Wednesday Open Thread

Dentist day for me. Here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Obama's Embrace Of "Structural" High Unemployment | Thursday Morning Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    If the Election Were Today (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 12:20:15 PM EST
    Who would vote for Obama if Romney was the R choice.

    I wouldn't vote.

    That's one protest... (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:01:29 PM EST
    my choice is to vote for the also-ran...I got an hour to kill one Tuesday every four years.

    I'll vote for him. (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by magster on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:04:39 PM EST
    I won't campaign or canvass or donate or clash with Hillary supporters and alleged Obama supporter BTD on talkleft like I did in 2008, but I will vote for him over anyone in the Republican field.  It's crazy important to regain the House though, and I imagine I will do my best to work on any of the close campaigns in and around Denver to make that happen.

    Tangent: PPP shows Bachman surging in NH primary poll.  She may be the nominee.


    I've always had an eery feeling that (none / 0) (#23)
    by hairspray on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:25:12 PM EST
    the GOP would put up the first woman elected for president.  I hope I am soooo wrong.  

    Having Bachmann in either (none / 0) (#28)
    by brodie on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:39:24 PM EST
    spot on the GOP ticket would clinch it for me.  I'll side with Disappointing any day over Disaster or Doomsday.

    Though I'm sure the GOP establishment will try to soften her jagged fundamentalist, theocratic edges and try to package her as just another "compassionate conservative".


    If the GOP establishment (none / 0) (#78)
    by Zorba on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 05:21:55 PM EST
    is going to try to "soften" her image, they'd better find a way to shut her husband Marcus up.  And he doesn't seem like the type who would go along with being told to keep his mouth shut.

    I intend to vote for Obama (none / 0) (#32)
    by lilburro on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:46:17 PM EST
    I may or may not work for Obama.  If I am completely infuriated, I'm not going to do a great job of working for him.

    I always vote (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Towanda on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:06:45 PM EST
    so that I do not add to the pols' and pollsters' misunderstandings and misstatements about the electorate, presuming that those who do not vote do not care.

    But I get to do write-ins, and I just may have to do so again, as a protest vote about lousy choices.


    Agreed, Towanda. (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by jeffinalabama on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:09:46 PM EST
    From where I'll be voting it won't matter, but I can put some decent name in the mix.

    I love the write-in option (none / 0) (#65)
    by shoephone on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 03:51:28 PM EST
    especailly where it concerns one of my senators. Instead of voting for her, I always write in the name of an 88-year old friend and former micro biologist.



    The script on rw (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by jondee on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 05:09:49 PM EST
    talk radio around the country is that "the left" gets upset about this kind of thing because they love animals more than people (which is also why they don't mind when our brave fighting men and women are killed!)

    So, basically, if you're overly concerned about the treatment of animals, it could be a strong indication that you hate America.

    If Jim were around I'm sure he could elaborate..


    My vote - a write in vote for (5.00 / 3) (#94)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 07:51:50 PM EST
    Bernie Sanders

    Interesting (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:10:16 AM EST
    I am not voting to validate some pol.

    I am not voting because of a dog story, even though I own 4 and would slice the person who caused them any harm.

    I am not voting a write it as some protest.

    We are over a year out, so the final decision will be then.  But unless Obama raises taxes and keeps his hands off SS, it's looking like I will stay home.  Had I wanted the current set of policies, I could have voted for Reagan(had they made the voting age 10).

    This will be the second time, the fist was '92 and that was because when I got out of the Navy, the election was so close that it wasn't possible.

    This business sucks, all I want is a sliver of someone respectable to support, I even volunteered in '08.  Phone duty, but it felt good, this time I wouldn't be any help if someone were to ask me 'Why ?'.

    Which is precisely why, at this point, I don't think I will vote.  

    No one gave a reason as to why I should vote for Obama that is actually in regards to Obama.


    I've already brought up (5.00 / 0) (#142)
    by brodie on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:24:24 AM EST
    the Sup Court as a major factor in how Dems should consider voting next year.  So far Obama has been good with his two picks -- neither one a closet Anthony Kennedy or callous corporatist.  The next president likely will get at least one maybe 2 picks over 4 yrs, and if Ginsberg or Breyer should decide or have to step aside, that means Roe v Wade and other privacy and consumer and civil rights issues are going to be decided against liberals and for the religious fundies and corporate execs and racist elements.

    No thanks rolling those dice.  I'll be waiting a while to make my final decision about voting O, but if it's Romney/Bachmann or Bachmann/Who Cares I've already made up my mind.


    Great Point (none / 0) (#149)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:40:40 AM EST
    I will have to check out that aspect, but if what you say is true, I will vote for O for 1 SCoTUS appointment, two and I might stop bashing him.



    I'm writing in Knuckles McGurk, (none / 0) (#3)
    by jeffinalabama on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 12:25:40 PM EST
    the misunderstood almost-pit-bull.

    Or actually, Joe Turnham. He's a southern liberal, fought the good fight for a long time, got NO support when running for congress from the DCCC.

    He's worth a shout out.

    Let's see a primary challenge from the left. I have time, but y'all know me, it would not make for anything newsworthy.


    Irish Setters have been (none / 0) (#66)
    by shoephone on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 03:53:23 PM EST
    part of my family since the 1940's; I will never forgive Willard for that inhumane act either.

    It was kinda creepy watching (none / 0) (#73)
    by nycstray on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 04:40:58 PM EST
    him last round trying to convince everyone that he was a sane rational decision maker, knowing the dog story and all . . .

    At least we won't have the same two-fer this time, with Huck and his dog killing son sitting this one out . . .


    I didn't vote for Obama the first time (none / 0) (#123)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 09:22:27 AM EST
    Does that mean I am smarter than the average bear?



    average bear, yes (5.00 / 1) (#185)
    by jondee on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 02:32:41 PM EST
    average person, no.

    Ah I can just feel the love (none / 0) (#188)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 03:05:35 PM EST

    Sorry for jondee's post, (none / 0) (#189)
    by jeffinalabama on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 03:50:55 PM EST
    PPJ, i think it's meant as a running joke. You're ok in my book even with everything we already know we disagree on. Finding out more disagreements won't change that.

    You gotta forgive Jondee (none / 0) (#192)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 04:44:09 PM EST
    He be a Yankee!


    Now off to the ball game!


    Good luck to the All Stars! (none / 0) (#193)
    by jeffinalabama on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 04:53:53 PM EST
    Et tu, PPJ? (none / 0) (#163)
    by jeffinalabama on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 11:30:00 AM EST

    No man, I aint et nothing... (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 01:14:19 PM EST
    To steal a line from Brother Dave Gardner.

