Sunday Open Thread

Happy Fathers day to fathers everywhere.

R.I.P., Rodney King, who drowned in his swimming pool yesterday. He was 47.

I'll be busy today setting up my new laptop. Thanks again to TL readers who helped me buy it. It's a Sony Vaio, just like my last 6 laptops. It has a bigger screen (15 inches and still just 4.5 pounds) so hopefully I'll make less blogging typos. (I had a few Macbooks at one point, but the last one was stolen 4 years ago, and I've yet to replace it.)

I did stop at the Apple Store first yesterday to check out the new retina display model, and while it's nice, it was too expensive and didn't scream out at me, "Buy me." The Sony store was at the other end of the mall, and having picked out which one I was interested in online, I went right to it and it was love at first sight.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Justice Ginsburg: Turbulent Times at Supreme Court | George Zimmerman: Bank Surveillance and New Discovery >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Can we all get along? (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Angel on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 02:47:24 PM EST
    Too bad the answer is still not a resounding YES.

    True (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by ZtoA on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 03:41:09 PM EST
    and RIP Rodney King. He seemed such a decent person.

    And happy father's day to all the fathers out there. I'm cooking a medieval dinner for the glory of Game of Thrones with the help of my nephew. Too bad I don't have a bunch of rented heads and limbs around and could put W's head somewhere in the decorative aspect of the dinner. .....just kidding of course. But I wonder if there is a way to honor his exalted place next to some Stark heads. Better get my wench self back to the kitchen!


    How fun!!! (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 08:49:55 AM EST
    We did steak and potato salad blah blah bland.  We did get Josh in the pool though even in head gear.  The pool could no longer be denied.

    What a great dinner party idea though, Game of Thrones characters.  I went to one once where everyone was a famous/infamous noble person.


    The use of Gee-Dubs head by (none / 0) (#10)
    by gadfly on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 06:26:33 PM EST
    the "Game of Thrones" production company is indeed a political statement simply because the company is located and filming is done in Northern Ireland.  Why would there be a Bush43 head laying around there?

    So this is obviously an HBO directed prop simply because it fits nicely in with the dialogue used in "Game Change" to make Sarah Palin look bad.


    Based on the pictures (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by sj on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 08:14:59 PM EST
    I can't say that it jumped out is GWB.  They don't show the prosthetic from the front.  But I'll accept that there's a resemblance.

    Having said that, it isn't necessary to write dialog into a program to make Sarah Palin look bad.  Just stand still and let her talk.

    Oh.  And having said that, what does that have to do with the comment you're responding to?


    Who plays Sarah Palin? (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 08:58:08 AM EST
    Aligning Dubya with the Starks was at a base level off the chain because the Starks make decisions based on morals and principle.  I'm so mad at Game of Thrones for insinuating that a Dubya head has a right to be on a pike next to a Stark head :)  I'm outraged :)

    What about this political statement? (none / 0) (#16)
    by Angel on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 08:45:46 PM EST
    GOP Montana has a bullet-riddled Obama outhouse with a bunch of nasty stuff to go along with it here.


    I'd like to know your thoughts on this.  


    Well, the GOP's thoughts are ... (none / 0) (#18)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 09:14:50 PM EST
    ... quite apparently self-evident, and I would argue, have been for some time now.

    As failed Nevada GOP Senate candidate Sharron Angle said back in 2010, "[People] are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies, and saying my goodness what can we do to turn this country around?"

    Speaking personally, my political stretegem has always been that while I'll never throw the first blow to start a fight, I can duly promise my opponents that I'll be landing the last one which ends it.

    Therefore, events may soon require us to tell Republicans unequivocally, that they go there at their own peril.


    He can't help it (none / 0) (#22)
    by Rojas on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 10:38:58 PM EST
    if he was born with a silver foot in his mouth...

    I don't think it was (none / 0) (#47)
    by lousy1 on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 08:51:06 AM EST
    the GOP. Your source incorrectly characterized its source.

    There was less laughter - although plenty of picture-taking - of an outhouse labeled "Obama Presidential Library" parked outside Missoula's Hilton Garden Inn, where the convention took place.

    Nothing on the outhouse indicated who was responsible for it, although it made an appearance in the Memorial Day parade in Corvallis in Ravalli County.

    The outhouse was painted to look as though it had been riddled by bullets.

    Inside, a fake birth certificate for Barack Hussein Obama made reference to the disproven controversy over the president's origins. It was stamped "Bull--." A graffito advised "For a Good Time call 800-Michelle (crossed out), Hillary (crossed out) and Pelosi (circled in red.)"

    State GOP Chairman Will Deschamps of Missoula said he didn't know who'd brought the outhouse, but dismissed it as "a sideshow."

    "It's not something I'm going to agonize over," he said. "Some of that stuff is not real good taste. We do have a president of the United States, and we have to honor that."

    From Missoulian


    Ha ha! (none / 0) (#28)
    by ZtoA on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 11:31:20 PM EST
    I think the producers of the show were p!ssed! If you see the photos you really can't tell it is some GW look alike head.

    But its pretty hilarious. The conservatives are mad because W is just a head on a stake, and the liberals are mad because W is in with the really good guys. Guess in your HBO conspiracy theory 3D world getting EVERYONE mad is fab for ratings.


    Not to be nasty (none / 0) (#48)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 08:53:51 AM EST
    and I'll even say that Rodney appears to have reformed his life a bit. But let's not forget that this all started because he, and a companion, were driving at extremely high speeds on LA freeways and when finally caught he decided he wouldn't stay down on the ground and be shackled. As a result the cops, high themselves on adrenalin, hit him repeatedly.

    His companion stayed down and was not hurt.

    The resulting actions cost millions in property damage and lost lives.

