home

Monday Afternoon Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 04:28:39 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Get your Obama SUX jollies out here.

I won't be in this thread.

Open thread.

Update (TL):

107 degrees according to my dashboard. Maybe it's the thin air, or that we're a mile closer to the sun, but whatever it is, it feels surreal to be outside. And very uncomfortable.

< The Olympic "Ideal" | Welcome Back, Kim DotCom! >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Monday Afternoon Open Thread | 202 comments (202 topical)
    What's the point then? (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by oculus on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 04:32:52 PM EST


    I can't find an air conditioner (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by vicndabx on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 04:57:16 PM EST
    My apt has these casement windows that require AC's w/very specific dimensions. {obama sux}  Friedrich, the one brand I could reliably count on to have models that fit my apt windows no longer makes models that fit {I bought an over priced one from them last summer, obama sux}.  Only ones they have now are these over priced trend master ones that look like they belong on a design show {obama sux}.  What's worse, you can't simply search for AC's using window dimensions {obama sux} - either the website doesn't provide them or you have to click a link for each AC and then click another link to see the specifications {obama sux!!!!!!}.

    /s

    Try the portables? (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Towanda on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 05:40:56 PM EST
    European, when we got them years ago, but now much more available in the U.S.  The units sit on the floor, but a hose (like a dryer vent hose) connects out the window -- a solution for those casement windows.

    When we finally put in central ac (at least to upper floors of this old house), we handed off the portables to relatives, who still are using them, lo these twelve years later.

    They sure will be using them later this week, when temps here are to hit 100.  I don't know how, after weeks of drought already, we're going to save the garden.  

    And, of course, the heat hits just in time for moving day for my daughter.  We're all going to be verrrry sloooow-moving on moving day.

    Parent

    Thanks (none / 0) (#41)
    by vicndabx on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 08:41:01 PM EST
    Will see if I can find one.  I've looked at these, but usage is complicated by push out window panes.

    Appreciate the suggestion.....

    Parent

    Vic, I saw portable air conditioners (none / 0) (#50)
    by caseyOR on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 10:56:05 PM EST
    like Towanda described in the Target ads in yesterday's newspaper.

    I don't know if you patronize Target, but it's a place to start.

    Parent

    And Obama Sux! n/t (none / 0) (#51)
    by caseyOR on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 10:56:44 PM EST


    Parent
    I had one of those for my (none / 0) (#58)
    by nycstray on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 11:39:12 PM EST
    bedroom when I lived in Brooklyn. Much appreciated it! Passed it on to a friend when I moved since it was only 2yrs old. She now appreciates it :)

    Parent
    Also, think about celing fans (none / 0) (#59)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 11:39:48 PM EST
    I live, I suspect, in a much cooler climate than you do, but we just had a few days of 90-plus, and the ceiling fans in my house do a truly awesome job of keeping things cool.

    What they do is blast the warmest air down from the ceiling to the floor, which has the effect of pushing the cooler floor-level air up to about head height, from which it then gradually sinks back, while the warm air rises up more quickly to the ceiling again.

    So you get cool air going up and going down, the air in the room churns itself up nicely, and unless you're sitting right under the fan, all you notice is that the room is distinctly cooler than it was before you turned the fan on.

    Parent

    That's what I have now (none / 0) (#63)
    by nycstray on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 11:49:32 PM EST
    and I LOVE them. We did have the odd 96 degree day a couple weeks ago, and they also help in the evenings when the temp drops to cool off the rooms faster than just open windows with reg fans.

    Do yours have remote control? My one in Brooklyn didn't, but this house does. I love sitting here working and being able to adjust the fans without getting up :) Silly, I know, but I do like it!

    Parent

    Psst: I also like playing with the remote (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by Towanda on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:38:24 AM EST
    for our ceiling fan.  I learned to reverse it one way for warmth, another way for coolth (?).  Our fan also has a lovely stained-glass light, and I can dim it or brighten it with the remote control.

    After all, the fan is year-round, while my other favorite remote toy is only for a few weeks a year.  It's a remote for Christmas tree lights that can make them go on off sixteen ways.

    And my kids think that I need a life.  Ha!  This IS the life, sitting in a comfy chair and controlling the world!  Well, the world around me.

    I'm gonna be a suckah for a roomba one of these days.

    Parent

    Hah! I have the dimmer also! :) (5.00 / 2) (#73)
    by nycstray on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:51:42 AM EST
    (and that reverse option) Your kids will soon learn to appreciate the lil' things in life, like controlling your environment with a remote! :D

    I can't get a Roomba until Roxy! grows a brain.  I think she would kill it on day one :P I may control my environment, but Roxy! controls a lot more until that maturity brain shows up {grin}

    Parent

    Okay. Obama SUX. (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 05:11:02 PM EST
    That said, Romney SUX even more.

    There, I feel much better now. Thank you, BTD.

    ;-D

    I disagree. Obama doesn't <well you know> (1.50 / 2) (#35)
    by lousy1 on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 08:18:53 PM EST
    He is apparently, disinclined due to a choking problem


    Parent
    ewwwwwwwwwwww (5.00 / 2) (#77)
    by TeresaInPa on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 07:26:24 AM EST
    you are lucky my rating button finger is not feeling well today, buster.

    Parent
    classy (none / 0) (#83)
    by Leopold on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 08:34:15 AM EST


    Parent
    Well the Fellas On... (none / 0) (#148)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:22:17 PM EST
    ...Wall Street tell me he gives them the GFE afterwards, no complaints I hear.

    Parent
    the truth is often in the middle (none / 0) (#31)
    by pgupta on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 07:30:39 PM EST
    "Obama SUX" from the right is just as wrong as "I don't care, Obama is awesome" from the left.

    It does SUX though that Obama did not listen to Biden on Afghanistan.
    http://www.salon.com/2012/06/25/biden_in_leaked_memo_told_obama_war_plan_flawed/

    Parent

    I'm personally looking forward to the debates (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by CST on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 05:11:12 PM EST
    where I fully expect Mitt and Scott to wipe the floor with their respected rivals.  I swear :)

    At least then we can be done with the debate debates (there must be 30 boston.com articles about the brown/warren back and forth on what debates they each agree to).

    Idiotic (none / 0) (#61)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 11:42:16 PM EST
    I've seen a little bit of that stuff about the Brown/Warren debates and it has really gone way beyond the pale.  My sympathies.

    But really, can you blame half-wit (or maybe just lazyman) Brown for doing everything he can think of to avoid debating Warren in any high-profile circumstance?


    Parent

    They have 2 debates scheduled (none / 0) (#74)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 06:35:54 AM EST
    It's a myth that he is "avoiding debates".  They have 4 scheduled and were not coming to terms on only the 4th one (which they did - a week ago). Brown refused to debate at the Kennedy Institute (where Ted Kennedy's wife is the president of the Board of Trustees, and was obviously going to endorse Warren).  Meanwhile, Warren hadn't responded to Brown's two invitations to radio debates.

    Doesn't seem like being "afraid" to debate anything. Jsut seems like working it out so neither candidate feels they are at a disadvantage.

    Parent

    4 debates scheduled - not 2 (none / 0) (#75)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 06:36:12 AM EST


    Parent
    Here is the latest (none / 0) (#99)
    by CST on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 10:34:50 AM EST
    on the debate debates.

    This whole thing is rediculous, and no, I won't give Brown a pass when he is so clearly seeking out every possible "gotcha" moment, and failing so badly at finding them - it's just juvenile.  It's also a myth that she's "avoiding debates".  He refused to go to the Kennedy Institute but wants to do talk radio which is right-wing central.

    "The senator rejected a televised debate proposed by Victoria Reggie Kennedy, widow of Senator Edward M. Kennedy, after she refused to withhold an endorsement in the campaign. Yet Brown said he would appear with Rea, a conservative who openly labels himself Brown's friend, with or without Warren."

    Parent

    I don't give anyone a break, (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by dk on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 10:53:49 AM EST
    but it really is just par for the course political posturing by both candidates.  It just seems odd here in MA because we so rarely have contested elections (it being essentially a one-party state and all).

    Parent
    Of course it's ridiculous (1.00 / 1) (#103)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 10:58:11 AM EST
    But it's not like they had no debates scheduled and he was "afraid" to debate her. That was pure spin.

    And just as he (rightly, I think) refused to debate at the Kennedy Insitute, when some people still refer to the seat as "Teddy's seat", (with Rachel Maddow moderating???) Warren rightly refused to debate in a setting that is "right-wing central".

    Again - silly season.

    Parent

    yea very much (none / 0) (#105)
    by CST on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:03:44 AM EST
    the silly season.  And no, I'm not used to it, and I don't like it!

    Hence my first comment, wake me up when the actual debates start so I can stop hearing about the debate-debate nonsense.

    Parent

    Well, at least the GOP can now ... (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 05:23:03 PM EST
    ... dispense with its patently phony concern about voter fraud:

    PoliticsPA.com | June 25, 2012
    Turzai: Voter ID Law Means Romney Can Win PA - "[...] House Majority Leader Mike Turzai (R-Allegheny) suggested that the House's end game in passing the Voter ID law was to benefit the GOP politically. 'We are focused on making sure that we meet our obligations that we've talked about for years,' said Turzai in a speech to committee members Saturday. He mentioned the law among a laundry list of accomplishments made by the GOP-run legislature. 'Pro-Second Amendment? The Castle Doctrine, it's done. First pro-life legislation - abortion facility regulations - in 22 years, done. Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.' The statement drew a loud round of applause from the audience. It also struck a nerve among critics, who called it an admission that they passed the bill to make it harder for Democrats to vote -- and not to prevent voter fraud as the legislators claimed." (Emphasis is mine.)

    How many hours will pass before this clown attempts to walk back the now-spoken truth in his statement?