    Gotta love Brother Dave. (none / 0) (#184)
    by jeffinalabama on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 02:18:42 PM EST
    Wonder how many folks still remember him? I still have one album of his. Nothing to play it on, but got the album.

    How many remember? (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 02:59:17 PM EST
    Not many. Remember

    "....Man if you aint Charles I'm outta here!"


    "Mr Bubba was killed outright but Miz Billy was okay until Charles and me turned her head around..."


    Not if Checked the McCain/Palin Box (none / 0) (#182)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 01:48:58 PM EST
    Obama cuts SS (none / 0) (#125)
    by TJBuff on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 09:30:12 AM EST
    I'll write in Sanders.

    White House phone line (5.00 / 2) (#130)
    by MO Blue on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 09:41:25 AM EST
    has been busy all morning. Hopefully people are contacting them non stop withdrawing their support due to Obama's position on SS, Medicare and Medicaid.

    I have also contacted my so called Democratic Senator's D.C. and local office and advised that if any changes are made to these programs, I will work to defeat her.


    Don't worry, (none / 0) (#135)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:02:05 AM EST
    this is up to the Congress and the president is powerless. He can't wave a wand and get his way.

    Romney is clearly not worthy (none / 0) (#127)
    by sj on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 09:33:49 AM EST
    Alas, neither is Obama.

    Fairness a long inherited human trait? (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Dadler on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 12:28:10 PM EST
    I meant to say both ALIEN and confounding (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Dadler on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 12:53:57 PM EST
    Rather than the "it's both round and circular" thingy I threw up there.  hack.  lol.

    The trouble has been (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by jondee on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 05:37:16 PM EST
    that the militantly Social Darwinist element that inhabits the wealthiest 1% (the Scaifes, Kochs etc) has perfected the art of intimidating those that they can't buy off outright.

    And what are we to make of this masochistic, thank-you-sir-may-I-have-another? element in the Tea Party that wants to deregulate further, abolish the minimum wage and do away with unions altogether?

    Not to be a downer..I belive people are basically good too.


    from your link (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by sj on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:01:11 AM EST
    I found this exceedingly interesting:

    When given a mild anti-anxiety drug ... subjects still said they viewed an 80-20 split as unjust, but their willingness to reject it outright dropped in half.

    And how many people are on anti-anxiety/depression meds these days?  Makes it harder to find one's outrage if one is well medicated.

    disclaimer: NOT to say that these meds haven't been a lifesaver for many -- they clearly have.  But I still think we are an over-prescribed society.


    I found that paragraph odd, as well (none / 0) (#174)
    by Dadler on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:52:20 PM EST
    And, as you probably know from my posts, I also think we are over-pill'd as a nation.  If there isn't a pill to take for it, we'll find one, or make one, or borrow one.  Just swallow.

    No Big surprise... (none / 0) (#6)
    by jeffinalabama on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 12:34:02 PM EST
    people are basically good, and actually care about their fellow planet inhabitants. Even the elites-- look at all of the foundations to do good.

    It's those few who are genetically deficient who screw it up for the rest of us.


    The genetically deficient and politicians (none / 0) (#20)
    by republicratitarian on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:21:03 PM EST
    The law... (none / 0) (#48)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 02:42:24 PM EST
    their most powerful weapon.

    What is it about being elected that (none / 0) (#25)
    by hairspray on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:30:03 PM EST
    changes the dynamic?  If people are pretty generous towards one another why are the elected officials from (mostly) southern states so miserly?  They keep saying they are doing the nation's business but they seem to be doing the corporation's business. Why?  Is it all about being re-elected?

    are highly overinflated. I want my $20 back.

    Likewise for Spielberg's.... (none / 0) (#22)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:23:38 PM EST
    "Super 8"...total snoozefest.

    I liked Super 8 (none / 0) (#24)
    by magster on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:28:12 PM EST
    Maybe because I was 12 years old in 1979 like all the main characters, but I really got a kick out of the movie.  The ending dragged after a strong start, but that's nothing new for action movies.

    Started ok... (none / 0) (#26)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:33:30 PM EST
    with ya there...but it didn't go anywhere.  

    The alien was a totally lame let down.


    Saw "8" too, (none / 0) (#38)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 02:16:24 PM EST
    liked it alot more than "Paris." Really liked the girl in "8", thought she did a great job. The people hanging upside down unconscious in the web has been done many times before. The alien was lame, once you got to see it. And the process in which the alien went from maniacal killer to misunderstood sweetie-pie who just wanted to get home to mommy, was way too short and was completely lacking in any suspense.

    Well said... (none / 0) (#41)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 02:22:19 PM EST
    if the alien could sense all that from touching a human, and still kill all those people who surely had good in them somewheres...well, that alien was an extra terrestrial d*ck.

    I hope... (none / 0) (#43)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 02:25:09 PM EST
    the new season of Curb doesn't disappoint like that...judging from the plot of the first episode, it surely won't.  Larry is the sh*t.

    That's some funny stuff! (none / 0) (#49)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 02:46:34 PM EST
    Listen for the PC alarm bells... (none / 0) (#50)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 02:54:55 PM EST
    monday morning, some advocacy group will surely be lodging complaints, demanding apologies, etc.

    The alien ran a brokerage house on (none / 0) (#44)
    by jeffinalabama on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 02:25:26 PM EST
    Wall Street?

    I thought (none / 0) (#33)
    by Makarov on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:47:17 PM EST
    JJ Abrams directed it.

    The last picture Spielberg directed was Indiana Jones 4 in 2008.


    My bad... (none / 0) (#35)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:56:38 PM EST
    you're right, Spielberg just produced.

    You are correct, Spielberg PRODUCED Super 8 (none / 0) (#36)
    by magster on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:57:18 PM EST
    JJ Abrams directed.

    Tangent: I just saw Indy Jones 4 again after returning from a vacation weekend in New Mexico that included a visit (pre-fire) to the Nuclear Museum in Los Alamos.  The opening scenes where Indy absurdly survives a nuclear test in Nevada were fun to watch right after that museum visit.


    Abrams apparently wrote (none / 0) (#37)
    by brodie on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 02:04:36 PM EST
    it, too, as well as directed.  Spielberg was the producer only.  Sounds from one review it's a bit of a rip-off or mix of several classic Spielberg-directed flicks.  Of course, in Hollywood they would call that an "homage".

