

    Maybe there's something to be said about retirement. I might have to think about it all the more!


    I was looking for an excuse to (none / 0) (#11)
    by Jeralyn on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 05:53:58 PM EST
    post that graphic again, I don't really follow baseball. It is a big deal here in Denver though.

    Jeralyn (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by CoralGables on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 06:33:15 PM EST
    It's a beautiful picture but needs a bit of updating. Garrett Atkins is no longer a Rockie and I believe is currently out of baseball.

    A real Rockies fan... (none / 0) (#37)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 08:21:14 PM EST
    ...would have a real Rockie in the graphic!  Someone like, say, a fine Polish son like Tulo...

    I bet (none / 0) (#2)
    by CST on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 04:39:42 PM EST
    the red sox are happy to be playing in Texas today.

    36 degrees and raining.


    Similar dreary day in Philly, but the Phillies (none / 0) (#4)
    by Peter G on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 05:15:29 PM EST
    came from behind to beat the Astros 5-4 in their opener, thanks to a bunch of hits in the 9th inning.

    Halladay is picking up (none / 0) (#12)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 05:55:41 PM EST
    where he left off-- virtually unhittable.

    My rally cat (none / 0) (#51)
    by Makarov on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 09:03:26 PM EST
    takes full credit for the 6 hit, walk off 9th inning win.

    Cubs lost their opener (none / 0) (#3)
    by ruffian on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 04:44:27 PM EST
    to the Pirates. Terrible day for baseball in Chicago- 40s and rainy.

    This should encourage my Chicago (none / 0) (#7)
    by oculus on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 05:41:46 PM EST
    brother, who is currently biking across central FL.  

    Really, where is he? (none / 0) (#22)
    by ruffian on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 06:59:41 PM EST
    If he needs a place to crash. let me know! Got a spare room and friendly dogs.

    It is perfect biking weather here (none / 0) (#24)
    by ruffian on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 07:03:43 PM EST
    this weekend. Yesterday...not so much. Hope he is enjoying his trek.

    Vin Scully (none / 0) (#18)
    by CoralGables on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 06:40:08 PM EST
    put him in radio booth by himself calling a Dodger game, and he'll paint a three hour picture for you of a beautiful game with no television needed.

    Your Dodgers (none / 0) (#21)
    by Zorba on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 06:51:00 PM EST
    should maybe get a better class of fans.  I bet the critically injured Giants fan is not exactly rejoicing.  

    Admittedly, LA Dodger fans (none / 0) (#23)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 07:02:02 PM EST
    don't usually pummel people. Usually they are late to arrive and early to leave.

    Opening day brings out the doozies, though, folks with no interest in the game, but an interest in partying.


    Too much interest in (none / 0) (#25)
    by Zorba on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 07:04:11 PM EST
    booze, I'll bet.

    Booze, hot weather (5.00 / 0) (#52)
    by brodie on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 09:05:48 PM EST
    -- unseasonably hot in coastal CA in recent days, fierce longtime rivalry with the Giants, plus a certain type of low IQ fan can all combine to create a dangerous mix.

    And since this is apparently the second major parking lot incident on opening day for the Dodgers, they might actually consider putting some security people out there next time.  Perhaps even spend a few bucks -- dip into the excess profits from the ridiculously high priced beer sales --  and buy a few security cameras for the parking area.


    Ty Cobb... (none / 0) (#63)
    by kdog on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 09:00:07 AM EST
    might have begged to differ.

    Or any of the other great players fond of a donnybrook.

    I'm with ya in the stands and the lot...no place.  But on the field, there is a time and a place.  You can only pitch so much chin music between teams before a brawl is inevitable to settle it.  As long as nobody pulls a Marichal with a bat, I don't think its the worst thing in the world.  Part of the game.


    Having been a pitcher (none / 0) (#83)
    by NYShooter on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 05:40:23 PM EST
    from little league thru college, I can tell you that the temporary hatred between a pitcher and batter as to who "owns" the strike zone borders on insanity.

    If a pitcher perceives the batter's elbow, or cap, touches the imaginary line over home plate, well, that's a show of utter disrespect and it deserves a response commensurate with the affront.

    I'm sure the batter has a different interpretation. Lol.

    But, you're right; its as much a part of the game as grabbing your crotch in front of millions of fans.


