home

NFL Sunday Open Thread

This week's Amato (John Amato of Crooks and Liars) and Armando Show (our You Tube Channel is here:

Our NFL picks (J is John, A is Armando (disagreements in BOLD): San Francisco 49ers -11 over Arizona Cardinals, St. Louis Rams +9 (A), Houston Texans (-9) (J), Minnesota Vikings -3 (J), Carolina Panthers (+3) (A), Washington Redskins +6 over Dallas Cowboys, Philadelphia Eagles -1 over Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Tennessee Titans +14 (A), Seattle Seahawks (-14) (J), Buffalo Bills +7 (A), Cincinnati Bengals (-7) (J), Pittsburgh Steelers +1 ((J), New York Jets (-1) (A), Green Bay Packers -3 over Baltimore Ravens, Detroit Lions (-3) over Cleveland Browns, Denver Broncos (-27) over Jacksonville Jaguars, New Orleans Saints (+2) over New England Patriots, San Diego Chargers (-3) (A), Indy Colts (+3) (J).

Open Thread.

< Saturday College Football OpenThread | Monday Open Thread: Moving Week >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    AN AXE LENGTH AWAY, vol. 155 (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by Dadler on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 09:08:14 AM EST
    He's a man of the cloth. Unfortunately, the cloth is soaked in chloroform. (link)

    And the rest of last week's comics for you to catch up on. It was a good week at AXE, very inspired, if you axe me anyway:

    Vol. 154

    Vol. 153
    Vol. 152
    Vol. 151
    Vol. 150
    Vol. 149

    Have a lovely Sunday, y'all. Peace.

    Yeah, you picked Miami over Ravens (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Chuck0 on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 09:08:32 AM EST
    last week. And that didn't work out so well. Packers over Ravens, don't hold your breath. Go Ravens!

    Remember Joe the Plumber? (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Angel on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 02:27:57 PM EST
    Oh My (none / 0) (#20)
    by squeaky on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 05:27:43 PM EST
    Well it would be a milestone to have the first gay president.

    Is he out of the closet?

    Parent

    Oh... (none / 0) (#21)
    by squeaky on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 05:45:42 PM EST
    Isn't he the same guy that Bush was having for late night private pressers at the WH?

    Jeff Gannon/Guckert?

    I think he changed his name to Joe.. looks like the same guy..

    Parent

    Seriously (none / 0) (#45)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 11:39:21 AM EST
    This is the header:
    America Needs a White Republican President

    Right below that:
    Admit it. You want a white Republican president again.

    Now before you start feeling like you're a racist, understand you are not.  Wanting a white Republican president doesn't make you racist, it just makes you American.

    His reasoning is that since Obama, criticizing the President has become a racial thing, so if we get back to a white guy, that perception will disappear and 'America would be more free than ever to discuss the issues'.

    Holy **, at least with this kind of garbage the media won't be treating him like some sort of political savant like they did in 2008.

    Parent

    He represents what the Tea Party is truly about. (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by Angel on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 12:03:30 PM EST
    So sickening and scary that there are millions just like him.  

    Parent
    Yup...the tri-corner hat is a clever cover for the (5.00 / 3) (#50)
    by ruffian on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 12:06:47 PM EST
    white hood.

    Parent
    Exactly. (none / 0) (#51)
    by Angel on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 12:12:11 PM EST
    Keith Alexander (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Edger on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 06:52:44 PM EST
    "We don't need less domestic spying on Americans. We need better and more convincing bullsh*t!"

    NYT, Oct. 12, 2013

    FORT MEADE, Md. -- The director of the National Security Agency, Gen. Keith B. Alexander, said in an interview that to prevent terrorist attacks he saw no effective alternative to the N.S.A.'s bulk collection of telephone and other electronic metadata from Americans.
    [...snip...]
    While offering a detailed defense of his agency's work, General Alexander said the broader lesson of the controversy over disclosures of secret N.S.A. surveillance missions was that he and other top officials have to be more open in explaining the agency's role, especially as it expands its mission into cyberoffense and cyberdefense.