    I forgive no one in this matter. The police should have been in better control of themselves as they tried to subdue an out of control Rodney. But then again I doubt if any of their critics have tried to arrest and restrain a large man who doesn't want to give up.

    To call, or even hint, that Rodney King was some type of hero is beyond ridiculous.


    Gee Jim (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 08:59:32 AM EST
    High on adrenaline?  So all that raping of female soldiers is somewhat to be expected when some are high on adrenaline?  High on adrenaline...now I've heard it all

    MT you are the world's greatest expert (none / 0) (#54)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 09:11:41 AM EST
    at putting words in someone else's mouth.

    Now, show me you can read the whole comment and note that I forgave nobody.


    Figures of authority (none / 0) (#55)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 09:15:38 AM EST
    with lethal weapons and all the legal right to use them get a special pass from Jim to lose their minds "just little bit" when they are "high on adrenaline".

    MT, you are making things up. (none / 0) (#56)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 09:29:03 AM EST
    I wrote:

    I forgive no one in this matter. The police should have been in better control of themselves as they tried to subdue an out of control Rodney.

    Now. Please stop picking a fight. My day is going no better than yours and I don't feel like being a substitute whipping boy.


    Being "high on adrenaline" (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 09:51:17 AM EST
    should not lead anyone to beating someone nearly to death.  Why not use your adrenaline to more easily enable you to do something else, like stop the beating?  

    Tracy, you are just picking a fight (none / 0) (#100)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 08:26:32 PM EST
    and I am in no mood to ignore you.

    I didn't condone anything or anyone.

    I just pointed out what happened.

    Now, if you want to claim you didn't understand what I wrote, fine. But you are too smart to not have.


    Then what did high on adrenaline (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 19, 2012 at 04:10:32 AM EST
    have to do with anything?  You put that in there for a reason Jim.  I didn't imply that the police officers had something going on that was "impairing" their judgement....they were "high", you did.  Oh yeah, they were "high" and it was Mr. King's fault they were "high" huh?

    Too Funny... (5.00 / 4) (#63)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 10:33:11 AM EST
    ..how can anyone expect the cops to take down a large man without beating him to a pulp, it's not like it's their job now is it Jim.

    And let's not forget the $4M those cops cost taxpayers since it seems that costs are part of the equation.

    Jim, there is no excuse for that kind of brutality, but it's funny to read a winger try and justify it.  Any views on the NYPD using a plunger to anally and orally sodomize a man in custody.  HERE

    More adrenaline junkies I guess and is that something us common folks can use as a defense, "The adrenaline made me do it..." ?

    But way to keep it classy the day the man died.


    Actually Scott the deal is that the person being (none / 0) (#103)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 08:38:31 PM EST
    arrested is expected to surrender peacefully. If force is required someone is going to get hurt.

    And if you don't understand how adrenaline cuts in when a chase and fight happens then... No, you do understand.

    And speaking of classy, did you miss when I wrote, "I forgive no one?" Do you understand "no one" includes the cops?

    No you didn't, you just wanted to snark.

    BTW - How much did the riots cost?

    And everything leads back to King, the high speed chase and his refusal to be arrested.

    What should the police have done? Just let him go?



    Gesh (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by jondee on Tue Jun 19, 2012 at 03:46:18 PM EST
    just how thick are you exactly?

    Pin him face down, put on the handcuffs, and put him in the car.

    There were something like eight or ten officers on the scene.

    Course I realize I ain't never had ta deal with one THEM when they're all liquored up..


    Rodney King was trying to avoid ... (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 05:08:48 PM EST
    ... the pummelling he was receiving, Jim. If cops repeatedly hit you so hard that they actually broke your leg, I daresay that you'd arise to your feet in an adrenaline rush and would be trying to get away from them, too.

    Nobody is saying that Rodney King's a hero. But nobody deserves what he got at the hands of LAPD, either. That the trial of those four policemen accused of abuse was moved to Simi Valley, rather than held in L.A. where the crime occurred, was a pretty good indication that the fix was in. It wasn't the first time such things happened. Sadly, given the evidence and fallouyt of the Rampart scandal, it probably won't be the last.

    Law enforcement in Los Angeles has long enjoyed a notorious reputation for corruption and lawbreaking, going back to 1871 when the police orchestrated what still stands as the greatest single case of mass lynching in American history.

    So, please excuse me if I don't take the word of an L.A. cop at face value.


    His companion stayed on the ground and was (none / 0) (#101)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 08:30:07 PM EST
    not harmed.

    And please. Like Tracy you are too smart to not understand what I wrote but have launched into your "lecture mode."

    Stop. We all have lived through it, watched TV and read newspapers.


    I can just hearJim's type (none / 0) (#110)
    by jondee on Tue Jun 19, 2012 at 03:42:08 PM EST
    fifty years ago: "People should never take the law into their own hands, but that buck shoulda' known better than to whistle at a white woman.."

    It's completely inexcusable that those pigs (an appellation completely applicable in this case), administered multiple skull fractures to a man wallowing around on the pavement like a wounded buffalo, while half a dozen other officers stood around getting their sadistic rocks off. Two or three officers could've had him pinned down, handcuffed, and in the back of the squad car in a few minutes, if they had been intent on correctly doing the job they were trained and paid to do.


    After years of personal attacks (none / 0) (#112)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 19, 2012 at 09:27:05 PM EST
     by jondee and his continual demonstration of an inability to debate the issues I am forced to note that discussing anything with him is not worthwhile. Simply put, he is incapable of a reasoned debate.

    And you even gave back that (none / 0) (#113)
    by jondee on Wed Jun 20, 2012 at 12:23:30 PM EST
    corsage I gave you before the prom..

    What part does "reason" play in claiming that the police caught on videotape grotesquelly and sadistically abusing the job they were trained to do "leads back to King"..?