    Cubs humor from The Onion (none / 0) (#42)
    by ruffian on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 08:32:32 PM EST
    Cubs can't believe they're doing this again.  Gotta laugh instead of cry.

    Quade added that even if the Cubs were to somehow make the World Series, they would inevitably lose in a devastating fashion that would physically and emotionally destroy anyone associated with the team in any way for decades to come

    So true. After that Bartman playoff I'm not sure I can take another one. I'd almost rather they not get to the WS if they are not guaranteed a win.


    Really gives you high hopes for (none / 0) (#43)
    by ruffian on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 08:34:06 PM EST
    Democracy there, doesn't it?

    Aaaargh....replied in the wrong spot (none / 0) (#44)
    by ruffian on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 08:35:05 PM EST
    Meant as a response to Karzai hoping the Koran burner will be prosecuted.

    Boston's relief pitching... (none / 0) (#14)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 06:24:21 PM EST
    When you have to bring in Wakefield to stop a rally, your bullpen might be suspect.

    OK Donald, guess we can just (none / 0) (#17)
    by BTAL on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 06:38:54 PM EST
    give a free pass to the murderers who were so "righteously" offended by that 1st Amendment action.

    I don't (none / 0) (#20)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 06:45:04 PM EST
    think he's saying that the murders need to be given a pass but the idiot who burned the Koran sure has some responsibility that I'm sure he's not willing to accept.

    And you Republicans want more fundamentalism in this country?


    I'm sorry... (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by kdog on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 09:04:55 AM EST
    book burners are arsehates, to be sure...but so are those who retaliate violently to a book burning tens of thousands miles away.  Ya can't hold a book burner in Fla responsible for a violent mob in Afghanistan, that is totally giving the Afghan mob a pass they do not deserve.

    Not (none / 0) (#65)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 09:22:27 AM EST
    excusing them. They are scum but to not hold that idiot in FL accountable when he KNEW what the reaction would be is inexcusable too.

    I think it only rises to the level of (none / 0) (#68)
    by jeffinalabama on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 09:27:26 AM EST
    tort law. he committed no crime.

    Well (none / 0) (#69)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 09:30:09 AM EST
    I'm comparing the guy in FL to the clerics that run around inciting people to murder but don't actually murder anybody.

    Agreement here. (none / 0) (#67)
    by jeffinalabama on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 09:25:46 AM EST
    Murder of noninvolved innocents, or even the burner himself, is more than extreme. It's Crusades-type reaction.

    There's no equivalence between some jackwagon burning the Quran, making a cartoon, etc., and mass murder.

    A silly Florida preacher didn't cause the reaction. Something else or multiple things inflamed the folks to create this reacion.

    Think of the Maine. Hearst used the incident to manipulate a war. The acts of a single evangelical preacher in Florida didn't cause this.

    And no, he did nothing criminal. However, I wonder about civil suits for negligence or willful disregard.


    For the record (none / 0) (#26)
    by BTAL on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 07:05:09 PM EST
    I think the "pastor" in FL is an azzhat.  

    Where do we start applying "responsibilities" to the other side for stupid and/or deliberate hateful acts?

    And you Democrats want more enlightenment in this country?  Touche?


    Agree with the first two points (none / 0) (#29)
    by Rupe on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 07:43:49 PM EST
    Time to get the hell out of that country, I say.  I don't have any tolerance for religious extremism anywhere, and we obviously have our own crazies to deal with stateside.

    Where (none / 0) (#30)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 08:06:28 PM EST
    did I excuse the people that actually killed the UN workers? Nowhere. Fundamentalism is a SERIOUS problem. Most republicans and/or conservatives don't see fundamentalism as a problem. they only see Islamic fundamentalism as a problem when it's not strictly Islamic fundamentalism that's a problem.

    Remember we have Christian Fundamentalists who have murdered people too.


    I don't know (none / 0) (#27)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 07:27:24 PM EST
    what Donald is saying.

    But I do know what he did say and what he did not say.

    And BTAL has a huge and important point.


    You (none / 0) (#33)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 08:10:32 PM EST
    conservatives don't really realize what the problem is. The problem is RADICAL RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM whether it be Christian or Muslim. Those people that horrendously murdered the UN Workers are just as disgusting as the Christian Fundamentalists in this country who have murdered people.

    This idiot fundamentalist pastor yelled fire in a crowded theatre. So if you think that's okay then have at it.