    You concede (none / 0) (#79)
    by lousy1 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 07:53:07 AM EST
    that because of the provisional ballot provision of the voter fraud act that

    the outcome of the election would be the same with or without ID requirement.

    That is, in a close race all provisional ballots  cast by legitimate voters who lacked IDs on election day would be tallied.

    So obviously Mr Turzai is postulating that eliminating voter fraud will provide Romney the margin victory.

     

    Parent

    and therefore "postulating" that (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by DFLer on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 08:22:46 AM EST
    voter fraud is perpetrated only by Democratic (non-Romney?) voters

    Parent
    Mr Turzai (none / 0) (#85)
    by lousy1 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:14:46 AM EST
    Doesn't seem to address the issue. He obviously thinks that the majority of the fraud in Pennsylvania favors Democratics.

    That Republicans voted for the measure while Democrats averred seems to support his views. Other interpretations are possible but require one to believe that the members of the political parties are voting a key political issue based on principal rather than vested self interest.

    There is certainly a well documented body of evidence of urban political machines engaged in egregious fraud dating back at least to Tammany Hall. These centers are primarily - but not exclusively- Dem. There is a large body of testimony from participants in older vote fraud schemes.

    If these practices persevere, understandably the participants have a motive for zipping up.

    Google Voter Fraud Philadelphia

    Parent

    Not necessarily (5.00 / 2) (#128)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 01:28:04 PM EST
    It could be self-interest as well, the poor and minorities are less likely to have an acceptable form of ID, and since said groups generally don't vote for those who actively despise and/or oppress them its obviously in the GOP's self-interest to deny suffrage to as many members of said group as possible without it adversely impacting GOP performance in other groups.    

    Parent
    You are missing the point (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by sj on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:24:31 AM EST
    It isn't the "outcome of the race" that is the overarching issue here.  Forget "outcome of the race".  It was a major part of your misunderstanding about absentee ballots and you are bringing it to this discussion.

    The issue is accessibility to the ballot box.  If the casting of a provisional ballot causes the a valid voter to make a second trip to confirm identification, then it can be an undue burden.

    Not only are our election days on a work day, but the second trip is on a work day as well.  So one loses work time.  Maybe just half a day if you have a car, maybe more if mass transit is required.  But if you have a car then maybe you have to pay for parking or get a parking ticket.

    Consider that.

    Now if you want to talk about how that affects the outcome, collect data and see who is being targeted for removal from the voter rolls.

    Parent

    How many (1.50 / 2) (#88)
    by lousy1 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:30:33 AM EST
    working citizens lack a photo id? None that I have ever met.


    Parent
    And you continue to miss the point (5.00 / 3) (#89)
    by sj on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:31:11 AM EST


    Parent
    I think I understand your premise. (none / 0) (#92)
    by lousy1 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:46:13 AM EST
    I just don't but it.

    Please provide some statistics to how many legitimate voters are being disenfranchised in Pennsylvania and I may bend.

    Can you concede that even the appearance of officially approved vote fraud is deleterious to the confidence of the country?
     

    Parent

    Still missing the point (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by sj on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:52:43 AM EST
    It doesn't matter how many.  The statistics you want are irrelevant.  The issue is equal access to the ballot box.   Period.  There is a time and a place for a provisional ballot.  It used to be used as a tool for exceptional circumstances.  Not as the primary vehicle for a legitimate voter to cast that vote.

    And I concede only that you have posed a meaningless question that seeks to take the discussion sideways.  Another detour into the irrelevant.

    Parent

    I think you have a misconception. (none / 0) (#107)
    by lousy1 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:10:25 AM EST
    The law doesn't and never can guaranteed equal access to the ballot box. For instance rural voters and citizens out of country do not have the same ease of access as urban voters who typically can walk to a polling place.

    Doesn't matter. All that is required is that voters in some abstract class are treated equally. Voters who chose not to have a photo ID are not in the same class as those who do.

    Voters who are not registered and register on voting day are going to find it more difficult to vote and their vote may be provisional.

    So what? They all have an equal chance of effecting the outcome with their ballot.

     

    Parent

    I have a misconception? (5.00 / 4) (#115)
    by sj on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:32:12 AM EST
    uh-huh, really.  I have been active in this process for years.  Voting is not an abstract process performed by abstract classes.  It is one one venue provided to citizens to have a voice in their society.

    You spout off errata as if all states are equal in their laws.  They are not.  But the one thing that should be a given is that if one has registered to vote, that registration should be on file and the voter should have every expectation of voting at the voting booth like every other registered voter.  Not knocked off the rolls because some unknown third party took exception based on what is effectively a whim.

    And the fact that you are back to worrying about "effecting [sic] the outcome" shows that you aren't really serious about the electoral process.  Only about promoting your own viewpoint.  No point in further trying to educate the uneducate-able.  

    Later.  Or maybe not.

    Parent

    Sorry typo (none / 0) (#93)
    by lousy1 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:46:58 AM EST
    I don't buy it.

    Parent
    Is there some significance to (5.00 / 2) (#100)
    by Anne on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 10:49:30 AM EST
    your use of "working" citizens?  Does working have something to do with voting?

    As far as I know, one cannot register to vote without identification and proof that one lives in the precinct where one wishes to register, so every person listed on the rolls has already provided identification and proof of residency sufficient to get them registered.

    In Maryland, where I live, the voter rolls are on electronic poll books.  When you come in to vote, you have to give your name to the election judge, who then brings it up on the screen and asks you to verify the month and day of your birth before printing out a voting slip for you to sign, and handing you a card to insert into the voting machine.  If you have already voted, that information will appear on the screen, so while it is possible for someone else to vote in your place, it is not possible for you to vote again.  In the three or four election cycles I worked as an assistant chief judge, I never saw one instance of someone showing up to vote where the poll book showed he or she had already voted.

    Are there dead people on the rolls?  I'm sure.  Do the dead vote?  I guess it's possible.  There are people who have since moved who are still on the books in their previous precinct.  It's not a perfect system, but it's not so imperfect that we have to design ways to keep making it harder for people to vote, especially when, of those who are eligible to register, such a relatively small percentage do, and of those who are registered, a shamefully large number of them don't bother to vote.  Whether this is a reflection of the poor quality of the choices we have, or indifference, or the belief that voting doesn't change anything - or all of the above - I don't know, but I do know that it makes no sense to make it harder, not if we actually want an engaged, participatory electorate that demands a participatory government.  But maybe you don't want that, I don't know.

    When Republicans hire consultants who record and send robo-calls to heavily Democratic districts, telling voters - before the votes are even counted - that Democrats have been victorious in an effort to suppress the Democratic vote - which happened here in MD when Bob Ehrlich ran for governor in 2010 - that to me is far more serious an example of voter fraud than the piddling instances of ineligible people casting votes.

    I suspect you will not agree.


    Parent

    The working citizen reference was in response to (1.00 / 1) (#112)
    by lousy1 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:23:56 AM EST
    The issue is accessibility to the ballot box.  If the casting of a provisional ballot causes the a valid voter to make a second trip to confirm identification, then it can be an undue burden.

    Not only are our election days on a work day, but the second trip is on a work day as well.  So one loses work time.  Maybe just half a day if you have a car, maybe more if mass transit is required.  But if you have a car then maybe you have to pay for parking or get a parking ticket.

    Of course if you have a car typically you also have a photo id.

    Almost impossible to get a job without an ID also


    Parent

    Have you told us yet why (5.00 / 3) (#122)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:08:32 PM EST
    it should be necessary to have a car and/or a job in order to take advantage of your RIGHT (not privilege) to vote? If so I have missed it.

    Parent
    I never said or implied that (none / 0) (#126)
    by lousy1 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:53:28 PM EST
    either was required.

    I did point out is was inconsistent to moan about lost wages or driving costs for a voter who was forced to cast a provisional ballet because they lacked an ID since either typically require an ID.

    BTW this study Voter ID Experience in Georgia
    suggests that many here are overstating the problem.

    Parent

    The Heritage Foundation - heh (4.00 / 3) (#194)
    by Yman on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 06:18:41 PM EST
    You're funny.

    Nothing from Rush or Beck?

    Parent

    Of course (none / 0) (#101)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 10:53:22 AM EST
    They don't purge the voter rolls, so as I have said several times, my sister was "registered" to vote in multiple precincts at the same time - some under her maiden name, and some under her married name (because she moved several times during the first years of their marriage).  If she so wanted, last election, she could have cast 5 votes in 5 different places.

    My mom also said my dad is still listed and he died 2 1/2 years ago.

    Parent

    People have ample opportunity to (5.00 / 2) (#123)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:15:36 PM EST
    commit any number of crimes or fraud. If a merchant wanted to put defense against shoplifting as a higher priority than getting people to shop in his store, of course he could lock everything up tighter than a drum and be out of business in a month. But he measures the odds and decides the level of safety he needs.

    The proponents of these draconian laws claiming to be there only to prevent fraud have vastly overstated the odds of fraud, telling me that their real aim is to 'close the store' to certain shoppers.

    Parent

    Did she vote 5 times? (5.00 / 2) (#130)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 01:34:26 PM EST
    Of course not, no one does, once is pointless enough...thats why this is a disenfranchising cure for a disease that doesn't exist.

    Half the people who can vote don't bother...and we're worried about somebody who might vote twice?  Gimme a break.

    Parent

    I'm going to quote Anne here (4.25 / 4) (#104)
    by sj on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:02:51 AM EST
    Are there dead people on the rolls?  I'm sure.  Do the dead vote?  I guess it's possible.  There are people who have since moved who are still on the books in their previous precinct.  It's not a perfect system, but it's not so imperfect that we have to design ways to keep making it harder for people to vote, especially when, of those who are eligible to register, such a relatively small percentage do, and of those who are registered, a shamefully large number of them don't bother to vote.  Whether this is a reflection of the poor quality of the choices we have, or indifference, or the belief that voting doesn't change anything - or all of the above - I don't know, but I do know that it makes no sense to make it harder, not if we actually want an engaged, participatory electorate that demands a participatory government.  But maybe you don't want that, I don't know.
    Has your sister voted in more than one polling place?  Has someone voted using your father's name?