    "Given where we are and all the issues that are on the table, I do feel it's important to have a public, transparent discussion on cyber so that the American people know what's going on," General Alexander said. "And in order to have that, they need to understand the truth about what's going on."

    "The way we've explained it to the American people," [Alexander] said, "has gotten them so riled up that nobody told them the facts of the program and the controls that go around it." --- except Ed Snowden, of course...

    Edger is nothing but a SPAMMER. (1.50 / 2) (#28)
    by Amiss on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 09:55:53 PM EST
    Please relieve us.

    Parent
    Edger isn't a spammer (5.00 / 4) (#29)
    by sj on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 11:40:08 PM EST
    He just has strong convictions, and maybe a sense of despair. Okay, that despair might be coming from me.


    Parent
    You do have the opportunity to counter (5.00 / 5) (#32)
    by MO Blue on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 12:00:43 AM EST
    Edger's arguments against NSA's activities if you support a surveillance state.

    Personally, I'd much rather have relief from NSA spying on us.

    Parent

    Pretty Sure... (3.00 / 2) (#46)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 11:41:28 AM EST
    ...you need to Google the word spammer, because either you think you are clever, which your not, or you don't know what spam is.

    Parent
    SPAMMER ALERT (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by sj on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 11:49:01 PM EST
    Janet668 hitting old threads. Amiss, that is a spammer :) A very busy spammer.

    Another state with a GOP Governor (5.00 / 3) (#38)
    by CoralGables on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 08:41:13 AM EST
    may now see polling numbers take a hit.

    Scott Walker of Wisconsin appeared to be impervious to the GOP polling numbers cratering as of late.


    Maybe not anymore as his administration appears to have stepped in it all on its own.


    For those curious about health care credits (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by CoralGables on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 09:22:54 AM EST
    Although they are supposed to differ state to state, this website from Cal Berkley, which didn't ask for my state, only missed by $3.00 per month on the silver plan compared to what came back from healthcare.gov when I signed up this morning.

    ESTIMATE YOUR SUBSIDIES UNDER THE NEW FEDERAL HEALTH LAW

    You must have been very lucky (none / 0) (#42)
    by jbindc on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 11:08:04 AM EST
    To actually get logged in, since about it appears that up to 99% can't get enrolled through healthcare.gov.

    It's a batting average that won't land the federal marketplace for Obamacare into the Healthcare Hall of Fame.

    As few as 1 in 100 applications on the federal exchange contains enough information to enroll the applicant in a plan, several insurance industry sources told CNBC on Friday. Some of the problems involve how the exchange's software collects and verifies an applicant's data.

    "It is extraordinary that these systems weren't ready," said Sumit Nijhawan, CEO of Infogix, which handles data integrity issues for major insurers including WellPoint and Cigna, as well as multiple Blue Cross Blue Shield affiliates.

    Experts said that if Healthcare.gov's success rate doesn't improve within the next month or so, federal officials could face a situation in January in which relatively large numbers of people believe they have coverage starting that month, but whose enrollment applications are have not been processed.

    And we all know it's NOT because of the debunked myth that it's because "Obamacare is too popular".

    No one knows how many people have managed to enroll because the administration refuses to release those numbers, but the website's launch has been rocky.

    Media outlets have struggled to find anyone who's actually been successful. The Washington Post even illustrated that sought-after person as a unicorn, and USA Today called the launch an "inexcusable mess" and a "nightmare."

    White House officials initially blamed the problem on an unexpectedly high volume as they had more than 8 million hits in the first week, but after it went offline over the weekend for repairs, officials now acknowledge other problems.

    "We've identified the glitches, we've added hardware, we're recoding software, and I can tell you today is better than yesterday, and we are hoping in the very near future to have a seamless process that's what we are aiming for," Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said.

    However, computer experts say the website has major flaws.