    Been a very long while since I've seen a really good, creative and original ET-themed Hollywood movie.  Mostly remakes lately of old classics, and not necessarily improvements on the originals.  This one too looks to be a disappointing re-hash in its own way.


    utter ripoff (none / 0) (#77)
    by Dadler on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 05:21:02 PM EST
    er, homage, excuse me.

    boring, tired, and reminded me very little of actual life in '79, when I was also 13.  There is no such thing as a sentimental adolescence.  If you have one, you're a true freak, but congratulations, I envy you.  What I remember is getting my ass kicked, out of control zits and popping them bloodily for hours; I remember adolescents being uncommonly cruel to the least among them, and being befriended by a loner who was already doing PCP.

    SUPER-8 was very Abrams, meaning in the end it was about nothing much at all.  Always my problem with his shows.  Pretty but kind of empty.  IMO, and I'm cranky, so...

    Also, disclaimer, Abrams screwed over my buddy, who formerly ran his company, but my friend now has a huge network gig, so he did alright.  


    My grandson said it was (none / 0) (#126)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 09:32:36 AM EST
    his Movie of the Year!

    You may be the wrong audience.


    I was home sick (none / 0) (#129)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 09:39:54 AM EST
    But my guys went to it and loved it.

    over-manipulated color palette, to the 80's sitcom one dimensional characters of the bride to be and her friends and parents, to the plot so completely predictable (aside from the one twist) that it made my stomach hurt.

    Instead of being suspended, my disbelief was deep in a crater at my feet.


    Natural, understated, eminently appealing. Loved her in that Versailles scene.

    However, the scene later in the movie where she returns to the screen and translates from the diary took me out of the movie.

    It jumped out at me as being unnecessary and out of place - that there were many more skillful and less obtrusive ways to make that plot point.

    After the movie when I found out who she really was, and then I understood why he brought her back into the movie...


    Your favorable reaction to (none / 0) (#80)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 05:26:47 PM EST
    "Midnight in Paris" is similar to mine.  However, I the believe the movie's charm lies in a place other than in in-depth character development. Indeed it is the opposite that Woody Allen  presents. The characters are not necessarily as they are or were, but as Gil Pender sees them or wishes them to be. Inez as well as her Republican parents, John and Helen, are a part of Gil's perceptions and a part of Allen's fable of searching and satisfaction.  A nod to surrealism, a bow to nostalgia and a cold splash of the present, makes Gil's (and Woody's) art.

    I agree about the fiancé and parents (none / 0) (#104)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 09:08:21 PM EST
    They all could have been dropped and it would have been better.

    Oh, I liked it a lot (none / 0) (#102)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 09:05:30 PM EST
    Not perfect, but enjoyable, and nice to see a film made for adults.

    Better and better. (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by lentinel on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:42:08 PM EST
    I thought the title for the most vague source attribution was the one that appeared in the Times the other day relating to the Strauss-Kahn case:
    "officials close to the situation".

    But I do think today's source tops that one:

    It is:

    "according to a person briefed on the matter."

    My noggin spins.

    This is too rich.... (5.00 / 3) (#61)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 03:28:47 PM EST
    The FDA is taking a closer look at Chantix, the stop smoking drug, cuz it may cause heart problems.  What a coincidence, just like smoking! lol

    but... (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by markw on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 07:14:22 PM EST
    As Jeralyn has pointed out, there was no need to rely on the government of France to extradite.  The DA could have quietly got a sealed indictment and just waited until DSK returned to the US to arrest him.  IMF headquarters are in Washington, and DSK presumably either lives near there or travels there frequently.

    DSK owns a home (none / 0) (#87)
    by Zorba on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 07:18:26 PM EST
    in DC (Georgetown).

    Who knows whether (none / 0) (#93)
    by Zorba on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 07:46:48 PM EST
    or not he really did rape her, or whether it was consensual?  He might not have thought he did anything wrong, either way.  If they had sealed the indictment, he might not have known he would be arrested next time he came here.  And if he did think he would be arrested and refused to return to the US, he would have had to resign from the IMF, anyway.  Their headquarters are in DC, and you can hardly have a Managing Director who refuses to go to the headquarters.

    out of order (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by markw on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 08:34:20 PM EST
    He only lost the IMF job because he was arrested.  If he hadn't been arrested, he wouldn't have lost the IMF job.  He would have come back to his job at the IMF and could have been arrested then.

    As for his knowing he was going to be arrested, I think the fact that
    he phoned the hotel twice to inquire about his cell phone, and gave his exact location right before he was otherwise about to leave the country, is pretty strong evidence he didn't expect to be arrested.


    you are beating a dead horse (5.00 / 0) (#110)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:31:56 AM EST
    with the extradition argument, as others have pointed out. He comes here all the time and all they had to do was get a sealed indictment.

    No one will every know what actually happened except the two of them, so it's hardly the only relevant thing.

    What's most relevant to me is the rush to judgment in the DA's office and court of public opinion. If you are going to perpetuate that, please limit yourself to four comments a day on the matter.


    Diplomatic immunity? (none / 0) (#96)
    by Erehwon on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 08:19:44 PM EST
    If he was here on IMF business, wouldn't he have diplomatic immunity? As opposed to a personal visit, as this last one was?

    Here is a reasonable article on the issue ... (none / 0) (#103)
    by Erehwon on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 09:06:22 PM EST
    black teen threatened with jail due to prank (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by markw on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 09:12:12 PM EST
    Have you seen this story?  Criminal prosecution of a black teen simply for leaving a sex doll in a school toilet as a senior prank.  It's hard to see what exactly he is being charged with--I can't figure out what crime he could possibly have committed, unless he trespassed (but there's no reporting that that occurred).

    I'm not one to call racism left and right, but this one leaves a very bad taste.

    Way to keep things in perspective (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by rdandrea on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:08:17 AM EST
    He didn't exactly call in a bomb scare, the school overreacted.

    Senior prank went bad in Durango, CO this year.  Seniors scattered 30 bales of hay throughout the school.  Trouble with hay, as opposed to straw, is that's it's partially digested by mold.

    School had to be shut for four days and the cleanup cost $200K.

    In this case, the school district and legal system DID keep things in perspective and the kids were sentenced to community service, no restitution, and were allowed to graduate with their class.


    good lord (none / 0) (#108)
    by The Addams Family on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 11:01:28 PM EST
    glad this outrageous case has attracted national attention

    Reminds me of 1996 (none / 0) (#112)
    by EL seattle on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 04:55:27 AM EST
    Even before 9-11, it was very possible for pranks to not end well.

    LINK: 1996 Seattle Bomb Scare

    Massive overreaction doesn't require a racial component.  