    Hmmm... even if so, I think that causes less damage to democracy than voter ID laws.  I know you don't agree.  In this matter I don't think it's just a difference of opinion.  In this matter I think you are just plain wrong.  :)

    Parent

    Well I would say (none / 0) (#132)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 02:05:25 PM EST
    that if two members of my family are still on the rolls, there's probably a pretty good chance of many more people all over the country also being on multiple rolls. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

    And as Anne also pointed out - you need ID to register to vote in the first place.  So then why is it such a leap to require a Voter ID card, a license, a state ID card (which most states give to those who can't afford it), or something to be required to vote?

    Parent

    What about those that vote by mail? (5.00 / 2) (#134)
    by nycstray on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 02:22:28 PM EST
    How are we to show our ID? Absentee same prob?

    Parent
    At least 2 ways (none / 0) (#135)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 02:28:05 PM EST
    that I can think of right off the top of my head:

    1. A voter could have to write the ID # on the ballot, and/or

    2. A voter could have to submit a photocopy of the ID (could get 10 free copies of something like that when you get the ID if you can't afford it).

    And I'm sure people at a higher pay grade than me could think of more.

    Is it a perfect solution?  No, but is the alternative that we should do nothing because there isn't a perfect solution?

    Parent

    The only alternative on this site, anyway, (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 02:41:36 PM EST
    is to do nothing.

    Not because there is not a perfect solution, but because a) the status quo doesn't hurt - and in fact probably benefits - the Dems, and 2) screw the Repubs. (Because they, you know, hired consultants who sent out unfair robocalls. And other mean stuff like that.)

    It would be cool, to me anyway, for just one lefty to say something like "You know what, I agree, I wouldn't like it either if I was effectively disenfranchised by an illegal vote that cancelled out my vote. So here's my idea of how to lessen it from happening: ..."

    Parent

    You missed a reason (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by CST on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 02:50:31 PM EST
    I think a lot of us honestly don't have a problem with the idea of someone who isn't a citizen voting.  Not just because it probably benefits Dems (although I grant you it makes it easier), but because it's someone who has taken enough of an interest in their adopted country that they actually care to vote.  So I don't consider my vote "canceled out" by an illegal immigrant, I see it more like they are adding their own voice to the process, but my vote is still there, I'm not disenfranchised by anyone else voting.

    But you're right I think most of us just don't consider voter fraud to be a "real" problem.  So no, we aren't looking for solutions.  But your a) and 2) list is not the reason why.

    Parent

    Spoilsport. (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:02:12 PM EST
    btw, "a) & 2)" was from an episode of Mad About You. Always makes me smile...

    Parent
    Yeah (none / 0) (#149)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:25:46 PM EST
    I think a lot of us honestly don't have a problem with the idea of someone who isn't a citizen voting

    That whole idea of the 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th Amendments to the Constitution where it specifically mentions "citizens" as eligible to vote [in federal elections] (and not "persons") is just so antiquated. I mean, Democrats hate it when Republicans don't follow the Constitution, so why should they have to?

    Also that little thing of it being a federal crime to register and vote in federal elections - but why would anyone have a problem with that?

    Parent

    I understand why others might care (5.00 / 1) (#157)
    by CST on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:37:08 PM EST
    I'm just not one of those people.

    I realize that for you the fact that something is illegal makes it inherently wrong.  I do not share that view.  I think there is right and wrong, and legal and illegal, and they are not always directly related, although as a society we should try.

    I would be comfortable changing the law to allow it, so in that vein, enforcement is not a top priority issue for me.  Kind of like deporting 16 year olds.  Or checking papers at traffic stops.

    Parent

    "Federal crime"... (none / 0) (#153)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:33:46 PM EST
    talk about a useless statement...so many things are a federal crime that they literally cannot be counted!  I sh*t you not!  We could be commiting a federal crime right now and not even know it.

    Parent
    I'm pretty sure sh*tting someone (none / 0) (#155)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:35:43 PM EST
    is some sort of crime...

    Parent
    Roger Clemens... (none / 0) (#161)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:45:27 PM EST
    knows all about it!

    Good thing we still got jury nullification going for us.

    Parent

    I don't vote Brand D.... (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:00:34 PM EST
    My concern is solely on those turned away from the polls erroneously or nefariously...stands to reason any crackdown on "voter fraud" is gonna inevitably lead to more of that.  I'd call it an unintended consequence, but I think that is the intended consequence.

    It may be a game to tilt the scales for Brand D/Brand R to other folks, but not I.  It's about preserving the right to vote just in cause we get candidates worth voting for in the future, by some miracle.  

    Besides, we're already going "ID" crazy as a society, lets not bring it to the polls too.  I've never shown an ID to vote in my life, and I hope I never have to.  And in 16 years of voting no one has tried to vote under my identity, and I've seen no evidence that it is a problem anywhere...so really what gives with this sh*t?

    Parent

    Ya, I agree that numerically (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:16:37 PM EST
    it's probably not a problem. Personally, I think both brands are (now) using the issue for political purposes.

    However, we do decide for ourselves what constitutes a "problem." And it mostly depends on who's ox is getting gored, as an infamous TL commenter often says.

    For example it's not a problem to me for my town to have ordinances banning smoking in any public place.

    For some others, it is a problem to them.

    Anyway, here are some numbers:

    The report also noted that in 2000, random checks by the Honolulu city clerk's office found 200 registered voters who admitted they were not U.S. citizens. And in 2004, at least 35 foreign citizens applied for and received voter cards in Harris County, Texas, the report noted.

    The bipartisan blue-ribbon commission, which was chaired by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker, recommended laws that require voters to show a photo ID before voting - aa recommendation that came before the federal REAL ID law was created.

    Recent events also suggest at least the strong possibility of non-citizens voting.

    In 2011, Colorado's secretary of state found by comparing drivers' licenses that Colorado had potentially as many as 16,270 non-citizens on its voting rolls.

    In 2007, the Dallas Morning News ran a piece titled "Non-citizens likely voted in Bexar County" which explained how 330 non-citizens were discovered on voting rolls after they were summoned for jury duty.

    The 2004 Washington State gubernatorial election was decided by 133 votes while 1,678 illegal votes, mostly by felons, were cast. The election was upheld because there was no accurate way to determine which candidate was the recipient of the illegal votes.



    Parent
    Infringements on civil rights... (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:31:43 PM EST
    usually start out as somebody else's problem, then snowball into your problem.

    As the saying goes...

    First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist...

    Sidenote...kudos to the felons in Washington for being able to participate! ;)

    Parent

    How are "both brands using the issue"? (5.00 / 1) (#183)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 05:37:19 PM EST
    Sarcastic: "Personally, I think both brands are (now) using the issue for political purposes."

    Why don't you point out for us the number of Democratic-sponsored Voter ID bills introduced in state legislatures these last few years?

    How about actual documented conspiracies to commit voter fraud in the United States over the last decade?

    You can't, can you?

    I'm getting so tired of these types of patently false equivalencies being presented, without also providing any corresponding proof to support such a contention. It's a fat-a$$ed, lazy, specious and mendacious argument, that merely allows you to ignore the facts on the ground, while continuing to wallow merrily in your own ignorance.

    Because no, sarcastic, both sides AREN'T doing it. One side is clearly attempting to target select populations through Voter ID laws in order to restrict their access to our constitutionally-mandated right to vote, while the other side is trying to defend it.

    And if that battle somehow renders the whole thing a political wash in your eyes, then you're a fool who's obviously misplaced his inch-thick bifocals.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Wrong. (none / 0) (#197)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 06:48:27 PM EST
    Both sides are using the issue to shore up there base.

    Parent
    Who brought it up first, genius? (none / 0) (#200)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 07:43:12 PM EST
    You're hopeless, saracastic. Clearly, You'll hear only what you want to hear, and you'll simply disregard the rest.

    Parent
    Good lord, (none / 0) (#201)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 08:01:40 PM EST
    it's like talking to a kindergartener: "He started it!"

    Go put your head back in the sand, champ.

    Parent

    That Colorado stat is... (5.00 / 1) (#195)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 06:28:37 PM EST
    oh what's the word--claptrap?  When pressed on his "findings", our SOS could not prove or back-up a damn thing.  Simply fanning the flames of hate and suspicion for political gain.  

    Which is exactly what you want out of an elected official charged with overseeing elections.  Thankfully, we have county officials who are willing to stand up to his bs.  

    Parent

    It may be so, thanks for the info. (none / 0) (#198)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 06:49:21 PM EST


    Parent
    He found six (6) suspected instances. (5.00 / 2) (#199)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 07:13:01 PM EST
    Six in the 2010 election.  

    Six individuals are suspected of voter fraud in the 2010 election, according to the Colorado Secretary of State's Office.

    Based on a comparison of voting records between Kansas and Colorado, the individuals appear to have cast ballots in both states. The information has been turned over to the FBI for investigation.

    All living along the KS/CO boarder.  Care to take a guess what political party they belong to?  Not a one of "reforms" he has suggested would have prevented this from happening.  

    Mr. Gessler has a habit of repeating his empty politically claptrap time and time again.

    Then there was the 11,805 people who, Gessler said, were not citizens when they registered to vote.

    Of these people, Gessler said he has a  list of 4,947 actual voters who could have voted illegally in Colorado.  But Gessler refused to give this list to The Denver Post or anyone else. Most recently, last weekend, he said there are "a lot" of noncitizens on the voting rolls.