    "It wasn't designed well, it wasn't implemented well, and it looks like nobody tested it," said Luke Chung, an online database programmer.



    Parent
    May have been lucky (none / 0) (#44)
    by CoralGables on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 11:37:52 AM EST
    And may have spent too much time playing around asking questions in the live chat (btw the wait was less than a minute each time).

    I know how much of a tax credit I'm eligible for now but currently can't pull up my plan options. Not really important as I wouldn't sign up before the deadline anyway.

    The major difference between the state run sites and the national site is the state sites permit window shopping without the app process, meaning far less data is bouncing around initially making it easier for far more people to be playing at once.

    But, I have my ID# and can get any information I need quickly by phone now or in the live chat.

    Parent

    AN AXE LENGTH AWAY, vol. 156 (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Dadler on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 09:27:38 AM EST
    Columbus Day special: Chris wasn't all that. (link)

    Volume 155
    Volume 154

    Happy Rainy Days and Mondays always get me down Day. Peace out, my fellow mortals.

    John McAfee (none / 0) (#1)
    by Edger on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 08:58:41 AM EST
    founder of the McAfee internet security and anti-virus company, talked about website user security and how people are likely to be scammed trying to use the obamacare sites in an interview Friday. It was broadcast on Fox News, so those so inclined can just dismiss what he had to say of course, but for those who evaluate things based on content and information instead, here's what he had to say:
    Obamacare websites have "no safeguards" to protect Americans who enroll in the health insurance exchanges from hackers who will "empty your bank account," according to internet security pioneer John McAfee.

    McAfee said he could create a fake Obamacare exchange website for "a couple hundred dollars" and expect a big return on the scam.

    "I'll ask you your social security, your date of birth, [so] an hour later I can empty your bank account," he told Fox News' Gretchen Carlson.

    "And this is going to happen, it's going to happen soon. Nothing in the Obamacare system safeguards against this," he said.
    [...snip...]
    any hacker can put a website up, and make it look extremely competitive, and because of the nature of the system -- this is health care, after all -- they can ask you the most intimate questions and you're freely going to answer them."

    On the other hand, you'll be scammed anyway, even on a "legitimate"(sic) obamacare site.

    News llash for Fox and McAfee (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by ruffian on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 11:26:07 AM EST
    People have been buying health insurance online for years - at least 10, when I bought my first policy online.  Have not heard of any identity theft issues with it, when banking sites have them regularly.

    The glitches experienced in the health care site this week likely were bottlenecks in the various security related 'add-ons' McAfee says he can hack around.  

    Nothing is 100% secure, but I would rate this as among the least of the problems with Obamacare.

    Parent

    I would also (none / 0) (#11)
    by Edger on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 11:55:47 AM EST
    rate this as among the least of the problems with Obamacare.

    The millions of spam phishing emails will go out from the spammers with links to faked genuine looking obamacare sites, and many people will fall for them and enter their personal and banking information without reading the url they are on carefully, and have the bank accounts cleaned out. Mostly elderly and sick, people who can least afford to be scammed. The scammers are heartless. Almost as bad as politicians and insurance companies. But the numbers will pale beside the millions who will be scammed by the real thing.

    Parent

    We'll see (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by ruffian on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 12:11:35 PM EST
    It is true that people are usually dumber than I think, so you may be right.

    Parent
    Well, the reason (none / 0) (#18)
    by Edger on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 03:42:52 PM EST
    there is so much spam and so much phishing is because it works, I think. The cost of sending out millions of emails is next to nothing. Probably less than .01% response rate (10,000 of 1,000,000) makes it profitable.

    Parent
    But Really.... (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 12:16:11 PM EST
    ...what is the argument, laws shouldn't be written because scum bags will use them to scam naive people.

    How many folks have been ripped off because of Prescription Drug Plan ?  I would argue the entire Iraq war was one huge scam that enriched a whole lot of very sinister folks.  But how many people have been ripped off donating to organizations that claim to be related to Vets or the military in general ?