    Afterall, this wasn't as if Jeremiah Wright accidentally wandered into a Teabagger event..  


    I know (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 03:56:19 PM EST
    That post made me remember a very dark time in the history of our country.

    I remember all the statements that were made by my coworkers during those riots. Some were very unhelpful and some were okay. It seems like every time something like this happens, it brings out the ugliness in a lot of Americans and makes me wonder what is wrong with our country that people become so hateful and so ugly?


    This country needs an awakening in community. (5.00 / 4) (#6)
    by Angel on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 03:59:03 PM EST
    We need an awakening OF community (none / 0) (#52)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 08:59:55 AM EST
    I would offer that ... (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 09:01:19 PM EST
    Ga6thDem: "... what is wrong with our country that people become so hateful and so ugly?"

    ... the hate and ugliness you note have always been an unfortunate but perhaps very necessary part of our country's age-old struggle to live up to the ideals enshrined so eloquently in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States.

    Throughout American history, the public consensus has generally been either in denial of some of the less savory aspects of our national character, or determined to never discuss such unpleasantries amongst polite company.

    Only when contemporaneous events served to preclude any further attempts to delay the inevitable, have Americans reluctantly undertaken to resolve the nation's thorniest domestic issues. And as our history shows, our dark side's internecine struggles with the better angels of our nature have most oftentimes not been very pretty.

    Thus, what looks to us in retrospect to be philosophical or moral no-brainers, were in fact anything but easy at the time the struggle played out. Sometimes, as was the case of our decades-long impasse regarding the subject of human slavery, it proved to be outright devastating, resulting in a bloody, four-year-long civil war.

    As no less than Sir Winston Churchill once wryly observed, "Americans can always be counted upon to do the right thing -- after they've exhausted all the alternatives."



    Well, I wish we would exhaust all the alternatives (none / 0) (#85)
    by sj on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 03:03:11 PM EST
    when it come to drone aerial attacks and rendition and punishing whistle blowers so that we could start doing the right thing.  I'm ready for that.

    Hobson's choice, then (none / 0) (#90)
    by Farmboy on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 04:08:24 PM EST
    It seems to me that the alternatives to drone-launched missiles run the gamut from air, sea, or land-launched missiles; SEAL or other special forces led missions; conventional military missions; attempts at deals and negotiation; or ending the confrontation against terrorists altogether by walking away from the issue. (this last one is my favorite piece of advice from childhood: if you just walk away from bullies they'll leave you alone)

    Which alternative do you prefer we as a country exhaust? Or do you have a different way of approaching the issue that keeps innocent folks safe and bad folks from doing bad things? (which I believe should be the desired outcome - nobody anywhere is hurt or endangered)


    One can't keep everyone safe (none / 0) (#97)
    by sj on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 05:26:29 PM EST
    all the time.  My dad tried; if he could have kept us in a padded room until we grew up, one with no wall sockets or sharp objects or water deeper than inch, he would have been a much more relaxed man.  But the world has inherent risks.  In my world view we're here to deal with them, not to be kept safe from them.  There's a balance.  And I prefer a little more risk and a little more freedom.

    We need to do right by our neighbors, absolutely,  whoever and wherever they might be.  But I'm pretty sure we're not doing that with carpet bombing.  How about a little more standard police style work.  You know, intelligent investigation and following leads, instead of following rumors and dropping bombs.


    Of course not (none / 0) (#24)
    by Rojas on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 10:53:58 PM EST
    Jerrry Spence's letter to Alan Hirschfield covers the issues of the last four decades quite well. How did the bottom rail end up on top?
    We voted for it.
    We pleaded for it.
    Of course, there was manipulation. We ignored it and begged for more.

    A Sony Viao? (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by DebFrmHell on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 11:19:06 PM EST
    OMD!  I loved my Sony.  That is the one that went in the burglary.  Such a nice big screen. Seriously, you could tap dance on that big old screen. Lots of bells and whistles...

    I am a jellu$ H8r!  LOL!

    On the other side of the coin, my beloved aunties bought a brand new TOSHIBA not 3 weeks ago.

    She had previously killed off two (!) Brand new Sonys, the sweet ones with the guts all behind the screen.  Touch screen, camera.  Things of wonder for me.  

    She has cats.  She didn't close  up the new laptop before going shopping.  Cat tosses out a hairball onto the keyboard and fries the motherboard. She is going to give it to me to play around with if I can find a motherboard within reason for purchase.  Unless, Toshiba can do something with her warranty...HA!

    That is 3 brand new computers in less than two months.  Methinks she is not destined for something new to play Free Cell on... so on my days off, I guess I will drive out to Canyon Lake and hook up her old 2002 Dell back up so she can play! And get on the internet.  That Dell is so old it is beige...


    ((I took part of my old Toshiba apart once to insert a memory card to increase its size. I had dropped it down the escalator at the CO Springs airport so it was kind of funky after that.  I thought to self "What's to lose?"  

    It was just like in the cartoons!

    I was sho_Ocked, shocked I tell you, when it worked!))

    Look around you. (5.00 / 3) (#27)
    by DebFrmHell on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 11:30:35 PM EST
    I am sure you will find someone you know who has addiction problems.  If you don't, then they are very good at hiding it.

    Mr. King is at peace.  Let him stay that way.

    that comment was deleted (none / 0) (#31)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 12:22:44 AM EST
    We don't speak ill of the dead here on the occasion of their death. It's bad manners and a cheap shot. It also probably brings bad karma.

    Karma (1.00 / 3) (#35)
    by lily on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 12:57:05 AM EST
    some would say King death was karma for the way he lived

    Wow, you just do not know when (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by caseyOR on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 02:14:28 AM EST
    to quit, do you?