    Parent
    Thanks, claptrap it is! (none / 0) (#202)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 08:03:12 PM EST


    Parent
    Also, I forgot (5.00 / 1) (#165)
    by sj on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:47:39 PM EST
    I have never, ever looked at anybody else's vote as canceling mine.  I look at their vote as them stating their preference.  When I vote, I state my preference.

    What kind of idiot is more concerned because someone else might be "canceling" their vote?

    Parent

    Only an idiot can't understand why someone (5.00 / 1) (#171)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:59:43 PM EST
    would not be happy should an illegal vote cancel out their vote.


    Parent
    Are you so sure then that (5.00 / 1) (#174)
    by sj on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 04:36:19 PM EST
    your vote would be "canceled"?  Maybe it would boost your vote.  

    Parent
    Then I guess I'm an idiot (4.00 / 3) (#176)
    by sj on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 04:43:13 PM EST
    Because I really don't want to look for "illegal voters" under every stone.  And anyway, why would I care about an "illegal voter" when I even want you to vote?  

    Parent
    You completely misunderstand (5.00 / 1) (#166)
    by sj on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:47:46 PM EST
    the status quo doesn't hurt - and in fact probably benefits - the Dems, and 2) screw the Repubs.
    The status quo benefits the voters.  I can't believe how resistent some people are to taking the issue out of party politics and into a neutral zone.


    Parent
    You are either obtuse or intentionally missing (none / 0) (#172)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 04:01:11 PM EST
    the point that some people are not happy with illegal voting.

    Parent
    illegal voting is not my bugaboo (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by sj on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 04:38:57 PM EST
    my bugaboo is the attempt to make things difficult for legitimate voters.  That has a far more demonstrable premise than "illegal voting".

    Parent
    As I understand (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 02:46:11 PM EST
    it there is REAL fraud in absentee ballots but the GOP is not addressing that problem because apparently that fraud benefits them. Remember all those absentee ballots in FL back in 2000 that were questionable?

    Parent
    You do realize don't you (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by nycstray on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:35:41 PM EST
    that votes by mail are already verified via signature?  :) Funny thing was, it was the same in Brooklyn when I voted in person. I had to sign next to their copy of my signature.  So why should I need a photo ID?  Or keep 10 free copies around? Once a person is on file (registered) why should they have to jump through more hoops when a signature seems pretty good?

    BTW, my current photo ID was stolen and I haven't gotten around to replacing it yet, but I was still able to vote in the primary via my signature.

    With technology today, you would think they could find all those dead people in the system and people like your sister (btw has she gone to each polling place to check on her status?) without creating yet another layer of non-fool proof ID-ing.


    Parent

    No she hasn't (none / 0) (#159)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:40:46 PM EST
    But I've told her about it.  She's just been too lazy to do anything about it.  And if she was more evil minded, she still could go vote in all those places - that may not make a dent in federal elections, but it certainly could in things like state elections.

    Parent
    And having already satisfied the (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by Anne on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:26:21 PM EST
    Board of Elections at the time of registration that one is eligible to vote and is who he or she claims to be, it should not be necessary to have to keep proving it over and over and over again.  

    Yes, your name could change, and you could move, but name changes and changes of address don't make someone ineligible to vote, even if they may be voting in the wrong location, and the problem that I have with all these Voter ID laws is that they are less about integrity of the system and more about making more people ineligible to vote as a way to manipulate the outcome of elections.

    How about if, instead of having to put their thumbs on the electoral scale in order to win elections, there would be more of an effort to run better candidates, for incumbents to govern and lead more responsibly, to stop catering to special interests and actually delivering on the promises made every election cycle?  How about if, instead of being afraid that some small percentage of people will vote who might not be eligible, we be more concerned about the general apathy and disinterest in voting with which a much larger percentage of the voting-eligible population treats the electoral process?

    The question I really, really hate is, "what's the big deal?"   I think a lot of bad policy and bad governance have been imposed on people with that question being asked as a way to justify  how benign someone wants you to think it is.  It's the question that gets asked right before "if you have nothing to hide, what's wrong with the government  listening to your phone calls, reading your e-mails, tracking your internet usage?"  

    Because, on this issue, first it's the "no big deal" of showing the photo ID.  Then it's the slightly more bothersome "along with proof that you still live at the address on the ID."  And who knows where it goes from there - because getting this kind of foot in the door pretty much guarantees that it will go somewhere, and one day people will wake up and realize, hey, it was a big deal.

    And then it's too late.

    Parent

    Turn it around (2.00 / 1) (#152)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:33:08 PM EST
    The question I really, really hate is, "what's the big deal?"   I think a lot of bad policy and bad governance have been imposed on people with that question being asked as a way to justify  how benign someone wants you to think it is.  It's the question that gets asked right before "if you have nothing to hide, what's wrong with the government  listening to your phone calls, reading your e-mails, tracking your internet usage?"

    "What's the big deal" of doing what's already in place?  I'm not talking new laws - I'm talking about the ones one the books for decades.  You've ALWAYS been supposed to show some ID, but most poll workers either don't know or haven't been trained.  There's a REASON you automatically get a Voter ID card when you register - the state doesn't just send it for no reason.

    And I agree the real problem is that we need better candidates.  But that isn't going to happen in this climate - it's only going to get worse because with the scrutiny, especially on the bull$hit stuff - no one in their right mind except a narcissist is going to want to run.

    Parent

    No, sorry - one has not ALWAYS (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by Anne on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:47:21 PM EST
    had to show ID before voting; I have repeatedly made mention of the fact that in MD there is NO requirement to show any identification - unless you registered to vote before you turned 18 and have turned 18 by the time of the election.  We verify birthdates, not identities.

    We are allowed to ask you your name, and the month and day of your birth.  Period.  

    Is it different in other states?  I don't know - but I know MD and what you are stating is incorrect.

    Parent

    Not quite (none / 0) (#169)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:54:58 PM EST
    At least, not for all voters, according to the Maryland State Board of Elections:

    Under the Help America Vote Act, certain voters must satisfy an identification requirement before voting for the first time in Maryland.

    A voter is subject to this new identification requirement if the voter:

    Registered to vote by mail; and
    Will be voting for the first time in Maryland.

    Because of the voter registration requirements effective January 1, 2006 (see above), most voters will satisfy the identification during the registration process. Generally, only the following voters will be subject to the identification requirement:

    -Those voters who do not have a driver's license, MVA ID card, or social security card and who submitted their voter registration applications by mail after January 1, 2006; and
    -Those voters who registered to vote by mail between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2005, and have not yet voted for the first time.
    -These voters can satisfy the identification requirement by providing one of the following:

    The voter's driver's license number, MVA ID card number or at least the last four digits of the voter's social security number, and election officals will attempt to verify this information with MVA or Social Security Administration.

    A copy of a current and valid photo identification (i.e., Maryland driver's license, MVA ID card, student or employee photo ID card, military ID card, passport, or any other State or federal goverment issued ID card).

    A copy of a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck or other government document that shows the voter's name and address.

    If a voter does not satisfy the identification requirement prior to Election Day, the voter will be required to present identification before voting for the first time.




    Parent
    sounds like (none / 0) (#193)
    by Amiss on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 06:11:45 PM EST
    What we now have to do in Florida to RENEW our drivers licenses. A real PITA.

    Parent
    So (2.00 / 1) (#162)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:45:32 PM EST
    Board of Elections at the time of registration that one is eligible to vote and is who he or she claims to be, it should not be necessary to have to keep proving it over and over and over again.

    If you lost your wallet, you should be able to go the DMV and get a replacement driver's license wihtout having to show who you are, because you've already established that you are eligible to legally drive in the state without having to prove it over and over again?

    Or another example - the bar exam is a two day test in most states.  You have to show your ID when you check in on the first day.  You have to show it again after lunch.  You have to show it on the second day, and then the second day after lunch. Should you not have to show it after the first time because, hey, you've already shown that your on the list, so why can't they just let you in?

    Parent

    jb, it's not like that anymore... (5.00 / 2) (#180)
    by fishcamp on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 05:02:45 PM EST
    when I recently renewed my drivers license I had to show two other types of ID that verified my actual street address.  My existing drivers license didn't qualify as one but my voters card did.  Most of my mail goes to my PO box and I rent so I had no utility bills with my street address.  The DMV lady said to just walk across the street to the county and change the address on my boat and/or car registration which I did without that lady even asking for any ID.  HLS is making it difficult for Americans to even get ID when they are legal.  Any terrorist can open an account with several utility companies, have them sent to a street address, get a drivers license, and a voters card and carry on.  The system is flawed.

    Parent
    Apples and oranges... (4.00 / 3) (#167)
    by Anne on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:51:36 PM EST
    sometimes I get the feeling you won't be truly happy until we are living in a bona fide police state, with everyone having to carry and produce their "papers" upon command.

    And "consequences" for not being able to do so.

    What is it about freedom that makes you so uncomfortable?

    Parent

    I agree (none / 0) (#109)
    by lousy1 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:13:06 AM EST
    that any attempt to illegally interfere the election process is a serious crime.

    Parent
    Now we're getting somewhere, maybe (5.00 / 3) (#111)
    by sj on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:21:53 AM EST
    I agree (none / 0) (#109)
    by lousy1 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:13:06 AM EST

    that any attempt to illegally interfere the election process is a serious crime.

    Then do you concede that it is a crime to attempt to hinder or prevent a valid voter from casting his/her ballot by deliberately creating undue and onerous obstacles?

    Parent
    Sure (1.00 / 1) (#114)
    by lousy1 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:28:34 AM EST
    But you haven't demonstrated where these requirements are...