    Oh please (2.00 / 1) (#53)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 09:11:49 PM EST
    You have been here long enough to know that I am social liberal who also believes in a strong national defense.

    And I agree that fundamentalism is a problem.

    The problem is that we are letting Islamic fundamentalism proponents try to dictate to us what we can and cannot say by doing things that too many of our people are not willing to say is wrong.

    Radical Muslims killing people because of what is said in the US is not acceptable.

    Neither is us deciding that we must censor our speech and actions so as to not offend them.

    What that slippery slope leads to is a theocracy by default.

    And if our free speech means that people working in societies such as Afghanistan, Iraq, etc., etc., are put in harms way then I sympathize with their friends and families but that's the end of it.


    So you (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 06:08:20 AM EST
    don't think that the idiot in Fl should be held accountable for his actions? That's pretty much what you're saying. If you believe that then the people in Afghanistan who incite people to murder because of it are blameless also.

    The man in FL (none / 0) (#72)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 11:10:02 AM EST
    should be held accountable for any laws he breaks in the US.

    To do otherwise is to tell the radical Muslims that they can put us under defacto Sharia law.

    And he killed no one.

    The radical Muslims in Afghanistan did.

    Sorry if you can't see the difference.


    And apparenlty (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 11:39:51 AM EST
    you think that the clerics that incite people to murder because of this event hold no responsibility either.

    good grief (none / 0) (#74)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 11:37:58 AM EST
    You are putting words in my mouth. Did I say that he killed someone but if you hire a hit man to kill someone you're saying that you shouldn't be held accountable AT ALL.

    I think that conservatives like you should shun and disassociate yourself from the fundamentalists in this country instead of encouraging them. These people are coddled by the GOP and it emboldens them to do crap like this.


    Good grief yourself (none / 0) (#76)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 12:06:53 PM EST
    Your hit man comparison makes no sense.

    One more time. I am not a conservative. I have explained my position numerous times and you are making a false claim.

    Try to remember that the same right that allows you to condemn the pastor and those who "associate" with him also allow him to burn books and people to associate with him.

    That the "Arab Street" riots at the urging of radical Imams is not knew.

    We cannot let their actions control our freedoms.

    That would be defacto Sharia law.


    "new" (none / 0) (#77)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 12:09:57 PM EST
    And yes, the radicals who encourage the riots should be held responsible. But I don't have control of our foreign or military policy.

    Okay. (none / 0) (#86)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 06:53:34 PM EST
    I agree with you on the radicals that incite riots but why not the pastor in FL too? Isn't he just as guilty as the people screaming jihad? You seem to have different standards for different people. You just don't seem to think that the pastor should be held accountable for what he did.

    Guilty of what?? (none / 0) (#89)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 09:48:31 PM EST
    Exercising his free speech rights?

    Last time I checked book burning is not a crime.

    Killing people is a crime.

    But what's next?? Muslim riots and killing UN people because some gays got married?? How about a massacre because girls actually get to go to school in the US?



    He should (none / 0) (#100)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 03, 2011 at 04:21:46 PM EST
    be defrocked for being such an idiot and run out of town. He's an attention whore who does nothing but create trouble.

    Have at him (none / 0) (#101)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 03, 2011 at 07:04:16 PM EST
    that is your right.

    But the official posturing by Obama and Petraeus should stop.


    Heck (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 03, 2011 at 07:12:25 PM EST
    Petraeus warned this moron last fall when it first came up that something like this was going to happen and the moron didn't listen to him.

    Petraeus needs to understand (2.00 / 1) (#103)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 03, 2011 at 08:24:31 PM EST
    that he is employed in the task of defending a country and a society that allows all kinds of idiots and morons to do all kinds of idiotic and moronic things.

    And if thinks being nice nice to radical Imams will help he should be fired.

    And if he doesn't like the job he should resign.


    There's (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Apr 04, 2011 at 05:41:40 AM EST
    a difference between dealing with a wasp's nest (the radicals) or poking a stick in their nests. I don't think he's saying be nice to them but that there are consequences to stupidity. I mean driving drunk sure is stupid but if you hit somebody and kill them while driving drunk they're still dead.

    Terry Jones knew what he was doing. He thought and thought about it. It was premeditated. He knew that people would be killed by his stupidity but he just didn't care.