    Are you kidding me? (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 09:58:38 AM EST
    They gave him brain damage.  My father suffered a horrible skull fracture, we have soldiers all over the place suffering from head injuries...and those injuries change people forever.  Most of the people suffering from them also suffer forever more from a kind of psychic pain.  Substance abuse is rampant among them, they seek relief and our legal pharmacy is woefully inadequate in helping them.  I can't believe how ignorant of the facts surrounding brain trauma some people are.  They beat him until he could barely talk......ever again.

    again careful...... (none / 0) (#76)
    by lily on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 12:24:58 PM EST
    My husband survived a massive brain injury, compound fracture left temporal, skull fracture into brain matter. I am aware of the various changes to cognitive functions and behavior from TBI.  

    I was the primary caregiver for 5 years of one of my brothers suffering with young onset Parkinson disease, co-morbidity with drug addiction. Damage to the dopamine delivery system maintains drug addiction. PD symptoms can look just like meth addiction.

    So yes I read neuroscience, extensively.
    My son is a bio-chemist in medical research.

    R.King was a serious drug user and alcoholic prior to 1991 beating, he had convicted of  robbery in which he  hit a shop keeper in the head with a tire iron.


    What they did to him (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 12:31:02 PM EST
    made certain he could never recover.  His frontal lobe doesn't even work properly.  Do you understand that?  Do you know what your frontal lobe is responsible for?  It controls you impulses, it allows you to learn from your mistakes.

    Your hatred of human beings who have addiction problems seems to be one of your primary addictions.  They have 12 step groups for that if you are ever interested.  Maybe you could swap your addiction out for something less destructive.

    We all have them, we all have two primary addictions running at all times.  Mine are coffee and Talkleft.  Yours are hating people who have certain substance addictions, and what is your second?


    If you have that much knowledge and (5.00 / 3) (#81)
    by Anne on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 02:11:10 PM EST
    understanding of the science and medicine of brain trauma, there really is no excuse for your rush to condemn King and lay his death from drowning as being part of the bad karma he created.  

    No one here is claiming Rodney King to have been a model citizen, but the injuries that were inflicted on him made sure that he would never get the chance to be any more than a severely damaged person; for reasons I cannot understand, that seems to please you, and your so-called "expertise" isn't making that any more palatable.  

    It didn't work when you claimed all that neighborhood watch experience, and it isn't working now - at least not for me.


    his drowning was the result (1.00 / 2) (#84)
    by lily on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 02:55:09 PM EST
    of drug and alcohol consumption according to his fiancee he was drinking and doing drugs the prior day and all through the night.

    The karma comment is simple to deconstruct, King's destruction addiction was responsible for his early death.

    Look I am fully aware of your hostility towards me since your comments always include a personal jab, however your speculations about what I think are wrong and kinda mean spirited, similar to right-wing reactionaries attitudes.


    You just don't know (5.00 / 3) (#87)
    by sj on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 03:14:16 PM EST
    when to withdraw, do you?  It's kind of exhausting just reading you.

    Well once again you got that (5.00 / 3) (#89)
    by ZtoA on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 04:00:22 PM EST
    spot on right. Anne is definitely a right wing reactionary. The biggest right wing reactionary I've ever seen.

    Ha! (5.00 / 2) (#98)
    by sj on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 05:29:01 PM EST
    careful..... (none / 0) (#32)
    by lily on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 12:27:06 AM EST
    lecturing me about the tragedy of addiction.
    I have lived it.

    My father was an alcohol. When he progressed to alcoholic psychosis I facilitated a 5150/5250 hold with the assistance of Los Angeles county psychiatrist and cops. My father died while institutionalized.

    Our family took responsibility and limited the threat he became. I don't make excuses for addicts. King's record shows he was not the decent guy people wish he was. He was jailed twice for abusing his wife.


    your comment was deleted (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 12:38:31 AM EST
    because we don't speak ill of the dead here on the occasion of their demise.

    No one is lecturing you about addiction. But your experiences with the subject, just like your experiences with disadvantaged youth, don't warrant you making conclusions about others whom you don't know. This is an open thread, so you can discuss your personal history if you want, but please steer clear of saying the equivalent of "X acted this way because this happened to someone I know and that's how they acted."


    conclusions? (none / 0) (#38)
    by lily on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 02:19:01 AM EST
    I provided a link to a national news story listing Rodney Kings history of arrests, convictions.

    I responded to a comment concluding King was a decent guy. Sorry, guys who beat their wife are not decent, especially when they repeat the crime after jail time.

    we don't agree about the tone of Debfrhell comment.

    I see no benefit in pretending when the truth is far more instructive.


    Try serious brain injury (none / 0) (#59)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 09:59:28 AM EST
    What do you know about that and how that leads to substance abuse on a grand scale?

    Book recommendation. (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by caseyOR on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 12:18:44 AM EST
    I just finished reading John Irving's new book, In One Person. I started the book yesterday afternoon and finished tonight. Yes, it is that good.

    I wouldn't recommend all, or even maybe most, of Irving's novels. He is a bit erratic. I mean, his last book, Last Night In Twisted River, well, I couldn't get through it.

    This new book, though, is, IMO, his best work since A Prayer for Owen Meany, which was an extraordinary novel. I just finished this new book, and I intend to start rereading it tomorrow. I know there are things I missed.

    I don't often recommend books. Reading material is such a personal choice, and taste varies so. In One Person, though, that is a book we all should read.

    thanks for the info (none / 0) (#40)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 07:06:17 AM EST
    I was on the fence about reading that one. I generally love his books, though as you say, some better than others. I'll move that one up on my list!

    I finished 'Bring Up The Bodies', Hilary Mantel's sequel to 'Wolf Hall' over the weekend.  Certainly a good primer on how to force confessions. I hope unscrupulous prosecutors aren't reading it!  I love her, Mantel's, dry humor and style. This book might suffer a little from being the middle book of a trilogy, but it set the stage well for the final part of Cromwell's story.