    Parent

    I looked back (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by Edger on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 12:19:41 PM EST
    through all the comments above and couldn't find that argument anywhere.

    Parent
    It really is the argument for single-payer (5.00 / 5) (#13)
    by ruffian on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 12:19:53 PM EST
    that was too explosive to make - many people aren't mentally equipped to buy insurance on their own. If insurance does not come to them in the form of a card handed to them by their employer or the government, they cannot deal with it.  Int he long run that is probably exactly what will sink Obamacare. I hope it happens in such a way that single-payer will be seen as the only feasible alternative.

    Parent
    Another great benefit <snark alert> (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by MO Blue on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 05:53:01 PM EST
    of our new insurance legislation:

    The cost of Obamacare varies wildly by state

    The feds will spend just about $10,000 subsidizing health insurance costs for a poor, middle-aged man who lives in Georgia - and just $3,000 buying the same guy in nearby Tennessee a near-identical plan.
    ...
    In a state like Wyoming, for example, the cost of a medium level plan (or, for the wonks, the second-lowest cost silver-level plan) is $743 per month. Since the enrollee is only putting up $19 per month, that leaves the federal government footing a bill of $724 per month or $8,688 annually. link

    Insurance profit and protection act for sure.

    Parent

    Why should people have to be (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by BackFromOhio on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 01:45:50 AM EST
    "mentally equipped" to buy their own health insurance?  Trying to figure out which is the least objectionable option through the morass, only to save a few nickels and spend a wad when single payer would save everyone much wasted time is annoying to say the least. Shouldn't everyone have access to decent healthcare without having to be a genius at reading the purposefully incomprehensible language?  In NY, where there have been many plans available to those with incomes too high to qualify for Medicare but too low to go the most expensive route, one can only learn about the policies by careful cross checking and spending hours hunting through the Internet. And then one finds that most adult policies cost more than one can afford or only come with a $2,000 deductible.  And then, to parse through the available policies, one must check out each insurance company's offerings.  

    Parent
    Edger (2.00 / 2) (#26)
    by Amiss on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 09:36:35 PM EST
    I apologize but you appear to be quite adept at spamming yourself, along with trying to scam the good folks here with your SPAM.

    Parent
    Well, since he told this to Fox News, ... (3.50 / 2) (#6)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 10:46:34 AM EST
    ... it must therefore be true, huh? Three thoughts here:

    (1) McAfee was the worst antivirus software I ever had, next to useless because it regularly failed to provide timely updates to meet evolving cyberthreats. I dropped it a decade ago, and never looked back. Personally, I think its customer based is mainly comprised of people who don't know any better. To be fair, some people beg to differ.

    (2) John McAfee is an alcoholic, drug addicted,  paranoid crackpot and con artist -- a guy the BBC characterizes as "a crazed, perhaps even deranged, personality," and profiled in Psychology Today as a "master manipulator."

    (3) You're in Canada, so other than offering you yet another self-indulgent opportunity to bash any and all things Obama, why does this concern you?

    Parent

    As much as I (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by BackFromOhio on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 01:38:31 AM EST
    found the info in your comments interesting, it all amounts to ad hominem attacks.  The substance of what edger wrote is scary.

    Parent
    A couple of warnings about phishing sites (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by Edger on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 02:33:27 AM EST
    InformationWeek Security
    5 Obamacare Health Site Security Warnings, page 2
    4. Fake Sites

    Which health insurance exchange sites are real? "The health insurance exchange isn't made up of a single, authoritative site where people can go and register for coverage," said Christopher Budd, threat communications manager for Trend Micro, in a blog post. "In addition to the federal site, people can apply for coverage at sites run by individual states. Then, within each state, there can also be legitimate third-party sites that provide assistance and even broker coverage," he said.