    Yes, what the Rev did was dumb. (none / 0) (#105)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Apr 04, 2011 at 08:56:19 AM EST
    But what he did was and is legal.

    Bowing to the wishes of the radical Imams does not fix anything.

    In fact, our condemnation of the Rev encourages the radical Muslims by leading them to believe they can establish de facto Sharia law by rioting and killing whenever they are "insulted."

    We are never going to change Afghanistan by mealy mouthed statements like the Gen. issued. What he should have said was:

    "America does not condone book burning. But in America people are free to do so. The Muslim world needs to get over their belief that they have the right to kill people because someone has insulted them."

    And if he doesn't understand that then he needs to be replaced.


    Well (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Apr 04, 2011 at 09:26:45 AM EST
    don't you think that Mr. Jones was bowing to the wishes of the radicals by his behavior? What he was doing plays right into what they want. The radicals want to "show" the rank and file Muslim in the Middle East that Americans are "evil" and up to no good and Terry Jones just helped them more than anybody else in this country. So you can defend this guy all you want but he's done way more for the Radical Imams than anybody else.

    The Rev can (none / 0) (#108)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Apr 04, 2011 at 01:47:14 PM EST
    bow and the Rev can scrap.

    That is his right.

    You write:

    The radicals want to "show" the rank and file Muslim

    What's next? Shall we stop allowing females to go to school to show that we are ready for Sharia law?

    Shall we regard honor killings as cultural rather than criminal to show that we are ready for Sharia law?

    Condone hanging gays and stoning people accused of infidelity to show that we are ready for Sharia law??

    Of course not.

    And the fact is that we changed Germany and Japan by first destroying their country and then occupying it and demanding they change.

    Should we do that again? Nope.

    But we should tell them that we do what we do and if they want respect they had better start showing some respect for the rights of others.


    Ralph Reed (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by jondee on Mon Apr 04, 2011 at 02:44:46 PM EST
    as I recall, wingnut coalition stalwart Ralph Reed, in his book Active Faith, reccomends a return to Old Testament Judaic law including the putting to death of adulterers and blasphemers..

    Of course, somehow it's different when a lilly-white, God-fearin', ex-college Republican leader says these things. Somehow.

    Plus, most folks is just too dang busy these days 'a-teabaggin' each other to take much notice..


    heh (none / 0) (#111)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Apr 04, 2011 at 06:27:15 PM EST
    Last time I checked Reed has as much power as you and me.

    Which is none.

    But thanks for dropping by and showing your nasties... again.



    Gird thy loins and casteth (none / 0) (#115)
    by jondee on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 03:01:31 PM EST
    the teabag from out thine eye..

    Heh. Tell me who has power when looy-tunes-Right sugar daddy Richard Mellon Scaife starts sending ME money..

    Then we have R.J Rushdoony, founder of the christian-Right Rutherford Institute - funded again by Scaife - who were major players in the 'get Clinton' campaign in the nineties..

    Rushdoony advocated the death penalty for abortion, sodomy, adultery as well as for "blasphemies" and "propagators of false doctrines". Last but not least, Rushdoony was a Holocaust denier..

    Bottom line, you've got enough dirt in the back yard of your own coalition to clean up without looking for monsters abroad.


    You (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Apr 04, 2011 at 04:45:38 PM EST
    are being silly. I asked you if Rev. Jones did not help the radical Imams? You are leaping to hysterical conclusions.

    Apparently the fact that women go to school here does not motivate the radicals to kill people.

    You are demanding that the radicals in other countries "show some respect" but yet don't demand the same of the radicals in this country?


    Silly is as silly does (none / 0) (#112)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Apr 04, 2011 at 06:36:31 PM EST
    Of course he helped the radicals and he has the right to do so.

    Should we shut him up to satisfy them?

    What we have here is the world famous slippery slope.

    Do you remember Obama's middle name??? Some newspapers forbade using it by commentators in their forums.

    And yes, when the Muslim world limits its self induced insult responses to condemning the "insult" with no dead, beheaded or otherwise, then they will have shown some respect.

    Look, if you want to let the actions of radical Muslims control what we say, do or write, just keep on bad mouthing our idiots and being seen by the radical Muslims as supporting them.

    I know that isn't a pleasant thought but freedom often is not.