    (Hopefully the charges in this case will be reduced once everyone has their turn in the spotlight.  But when I read this Post story my first thought was that if the security cam footage also showed this guy popping a few Tylenol capsules on school grounds, the Law might have pushed for the death penalty.)  


    Glad I graduated in '95... (none / 0) (#118)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 08:10:58 AM EST
    we tossed around a blow-up doll like a beach ball during our graduation ceremony as a prank, I don't think the Franciscan Brothers were amused, but they didn't drop no dimes on us.

    That case is a new low for our drop a dime, police, prosecute, & imprison state. We've really jumped the shark this time.


    It's the process (none / 0) (#121)
    by loveed on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 08:55:14 AM EST
    If this happened in some small bible belt town, I think the out come would be the same. Religious community goes wacky about anything sexual.
     Don't be blinded by the calls of racism. This could have happen to anyone.
     With today's media any outlandish thing can ruin your life. The fear of terrorism also plays a part.

    Thanks for bringing race into it here. (none / 0) (#175)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:55:33 PM EST
    Miami Herald columnist Leonard Pitts focused on Morton's case recently in his nationally syndicated column, suggesting that Morton's case was another example of unfair treatment for a black youth without a wealthy family.

    Morton's father brushed off that suggestion when Pitts asked him about it, and Morton's mother declined to discuss that point with The Star.

    Morton's attorney, Robert Turner, also downplayed race, suggesting that the size of the small blue-collar city an hour southeast of Indianapolis played a role.

    Bill Goins, 58, a member of a prominent black family who has led the local NAACP chapter for 20 years, disagreed that race seemed to be a factor. And Williams pointed out that early on that day, school administrators who were frantically reviewing security video couldn't distinguish the suspect's race.

    Morton is being represented by Indianapolis attorney Robert Turner, a former city public safety director.

    Turner, who is black, also downplayed race. He suggested another factor: the fact that it happened in a small town.

    Morton was arrested and faces up to eight years in prison. The newspaper reports that it's unlikely he'll receive a full sentence, and the prosecutor has suggested he won't seek prison time.
    All that said, this is my position also:
    "But use the school disciplinary process. Don't try to label the kid a felon for the rest of his life."

    TalkLeft quoted in Orlando Sentinel (5.00 / 3) (#113)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 06:49:53 AM EST
    Every morning on the Opinion page they have an excerpt from one right blog and one left blog about the issue of the day. This morning it was the Anthony verdict. I was pleased to see one of Jeralyn's quotes represent the left. Here is the part they selected from her initial post about the verdict:

    I wish the news media would stop saying no one will ever be held accountable for the little girl's murder. It hasn't be proven there was a murder. The defense argued it was an accident. The state took its best shot and came up short.

    Congratulations to Jose Baez, Cheney Mason and everyone else on the defense team. They represented their client with pride and dedication, and with enormous sacrifices to their personal lives and law practices. They successfully battered the junk science, and prevailed in the long run -- despite the unprofessional conduct of a prosecutor who smirked throughout their closing argument.

    What's "left" about Jeralyn's position? (5.00 / 2) (#165)
    by Erehwon on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 11:52:56 AM EST
    While I am obviously glad that Jeralyn was quoted, I find it more than annoying that society has become so messed up that simple adherence to the rule of law has now become a "left" position. A brave new world indeed!

    The name of the blog (none / 0) (#172)
    by magster on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:40:34 PM EST
    unfortunately is counterproductive in this instance.

    Well, I guess everyone's waking up to the (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 07:11:15 AM EST
    news that our esteemed president has decided it's time to go big - forget the piddly $2 trillion in cuts Joe Biden was working on, because Obama wants to double that.  Yep, double it - because then the world will know that we're really serious about deficit reduction and really understand how important it is to get our finances in order.

    From the NYT:

    Mr. Obama, who is to meet at the White House with the bipartisan leadership of Congress in an effort to work out an agreement to raise the federal debt limit, wants to move well beyond the $2 trillion in savings sought in earlier negotiations and seek perhaps twice as much over the next decade, Democratic officials briefed on the negotiations said Wednesday.

    The president's renewed efforts follow what knowledgeable officials said was an overture from Mr. Boehner, who met secretly with Mr. Obama last weekend, to consider as much as $1 trillion in unspecified new revenues as part of an overhaul of tax laws in exchange for an agreement that made substantial spending cuts, including in such social programs as Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security -- programs that had been off the table.

    The intensifying negotiations between the president and the speaker have Congressional Democrats growing anxious, worried they will be asked to accept a deal that is too heavily tilted toward Republican efforts and produces too little new revenue relative to the magnitude of the cuts.

    And the WH thinks this will be a positive political move:

    White House officials acknowledge the unrest among Democrats. But they argue that Democrats will be in stronger shape politically heading into November 2012 if they help enact a credible deficit reduction deal, allowing them to mount the argument that they protected Medicare from a much more drastic overhaul by Republicans.


    The officials are convinced that a larger package -- one that would demand deeper cuts and more taxes but put the nation on a sounder fiscal footing for a decade or longer -- is more politically palatable than the $2 trillion-plus package that was being cobbled together in talks presided over by Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.


    "We don't need a minideal," Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat, said Wednesday on the Senate floor. "We need something that speaks authoritatively to the world that the United States understands its deficit challenge and is prepared to make the hard choices to address it."

    I think this is going to be a case of going big AND going home.

    Anne I know your not surprised ! (5.00 / 2) (#115)
    by samsguy18 on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 07:40:05 AM EST
    Obama is Predictable....

    He ran on this in the primary... (5.00 / 3) (#153)
    by masslib on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:56:37 AM EST
    It's basically the Hamilton Project come to fruition, never mind the decimation of the middleclass, the massive expansion of poverty, or the failing economy that has emerged in the meantime.  This is what Obama ran on.  He can't wait to remind voters he kept his promise to reform entitlements.

    figures - he looked at the 2 trillion (5.00 / 2) (#167)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:00:44 PM EST
    as an opening position start of bargaining, not an already compromised position. Just like the public option in the health care negotiations.

    Its the failed Catfood Commission (none / 0) (#117)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 07:51:15 AM EST
    that is looking at us, all $4 trillion, without the size of military cuts.  The president is going with Pete Petersen et al rather than the poor and middle class.  And, Boehner gets bailed out on the Ryan Medicare blunder, since Medicare gets a new blunder.  Nixon goes to China, updated. It is historic.

    That's why (none / 0) (#124)
    by lilburro on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 09:23:33 AM EST
    I question people who think that the Democrats have the upper hand in this now since the GOP walked away from the original deal.  Democrats in the Senate are alllll over making some impressive "Grand Bargain," as digby likes to say.  I'm not sure the Congressional Democrats have the footing to push back, since they haven't until very recently had a role in the talks and they still hardly have one, plus there are plenty of Blue Dogs in there too.