    Also finished Gilbert King's 'Devil in the Grove:Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America'. This is a heart rending account of 4 young Central Florida black men railroaded on a rape charge in 1959, and their defense by Thurgood Marshall and other lawyers with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. To me one sign that the new America has not yet come is that some of the bravest people this country has ever produced have ever produced, like Walter Irvin, Franklin Williams and Henry Moore are not automatically mentioned in the same breath as astronauts, athletes and the other people we call 'heros'.   The book is a good read and a reminder. I could only read it in small doses n order to keep my blood pressure manageable.


    ooops - 1949 (none / 0) (#41)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 07:07:04 AM EST
    I just finished "Bring Up the Bodies" (none / 0) (#72)
    by oculus on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 11:57:03 AM EST
    and eagerly await the third in the series

    I am reading Anthony Shahid's "House of Stone."  He was NYT's bureau chief in Beirut.  He died before this book was published.  Asthma attack induced by horses.  He had gone into Syria and was returning to Lebanon.  


    I heard the interviews with his wife (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 08:30:31 PM EST
    when it was published. Sounded interesting - he was such a good writer. I'll add it to the list.

    I'm finally getting around to reading a book I bought a long time ago- Taylor Branch's At Canaans Edge, the final in his Martin Luther King/ civil rights movement trilogy. The first two were so good, and I ordered the third when it came out. Put it on the stack and it has been waiting for the right moment. Summer is my serious reading time around here - like winter in the north.


    I think I'll add that to my reading stack. (none / 0) (#44)
    by Angel on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 08:11:35 AM EST
    Thanks for the suggestion.

    Those crazy Republicans! (5.00 / 3) (#42)
    by jbindc on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 07:19:31 AM EST
    This time in Michigan.

    State Speaker of the House, Jase Bolger (through his deputies) banned Rep. Lisa Brown from the floor during a debate over an anti-choice bill.  Her crime? She ended her comments with a letter from a constituent that said, "Finally Mr. Speaker, I'm flattered that you are all so interested in my vagina, but no means no."

    She used the word (gasp) vagina! (Of course, the Republican leadership said it was because she was comparing the support of legislation to the raping of women - you decide).

    Democratic state Rep. Barb Byrum was also banned for daring to speak up.

    So, to counter this idiocy, the Vagina Monologues will be performed on the Capitol steps in Lansing tonight.

    Seriously - can we not have adult conversation to tackle adult problems in this world?  Seems like there are many who have to resort to having discussions like 5 year olds.

    It wasn't the word (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by christinep on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 08:56:40 AM EST
    It was the banning-from-the-floor action....  While the constant back & forth can cause the mind to numb, I do think that the action of banning for using a word relative to subject matter is yet another step too far.  I'm not sure what the organized or strategic response in Michigan should be, but there must needs be a highlighted response.  

    As to this particular issue, we could note that recent legislative discussions in such traditional areas as Virginia & Mississippi used the same "word" when the subject involved medical testing proviisions and abortion (aka Virginia's legislative fumbling when trying to require "trans vaginal" incursions.)


    That is seriously creepy (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by sj on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 03:12:45 PM EST
    There was so much paranoia going around that who knows who was responsible.

    Now... (5.00 / 2) (#91)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 04:10:42 PM EST
    ...that's legal with the Patriot Act, which is even worse IMO. they can even take stuff now without over sight. One has to assume your father was pro-Nixon, at least to the world. Were his enemies tapping as well, certainly Nixon's people weren't tapping their own. Never mind, I forget the depth of his paranoia. Either way, we have less rights than we did then.

    Post-trial grant of immunity (none / 0) (#1)
    by cboldt on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 02:04:14 PM EST
    I've been searching for caselaw on 776.032 motions for immunity, basically looking for whether or not defendant must testify, or if a sworn motion is sufficient to get defendant's "facts" on the record for the hearing.  I'm still of the opinion that a sworn motion is adequate as a matter of law, but I can't prove it yet, with an authoritative cite.

    Anyway, many of the cases are interesting for the purpose of illuminating the law; and also for seeing quite a diverse range of justifications advanced by trial courts.  So, here is one of the cases I found interesting.

    State v. Jarkas Grant of 776.032 Immunity (Dec 5, 2011)

    This is a post trial grant of immunity.  Decision went to defendant due to absence of other eyewitness, and discounting of the state's circumstantial evidence.

    I thought it was interesting, for both points, the possibility of a finding of immunity on appeal from trial (as opposed to an appeal from a pre-trial denial of immunity); and for the deeply discounted value assigned to circumstantial evidence.

    Due to the speculative nature (none / 0) (#2)
    by Kyreth on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 02:37:45 PM EST
    of this, I wasn't sure if I should bring it up, but I saw mention that Jeralyn was going to go through the 7-11 Trayvon video with audio etc. and thought "Heck, it's an open thread so..."

    Someone pointed out in one of them (and I went through and listened to it myself), that at one point while he's at the counter, it looks as if he's reaching for his phone and the word "Hello" is spoken.

    I don't know if it's anywhere remotely clear enough to be legally useful, what I found interesting is if that was in fact Trayvon saying "Hello"...he has a noticeably deeper voice than George.  

    So I was curious if Jeralyn (or any others) had caught that and had thoughts.

    yes it sounds like he is (none / 0) (#8)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 05:15:00 PM EST
    saying "hello" twice, probably into his phone, either he was getting a call or losing the connection with a call.

    According to his mother, (none / 0) (#23)
    by Redbrow on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 10:44:42 PM EST
    Sybrina, the only other sample of his voice in existence is his voicemail greeting. It would be intersting to see how Trayvon's voice fared in the "audio expert's" expensive software.