    I occurs to me that this conversation (none / 0) (#113)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Apr 04, 2011 at 06:48:10 PM EST
    is going no place.

    Let me summarize my points.

    The so-called Arab Street is easily whipped into a frenzy by supposed religious Imams. They have done it over cartoons, flushing a Koran and now burning one.

    I wish that our nuts would be smart enough to not give them the "reason" but I'm not about to condemn them for burning a Koran anymore than I condemn our Left leaning nuts for burning the US flag.

    I view trying to get along with the so-called religious Imams as useless. It is like feeding a boa constrictor. When you run out of food the snake will come for you.

    And yes, the point of the riots is to try and make us bow to their point of view and religious law.

    'Nuff said. Enjoyed the thread. Have a nice night.


    but you'll condemn Obama (none / 0) (#117)
    by jondee on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 03:33:17 PM EST
    for not standing close enough to the flag on stage at your website..

    you being the social liberal voice of reason and moderation that you are..


    I will take all opportunities (none / 0) (#118)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 07:15:18 PM EST
    to criticize Obama.


    Because he was not, is not and will not be, qualified to be President.

    It really is just that simple although I know you cannot and will not accept that.


    if there were that many (none / 0) (#120)
    by jondee on Thu Apr 07, 2011 at 04:25:40 PM EST
    genuine opportunities, you wouldn't have to make ludicrous things up, now would you..

    Or is it just that you can't anything to stick on Obama that can't also be stuck on the 'thugs and teabaggers?


    after being President (none / 0) (#121)
    by jondee on Thu Apr 07, 2011 at 04:44:52 PM EST
    he's still less qualified that Palin, Michelle Bachman or Glenn Beck..

    Yes, that point's already been made many times over by the members of Teabag Nation. How do the know? well, they just do. Plus, it was spelled out in Beck's outmeal one morning (along with the location of the lost city of Atlantis)


    Obama's middle name lol (none / 0) (#116)
    by jondee on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 03:06:03 PM EST
    Gentleman, start your teabags. And lets get that Palin blow-up doll inflated.

    As I saw at Ballon Juice (none / 0) (#119)
    by Harry Saxon on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 09:53:21 PM EST
    "We can agree to disagree, but I'm right."

    Steve at No More Mr. Nice Blog (none / 0) (#106)
    by Harry Saxon on Mon Apr 04, 2011 at 09:05:51 AM EST
    summed it up this way:

    (On the other hand, can we really say that Jones is condemning the violence that followed his deed? He's deeply invested in the idea that Muslims are a lower order of being. He wants them, or at least some of them, to affirm his theory. He wants this to happen. So in a way he's an advocate of this violence.)

    Click or Don't Blog Me


    Oh, please (none / 0) (#57)
    by Harry Saxon on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 05:09:29 AM EST

    The problem is that we are letting Islamic fundamentalism proponents try to dictate to us what we can and cannot say by doing things that too many of our people are not willing to say is wrong.

    That's the funniest thing you've written all year, PPJ.


    You know, (none / 0) (#36)
    by lentinel on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 08:17:49 PM EST
    Bush yelled fire in a crowded theatre and has gotten away with it.

    Did you see (none / 0) (#19)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 06:43:25 PM EST
    this sentence:
    President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan on Thursday called on the United States to bring those responsible for the Koran burning to justice.

    Um, we don't have laws against this type of thing. Too bad he doesn't know that.

    The last major league (none / 0) (#28)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 07:30:25 PM EST
    game I attended was the Coor's Field opener in 2003 vs the Cardinals.

    Walker, from mid right field, threw out a runner trying to score from third..

    I miss Denver.

    For the Baseball Fans (none / 0) (#31)
    by CoralGables on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 08:06:59 PM EST
    Josh Johnson is throwing a no hitter through 6 innings in Miami against the Mets.

    And (none / 0) (#32)
    by CoralGables on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 08:08:57 PM EST
    exactly 90 seconds later, it is no more.

    Look what you did! (none / 0) (#34)
    by Rupe on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 08:10:59 PM EST
    I was thinking (none / 0) (#38)
    by CoralGables on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 08:23:01 PM EST
    the same thing damn. For anyone with Josh on their fantasy team I take full responsibility.

    I always thought (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by brodie on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 08:29:16 PM EST
    the taboo, for fans not sitting on that team's bench, was to not mention it before the seventh inning.  