    Kent Conrad proposed a 50/50 cuts/taxes package yesterday (or maybe it was two days ago)...yeahh.  That's gonna happen.


    I knew Judge Perry (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by loveed on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 09:21:37 AM EST
    would not let her out. This is disgraceful.

     This judge was pro prosecution from the start, he bent over backwards,and they still lost. He ridicule Baez throughout. Questionable decision against the defense.

     When she made these false statement, she did not have a lawyer. She had not been read her rights.

     Just like OJ one way or another they were going to get her. The were going to make her pay. They also want her to pay for the cost of the investigation.

     I often speak about the process and the unfairness to American. This could be you,or your child.
     The state has so much power to use against us. This verdict is sour grapes.

    Relax (none / 0) (#158)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 11:01:05 AM EST
    it looks like it will be next Wednesday. One more week may be the best thing for her to get things organized so she has a place to go away from the frenzied crowd.

    The war on science (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by CST on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 09:44:28 AM EST
    rears its' head again.  Must be election season.

    "I support intelligent design," Bachmann told reporters in New Orleans following her speech to the Republican Leadership Conference. "What I support is putting all science on the table and then letting students decide. I don't think it's a good idea for government to come down on one side of scientific issue or another, when there is reasonable doubt on both sides."

    The science is on the table.  There is nothing in science that suggests intelligent design.  You can't just make stuff up and call it science.  Reasonable doubt may exist on both sides, but only one side actually has positive data to back it up.  But yea, lets lie to kids and then let them decide what's true or no.

    put all science on the (5.00 / 3) (#133)
    by sj on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:00:46 AM EST
    table and let the students decide?  Well, heck, then I'm not buying gravity.  That bit of pseudo science is wreaking havoc on the body.

    Science ? (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:32:20 AM EST
    What I support is putting all science on the table and then letting students decide.

    Several problems, if only the science is on the table, then Intelligent Design isn't.

    The other issue is letting kids decide curriculum.  Great if your an eighth grader, Underwater basket Weaving rocks.  But here in reality, we make kids take subjects they dislike because like vegetables, they are good for them.

    Better educated kids = A better educated country = A competitive future labor force = A stronger and more robust US economy.

    And using one of those Algebra rules (transitive), I can state:
    Better educated kids = A stronger and more robust US economy.


    whoops (none / 0) (#132)
    by CST on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 09:45:06 AM EST
    Not that surprising really (none / 0) (#144)
    by brodie on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:29:34 AM EST
    since she's a well-known religious fundie (actually people should be more outraged by her views on homosexuality and the proper role of women wrt their husbands in marriage).

    Interesting that Mitt Romney's position (as of last campaign) on evolution is that he agrees with Darwin on human evolution, but believes God created the Universe in the first place.

    I think he'll be fine with GOP voters with that position, and I don't see evolution/ID as the hot-button issue it was a few years ago.  

    For the GOP this time, it will be about who has the best chance of ousting Obama from the WH -- they will therefore be more inclined to overlook certain disagreements on social issues and related if that candidate looks like a winner.


    Apropos of nothing. (none / 0) (#2)
    by jeffinalabama on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 12:23:16 PM EST
    I found out that my insurance doesn't cover viagra. I decided to finally ask for some on the off chance that someone would find me less than repulsive, or have had about 25 champagne of beers, lol.

    I also found out that birth control and other female-specific drugs aren't covered.

    I can do without viagra, but hormone therapy and birth control are not mere toys.

    The pregnant pharmacist asked if I wanted to buy one pill for $24.75. I told her that was a good 3-day weekend in Juarez. She blushed.

    I'm surprised she didn't blush... (none / 0) (#9)
    by Dadler on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 12:51:25 PM EST
    ...asking you to by a single dose.  Where's those free samples to get me hooked?  What kind of dealers are you?  Sheesh.

    And try Juarez, you should be able to get them three for twenty down there.  But maybe it's changed in Mexico, too.  There's always Canada online.  

    And xnay on that repulsive, chicks need a keg to dig me stuff.  Trust me, as the king of self-hatred, as a man with an inferiority complex so vast it has its own BART station, it does not help with the blood flow. In any way.

    Hey, hey, hey.

    Peace, my friend.


    Can I get a BART station (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by jeffinalabama on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 12:56:11 PM EST
     or does one have to live there?  I'll take an AMTRACK stop, even if it's a twice-weekly.

    Thanks for the kind words, bro. As to that new site, still figuring it out, I'm down 270, mostly because of bad play, but one italian and one scandinavian-- the italian in omaha pl, not hi/lo, hit me kind of hard. Decided to railbird for a while. Finished 3, 4, 4, and 32 in tourneys, but they were free or penny tourneys with few entrants. One I entered, and it finished before I looked in on it.


    Some ladies... (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:22:26 PM EST
    go for the self-deprecating style of game...and thank goodness, its my bread and butter!

    Don't believe ol' Jeffrey for a second, I've seen pics of an old flame of his...dude does mighty fine for himself:)


    Just saw a photo on the net (none / 0) (#5)
    by the capstan on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 12:32:53 PM EST
    of the Casey A. defence poster plus back-story of all the characters that had been invented by her.  A little coal-black humor: there never was a Caylee at all.  Mass delusion in the Anthony family, and when Casey tired of the character, the little girl was written out.

    Ok--maybe more than a little out of line to joke thusly.  But what if the defence and parents' claims about Casey's inventions were true?  The young woman may not have been clinically insane (an Eve character), but she could not have been entirely normal.  I read there that she told her family entire scenarios about imaginary 'friends.'

    disclaimer: the only portion of the trial or news about it I ever saw was the reading of the verdict.  I am depending on that photo and story today not being invented from whole cloth.

    There was a poster like that in (none / 0) (#106)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 09:15:29 PM EST
    the defense's closing arguments. I think she is disturbed, to say the least. Not legally insane in the sense of not being able to participate in her own defense, but something is wrong there. Baez said that at some point the police should have recognized that and approached the case from a different direction. Maybe they would have gotten some useful information out of her with more sensitive questioning,

    from the author (none / 0) (#7)
    by The Addams Family on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 12:45:21 PM EST
    gross abuse of power (none / 0) (#8)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 12:50:36 PM EST

    Who had the power to get the other arrested?

    There are actually (none / 0) (#91)
    by MKS on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 07:38:18 PM EST
    extortion rings that work hotels and events for the rich.....