    "And now he is gone from his mother forever, only able to stare out at her as a shining face on a cellphone. She has no home videos of Trayvon. She doesn't even have voicemail messages from him saved. The only way that she could now hear Trayvon's voice would be to call his phone and listen to his answering message, but she dare not do it. "If I hear his voice, I think I'm going to scream."

    Interesting (none / 0) (#7)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 04:57:27 PM EST
    story on the soon to be first African American President of the Southern Baptist Association


    Convention, not Association (none / 0) (#19)
    by unitron on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 09:51:40 PM EST
    Interestingly, the SBC has recently been exploring the idea of a name change to get out from under the regionalism inherent in the current one.

    They were leaning towards Great Commission Baptists, but I never saw anything to indicate if they were aware of the recent ABC show with the same initials.


    I think (none / 0) (#39)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 06:06:42 AM EST
    you get the point anyway. I had no idea they were thinking of changing their name. I know there's already American Baptists but why don't they just make it simple and call themselves the Baptist Church of America or something?

    Sony Vaio (none / 0) (#9)
    by gadfly on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 06:06:59 PM EST
    I recently bought a F series and I can say that it is a fine machine, 16.4 inch diag. screen and a screaming core I7 processor. I hope you spent some extra on the video components, because the standard video card and video memory needs a little help.

    Didja ever notice... (none / 0) (#11)
    by Repack Rider on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 07:19:56 PM EST
    That the somewhat vaguely worded Second Amendment is sacred, and used to justify any level of personal armament, but the Eighth, which unequivocally prohibits torture by the government, is ignored?

    Does anyone remember when the Chair of the Senate Intel Committee, Dianne Feinstein, promised us a complete report on torture by the CIA?

    She sure doesn't.

    If you haven't noticed... (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Dadler on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 10:01:43 PM EST
    ...Dianne Feinstein is worthless.  Less than.  She and her husband, after all, profited nicely from the wars we have been in for the last decade.

    The sooner D-Fi is in diapers in a rest-home the better.


    Why Zimmerman was not charged with mansalughter (none / 0) (#12)
    by cboldt on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 07:39:37 PM EST
    I didn't realize until a few moments ago that the crime of manslaughter refers to FL Chapter 776, justified use of force.

    F.S. 782.07 - Manslaughter

    (1) The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter

    If the charge was manslaughter, the information and affidavit would have to negative the self defense provided by Chapter 776.  That would set the stage to cure Dershowitz's specific criticism (the affidavit would negative the claim of self defense); or make it a legitimate one (the affidavit is supposed to negative self-defense if the crime is manslaughter, but it does not).

    In reading the details of criminal law, distinguishing between the various forms of homicide, it is dawning on me that Corey's downgrading of the charge is potentially a non-trivial undertaking; and that O'Mara could be pushing for that Statement of Particulars in order to reveal, to the Court, that there is no evidence for depraved mind.

    What is depraved mind? (none / 0) (#13)
    by cboldt on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 08:13:01 PM EST
    See Wiley v. State, a recent Florida case, for what it is not.  Good case, too, for what the state has to produce in the way of non-circumstantial evidence, to survive a Motion for Judgment of Acquittal.

    In the context of second-degree murder, an act is imminently dangerous to another and evinces a "depraved mind" if it is an act or series of acts that: (1) a person of ordinary judgment would know is reasonably certain to kill or do serious bodily injury to another; and (2) is done from ill will, hatred, spite or an evil intent; and (3) is of such a nature that the act itself indicates an indifference to human life. Bellamy v. State, 977 So.2d 682 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008); Michelson, 805 So.2d at 985. However, "extremely reckless behavior itself is insufficient from which to infer any malice. Moreover, an impulsive overreaction to an attack or injury is itself insufficient to prove ill will, hatred, spite, or evil intent." Light v. State, 841 So.2d 623, 626 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); McDaniel v. State, 620 So.2d 1308 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Williams v. State, 674 So.2d 177, 178 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). Further, "[a]lthough exceptions exist, the crime of second-degree murder is normally committed by a person who knows the victim and has had time to develop a level of enmity toward the victim," and "[h]atred, spite, evil intent, or ill will usually require more than an instant to develop." Light, 841 So.2d at 626.

    I wrote a post about this (none / 0) (#33)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 12:30:56 AM EST
    a while ago here

    There is abundant case law in Florida that an impulsive overreaction to an attack or injury is insufficient to prove ill will, hatred, spite, or evil intent. Even extremely reckless behavior, by itself, is insufficient from which to infer any malice.

    And, while exceptions exist, second-degree murder usually applies when the defendant and victim knew each other prior to the killing, allowing time for enmity to develop. As many Florida decisions have held, "Hatred, spite, evil intent, or ill will usually require more than an instant to develop."

    The exceptions I have read in Florida case law, including as recently as decisions last month, finding enmity and ill- will when the defendant and victim were strangers, involve situations such as a defendant who claimed to be on a suicide mission and decided to make headlines by driving into a crowd of strangers, intending to kill them as well as himself. Or where the defendant drove his car down a sidewalk at a high rate of speed killing a child, and then drove down a second sidewalk striking and killing another child.

    I downloaded many cases from Lexis that all say the above. None I found held differently.


    I'm Slow on the uptake (none / 0) (#36)
    by cboldt on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 01:02:53 AM EST
    Thanks for linking that post of yours here.  I ran into it just after posting the link to and blockquote from the Wiley case, and felt a little bad for covering such old ground, anew.

    Good morning, Vietnam! (none / 0) (#14)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 08:13:36 PM EST
    I would like to note that today marks the 40th anniversary of the infamous break-in by President Nixon's White House "Plumbers" of the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate Hotel.