    Had you waited just one more inning you would have been in the clear, with no karmic repercussions, by this version of the superstition.  

    Unfortunately, you didn't, and so will have to pay.  If not in this life, then the next.  Sorry -- the gods of balance and harmony demand payment ...  ;-)


    B y gods of balance and harmony, (none / 0) (#45)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 08:38:11 PM EST
    you of course mean Jobu, right? otherwise you face a flying bat to the back of the head!

    Wear a helmet, brodie...


    I will toast Jobu (and Josh) (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by CoralGables on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 08:51:26 PM EST
    with a rum drink this evening and ask for forgiveness.

    Well being of Egyptian (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by brodie on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 08:52:34 PM EST
    bent (spiritually, in the ancient sense), I actually had in mind Ma'at.  But since baseball was one of the few things they didn't apparently get around to inventing (too busy building pyramids for the gods probably), I concede the American god Jobu better fits the bill.

    Two days of baseball only so far, and it looks like an interesting season shaping up.  A multi-multimillionaire superstar hits into 3 double plays on opening day, the knuckledragging Dodger fans are up to their usual civilized antics in the post-game parking lot, and a poster at TalkLeft ruins a no-hitter for a pitcher ...



    Collateral damage. (none / 0) (#35)
    by lentinel on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 08:15:43 PM EST
    I've been watching some cop shows recently.

    Victims are referred to as "vics".
    Decomposition of bodies is referred to as "decomp".
    Dead bodies are "d.b.".

    This does little to bolster my confidence in the survival of our species.

    I watched a few minutes of (5.00 / 3) (#40)
    by ruffian on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 08:26:23 PM EST
    'criminal minds' the other night. Horrifying. It is like the Manson murders as daily fare.

    When I think of people on a steady diet of this stuff it does not do much for my confidence either.


    Exception! (none / 0) (#84)
    by NYShooter on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 05:56:25 PM EST
    The medical examiner, "Ducky," on NCIS ripped a new A__hole to a subordinate who referred to the deceased as a "Vic."

    "They are vic-TIMS, and don't you forget it!"



    Tax them now or die not too much later (none / 0) (#61)
    by Dadler on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 08:14:57 AM EST
    I enjoyed Bill Maher last night (none / 0) (#62)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 08:53:56 AM EST
    a lot.  Republican Doug Heye could not have made it any more obvious that the Republican party HAS NO SOLUTIONS AT ALL to offer to any of the nations very real problems.  After the public/voter outrage following what the WI Republicans have done and other states taking their lead, I think the Republicans are pretty doomed at party level next election cycle.

    I think we're all pretty much doomed, (5.00 / 2) (#71)
    by Anne on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 10:00:53 AM EST
    regardless of how badly the GOP does in the next election cycle.  Why?  Because what the Dems seem to be offering doesn't look so much like Democratic ideas but old Rockefeller Republican ideas.  And warmed-over Reagan ideas.  Shoot, the best an alleged Democratic president and Democratic-majority Congress can do is Bob Dole Health Whatever Reform?  What's wrong with that picture?

    Our choices are apparently to go crazy right, or sane right; not much there for those of us who want to go left, especially considering that we have to so much farther left to go just to get back to where we were in 2008.

    And I don't see that happening, so God knows how much more Republican the Democrats will be by the time we get to November, 2012.

    I shudder to think.


    Dems in Congress as (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by brodie on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 11:15:10 AM EST
    Rockerfella Repubs isn't far off the mark.  Sorta moderately centrist on domestic and social issues overall, with a little more center-right hawkish profile on FP, or at least as cong'l Dems have so far not resisted on continuing in Afghanistan.

    And while Obama has talked up the virtues of Ronnie Reagan, apparently one of his role models as president, he governs a little more in actuality like Ike, the sort of well-liked, bipartisan-oriented fellow who worked cooperatively with the opposition party in Congress.  Like Ike, O has given his Pentagon/CIA a very long leash, if any, as they have largely been the dominant partner so far in calling the major shots in FP.

    Domestically the legislation produced is Wall St friendly (Ike being a good friend of big business, who enjoyed playing golf with their ceo's), while a couple of Sup Ct picks from the center-left (Warren, Brennan for Ike) and a few other smallish things have been enough up to now to mostly placate the liberals, or at least keep them from mounting large protests against the admin.