     

    deliberately creating undue and onerous obstacles


    Parent
    I know I said I wasn't going to respond (5.00 / 2) (#117)
    by sj on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:40:35 AM EST
    But I had another thought.  You seem like the kind of guy that requires a physical demonstration of some concepts, so I propose this:  

    Have your own voter registration challenged in such a way that you will be required to cast a provisional ballot and followed by the requirement to present your ID to the Secretary of State, or Election Commission (or whatever the governing authority).  Attempt to vote after traditional working hours.  Then report on how little problem it was.  

    Oh, and don't forget to dock yourself for any hours you were unable to work.

    Parent

    Ok (none / 0) (#125)
    by lousy1 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:38:50 PM EST
    I called up the campaign office of a contestant for congress.

    I lied and told them I wanted to vote but lacked a voter ID.

    They offered to send some one to my house to help me out with the paperwork and also offered to later give me a lift to the polls.

    Gee, how hard was that.

    I guess I could wait until election day to discover I needed an ID but that would require I get a lobotomy.

    Parent

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 01:32:35 PM EST
    considering it required you to hunt down who to call and then call them it was hard, have you ever worked on a campaign getting in touch with people can be a freaking pain, I mean part of me gets why the GOP would want to do this despite it being transparently obvious that voter fraud is an almost non-existent problem, but I mean wow literally wanting to undermine democracy is pretty disgusting.

    Parent
    You are proving to be most dishonest (5.00 / 3) (#156)
    by sj on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:36:45 PM EST
    Not only did you lie to a campaign, but you pretend that you subjected yourself to the same obstacles that others would endure.  In spite of being told repeatedly what the reality is.  Pardon me, but your privilege is showing.

    But the lobotomy is optional.  

    Parent

    And what obstacle is is that? (1.00 / 1) (#177)
    by lousy1 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 04:48:00 PM EST
    It is as easy to obtain an ID as it is register to vote.

    I appreciate you offer of a lobotomy, but I decline. Sorry. I'm afraid you'll have to wait till I'm dead before I become one of your party line voter.

    I'm sure the Republicans enjoy the Dems shrieking every time reasonable voting safeguards are discussed.

    IMHO most independent American seem to wonder "What are they hiding?"

    Parent

    As a matter of course, I refuse ... (5.00 / 2) (#184)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 05:42:13 PM EST
    ... to concede anything to the inherently clueless.

    Parent
    No, he's not (none / 0) (#196)
    by Yman on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 06:41:29 PM EST
    So obviously Mr Turzai is postulating that eliminating voter fraud will provide Romney the margin victory.

    The alternative (and more logical) premise is that enough legitimate Democratic voters will be disenfranchised to give Romney the victory.

    Parent

    I hate it when I out-think myself (5.00 / 4) (#10)
    by CST on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 05:43:31 PM EST
    I put something away someplace safe so I don't lose it.  And then I can't find it because it's someplace totally obscure that I never go near.

    I know my passport is around here somewhere...

    The dreaded "safe place" (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by sj on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 05:47:05 PM EST
    Whenever I put something there it is usually safest from me.  

    Good luck finding your passport.  I hope you plan on going somewhere wonderful.

    Parent

    yes! (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by CST on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 05:55:19 PM EST
    I do this all the time.  At least this time I started the search in advance, so I have a few days.  Unlike the time I ended up leaving for Canada 3 hours late.

    I'm visiting friends and family in germany and turkey.  I lived in Germany 12 years ago but I haven't been back in a decade, and I've never been to turkey so I'm very excited.  And my sister and I decided to tack on a weekend in barcelona just for the heck of it - since I've also never been to spain, but between the two of us our spanish is passable.

    Parent

    Oh, have a wonderful trip! (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Angel on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 06:17:23 PM EST
    We went to Spain almost two years ago and had the best time, didn't want to come home.  Started the trip in Madrid and took the high-speed train to Barcelona.  Just fell in love with Barcelona, everything about it was great.  Loved the beaches and stopping in places to get a glass of afternoon wine and tapas and exploring the street markets.  People are friendly so minimal Spanish is fine.  

    Parent
    Ooh! Ooh! I want to go! (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 06:58:59 PM EST
    And I'm not even back from my current vacation ...

    Look forward to hearing about Germany and Turkay. My mother and aunt were in Turkey just last April, and thought it was marvelous. Now, only two months later, they've just accompanied us on our trip to Vietnam and Tokyo. There are distinct advantages to retirement!

    ;-D

    Parent

    What a fun trip. As to your passable (none / 0) (#16)
    by oculus on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 05:59:03 PM EST
    Spanish in Barcelona, my friend's Spanish is quite good but it wasn't all that helpful if the tapas bar guy only spoke Catalon  Sign language was helpful.  Beautiful, fun city.  

    Parent
    haha yea (none / 0) (#17)
    by CST on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 06:01:54 PM EST
    after a year of living in germany - at the start of which I didn't speak german - my international sign language is also well developed.

    Our spanish will be highly suspect in spain, since we learned it from puerto ricans, but it's better than say france or greece where neither one of us speaks a word.

    Parent

    As I get old and older, (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by the capstan on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 06:11:06 PM EST
    I have learned to put things I value or need in the same old place where I always kept them--otherwise, they are gone till I accidentally run across them again,  (Done that a lot getting ready to leave town.)  Only other option is to use 'logic' to find a logical hiding place--eventually I will usually remember.  

    Hope you find it!

    Parent

    One of the perks... (none / 0) (#86)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:18:59 AM EST
    of being a Sealy Postuerpedic Savings Bank Account holder is all your important docs are right there with your life savings, safe and sound.

    Well, not really "important", no official document is important to me, but bueracrats and agents seem to swear by them;)

    Parent

    I hope (none / 0) (#90)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:37:24 AM EST
    You at least have a fireproof safe!

    Parent
    Manufacturer claims it is... (none / 0) (#113)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:27:03 AM EST
    and I hope its never field tested!

    I like my odds of the big banks burning down before my crib ever does;)

    Parent

    Hey Dog, your Johnnies are coming to SF (none / 0) (#120)
    by Dadler on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:05:00 PM EST
    December 4th, playing at War Memorial against my USF Dons.  (Apparently Lavin's dad played at USF.)  So you got plenty of time to figure our how to get out here.  If you can manage it, you'll have a free seat right behind the St. John's bench.  Peace.

    Parent
    LINK (none / 0) (#121)
    by Dadler on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:08:32 PM EST
    LINK

    Parent
    Bears. Wrestling. (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by scribe on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 05:50:07 PM EST
    in someone's front yard and shrubbery.

    Watch the video.

    Oh, and Obama SUX.

    Well, two can play at that game. (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 07:13:32 PM EST
    I mean, really, is there anything more nauseating than a cute video of a cat on a trampoline, or of cats who are just being cats?

    And yes, I blame Obama for this sickening epidemic of adorable cat videos on YouTube.

    Parent

    Thanks! (none / 0) (#64)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 11:57:13 PM EST
    I particularly enjoyed the one with the leapers/scramblers.  Cats are obsessed with being higher than everybody else.

    Parent
    In Florida! (none / 0) (#20)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 06:44:05 PM EST
    I didn't expect that when I saw it.  Wonder if bears will eat pythons...

    Parent
    At first I though the 107... (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 06:53:02 PM EST
    was your vehicle speed.  When I came out of the movie (Searching for a Friend for the End of the World) yesterday, my truck read 114--and it had been parked in the shade.  

    I blame Obama.  

    How was the movie? (none / 0) (#24)
    by oculus on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 07:02:37 PM EST


    Parent
    It probably SUX. (none / 0) (#28)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 07:16:04 PM EST
    Just like Obama ...

    Parent
    I enjoyed it. (none / 0) (#30)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 07:27:50 PM EST
    Some chuckles at the movie and some at the other patrons reaction to it.  Steve Carell gave a very non "The Office" like performance and Keira Knightley is pretty easy on the eyes.  Overall, a good Sunday afternoon diversion.  I'd give it 3.5 stars out of 5.

    Plus, it was much cooler in the theater than my condo.

    Parent

    Aargh! What state are we in??? (none / 0) (#54)
    by christinep on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 11:10:00 PM EST
    I'm being a bit of a nut cake...fearing that the air conditioning will go out.  Doesn't it feel constricted when the usual getaway to the mountains doesn't make sense since it would be like moving from the frying pan to the fire.

    Parent
    Used to have that fear in Brooklyn (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by nycstray on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 11:19:57 PM EST
    living on the top floor. Of course the news didn't help by telling us to conserve energy . . .   :/

    First summer I was back in Ca, I received a recorded call from ConEd on my cell to turn off everything (including AC!) except my fridge because of the extreme heat. I felt bad for my friends back in NYC! Was very thankful I chose a very mild summer climate as my next home . . .  heck, I don't even have AC! :D

    Parent

    Same here (none / 0) (#65)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:00:14 AM EST
    I do have a couple window units stashed away in closets in case of a really nasty long-lasting heat wave, but haven't felt the slighest need to go to the trouble of hauling them out yet.

    My house has a metal roof and very good attic insulation, so it stays cool for three or four days in a heat wave before it starts to heat up, and we don't (yet anyway) have 3 or 4-day heat waves in VT.

    Parent

    My poor little... (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 08:43:08 AM EST
    room A/C units can't keep up when it gets much above 90.  The one in the living room is very unstable in that sometimes it just blows hot air instead of the desired cool, so I understand the fear.  

    So, as a former EPA'er--how bad is it going to be when we do get some rain and all this fire retardant (basically fertilizer) that they're dropping gets washed into the watersheds?  Add in all the ash and I can't imagine its going to be good.

    Parent

    Mudslides could be an issue (none / 0) (#108)
    by nycstray on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:11:30 AM EST
    if you get heavy rains.