     Although the federal site does use SSL to verify its authenticity, "a survey of state and third-party sites also shows that official sites aren't required to provide the ability to verify the site using SSL" -- and many don't. "As people look for health care exchanges, they're going to be faced with potentially hundreds or thousands of sites that claim to be legitimate, but [they] won't be able to easily verify that claim," except based on how a site looks, said Budd.

    Accordingly, many security experts have recommended that -- just as with banking sites and PayPal, among other sites -- people never, ever click a link to the site that's in an email they've received, or use an online search to find the site. Instead, type the URL into the address bar, to avoid poisoned search results or phishing attacks. Or for healthcare, simply call one of the exchange phone numbers, or visit an office in person, recommended Budd.

    Trend Micro
    The Coming Risk of Scam "Obamacare" Sites

    The root problem is that the Health Insurance Exchange isn't made up of a single, authoritative site where people can go and register for coverage. In addition to the Federal site, people can apply for coverage at sites run by individual states. Then, within each state, there can also be legitimate third-party sites that provide assistance and even broker coverage.

    When a person starts looking through sites to find one, at this time, they're faced with the challenge that there's no official marking or labeling that they can look at on a site to know that it's an officially sanctioned site. A survey of state and third-party sites also shows that official sites aren't required to provide the ability to verify the site using SSL: many of them don't provide it for site verification at all, though the Federal site does. As people look for health care exchanges, they're going to be faced with potentially hundreds or thousands of sites that claim to be legitimate but won't be able to easily verify that claim.

    The next problem is that when applying for health care coverage, you have to provide all of your most sensitive personal information not only for yourself but your entire family. Most of us won't give our social security numbers out willingly. But when it comes to health care, the industry uses that information so regularly that we've come to accept handing that information over as a matter of course (even if we don't like it).

    Put these two things together and you've got a situation where people are primed to give away their most critical personal information to legitimate sites but can't be sure of finding their way to those legitimate sites.

    This is a perfect environment for identity thieves and other criminals to put together bogus sites to get personal information they can use or sell on the digital underground. And this situation also provides an opportunity for old fashioned healthcare scammers to offer bogus coverage and fraudulent billing scams to more unsuspecting people.

    SecurityWatch
    Beware of Fake Obamacare Insurance Marketplace Sites

    How to Stay Safe
    To avoid scamming sites, Budd said that people shouldn't start by using search engines to find information. Search results can be easily tainted by phishing sites, and targetting popular phrases is a key strategy used by scammers.

    Instead, people should start at https://www.healthcare.gov. From here, they can find the appropriate Marketplace website for their state. Information about legitimate third party insurance suppliers can also be found on these sites.

    Whenever possible, connect via SSL and use HTTPS, instead of HTTP, at the beginning of the URL. On HTTPS sites, a small lock icon should appear just to the left of the URL. You can click this, and verify the authenticity of the website.

    If the certificate is expired, or if you're not sure you can trust the website for any reason, take it offline. Budd told SecurityWatch that some insurance vendors can be reached over the phone or in person.

    Most modern browsers, like Chrome, will throw up a warning screen if they detects anything untoward about the site's certification. "If your browser raises a warning, stop there unless you know what you're doing," said Budd.

    And google obamacare phishing sites

    Do not click on links in emails. Type the url in to your browser address bar yourself.

    If you do click a link in an email, look at the url in your address bar after the site opens, and make sure you are actually at the site you should be at.

    Parent

    Why do you (5.00 / 4) (#37)
    by Zorba on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 06:17:42 AM EST
    Object to a Canadian criticizing Obama?  We Americans certainly feel free to criticize the actions of foreign leaders and the policies of foreign countries.  We do it all the time.
    Donald, you need to stop getting your panties all in a twist when people criticize Obama.  Providing rational arguments that support your side would seem to me to be the way to go if you really want to support Obama.  Having a mini hissy-fit only undercuts your arguments.

    Parent
    It's Become Donalds M.O. (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 12:01:18 PM EST
    Attacking criticizers of the Great One with one his many forms of non-sense that have nothing to do with the message.  As if being Canadian is some kind information blocker to American politics.