    But with a weak economy, and the union/wage worker backlash occurring in several states, as re-elect arrives O will be increasingly pressured to do more for the middle class folks in this country, including showing some spine and good sense in forcing huge corps and ceo's to pay more of their share, and in withdrawing from the unending Afghanistan mess.  Still waiting though for O to step up and act strongly for Dem values ...


    I think what disturbs me so, and leaves (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by Anne on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 03:50:58 PM EST
    me with little hope, is that increasingly, it seems as if it just doesn't matter what we say or what we do; the fix is in and there is little ability by the people - the Averages Joes and Janes - to influence what happens.  

    As for the weak economy, the metric is going to be that stocks are up and profits are up so everything must be coming up roses; we're already seeing a little of this.  

    Yes, there will be some meager bones thrown our way as we get closer to 2012, but it's going to be lip service, empty promises, happy talk-kabuki, with little substance behind it.

    Little did I know that when we were sneeringly told that we had nowhere else to go, I would be sitting here, two years later, realizing that not only don't I have anywhere to go - much less anywhere "else" to go - but that the party I spent my entire voting life registered with isn't interested in what I think or what I want - it just wants me to vote (D) no matter what.

    They can think again.


    Indeed (none / 0) (#88)
    by Zorba on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 08:06:28 PM EST
    I'm sick and tired of the "meager bones," Anne, and I have decided I will not vote for Obama again, in the Primary, or in the General Election.  Mr. Zorba keeps telling me that I will have wasted my vote, and that a Republican may then win in 2012.  But if people don't start trying to vote for someone else, then nothing will change.  I have said this before- maybe things have to go really, really far into the toilet before citizens wake the f*ck up and start to vote for their own interests.  If that doesn't happen, if Americans are really that deluded, then maybe America is not where I want to live.  And I say this with extreme sorrow.  America, I hardly knew you.   :-(

    A suggestion for people who have (none / 0) (#90)
    by MO Blue on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 10:00:24 PM EST
    decided not to vote for Obama in 2012.

    I intend to cast my vote as a write in for Bernie Sanders. I wish other left leaning people who do not plan to vote for Obama would do the same. There is no way the Democratic Party could legitimately spin that Obama lost those votes because he was not conservative enough.    


    Sounds good to me (none / 0) (#91)
    by Zorba on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 10:11:42 PM EST
    Bernie's not perfect, but he's very, very darned close to what I believe in.  Do you think we could get enough write-ins to shake up the Democrats?

    We can only try (5.00 / 0) (#94)
    by MO Blue on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 10:52:37 PM EST
    If everyone who decide not to vote for Obama voted for Bernie and recommended others with the same POV do the same, there is a slim possibility that we could shake them up a wee bit. For me it would be a big win if it was reported that votes were going to Bernie because Obama moved too far to the right.



    People need to check to see whether (none / 0) (#92)
    by Anne on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 10:17:43 PM EST
    write-ins are allowed in their states and/or they need to look into what is required to make sure their votes will count.

    In Maryland, if the candidate you want to vote for has not done what he or she needs to do to be on the ballot, the only way to vote for him or her is on a provisional ballot - but it's a moral action only - the vote doesn't count.

    And someone might want to check with Bernie to see if he's up for a presidential run...


    Bernie has stated that he thinks (none / 0) (#93)
    by MO Blue on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 10:42:40 PM EST
    it would be a good idea if someone from the left would primary Obama and he has no intention of running for president.

    I haven't checked out what the rules for write-ins are in MO but would prefer my vote to count so that people could see that I want someone to the left of Obama. Bottom line though, it is not absolutely necessary for Bernie to want my vote or for MO to count it. From my POV it is either write-in Bernie or leave the spot blank. I would prefer to vote for someone who is much closer to where I stand on issues. I feel I would waste my vote by voting against my interests and I would be doing that pulling the lever for the D or R in 2012.


    Oh, I agree with you completely; (5.00 / 0) (#95)
    by Anne on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 10:56:38 PM EST
    I am done with voting against my interests, am not persuaded by guilt or fear or Roe v. Wade, and believe that we cannot expect quality candidates if we keep showing that we're willing to keep lowering the bar - "marginally less bad" is not a metric we should be striving for, and continuing to vote that way is just perpetuating the decline.