    Carol Williams of the Los Angeles Times questions if we've in fact truly learned the lessons of Watergate, or whether we've instead been set up for an even greater fall, thanks to the Bush-Cheney administration's reassertion of executive privileges and the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling. With the benefit of 40 years' worth of historical hindsight, I think that this is a discussion worthy of some honest reflection and debate.

    In the meantime, we're heading out this morning to tour the various sites comprising one of the most decisive battles in world history -- Dien Bien Phu, which brought to an end France's bloody but futile eight-year struggle to reassert her colonial hegemony over Vietnam (1946-54).


    Learned from Watergate? (5.00 / 3) (#21)
    by Dadler on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 10:05:55 PM EST
    We are a supposedly free people allowing ourselves to be essentially enslaved by an inanimate object of our own creation, and over which we have complete control.  Right now, we couldn't learn how to put on our own national pants, forget learning any savvy lessons from history.

    Interesting tour for you in Vietnam, I'm sure, with your family's history from that war.  It is still a miracle to me that the Vietnamese have any decent feelings toward us at all.  Can't even IMAGINE that equation were the history reversed.

    Peace and travel safely.


    Re Watergate and Vietnam (none / 0) (#45)
    by brodie on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 08:29:58 AM EST
    reporter Robert Parry suggests there might be a link, Nixon wanting to recover the secret Johnson WH file on the 1968 Nixon campaign's illegal machinations to thwart the Paris peace talks and thereby eliminate the possibility of an October breakthrough benefitting Humphrey.  Nixon was told the files were at Brookings and was adamant that WH operatives break in and retrieve them one year before the Watergate burglary.  

    Were the politically explosive 1968 LBJ files on Nixon the reason for the latter break in?  Woodstein, in their recent WaPo piece, think in terms of a far more benign reason for Nixon to want the files, which Parry suggests is an example of our media elites getting the Watergate story wrong, missing the bigger picture, and thus failing to learn the right lessons.


    Sounds like a model citizen (none / 0) (#29)
    by Rojas on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 11:44:40 PM EST
    compared to the A$$holes that beat the hell out of him that night.

    "We just treated him like we always try to treat everyone," West said. "He wasn't happy, but he was compliant."

    Rialto police Capt. Randy DeAnda couldn't recall an incident where King was arrested in Rialto, but he said officers considered him "cordial, very professional and very cooperative"

    From the files of (none / 0) (#43)
    by jbindc on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 07:45:53 AM EST
    You knew it was coming:

    Rielle Hunter has a book coming out.  In it she talks about John Edwards other mistresses.

    Hunter and Edwards met on Feb. 21, 2006, at the New York Regency Hotel. She approached the former senator with the come-on, "You are so hot," and moments later he called to invite her up to his room.

    On that first night, Edwards, then mulling a second run for the White House, told Hunter he was currently sexually involved with three other women simultaneously, and had mistresses in Chicago, Los Angeles and Florida.

    Throughout the first weeks of their relationship, Edwards would reference these women, even detailing trips to meet and break up with them.

    But all three women, Edwards later confessed to Hunter, were completely fabricated. Made up, he said, so Hunter and other former mistresses, to whom he had told the same story, would not become too attached.

    "Johnny went on to tell me that the three women he had told me about the first night I had met him were, in fact, not real and that he had made them up... My mind was racing... He had told me detail upon detail. I remembered the ups and downs of emotion I had felt the night he went to Chicago to break off his relationship there," she writes. "My reality in our relationship had been ripped out from under me."

    Uh, okay.

    Maybe all of these people should go quietly into that good night and leave the rest of us out of it.

    I Know... (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 10:57:51 AM EST
    ...it was obviously ready to go earlier, and I can't help wonder if their were two versions, one if he was found guilty and one if not.

    Surely one would be much juicier I was thinking, but with the quote above it's pretty hard to make that claim.  She is an idiot and Edwards is even bigger one for going after her.

    Does she not realize that the kid is going to read it as some point ?  Talk about disturbing, a parent knowingly writing a book with intimate details about their sexual operas.  Never mind the insanity of willingly letting the public into you most intimate buffoonery of your life for $$$ when you have a child of a wealthy man.


    The funny thing is (none / 0) (#68)
    by jbindc on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 11:00:20 AM EST
    She's touting the reason for writing this book is so she can explain this all to her daughter when she grows up.

    Poor little girl.  Such idiots with few morals (apparently) for parents.


    I See... (none / 0) (#78)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 01:06:58 PM EST
    That actually makes sense coming from her. Like the idea of explaining it to her through conversation never occurred to her. Instead of a college fund, JE might want to start a Betty Ford fund, cause that seems an almost certainty.

    Please excuse me if ... (none / 0) (#96)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 05:15:26 PM EST
    jbindc: "Rielle Hunter has a book coming out."

    ... I don't rush right down to Barnes & Noble, and shove people brutally out of my way as I race through the aisles to grab a copy.


    No problem (none / 0) (#108)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 19, 2012 at 06:49:26 AM EST
    I pre-ordered a copy and it's on it's way to Hawaii just for you!  :)

    Dadler!!!! You must have sprinkled some (none / 0) (#53)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 09:09:12 AM EST
     Herpes Zoster viruses out the window on your LA-NY trip because I have Shingles.

    Your germ warfare attack has not gone unnoticed and I will be plotting revenge as I lay back zapped out on pain meds!


    oh, wow (5.00 / 3) (#60)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 09:59:42 AM EST
    Sorry to hear that. I hope you get to feeling better soon. I've never had them but I understand that they are painful.

    Feel better, Jim, (5.00 / 2) (#80)
    by jeffinalabama on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 01:57:22 PM EST
    and get ready for the Main Event!

    Thanks Jeff (none / 0) (#109)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 19, 2012 at 12:18:08 PM EST
    But I did poorly... You can't play poker worth a flip when zapped on pain meds..