    A woman meets someone who is rich and away from home, they have s*x, and then she claims rape to the police and then tries to negotiate a release of her civil claims.....

    This stuff happens....


    Sounds a lot like... (none / 0) (#31)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:43:08 PM EST
    the rich and/or powerful can't ever hook up with poor and/or regular people.  I don't think human sexuality and attraction works that way.

    functions, just for fun (none / 0) (#40)
    by The Addams Family on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 02:20:01 PM EST
    human sexuality and attraction : a sexual encounter between a powerful and wealthy French politician and a West African hotel cleaning woman from a dollar-a-day background = ________ : ________

    I'll play... (none / 0) (#47)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 02:37:41 PM EST
    Tiger Woods and a waitress at Dennys?

    Elizabeth Taylor and that handyman?

    When cupid shot me with an arrow, I didn't know the wealth or status of the object of my affection...something I can't explain stirred in my heart, soul, and loins.


    Re Liz... (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 09:34:28 AM EST
    Going back in time... I would have been her handyman.... and her Salty Dog!



    She was rich... (none / 0) (#166)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 11:54:05 AM EST
    and had status in the Hollywood world Jim, she would have been taking advantage of you if you were say a caterer on one of her film shoots, or a handyman fixing her kitchen sink, and that would be inappropriate....or so the argument goes, if I understand the argument correctly.

    Yes, but I would have forgiven her (none / 0) (#176)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 01:12:27 PM EST
    For sure:) Mars and Venus... (none / 0) (#179)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 01:18:50 PM EST
    and a couple millenia worth of baggage from less enlightened eras make all the difference...sucks we all gotta carry it, but it is what it is.

    She was absolutely the most sexy female (none / 0) (#187)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 03:00:40 PM EST
    ever to come out of Hollywood.

    For my money (none / 0) (#190)
    by sj on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 04:11:58 PM EST
    That was Sophia Loren.  although, technically, her career didn't start in Hollywood.

    That's a good choice (none / 0) (#191)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 04:41:52 PM EST
    so . . . (none / 0) (#55)
    by The Addams Family on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 03:12:35 PM EST
    Liz & Tiger = sexuality & attraction, whereas the handyman & the waitress = the notorious encounter at the Sofitel?

    sorry, kdog

    function FAIL

    A+ for romanticism, though


    How about (5.00 / 0) (#56)
    by CST on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 03:20:20 PM EST
    family structure: link

    No comment as to who is the monkey and who is the kitten.  But isn't the picture cute?


    Not my first trip... (none / 0) (#59)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 03:26:12 PM EST
    to summer school A-Fam.  Make up exam...How 'bout Bill & Monica? :)

    I know you're not seriously suggesting all cases of inter-income/power bracket rolls in the hay inherently involve abuse of power/status.  Some certainly do, but not all.


    Jobs (none / 0) (#10)
    by lilburro on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 12:52:05 PM EST
    Ezra has two interesting posts (1, 2) about the stimulus.

    I don't think we were going to get a $2 trillion stimulus.  Still doesn't excuse the lack of a jobs agenda after the stimulus was passed though.

    New Gunwalker hearings (none / 0) (#15)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:02:06 PM EST
    Keep hope alive n/t (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Yman on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:38:13 PM EST
    So thousands of guns waived through (none / 0) (#180)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 01:42:07 PM EST

    are only imagination?

    Obama is holding (none / 0) (#19)
    by Makarov on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:14:38 PM EST
    a Twitter town hall right now. Asking questions by directing questions @TownHall with hashtag #AskObama.

    Think most news networks are covering his answers live. He is not limiting his responses to 140 characters, obviously.

    Am I the only one (none / 0) (#30)
    by CST on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:42:19 PM EST
    that read the Casey Anthony threads and thought:

    "who on earth is Nancy Grace?"

    I had never heard of her before this.  Doesn't sound like I'm missing much.

    Unfortunately, I do know who Kim Kardashian is, despite all possible attempts to stay uninformed.

    Better known as (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 02:24:48 PM EST

    Nancy Disgrace

    Who is Nancy Grace? (none / 0) (#92)
    by MKS on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 07:39:37 PM EST
    A wealthy woman......

    Good gig.....


    UK phone hacking case (none / 0) (#34)
    by Alvord on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 01:47:40 PM EST
    Is it limited to the UK or have Murdoch owned media outlets done the same thing here and just haven't been caught yet?

    I Guess in Brittian... (none / 0) (#69)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 04:01:08 PM EST
    ... they call his product a tabloid, here we call it the conservative truth machine.

    Most Ridiculous Headline (none / 0) (#39)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 02:19:54 PM EST
    Feds: Foreign terrorists want to implant explosive devices in fliers

    Is TSA going to start colonoscopies ?

    Is it me, or is MSNBC really falling flat lately ?  This story seems so beyond ridiculous that I can't believe anyone would buy it.  Implanting bombs, seriously ?

    They would cost less than what the (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by jeffinalabama on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 02:29:28 PM EST
    insurance companies would cover. Gee, if you're at risk, fly twice yearly.

    Like the guy who robbed a bank of (none / 0) (#51)
    by observed on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 03:00:26 PM EST
    $1 to get health care in prison. Want a colonoscopy? Just schedule a flight, eat a lot of spicy food and say "oh man, I think I'm going to EXPLODE" when you hit the TSA gates.

    I've often wondered what my TSA "scan" (none / 0) (#54)
    by CST on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 03:09:37 PM EST
    looks like.  I've been having some ankle problems. Maybe they could take a look for me.  A flight to NY is a lot cheaper than an MRI.  Also easier to schedule, since I wouldn't have to take off work.

    All kidding aside... (none / 0) (#57)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 03:20:31 PM EST
    you will definitely get arrested for saying that...comedic terrorism.

    Kdog, let's pack the pens. It worked (none / 0) (#74)
    by jeffinalabama on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 05:04:30 PM EST
    in Birmingham, and maybe someone much more eloquent than I, like Anne, would write "letter from the TSA JAil."

    And no, this is not snark.


    No 'bout a doubt it... (none / 0) (#116)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 07:50:13 AM EST
    thats what it takes to make meaningful change...to be brutally honest, I'm either too selfish or don't care enough to subject myself to caging...duck and cover freedom on the sly is the fate I'm resigned to brother.



    It's just (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by Makarov on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:56:41 AM EST
    a shock doctrine attempt to head off the emerging fact full body scanners are unregulated and generate potentially unsafe radiation exposure.

    The whole reason for the invasive, lewd pat downs is to make everyone go through the full body scanners, so that industry supplying them can sell a whole lot more.