    I mean seriously wasn't that the Hawaii argument some of the D bags over at Fox were pushing for Obama, that Hawaii wasn't a real state, almost inferring that they are someone less informed than us real Americans.

    Donald problem is very similar to many of the Bush supporters had/have, the simply don't like any criticism of their beloved one.  And that anyone who provides it, even people in their own party, is RINO, or in Donald's case to Edger, some foreigner who should keep his mouth shut.

    God forbid someone reports the hubub over at Fox news.

    Since the source is a crazy junkie who got deported from Guatemala who appeared on Fix News, there is no real reason to go beyond mentioning that.  The rest was an unnecessary dig.

    Parent

    McAfee's charater doesn't really matter (5.00 / 3) (#64)
    by MO Blue on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 07:34:34 PM EST
    The fact that Edger lives in Canada doesn't either. What matters is whether or not there is a high risk of look-a-like sites. Seems like the state insurance regulators not only think there is a risk, they have already encountered sites designed to mimic the ACA sites.

    States encounter ObamaCare impostors
    State insurance regulators are encountering sites designed to mimic ObamaCare's enrollment portal, the online hub where millions of people are meant to purchase healthcare coverage.


    Parent
    Well you know what Donald (none / 0) (#7)
    by Edger on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 10:52:27 AM EST
    I have a lot of close friends in the US. And I don't want them scammed by McAfee, obama, or any other scam artists. obots I'm not too concerned about. They're too transparent, and most are not bright enough to realize it.

    Parent
    Edger's (none / 0) (#25)
    by lentinel on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 08:22:46 PM EST
    in Canada - the land that has the healthcare that Americans can only dream of... you know, the "professional leftists".

    Parent
    McAfee just wants to diss Oracle (none / 0) (#14)
    by vicndabx on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 12:41:38 PM EST
    that provided the security software under discussion.

    Senior executives at Oracle, a subcontractor based in California that provided identity management software used in the registration process that has frustrated so many users, defended the company's work. "Our software is running properly," said Deborah Hellinger, Oracle's vice president for corporate communications. The identical software has been widely used in complex systems, she said.

    NY Times Link

    Parent

    Question...... (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by NYShooter on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 08:20:56 PM EST
    Not specifically for you, V.

    If McAfee uncovered severe security threats in this system why wouldn't he have taken them to the proper authorities? Why take it to an organization (FOX) that, virtually, no one takes seriously? This just has "Agenda" written all over it.

    Or, are we to assume he tried to warn the Administration, but, was rebuffed?

    The system sucks, that's no secret. But, did McAfee uncover something that will derail ACA before it even gains some traction? I think that's what he, and, "they," hope, anyway.

    Parent

    Plus the Guy is a Junkie... (none / 0) (#54)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 12:30:10 PM EST
    ...who got deported from Guatemala last year because of guns, drugs, and a murder I believe.

    What is he going to report, some scum bags in Nigeria are going to sent a zillion emails with some kind for scam that some Americans will invariably fall for ?

    Phishing has got nothing to do with the website security other than using the name to scam people.  Are there actually issue with security at the website is what he should have addressed, not scammers creating fake websites.

    Paypal was one of the first to get hit with the fake website phishing.  Their actual website was safe, the problem is the phishers sent out emails that appeared to look like they were from Paypal with a link to fake site that looked just like the real a site.

    There is literally nothing a company or the government can do to prevent the gullible getting scammed.

    That being said, Obama is cool with spying on Americans, but not cool with busting the F's that rip Americans off.  That really ticks me off, we get no real benefit beyond their word they are keeping us safer.  Far more people the victims of scams than terrorism.  

    Parent

    Go Niners! (none / 0) (#2)
    by Dadler on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 09:01:27 AM EST
    And Chargers. I have a feeling SD is going to upset the Colts.

    The downside to being on the other side ... (none / 0) (#5)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 10:01:50 AM EST
    ... of the International Dateline is that NFL Sunday on Guam is a Monday and a work day. Go Seahawks.