    Parent
    It would be (none / 0) (#55)
    by sj on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 11:19:13 PM EST
    exactly like moving from the frying pan into the fire :(

    Parent
    Why is Sitemeter (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 07:53:28 PM EST
    asking me to log in to "authenticate" in a pop-up window?  Anyone know or having the same problem?

    Me too....I just hit cancel and it goes away (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 08:24:03 PM EST


    Parent
    Cool, thanks. (none / 0) (#37)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 08:29:18 PM EST
    Since I've got a migraine at the moment, I was hoping it wasn't just me stroking out.

    Parent
    Oh, ouch. Hope you feel better. (none / 0) (#38)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 08:32:46 PM EST
    Never had a migraine, but judging from a couple of plain old bad headaches I have had, they must be horrible.

    Parent
    Thanks again. (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 08:40:20 PM EST
    I've had migraines since I was 16 and have never gotten used to them.  It is the worst pain I've ever suffered through and I'm not exactly lacking for experience in that department.  

    Now, if I start typing like oculus then I'm really in trouble.

    Parent

    We will call the paramedics if that starts! (none / 0) (#43)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 08:47:29 PM EST


    Parent
    Much appreciated. (none / 0) (#44)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 08:51:21 PM EST
    Time is of the utmost importance when dealing with that sort of thing!

    Parent
    sitemeter is having issues (none / 0) (#42)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 08:47:23 PM EST
    We just disabled it. May take up to an hour to clear the caches or whatever it is called. Problem is with sitemeter, not TalkLeft. Sorry for the inconvenience.

    Parent
    The customer service... (none / 0) (#45)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 08:53:26 PM EST
    around this place is outstanding!  Thanks for addressing my concerns in such a timely and efficient manner, J.

    Parent
    Glad to do it (none / 0) (#57)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 11:37:02 PM EST
    I started having problems when I got back from work right after I posted this thread. I thought it was in TalkLeft. Every time I tried to delete a comment (in the Z threads, naturally) that pop-up happened. I tried my old laptop, my new laptop and my desktop, and it happened on all three. I figured it was either the one of my multiple virus/malware programs and almost tinkered with their settings, but called Colin, our webmaster instead. He figured out it was sitemeter. I still wasn't sure and didn't wanted to disable it unless absolutely necessary so I thought to check this open thread and see if anyone else was having issues, I  was really glad to see your comment.

    Every time I tinker with the advanced settings on a program, I end up messing up my computer. So you spared me.

    So yes, you should always let me know if there's a site issue.

    Parent

    Me too. Annoying. (none / 0) (#49)
    by oculus on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 10:47:55 PM EST
    Almost as much as needing to scroll down to "mobile" to TalkLeft as we know and love it.

    Parent
    Actually, I think the Obama Sux post of the day (5.00 / 3) (#39)
    by dk on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 08:37:08 PM EST
    belongs to Jimmy Carter in today's NYT.  Here are the first and last few paragraphs:

    THE United States is abandoning its role as the global champion of human rights.

    Revelations that top officials are targeting people to be assassinated abroad, including American citizens, are only the most recent, disturbing proof of how far our nation's violation of human rights has extended. This development began after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and has been sanctioned and escalated by bipartisan executive and legislative actions, without dissent from the general public. As a result, our country can no longer speak with moral authority on these critical issues.

    ...

    At a time when popular revolutions are sweeping the globe, the United States should be strengthening, not weakening, basic rules of law and principles of justice enumerated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. But instead of making the world safer, America's violation of international human rights abets our enemies and alienates our friends.

    As concerned citizens, we must persuade Washington to reverse course and regain moral leadership according to international human rights norms that we had officially adopted as our own and cherished throughout the years.

    (h/t Glenn Greenwald)

    Actually, I agree w/Pres. Carter and (5.00 / 3) (#52)
    by oculus on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 10:59:02 PM EST
    Glenn Greenwald.  

    Parent
    Carter's op-ed is definitely (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by Anne on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:50:38 AM EST
    right up there in the "Obama Sux" department, but I think the front-runner has to be Matt Stoller's post over at naked capitalism.

    Here's a snip:

    But there is another narrative, a real narrative about Barack Obama and his administration.  Obama is the ultimate cynic, a dishonest, highly reactionary social and corporate ladder climbing con artist.  Obama is the guy who calls a female reporter "sweety", who plays poker with the guys, and who thinks that his senior advisor's decision to cash out after making a "modest" salary of $172,000 at the White House is just natural.  He's the guy who used the rationale that he's a father of two girls as to why he doesn't want young women to have access to Plan B.  He was in favor of gay marriage in 1996, flip flopped for political reasons, and then pretended to change his mind as a matter of conscience.  He runs on populism with a worse record than George W. Bush on income inequality.  His narcissism, and the post-modern ironic sense of self-awareness of how his narrative is put together and tended, is his defining character trait.  It's not just that he's a liar.  Lyndon Johnson was a liar, but LBJ lied us into a war in Vietnam as well as a war on poverty.  FDR lied all the time, for good and ill.  Obama's entire edifice is based on lying almost entirely to help sustain his image, with almost no interest in sound policy-making.  Obama understands the threat of climate change, but like the exceptional con artist he is, what happens to others he does not know, or what happens in the future, is irrelevant to him.  He understands banking, and war, and women's issues, and corruption and Citizens United.  Like a great con artist, he has studied his mark, the American voter, and specifically the Democratic voter, and he undersands which buttons to push.

    Yee-ouch!  So...Matt: tell us how you really feel...


    Parent

    Wow (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 02:16:02 PM EST
    But at least the other guys are worse....

    Parent
    Holy Smoke (none / 0) (#119)
    by sj on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:04:35 PM EST
    Thank you for the link.

    Parent
    Thank gawd we have this SUX (5.00 / 3) (#124)
    by oculus on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:23:05 PM EST
    open thread.  

    Parent
    Even I stumbled across that (none / 0) (#127)
    by BTAL on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 01:03:41 PM EST
    article before it was noted here.  That snippet is just part of a major kick in the nether regions.

    Parent
    Leave it to Jimmy (none / 0) (#48)
    by Rojas on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 09:53:06 PM EST
    to piss in the soup.
    moral authority long gone...

    Parent
    Cater is so enamored of (none / 0) (#67)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:06:17 AM EST
    his own piety, I have to fight myself to keep from taking 180-degree opposite position just out of irritation.

    He's of course right here, but what the F is the point of making an issue of it right now?  It accomplishes nothing except approval from Greenwald and his own preening self-admiration.  Yech.

    Parent

    Well, aren't we supposed to make he who (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by oculus on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:36:32 AM EST
    six do our bidding?  Carter and Greenld are pushing. It worked re same sex marriage and certain undocumented persons.

    Parent
    when should it be said? (5.00 / 4) (#78)
    by TeresaInPa on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 07:41:39 AM EST
    he is right and he is pushing an issue when it is topical.  What else can he do?  I understand what you are saying, but somebody has to do it and Jimmy Carter has the courage to be that unpopular person.  He paid a high price for that in his political career.

    Parent
    I hate to ask the obvious question, but, (5.00 / 3) (#82)
    by Anne on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 08:33:07 AM EST
    if not now, when?  Are you saying it should have been raised sooner?  Would you think better of it if it had been said two years ago?  Would you still feel the same way if someone else were saying it?

    Sorry for all the questions, but I guess what seems to come through in your comment is irritation, as if Carter is disturbing you at a time when you don't want to be reminded of the things he's writing about.

    Maybe it's that we're in campaign mode, when for some reason, people feel they have to stop pressuring their party's candidate because that's so negative and might hurt their chances; we have to be positive now because the alternative is taking the express train to Crazy Town.

    I think pressure is good, always; I suspect, though, that Obama is as irritated by, and non-responsive to, Carter as you are.  But that's not where the pressure needs to come from, anyway - it's all about money and votes - and that's where the people come into it.  It's what pushed Obama on same-sex marriage, and what's pushing him on immigration.

    Maybe if the rest of us would learn the lessons the gay and Latino communities are trying to teach us,  we could start seeing some of our issues dealt with in ways we want them to be.  But I'm guessing that most people are too fearful of "the other guy" to risk it.


    Parent

    Yes, I am saying (none / 0) (#139)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 02:45:34 PM EST
    It should have come much earlier.  And to go parading around on the soapbox now is 100 percent guaranteed to have zero effect.  So what, one asks, is the point other than displaying one's virtuousness and above-it-all-ness?

    Once the election happens, if Obama wins, then I'll buy him a bullhorn.

    And yes, i said right at the top that Carter irritates the heck out of me.  If somebody else was saying this, I'd be more likely to think they were just stupid.

    But Carter is no naif. He knows the score in tough election campaigns very well.  And he knows very well that further riling up an already dissatisified base against the only guy we have in this election cycle is not going to help to prevent President Romney.  I leave it to you to figure out what possible (subconscious?) motivation Carter may have.

    Parent

    Well, actually it did come much earlier (5.00 / 1) (#160)
    by sj on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:41:37 PM EST
    albeit along with a guaranteed vote from some people.  But my ideals and principles are much more important to me than any single candidate and his or her re-election chances.  Always.  If you want to "stifle yourself" for your candidate's benefit that is up to you.

    Myself, I think anytime is the right time to exercise free speech.  (Although I don't think money is speech.  Just for the record).