    Worked for The Joker... (none / 0) (#45)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 02:26:25 PM EST
    in Dark Knight.

    I Rarely Watch Movies... (none / 0) (#53)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 03:03:57 PM EST
    ... all the references are losing me in translation.  

    I know who the joker is, my drunk GF's application of make-up two years ago had the Batman clowns flocking to me, even though I was Jack Skellington with sloppy make-up.  So irritating, hate Batman.

    Can I assume he had a bomb surgically implanted ?

    Back to the topic, according to the TSA we might have to start worrying about surgically enhanced patrons those might not be silicon/saline.

    Gimme me a fricken break, here in Texas, that's like 80% of women and from what I hear, lots of dudes packing those same enhancement in the buns and calves department.

    Sounds like a plan by TSA to start groping at will.


    Yeah... (none / 0) (#63)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 03:32:25 PM EST
    The Joker implanted a bomb under some dude's skin, then set it off as said dude sat in a holding cell at Gordon's station...a brilliant plot.

    AQ watches our R movies, same as our blue movies...can't be to careful:)

    Speaking of blue movies, soon the TSA fetish sites will be popping up with grainy groper footage...freaks abound man.


    Well Vivid Entertainment is Making a Play (none / 0) (#68)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 04:00:05 PM EST
    ... for Casey Anthony.

    I'll let someone else tackle the fetish aspect of that in regards to the moral majority clowns who I am going to assume were the biggest losers yesterday.


    please don't use the p word here (none / 0) (#109)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:22:19 AM EST
    thanks, it brings out the censors and site blockers and spammers. I had to delete magster's comment, feel free to repost without spelling out that word.

    P Word ? (none / 0) (#119)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 08:42:33 AM EST
    P**n ?  
    Just checking because I missed the comment.

    Sorry (none / 0) (#173)
    by magster on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:42:12 PM EST
    Very much intrigued by (none / 0) (#71)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 04:33:12 PM EST
    "The Man with the Motherf*cking Hat.". Who knew Chris Rock could perform on Broadway in a legit. play as a member of a most skillful ensemble. 1/2 price tickets available.

    Ezra Klein on Hardball (none / 0) (#82)
    by samsguy18 on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 06:29:55 PM EST
    Just happened to be in  a room where the  show was airing....Matthews introduced him as an expert and as Ezra is expressing his expertise around the debt crisis and how he thinks Obama should address the issue my first thought was OMG we are so screwed. There are so many of these superficial vacant vessels with a voice in the media no wonder the country is in an apoplectic state.

    odd DSK defense statement (none / 0) (#83)
    by markw on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 06:44:29 PM EST
    I read the following in a news report:

    Strauss-Kahn's defense team indicated last week that unless prosecutors presented strong evidence, the former frontrunner to become the next president of France would not be willing to plead guilty to any crime.

    And I something similar elsewhere.

    Isn't that a very odd statement?  Doesn't that imply, "Our client is guilty, but we'll only plead guilty if we find out that you have enough evidence to prove it."  Wouldn't it be much more natural for a defense team to say that we won't be pleading guilty because our client is innocent?

    Could this be an accurate summary of what the defense team said?

    a little more context (none / 0) (#84)
    by The Addams Family on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 07:10:07 PM EST
    It is possible that any deal would involve a misdemeanor plea in which he would serve no jail time and would be allowed to return to France. But it remains unclear if prosecutors have ruled out seeking a felony plea.

    Mr. Strauss-Kahn's defense team gave indications last week that he would be unwilling to plead guilty to any crime unless prosecutors presented strong evidence. Barring that, the Manhattan district attorney's office would have to dismiss the charges altogether or go to trial.

    wouldn't it benefit DSK to have the case go to trial, now that the accuser's credibility has been undermined?

    & doesn't the DA know that?

    so if the case is likely to be dismissed in the absence of compelling new evidence, why should DSK plead guilty to anything?

    i think that's a reasonable question that does not reflect on the defense's view of DSK, who of course must be presumed innocent


    of course... (none / 0) (#86)
    by markw on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 07:16:38 PM EST
    Of course it's a reasonable question and a reasonable defense strategy--I was just surprised to hear that the defense team reportedly voiced it out loud (rather than just thinking it)

    I think what they (none / 0) (#111)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:37:29 AM EST
    were saying is he's not guilty of the sex charges, which they expect to be dismissed, and they wouldn't consider pleading to any other crime (like a lesser misdemeanor of solicitation or offering to pay or paying for sex) unless the prosecution had strong evidence -- something other than the word of the accuser.

    The defense reaffirmed tonight DSK won't plead to anything.


    dsk timeline (none / 0) (#99)
    by markw on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 08:45:56 PM EST
    "The Impossible DSK Timeline"

    interesting read on possible timeline of that "encounter"

    i think i will wait (none / 0) (#101)
    by The Addams Family on Wed Jul 06, 2011 at 08:50:23 PM EST
    & see what the defense makes of this timeline

    which won't happen, because there will be no trial, no plea, no case



    The biggest problem she's going to have (none / 0) (#136)
    by rdandrea on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:03:42 AM EST
    Is that the State is going after her for the cost of the investigation and prosecution.

    Can they really DO that? (none / 0) (#137)
    by sj on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:05:49 AM EST
    I Think You Got That Wrong (none / 0) (#141)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:19:06 AM EST
    They could have went after her in the way of a fine, which they did, $3k or $4k.  They can't sue a person who is acquitted, but they could have fined her for lying and the costs associated with the lies, not the entire cost.

    Pretty sure you got that from Star Jones on the Today show, because she was saying the exact same thing, but someone else clarified that it had to be done today by the judge.

    I think it was more wishful thinking, it's clear Star wanted a pound of flesh.  She was going on about a million dollar fine and how that would be a start and blah, blah, blah...


    No (none / 0) (#152)
    by rdandrea on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:52:07 AM EST
    I got it by watching the sentencing hearing this morning.  State will submit invoices in 30 days and Defense will have roughly 30 days to review them.

    Hearing on this phase will be Aug 25.

    I think they're talking about billing Casey for each wild goose chase that her false statement sent law enforcement on.  Trouble is, that includes months of search time until body was found.


    They said on some news station (none / 0) (#159)
    by Makarov on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 11:07:20 AM EST
    today that a bill was going through the legislature to make Casey and "people like her" pay the total cost for prosecution and investigation.

    On the one hand, it sounds ridiculous. On the other, it sounds like an ex post facto law with respect to Casey.