    So LV is spared another year.


    That Explains... (none / 0) (#67)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 10:58:56 AM EST
    ...the Rodney King post.

    It was the shingles talking (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 01:52:42 PM EST
    we'll leave it at that.

    Get better soon jim - not an easy thing to get through.


    Nope (none / 0) (#83)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 02:47:40 PM EST
    He's 'zapped out on pain meds' and still trying to convince the world Rodney King had it coming. Too easy Jim, but I don't wish anyone pain, so I hope the meds are working. If not, add a beer or two to the equation and you will literally be feeling none.

    Nope, the shingles (none / 0) (#104)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 08:44:40 PM EST
    have nothing to do with what I wrote.

    But you give us a full up look at who you are when you bring them up.

    And I again note that you deliberately "misunderstand" what I wrote.


    Jim, I hope that you (none / 0) (#88)
    by Zorba on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 03:38:07 PM EST
    feel better soon.  A case of shingles is really awful- Mr. Zorba had a bad case a few years ago, and he was truly miserable (and as a result of this, I got my shingles vaccine shortly thereafter).  
    But don't blame poor Dadler.  If you had chickenpox as a kid, the virus has been dormant in your system all these many years.
    I hope that your doctor gave you antiviral meds, as well as pain meds.  

    Ah Dadler is a big boy (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 08:46:33 PM EST
    and can take being responsible for germ warfare.



    and I understand (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 08:52:55 PM EST
    the ins and outs of the disease... This is my second episode. The first happened in LV while on a business trip and the pain centered on my left shoulder arm area and the lesions hadn't appeared.

    Called 911 and self diagnosed a heart attack. Almost had one when the Doc, after hours of tests/waiting uttered the word "herpes" and I didn't understand the Zoster part.


    So if You Never had... (none / 0) (#92)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 04:15:30 PM EST
    ...chickenpox you won't get the shingles ? And anyone know the origin of the name, shingles sounds like something you get from living in squalor. I was surprised when someone told me that wasn't the case a couple years back.

    Ask Wiki (none / 0) (#93)
    by jbindc on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 04:22:45 PM EST
    And you shall receive:

    The family name of all the herpesviridae is derived from the Greek word herpein ("to creep"),[77] referring to the latent, recurring infections typical of this group of viruses. Zoster comes from Greek zōstēr, meaning "belt" or "girdle", after the characteristic belt-like dermatomal rash.[78] The common name for the disease, shingles, derives from the Latin cingulus, a variant of Latin cingulum meaning "girdle".[

    Basically, yes (none / 0) (#99)
    by Zorba on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 06:17:51 PM EST
    However, if you have never had chickenpox and never had the chickenpox vaccine, you can get chickenpox from being exposed to someone who has shingles.  You cannot, however, get shingles from someone who has shingles.  Shingles happens to a lot of people who had chickenpox when younger.
    See:  link
    And: link

    I can't wait to watch the right applaud SCOTUS (none / 0) (#61)
    by Farmboy on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 10:09:27 AM EST
    for overturning the ACA based on the unconstitutionality of death panels and the cornhusker compromise.

    Of course, the GOP could surprise me by proposing a viable replacement program that provides coverage for uninsured Americans.

    Or SCOTUS could surprise my by deciding that Article I of the U.S. Constitution authorizes Congress to regulate interstate commerce. But I'm not. Overturning the commerce clause opens the door for the right to negate legislation going back to the New Deal.

    Not holding my breath, I meant to say. (none / 0) (#62)
    by Farmboy on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 10:10:39 AM EST
    For some reason hitting the return key occasionally submits the form. Oh, well.

    I Think... (none / 0) (#69)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 11:04:03 AM EST
    ...it's hitting the tab key by mistake, then the back and enter buttons do other things because you are out of the text box.

    By George, I've think you've got it! (none / 0) (#70)
    by Farmboy on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 11:20:21 AM EST
    I just tried that and watched the focus move along as I hit the tab key - a behavior I was aware of but didn't realize I'd triggered.

    Thanks for solving a minor Monday morning mystery!

    (posted via tab-arrow-return combo)


    That's What They Are Paying... (none / 0) (#82)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 02:28:58 PM EST
    ...me for around here, only took a couple years to figure it out.

    nyceve has an interesting diary (none / 0) (#64)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 10:34:21 AM EST
    at DK.  Unfortunately ACA because it lacked pricing and cost controls was documented as leading to higher prices and deductibles for everyone.

    I can attest to that (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by jbindc on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 10:47:04 AM EST
    Just got a new individual policy at the beginning of the year.  Turned down because of "pre-existing condition" (BMI too high), so I couldn't qualify for the cheaper plan - even with a high deductible.  Had to get a more expensive plan, that of course, won't help with things like, oh the Weight Watchers meetings I go to (which would lessen my BMI).  I go to the doctor once a year for a physical, and I get a cheap prescription - and maybe a stop at a clinic for a sinus infection once a year.  That's it.  But I'm paying way more than I did before ACA.

    Would overturning... (none / 0) (#71)
    by kdog on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 11:21:27 AM EST
    or severely weakening the commerce clause make drug prohibition unconstitutional too?  Looking for a silver lining here;)

    I guess it depends on if they overturn Wickard (none / 0) (#75)
    by Farmboy on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 12:18:00 PM EST
    or just poke a couple idealogical holes in it. If they throw it out completely, then maybe you'll get your silver lining - while pretty much every federally funded social program is killed, and the states shrug off civil rights and voting mandates.

    Or they could rule that the ACA is unconstitutional and wrap this ruling up as un-citable like they did with Bush v Gore in 2000. Then you get no silver lining.


    Worth a read: (none / 0) (#73)
    by oculus on Mon Jun 18, 2012 at 12:03:16 PM EST