    Parent

    Money is speech (5.00 / 1) (#163)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:47:00 PM EST
    If you're driving down my road and throwing $50s and $100s out the window for me to pick up.  It shows you like me.  :)

    Parent
    Ha! (none / 0) (#168)
    by sj on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:54:03 PM EST


    Parent
    Oh, sure! This'll restore my faith ... (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 09:42:24 PM EST
    ... in the Holy Mother Church:

    Pittsburgh Post-Gazette | June 25, 2012
    Fox News Reporter Hired as Vatican Media Adviser - "In an effort to shore up its communications strategy amid a widening leaks scandal in a troubled papacy, the Vatican has hired the Fox News correspondent in Rome as a senior communications adviser. The correspondent, Greg Burke, 52, who has covered the Vatican for Fox since 2001, will leave the network to help improve and coordinate the Vatican's various communications operations, Mr. Burke and the Vatican spokesman said. Some Vatican watchers called the move a power play by media-savvy Americans -- including Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan, the archbishop of New York and the president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops -- inside a Vatican hierarchy run by Italians whose most frequent communications strategy is to accuse their critics of defamation. Mr. Burke is a member of the conservative Opus Dei movement, and his hiring underscores the group's role in the Vatican."

    (Sigh!) And as sure as the sun will rise in the east and set in the west, the old queens in the gold robes and ruby slippers will choose to ignore reality, and would rather double down on stupid.

    (This article was originally posted today in the New York Times -- but since that site has a pay wall, I've chosen to link the Post-Gazette instead.)

    do you get a pay wall (none / 0) (#60)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 11:40:59 PM EST
    when I link to NY Times articles? I thought they allow access when the link comes from a blog. If that's not right, I might start linking to alternatives. I usually read versions on a variety of sites before deciding which to link to -- if the content is the same, I pick the one with the least number of ads and graphics and no video. The Times is pretty good that way. ABC is the worst, and MSNBC not far behind.

    Parent
    I think you're still fine (none / 0) (#97)
    by lilburro on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 10:06:56 AM EST
    if you are coming in from a link, Facebook share, etc.

    Parent
    Thank you, Jeralyn, ... (none / 0) (#131)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 01:49:29 PM EST
    ... for that information. I didn't know that the New York Times paywall doesn't apply for a link from a blog. I don't worry about it, because I'm a e-subscriber to both the New York Times and Los Angeles Times (gotta have my papers of record -- such as they are nowadays), but others are not.

    Parent
    On the suxometer of politics (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by Towanda on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:48:20 AM EST
    where I abide these days, Obama barely gets a blip.  

    Speaking of abiding, doods:  Having just enjoyed a Big Lebowski Fest, I can recommend it, if ever it comes to your towns.  Thousands of folks showed up here, many in bowling shirts -- including hizzoner the mayor, who declared Big Lebowski Day.  (He is the only politician I know who doesn't sux.)

    That was a first for the fest, as was the sizable crowd, said the planners, so they're coming back some year soon.  If so, I will be there to abide again with the doods.  Good people, good times.  

    The Dude abides... (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 10:04:52 AM EST
    and will never die.  I love how Lebowski has spawned a whole sub-culture, with staying power.

    Phone's ringing Dude...

    Parent

    I See Your 107 and Raise you... (5.00 / 2) (#170)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:57:39 PM EST
    ...two.  Phone says 109, but when I check on details, it takes me to AccuWeather which says 105, and feels like 121.  Personally, anything over 100 feels the same.

    I get to work later then most, so my black vehicle is outside all day, I can't even imagine what that is going to say for a temp, or how long it will take in traffic to cool off.

    I love how one of the hottest summers, so far, is happening during a Presidential run and no one is talking about climate change.  Last year as well, one of the hottest on record and not a peep from either side.

    Seems like this was a fairly big concern four years ago and all the Obama supporters including myself were mad as hell at Bush for his indifference.  Now those same people, not myself, don't seem to think it's nearly as important as it was four years ago.  And the right surely doesn't want to talk about it.

    At least when the R's had power, the Democratic Party didn't pretend important issues weren't important because their horse is as ineffectual at the opposing horse.  And we don't go into an election cycle with both parties happy about not talking about the climate which is clearly changing.

    Obama, making important issue irrelevant because his followers can't see past re-election.

    A real barrel of laughs. (5.00 / 3) (#182)
    by lentinel on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 05:35:11 PM EST
    Get your Obama SUX jollies out here.

    Oh yes.

    It is such a jolly time, reacting to the information provided by this website about our draconian AG, about the continuation of the policy of detention without charge or trial, about the, how do you call it... "post partisan unity schtick"... the caving to the hospital lobby and the sinking of the public option, the targeting and killing of an American citizen "suspect", and other similarly amusing items.

    It's jolly time.

    Don't Forget... (5.00 / 3) (#185)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 05:42:24 PM EST
    ...that our super hero president might be the one person who enabled the dismantling of the New Deal with his 'landmark' legislation.

    Fun for all...

    Parent

    RIP, Nora Ephron (1941-2012) (5.00 / 2) (#203)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 08:25:57 PM EST
    Acclaimed Hollywood screenwriter / director Nora Ephron, who authored the two culturally iconic films When Harry Met Sally and Sleepless in Seattle, died today at the age of 71 after a lengthy battle with acute myeloid leukemia.

    An accomplished storyteller, Ephron also waxed fictionally (and ruefully) about her short-lived marriage to Washington Post journalist Carl Bernstein in her bitterweet novel Heartburn. Condolences to the family.

    I remember delivering truckloads... (none / 0) (#5)
    by Dadler on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 05:21:59 PM EST
    ...of electrical supplies to El Centro, CA in the middle of summer back in 1990. 110+ a few days.  And I'd be unloading the stuff by myself, by hand, sometimes a good ton or more, and putting it into a steel storage container that has been sitting in the sun for two weeks. "Sorry dude, we just can't spare the forklift right now." A-holes. You could only hope to get caught in a sandstorm on the way home.  And then maybe get laid off when you return to work and ask about the medical insurance you were supposed to be eligible for now that your probationary period is over.  True story.  Good times, good times.  Stay cool, J.

    Wouldn't you rather ... (none / 0) (#7)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 05:37:01 PM EST
    Jeralyn: "107 degrees according to my dashboard. Maybe it's the thin air, or that we're a mile closer to the sun, but whatever it is, it feels surreal to be outside. And very uncomfortable."

    ... be on Oahu, walking the dog along Kailua Beach?

    It's 67 degrees at 7:30 a.m. this morning in Tokyo, by the way. Just sayin'.

    Okay, I see the angry scowl directed at me. Nuf ced.

    ;-D

    72 and sunny at my place (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by nycstray on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 05:38:23 PM EST
    I'll be taking my Roxy! for a walk along the marina :)

    Parent
    I want desperately to give you a 1 rating. :) (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Angel on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 05:44:33 PM EST


    Parent
    Do it! C'mon, I dare you! (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 06:54:42 PM EST
    ;-D

    But seriously, don't feel too bad that you reside where you do. I've lived in Hawaii long enough to have seen more than a few of its darker moments, weatherwise.

    Believe me, if you haven't ever experienced the full power and fury of a Pacific monsoon, i.e., 22 inches of rain in a 12-hour period, you don't ever want to. It's a pretty helpless (if awe-inspiring) feeling, watching huge waterfalls cascade hundreds of feet off normally dry mountain ridges directly onto the roofs of the houses below, and seeing your street turn into a river, and hoping that water levels in the large streambed by your townhouse don't rise any further than they already have.

    (This linked story and accompanying video document what happened in my own east Honolulu neighborhood on March 6, 2012. We even had several waterspouts (an oceanic tornado) hovering just offshore that day, and an actual tornado that swept over west Oahu, just missing populated areas. All in all, March 6 was a rather scary day ...)

    Parent

    Yawn (none / 0) (#62)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 11:49:28 PM EST
    Same thing here in VT.  And we actually have four seasons.

    Parent
    yay Vermont (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by TeresaInPa on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 07:59:42 AM EST
    one of the very best states in the union.  Maybe it is the best, I am not sure yet. I know it is first in leaf peeping. It is first in maple syrup. There is much much more.  Oh, the people there have cool new England accents but unlike New Hampshire and Maine, you can understand them.  It's not a whole separate language.
    throughout history Vermonters always showed up and bravely fought when there was a war on, even though most of the time, the battle had little to do with them. Cool old barns and picturesque cows.

    Parent
    One of (5.00 / 2) (#91)
    by Zorba on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:45:19 AM EST
    Mr. Zorba's ancestors fought with Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain Boys, so he has historical ties to the state (even before it was a state).   ;-)

    Parent
    Well, you can understand (5.00 / 2) (#145)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:04:06 PM EST
    some of them, but trust me, not all, especially way out in farm country.  When my phone went out recently and the guys from the little local telco came to fix it, they fussed around with the wire junction box on the pole, and then came to tell me the problem was "moyce."  Took me a few seconds to figure out what they meant.

    VT is for some reason I can't figure out apparently the only rural place in the country with easy-going, tolerant, non-religious basically liberal people.  I don't know why it should be so incredibly different from, say, upstate NY right across the border, or NH on the other side.

    As for the scenery -- the part that doesn't have windmills on it anyway -- VTers are so fiercely protective of it that when a Romney-esque GOP businessman ran against Bernie Sanders for the Senate, he was close in the polls until he started getting his supporters to put up the most spectacularly glaringly ugly yard signs I've ever seen in my life.  He sank like a stone.

    VT's beauty is literally the state's lifeblood.  Mess with it and people won't take it lying down.

    Parent

    I had told a friend in clean energy (none / 0) (#95)
    by Towanda on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 09:53:40 AM EST
    wonderful thing about your Vermont, when she was assigned to that state to find sites for wind energy.  But wow, we did not know that Vermonters would be so loyal to oil! and so hostile to wind energy.  The local sheriff now assigns deputies to escort her to and from hearings there, with the threats.  And she no longer can consider it safe to stop along the roadsides to bring home some yummy maple syrup.  She never got to try my recommendation, maple sugar candy.  And somehow, the landscape no longer looks so lovely. . . .

    We and her family worry for her now, when she's there.  And we've scratched a trip to Vermont, too.  What the heck is happening there?  Is it going as crazy as is so much of the rest of the country?