    More on this (none / 0) (#160)
    by rdandrea on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 11:08:13 AM EST
    From today's Orlando Sentinel:

    Prosecutors on Wednesday filed a motion asking the court to tax Casey Anthony for "special costs" related to the case's investigation and prosecution.

    The motion signed by Assistant State Attorney Linda Drane Burdick asks Chief Judge Belvin Perry to order that Casey Anthony "pay reimbursement for the special costs of investigation and prosecution."

    Burdick, in the motion, said the "efforts and costs of the investigation were extensive and not immediately available." The prosecution wants Perry to set a hearing within 60 days to determine total investigation costs.

    I believe it is the costs (none / 0) (#168)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:02:00 PM EST
    incurred looking for Caylee while Casey lied to police (convicted of that) about what happened to her.

    That's my sense of it as well. (none / 0) (#178)
    by rdandrea on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 01:17:49 PM EST
    Which could be a lot of money, since the cops ignored Cronk in August when he called three times to try to report that he had found a skull.

    I think (none / 0) (#143)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:27:10 AM EST
    that when Obama said his presidency would be about changing the dynamics of politics and reaching consensus deals, people didn't believe him.

    For better or worse, he was clearly serious as hell.

    The problem is that many believed that change meant "changing in the progressive way across the board".  The real change is that he is truly governing from the middle.

    I don't like this SS cuts business one bit, but he's doing what he said he'd do.

    That's what people voted for and he's giving it to them.

    Think You Better Open a Dictionary (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:37:04 AM EST
    consensus -
     a : general agreement : unanimity
     b : the judgment arrived at by most of those concerned

     : group solidarity in sentiment and belief

    Pretty sure no one is happy with any of the deals, R's and D's alike.


    Oh (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by lilburro on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:45:03 AM EST
    so that whole transformative, Reagan thing, we were supposed to listen to that?  We weren't misinterpreting that?

    Glad we finally worked that out.


    Some of us did listen to it. (5.00 / 4) (#162)
    by masslib on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 11:20:07 AM EST
    Nice revisionism (5.00 / 5) (#155)
    by Dadler on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:56:51 AM EST
    Yes, his electoral base in 2008 was certainly comprised largely of people gung-ho to go after Social Security, it was a huge part of what made them rally around him. And, of course, other stuff like it that he said he'd go after all along.

    He is not governing from anything approaching the middle economically.  That really is a laughable claim. He is a supply-side, trickle down, nothing-the-government-can-really-do, Reagan winger on economics, worse really, since he's a Democrat legitimizing and helping cement the myth of conservative dogma as center and moderate.  It ain't, and no one who voted for him, save a few mental deficients, did so because this is what they wanted him to do.


    Also (5.00 / 5) (#156)
    by lilburro on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:57:22 AM EST
    it is a completely absurd rewrite of history to suggest that Obama did not win the primary by appealing to progressives, the Left, etc.  People weren't like, "Oh, that Hillary, she is too liberal."  Get real.

    many believed that change meant "changing in the progressive way across the board".  

    Uh, yeah, because that's how Obama's political campaign and biggest supporters presented him.  And how his biggest supporters, including you, still try to present him - as the most progressive liberal President since FDR.  You constantly want to be called "liberal" but then you come out in support incessantly of centrist policies.  At some point you have to stop labeling people and policies "liberal" when they are simply not.


    Totally agree. (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by masslib on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 11:19:31 AM EST
    Obama said he would reform entitlements in the freaking primary.  Just because the ABC crowd decided that meant ONLY a raise in the SS cap doesn't mean Obama changed his position at all.  Indeed, even in the light of a lousy economy, the virtual end of the middle class, and expanding poverty, Obama is sticking to his guns.  If he manages to pass this, he'll spend a good chunk of his reelection campaign reminding voters he reformed entitlements just as he promised to.

    Somehow, I don't think most people who (5.00 / 4) (#164)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 11:49:45 AM EST
    voted for Obama did so because they knew "changing the dynamics of politics and reaching consensus deals" was code for "moving the Overton window way to the right, blurring the ideological distinction between the two parties until all we are left with is right, and farther right, co-opting the worst of the Bush/Cheney policies and branding them with a big D, in an effort to get consensus deals because exerting genuine leadership to sell people on genuinely better policies is - pick one - too hard, just not in the cards, not his style."

    He said a lot of things - about transparency, about the Bush/Cheney policies, about the value of whistleblowers, about health care - the list goes on - that he not only has not addressed as he said he would, but in large part as they had been done in the past by Republican presidents - only to a higher degree of terrible, and in so doing, has reinforced and entrenched and legitimized them as acceptable.  Which they most certainly are not.

    Nope, sorry - if the man is governing from the middle, it is a middle he has created to accommodate his ideology and his comfort level, which is far to the right of the middle any liberals I know would recognize as such.


    I did believe him (5.00 / 4) (#169)
    by ruffian on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:06:52 PM EST
    that's why I did not support him in the primaries. I am against unconditional surrender to the other side.

    Depends on which group ... (5.00 / 0) (#183)
    by Yman on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 01:54:20 PM EST
    ... he was speaking to, or which votes he was looking for at the moment.  Right before the Ohio primary, he wanted the blue-collar/anti-NAFTA vote, so he promised to renegotiate NAFTA.  Of course, he also had his staff reassuring the Canadians that it was all just "campaign rhetoric".  Before the SC primary, he needed the bible-thumping, homophobe vote, so he invited Donnie McClurkin on his campaign tour.  Then he tried to walk it back when .  When he wanted support from seniors, he promised to allow importation of prescription drugs.  That got tossed under the bus in a backroom deal with Pharma.  Environmentalists got the cap-and-trade speech, then he sat on it until after Republicans took control of the House.  Immigration reforms groups got the speech, then the shaft.  Etc., etc., etc. ....

    Not to mention all the WORM (What Obama REALLY means) arguments we got from his supporters.

    But I guess that's the advantage of making vague and/or conflicting promises out of both sides of his mouth.  Someone can always say "He's doing what he said he'd do", and they'd be right ...

    ... sort of.


    hey! (none / 0) (#151)
    by The Addams Family on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:46:13 AM EST
    remember when Obama closed Guantanamo?

    oh wait


    He lied a lot (none / 0) (#171)
    by Towanda on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 12:38:43 PM EST
    but not about this, not in the way that you state.

    He's toast in 2012, and your mindset will be the reason that we will have President Romney . . . unless we end up with President Bachmann.


    Orlando Sentinel is reporting (none / 0) (#157)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jul 07, 2011 at 10:58:51 AM EST
    with time served and good behavior credit she will be released next Wednesday, July 13.