    Denver only covers the spread.... (none / 0) (#8)
    by magster on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 10:56:52 AM EST
    If Peyton Manning's backup is successful in his own right while being made to run the ball almost exclusively. John Fox is too respectful of his coaching fraternity to run up score. I'd take Jacksonville to beat the spread.

    All I ask is that (none / 0) (#9)
    by ruffian on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 11:17:39 AM EST
    the CBS evening schedule does not get so screwed up it messes up my Amazing Race recording schedule...no OT please!

    Other than that, my Bears beat some guy named Manning Thursday night, so I am set for the week!

    Doesn't it get messed up ... (none / 0) (#17)
    by Yman on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 03:35:07 PM EST
    ... pretty much every week during the NFL season?  It's been awhile since I recorded it, but I got in the habit of recording the AR and the show after the AR because it seemed to happen every week.

    Parent
    Yup....unfortunately about 80% of the shows (none / 0) (#48)
    by ruffian on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 12:02:56 PM EST
    I watch are on Sunday night, so my 9pm recording is already full!

    First World Problems.

    Parent

    5th grader convicted of conspiracy (none / 0) (#15)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 02:11:46 PM EST
    to murder a "really annoying" classmate:

    NYT

    I don't even know (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by sj on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 11:41:30 PM EST
    how to react to that.

    Parent
    One of the sadder things I've read in awhile... (none / 0) (#19)
    by Edger on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 03:56:28 PM EST
    After a year of traveling, Dutch writer Niels Gerson Lohman wanted to visit New Orleans, the city that his father - who died a year ago - had a great love for. The U.S. customs officials thought different.
    `We are under the impression you have more ties with more countries we are not on friendly terms with than your own. We decided to bring you back to the Canadian border.'

    They brought me back. In the car, no words were said. It was no use. I was defeated. To the Canadian border they said:

    `We got another one. This one is from the Netherlands.'

    The Canadian officer looked at me with pity. She asked if there was anything I needed. I said I could use some coffee and a cigarette. She took my passport to a back room and returned within five minutes, carrying an apologetic smile, a freshly stamped passport, coffee, a cigarette, and a ticket to the next bus back to Montreal.

    I have been cursed at a Chinese border. In Dubai, my passport was studied by three veiled women for over an hour and my suitcase completely dismembered. In the Philippines I had to bribe someone in order to get my visa extended for a few days. Borders, they can be tough, especially in countries known for corruption.

    But never, ever, will I return to the United States of America.

    Why I will never return to the USA
    Niels Gerson Lohman, 09 October 2013

    Sounds like a plan to me. (2.00 / 4) (#27)
    by Amiss on Sun Oct 13, 2013 at 09:53:25 PM EST
    Now if we can just get you to quit posting on blogs that are located in the USA trying to cause trouble
    Like the Fox in the henhouse.
    Now if you truly wanted to help your friends, post where they do and expound on their wonderful words of wisdom that are inspired by such wonderful lawmakers that have gotten me, a US citizen, into tremendous debt, thanks to their corruption.

    Parent
    You seem a little confused Amiss (3.67 / 3) (#33)
    by Edger on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 01:06:04 AM EST
    Everything I post here is about corruption in US lawmakers.

    Perhaps some of it is corruption that you like, and it upsets you that I call it out?

    Parent

    Your comment makes no sense to me, sorry... (3.67 / 3) (#41)
    by Anne on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 09:59:22 AM EST
    and you seem to have formed an alliance with Donald and gotten quite a bug up your a$$, not about what Edger is posting, but about the fact that he's in Canada.  And this matters to the fact of what American lawmakers and policymakers and corporations and saying and doing, how?

    I mean, what's the difference between what Edger's posting and what many of us Americans have also posted and are posting? Do you regard me and MOBlue and lentinel and Zorba and sj and Yman as spammers?  And I shudder to think what that makes Glenn Greenwald and digby and Charlie Pierce - some of the strongest criticism one can find coming from American bloggers - are they traitors, as opposed to just garden-variety spammers?