    Parent

    Sounds like (none / 0) (#106)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:06:12 AM EST
    some of them Vermont folks have the green energy hoax figured out.

    Parent
    Maybe so, (5.00 / 2) (#191)
    by NYShooter on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 05:56:18 PM EST
    but, I wonder if they also figured out, as your cult apparently has, that science is also a hoax?


    Parent
    What's the Hoax... (none / 0) (#179)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 04:57:10 PM EST
    ... that only the Republicans in the US have figured out ?

    Parent
    Oh, yeah, we Vermonters just love us (none / 0) (#142)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 02:56:29 PM EST
    that black oil stuff!

    For others who might be inclined to think the commenter knows what she's talking about-- there's a very big controversy right now in VT about stringing fields of giant power-generating windmills along our pristine ridgelines and right over around and through the homes of a heck of a lot of people.

    Among many other concerns, a fair number of us don't think that we'll generate a lot of tourists to come gaze at them in the fall, either, although sounds like that's something Towanda might think was cool.

    (And you might also want to know that oil actually has nothing to do with electricity generation, which is what wind power is for.)  All our electric power generation in this state is hydro, now that we've been trying and failing to close down our crumbling nuke plant and it no longer sells its energy into our market.

    Somebody also might want to look up the statistics on how many of us heat our homes with modern low-emission woodstoves fueled from carefully managed wood lots.

    Parent

    What ??? (5.00 / 1) (#178)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 04:52:34 PM EST
    I went to the Galapagos Islands a couple months ago.  The wind is their main source of energy, 75% I believe, and I am pretty sure it hasn't hurt their tourism dollars.  Which of course is their only dollars.

    Ditto for all the other energy conscience countries that use wind energy.  Is there some sort of study or something to indicate people will stay away, or it that good ole Bush gut feeling mentality ?  

    And if they really think damns are more aesthetically pleasing than wind turbines, well that is an opinion I don't share.  I can't imagine anyone believing the ridgeline views trump the river eco systems, but that seems to be what you are suggesting.

    And for the record, they can put the turbines in places that are out of view.  I never saw the turbines in the Galapagos so I asked our tour guide to take us.  he was actually excited about it and I got the impression that they are a source of pride for the locals.  A couple mile hike to see, not a farm, maybe 6 of them, but definitely not viewable from any road, or rather thee road.  You could probably see them from other peaks, but to me they actually blended well, definitely not intrusive, and a sign of their commitment to the environment.

    What I did wonder later, is how did they install these massive wind turbines in the middle of no where without some serious environmental damage.  I can only guess that they used helicopters, but I don't know.

    I know nothing of the VT debate, but to me that the energy debates rarely have anything to do with anything more then the power players and their never ending dedication to the status quo using their enormous powers to shape the debate.

    Parent

    Yes, I've seen wind energy in Australia (5.00 / 1) (#190)
    by Towanda on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 05:51:55 PM EST
    and we are so woefully behind in the U.S.

    But some here prefer to stay that way.

    Parent

    When J.R. Ewing (none / 0) (#192)
    by NYShooter on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 06:00:32 PM EST
    puts up a propeller in his front yard we'll know oil Is dead.


    Parent
    I don't (none / 0) (#147)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:21:53 PM EST
    see wind power being a force in somewhere like VT even without the scenery. The place for wind power to be really useful i would think would be places like Kansas, plains states with plenty of flat areas  where wind can build up speed.

    Parent
    I've seen them in West Texas and Maui, Hawaii. (none / 0) (#158)
    by Angel on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:39:18 PM EST
    They are beautiful from a distance but they generate a lot of noise pollution.

    Parent
    Oh, really? (none / 0) (#188)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 05:49:45 PM EST
    What's so beautiful about the ones on Maui -- even from a distance?

    Parent
    Well, I'm not the wind energy expert (none / 0) (#189)
    by Towanda on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 05:51:16 PM EST
    that my friend is, but I've walked through a lot of the reports, and mountainous Vermont would be a fine site for solid flow, as it happens.  

    But I've not time for that aspect of the debate now.  I note that nothing was said about what truly shocked me -- the death threats, the sheriff having to escort her for safety, etc.  No thanks, no trip there anytime soon.

    Parent

    73 & sunny here. But (none / 0) (#12)
    by oculus on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 05:44:59 PM EST
    I'd rather be in Manhattan.  

    Obama SUX (none / 0) (#25)
    by Rojas on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 07:08:57 PM EST
    Send 'em your cash

    Per a tape on public radio, (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by oculus on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 07:14:55 PM EST
    Today he who some say sux ashked a crowd if they thought people like "Miltt Romney--and me" should pay lower taxes.

    This may have been an honest phrasing. But not a politically wise one.

    Parent

    "ashked"? (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 07:17:55 PM EST
    Have you been hittin' the Cuervo shots again?

    Parent
    I think it was an honest question (none / 0) (#47)
    by Rojas on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 09:50:25 PM EST
    as to the wisdom, I'll leave that to the horse race folks.

    Parent
    Let's talk sequestration (none / 0) (#34)
    by ruffian on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 08:13:29 PM EST
    Anyone think it will happen? That is to say, does anyone think the automatic budget cuts will go into effect just after the election? The election date is significant because some large companies like my corporate overlord are claiming they have to notify employees 60 days before massive layoffs. Which would mean that layoffs targeted for the end of the year would have to be announced by the end of October.

    I bet a coworker a buck that it wouldn't happen. I think it will be a rare instance of bipartisan cooperation to repeal that budget deal that calls for the budget cuts.

    The cuts as they now stand will not (4.00 / 1) (#53)
    by caseyOR on Mon Jun 25, 2012 at 11:05:11 PM EST
    happen. The Pentagon won't lose a dime. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid will not be so lucky. I expect much bipartisan support for cuts to those programs in order to "save them".

    Obama, who sux by the way, will lobby hard for this "everybody has skin in the game" decision.

    Also, Bush tax cuts will be extended, perhaps made permanent.

    Parent

    SS has zero effect (5.00 / 2) (#66)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:03:30 AM EST
    on the budget or the deficit.  It's self-contained.  You could eliminate SS and not have a penny's impact on the sequestration or the defense budget.


    Parent
    Tell that to the kids in DC :) (5.00 / 2) (#68)
    by nycstray on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:24:39 AM EST


    Parent
    You know that, and I know that and just (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by caseyOR on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:48:27 AM EST
    about everybody else here at TL knows that, but for some reason the Very Serious People either don't know (unlikely) or don't care.

    It is all part of the Grand Bargain, don't you know?

    Parent

    I think it's deliberate, because they (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by Anne on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 06:40:37 AM EST
    certainly have the capacity and the resources to be educated.  It might help them a great deal if they would also get some education on how the monetary system actually works in this country, instead of falling back on the not-true talking point that the US budget is really no different from the household budget.

    The problem with all this education is that it destroys the plan to always go after programs and spending that affect people who have no clout: the old, the poor, the sick and the very young.  I mean, those arguments just disappear, and then they are faced with revealing who they really are: people who don't see the value in all of us having a decent quality of life, and don't understand that the better we all live, the stronger we are as a country.  And who fear that creating the conditions that lift people up will also shift the balance of power away from the 1%.

    Sure wish we had some Democrats in power who were committed to improving our quality of life, but as near as I can tell, we have Democrats singing in harmony with Republicans - with both way off-key - and trying to convince us that it's not the same song.

    I wonder - would it be better to be as stupid as these people think we are?  

    Parent

    I sympathize Jeralyn (none / 0) (#98)
    by lilburro on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 10:08:08 AM EST
    it hit 105 in Texas yesterday.  So it begins.  At least it's a dry(ish) heat...

    President Obama (none / 0) (#110)
    by CST on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:13:36 AM EST
    booed when he came to Boston.

    One does not simply... joke about taking our baseball players.

    No one took your player (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 02:35:31 PM EST
    Your team didn't want him and traded him.

    Parent
    booooo (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by CST on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 02:44:40 PM EST


    Parent
    It's not like... (none / 0) (#116)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:32:44 AM EST
    the pres. accused the Red Sox of drug dealing and asset forfeitured the Youk, save them boos for Bobby V. and upper management, or feel BTD's wrath! ;)

    Parent
    Yet another Dem (none / 0) (#173)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 04:04:30 PM EST
    Skipping the Democratic Convention.

    Sen. Claire McCaskill (along with Sen. John Tester, Sen. Joe Manchin, Rep. Bill Owens, Rep. Kathy Hochul, Rep. Jim Matheson, Rep. Mark Critz, and Governor Early Ray Tomblin.)

    There is one Republican representative who has announced he will not attend the Republican Convention.

    But 3 sitting Democratic Senators (5%)? 5 Republican senators skipped in 2008 because they didn't want to be tainted with the stain of Bush / Cheney. (One Democrat skipped in 2008).

    But:

    Matt Bennett, a cofounder of Third Way, a moderate Democratic organisation, said it is unusual for incumbent senators to forgo the national party convention.

    "Senate candidates almost always go to the convention, particularly incumbent senators," he said. For senators "to be staying away is a stunning repudiation not only of McCain but ... of Bush."

    Is this a repudiation of Obama or are they just running scared?

    Must be the VMA's (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 05:17:07 PM EST
    ...Which are scheduled the same night as Obama's acceptance speech.

    Parent
    Bcs dead (none / 0) (#186)
    by Amiss on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 05:47:49 PM EST
    Beginning 2014. Wee are about to float away here in ne Fla and kings bay.thank goodness we have submarines!

    It Gas Prices Stooopid (none / 0) (#187)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 05:48:27 PM EST
    Jim, does this mean Obama is assured victory, or was that just silly talk when prices were high ?

    60 month average price of gasoline.

    Monday Afternoon Open Thread | 202 comments (202 topical)