    Failing a candidate I could vote for, I would like the ability to vote "None of the Above," so that at least there would be a way to express my dissatisfaction with the slate in a quantifiable and meaningful way.


    My husband has been saying (none / 0) (#96)
    by Zorba on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 11:01:41 PM EST
    for a number of years that there should be a "None of the Above" option.  And if "None of the Above" receives the majority of the votes, the election must be done over but none of those on the original ballot would be allowed to run again.    

    Way way too early (none / 0) (#97)
    by brodie on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 11:07:55 PM EST
    to completely write off the incumbent.  And for primarying him, there's no one remotely like an RFK or even a Gene McCarthy willing to step up or waiting in the wings (GMcC) to be called.  

    I'm not nearly decided one way or the other, though some movement of libs-union workers needs to happen to wake this guy up and make him start governing more for Main St rather than his buddies like Geithner and Summers.

    And I shudder to think what a Tea Party-approved Gooper in the WH would do to this country if we sit on our hands like 2010 ...


    I have no doubt he will wake up...just (5.00 / 0) (#98)
    by Anne on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 11:21:59 PM EST
    long enough to go full-on into campaign mode and win votes, but I don't believe we will see, in any significant way that is measurable through actual governance, that this guy has any commitment to core Democratic principles - and it's governance and leadership that should make the difference, not campaign kabuki.

    At least for me.

    This president has had two years - with solid majorities in both houses of Congress - to show his commitment to Democratic values, and in just about every case, has chosen to go in another direction - further to the right.

    There is nothing to suggest he gives two hoots about the liberal/progressive vote, and I don't believe for one minute Obama will do anything more than mock and deride us for what we want.


    I seriously doubt that Obama will (5.00 / 0) (#99)
    by MO Blue on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 11:51:30 PM EST
    face a primary challenge from the left. Any challenge that might be mounted would be from the 3rd. Way or a so called bipartisan 3rd Party like the recently proposed "No Label" party where the Dems would be represented by people like Lieberman. Bottom line it will be structured so that the same corporate centric, lower taxes on the rich and starve the poor policies will be legislated no matter who wins.

    Obama's promises to enact progressive legislation made while on the campaign trail are worthless. We have heard him embracing Republican rhetoric and policies and seen the types of legislation he supports since he became president.    

    While I shudder to think what a Tea Party-approved Gooper in the WH would do to this country, I also shudder to think what Obama will do with the Republicans controlling both houses of Congress.    


    Brodie, if you are waiting (none / 0) (#87)
    by Zorba on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 07:57:48 PM EST
    "for O to step up and act strongly for Dem values," unfortunately, you're going to be waiting a long, long time.

    Unless or until this changes, (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by MO Blue on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 06:19:30 PM EST
    the government will be "Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%" and politicians will continue turn a deaf ear to the lower 99%.

    The Supreme Court, in its recent Citizens United case, has enshrined the right of corporations to buy government, by removing limitations on campaign spending. The personal and the political are today in perfect alignment. Virtually all U.S. senators, and most of the representatives in the House, are members of the top 1 percent when they arrive, are kept in office by money from the top 1 percent, and know that if they serve the top 1 percent well they will be rewarded by the top 1 percent when they leave office. By and large, the key executive-branch policymakers on trade and economic policy also come from the top 1 percent. When pharmaceutical companies receive a trillion-dollar gift--through legislation prohibiting the government, the largest buyer of drugs, from bargaining over price--it should not come as cause for wonder. It should not make jaws drop that a tax bill cannot emerge from Congress unless big tax cuts are put in place for the wealthy. Given the power of the top 1 percent, this is the way you would expect the system to work.

    BackFromOhio provided the link to the Stiglitz article.

    As long as it is legal to buy the government, nothing IMO will change in D.C.  


    I thought about this too last night (none / 0) (#80)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 02:19:14 PM EST
    But public outrage did shut down Obama's "tweaking" of Social Security now though.  I think people are so pissed at the Republicans that he is dropping many of his Republican ideas.  At least for now.

    Certainly (none / 0) (#70)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 09:58:57 AM EST
    in the upper midwest. I'm sure they'll continue to be elected in the south no matter what they do.

    True (none / 0) (#79)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 02:17:50 PM EST
    The Alabama state legislature was Democratic controlled though until last November.  I don't think the Republicans have had control of the State legislature for over 100 years until now.