    Oh, and you seriously need to look up "apology" in the dictionary, because the one you made to Edger upthread doesn't qualify.

    Parent

    Not to Mention... (3.67 / 3) (#55)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 01:02:39 PM EST
    ...the person in question is Canadian.

    Not sure how our deficit is the fault of the 'corrupt' Canadians, but hot damn, that is treading near Jim-esque like delusions.

    Parent

    What is the relevance of "Canadian" (1.00 / 1) (#56)
    by sj on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 01:11:00 PM EST
    Should Glenn Greenwald not criticize the actions of the UK because he is a US citizen? Or should GG not criticize the actions of the US because he lives in Brazil?

    Using nationality and/or residence to discredit that observations is BS, and it is actually a discredit to you.

    Parent

    Okay, I read (none / 0) (#57)
    by sj on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 01:14:51 PM EST
    your comment again after having coffee.

    ::Never mind::

    Parent

    Anne, (2.00 / 1) (#58)
    by Amiss on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 02:55:40 PM EST
    You should know better than what you accuse me of, period. I have pretty much given most of your posts over the years good or mostly top rating.

    It's kinda like a family to me, can make derogatory remarks about each other, but not anyone else. Especially not someone that is not living in the Ca-Ca.
    I feel you made a rush to judgment above.
    Perhaps I did with your buddy Edger, I know you really opened my eyes.

    Parent

    So, someone's comments are okay when (3.00 / 2) (#62)
    by Anne on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 04:38:36 PM EST
    they live here, but if they move out of the country, you're not interested in their opinions?

    My point was that Edger isn't saying or providing links to anything that others of us here have not also done, so why, all of a sudden, do you seem so determined to chase Edger out of here?

    As for ratings and such, I'm not someone who pays much attention to them, nor do I spend much time doling them out; when I do, it's because the comment stands out to me, either as being very good, or being near troll-level.

    "Rush to judgment?  I don't think so, not considering where you've now gone, to the simply tasteless and gratuitously rude "living in the Ca-Ca...if anything, that little bit of ugliness confirms that my judgment was spot-on.

    Parent

    I wouldn't be too concerned Anne (3.00 / 2) (#63)
    by Edger on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 06:02:26 PM EST
    although Amiss's motivations may be mildly curious, likely it's just that s/he's uncomfortable with the issues I raise and would rather not hear the criticisms, perhaps hoping the issues will disappear of their own accord. Which they won't of course, since they are the actions of the "corrupt politicians" Amiss doesn't like but paradoxically does not want to hear about.

    As far as chasing me out of here, that won't happen. Amiss will just have to learn to deal with my presence, as distasteful as s/he may find it.

    Parent

    Wow, you really stand by this comment (none / 0) (#59)
    by sj on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 03:08:14 PM EST
    which reads like word salad to me (which is not typical of you). Because rather than clarify/expanding your meaning, you are slamming down troll ratings.

    I won't do the same -- you aren't typically a troll; but you are wildly off the mark here, IMO.

    Parent

    No, I understood that 4 posts (none / 0) (#60)
    by Amiss on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 03:45:55 PM EST
    Was the limit in a thread for years now.
    Don't worry, my opinion will not be posted again.

    Parent
    The 4 post limit (none / 0) (#61)
    by sj on Mon Oct 14, 2013 at 03:53:34 PM EST
    is made by Jeralyn when the commenter is "chattering" with opinions in opposition to the mission of the website. And usually that restriction is made per topic, not generally for the commenter in general. I don't think you need to worry on that score.

    Rather than discouraging you from stating your opinion, I'm trying to figure out what it really is. I know you're angry but I don't see the reason for it.

    Don't get your feelings hurt, we're just trying to figure out what has you all het up.

    Parent

    is the that NYG did not lose.