home

Monday Night Open Thread: Passover

It's close to sundown here, which marks the beginning of Passover. Best wishes to all observing.

I just got back from the grocery store and was really surprised -- there was an entire aisle of Matzoh, from the U.S. and Israel, and all the regular Matzoh was sold out. Only options: Sodium free, gluten-free, etc. Also gone: white horseradish -- they had hundreds of bottles of the red horseradish. They also had an entire case of Kosher meats, but they were from Iowa, and ever since the labor violations of Agriprocessors came to light, I'm not buying meat from Iowa.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< R.I.P. Anthony Lewis | Tuesday Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Happy Pesach (5.00 / 5) (#1)
    by shoephone on Mon Mar 25, 2013 at 06:48:12 PM EST
    I depart tomorrow for a week of visiting with the family in sunshine and warmth...so I will be enjoying my own Exodus!

    Lucky you...it snowed all day today here. (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by Anne on Mon Mar 25, 2013 at 07:31:59 PM EST
    Because the air at the ground was relatively warm, it only stuck to the trees and grass - the roads were fine.  "Pretty without the problems" is how I described it to someone today.

    We're probably going to skip right over spring and one day soon I'm going to wake up to summer.

    Enjoy the weather and have a great visit with your family!

    Parent

    !3 inches of snow yesterday (none / 0) (#6)
    by MO Blue on Mon Mar 25, 2013 at 09:36:07 PM EST
    The roads were not good Sunday and it was nice that I did not have to go out. Stayed warm and cozy at home.  

    The groundhog that predicted an early spring definitely needs to be retired.

    Wish warm weather and a trip to a beach was on my agenda but alas it is not to be.

     

    Parent

    Where are you going -- SoCal? (none / 0) (#10)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:10:25 AM EST
    It's supposed to be in the 80s and sunny tomorrow in the L.A. area, but then all day on Tuesday, there'll be an early dose of the "June Gloom" -- a.k.a. "fog" to all you hicks and rubes who are hanging out on the eastern seaboard between Washington and Boston.

    Enjoy your trip. We're going to California for a few days after the legislature adjourns out here in May, and then it's off to Albany, NY to attend Elder Daughter's college graduation -- I can't believe I'm at that stage in my life -- before I return to my regular job in June.

    Parent

    Actually, I'm going to be hitting up all of Cal (none / 0) (#11)
    by shoephone on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 03:01:43 AM EST
    North to south and back again. Family in both sections. I've been reading weather reports and you're right, the cooler stuff may be on the way there. But, thankfully, it will still be mostly in the low 70's. It will be interesting to see what I get on the central coast, where I will be spending a  nice little jaunt.

    Parent
    Let me know if you'd like some suggestions...

    Parent
    I envy you. (none / 0) (#63)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:38:32 PM EST
    What I wouldn't do for a weekend in Santa Barabara or San Simeon right now! (Sigh!) There's something primordial about the California coast that is, for me at least, most always invigorating sensually and renewing spiritually. When I'm walking its shores on a foggy or overcast summer afternoon, the Pacific Ocean is whimsical, yet darker and tempestuous. It's an experience wholly apart from here in Hawaii.

    Have you ever taken the train along the central coast? Amtrak's Coast Starlight runs once daily in each direction between Oakland's Jack London Square Station and Union Station in Los Angeles during daylight hours, and its Pacific Surfliner runs several times daily between San Diego, L.A., Santa Barbara, Santa Maria and San Luis Obispo. If you're really not in a rush to get someplace, it's a pretty mellow way to travel and relax, without having to deal with highway traffic. And if you've never seen the rugged and beautiful coastline inside the boundaries of Vandenburg AFB, Amtrak's your only means to do that.

    Parent

    "I like New York in June..." (none / 0) (#12)
    by shoephone on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 03:04:24 AM EST
    "how about you...?"

    You'll be one proud papa that day.

    Parent

    Donald & Dadler (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by CoralGables on Mon Mar 25, 2013 at 07:27:53 PM EST
    and any other college hoops fans. Check out the official website for the City of Fort Myers in the upper left hand corner

    Love it when the whole town gets onboard.

    #DunkCity (none / 0) (#4)
    by Dadler on Mon Mar 25, 2013 at 08:04:37 PM EST
    Very nice.

    Parent
    Thanks for that link (none / 0) (#5)
    by sj on Mon Mar 25, 2013 at 08:42:25 PM EST
    I wouldn't have noticed without having it pointed out.  Plus, they turned me on to "Earth Hour".  I don't think I'd heard about that before.

    Parent
    Nice. (none / 0) (#7)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Mar 25, 2013 at 10:38:13 PM EST
    Thanks for the link. I'll be rooting for the Eagles to blow the doors off the bunkers where  BTD's Gators are holed up, and then take no prisoners.

    Well, UCLA's now officially fired Ben Howland, because three Final Fours in a row, four conference titles and 25 wins this year alone just wasn't good enough for the bipolar Bruin Nation, apparently.

    The local L.A. sports media's busy chanting "Bring in Shaka Smart!", as if the VCU coach somehow has absolutely no say in the matter, and completely obvlivious to the fact that Smart's already turned down North Carolina State and Illinois in favor of remaining at VCU. Butler's Brad Stevens? He signed a long-term contract extension just last year to stay put in Indianapolis, and knows a good gig when he sees it. Not everyone desires to be in the L.A. limelight.

    I mean, let's get real. The UCLA basketball program's become a graveyard of coaching careers, ever since John Wooden retired and passed the baton to Gene Bartow back in 1975. I agree with Charles Barkley's observation yesterday, that the Bruin faithful are craving another John Wooden, which they're never going to find, and they're living in the past.

    UCLA has now had eight head basketball coaches since Wooden stepped down, and two of them -- Bartow and Larry Brown -- simply threw up their hands and walked out on the program because the boosters have historically been completely unable to temper their expectations rationally. Hell, they got the administration to fire Jim Harrick only one year after winning the 1995 NCAA national championship, just because the Bruins got upset by Princeton the following year in the first round. One bad game, and they booted him out the door face first -- "Get outa here, ya phuquin' bum!"

    Given the UCLA basketball program's daunting history, what up-and-coming coach in his right mind would take that job now, when you know that they're just waiting to chew you up and spit you out, and some disgruntled but well-connected booster with an axe to grind is always looking to make his mark by stabbing you in the back?

    Hey, maybe the Bruins can hire Mike D'Antoni, once he gets $H!+canned by the Lakers after they miss the playoffs ...?

    Okay, that's my NCAA rant for the evening. Aloha.

    Parent

    I am amending my FGCU prediction (none / 0) (#47)
    by Dadler on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 12:31:08 PM EST
    Now that I realize their regional is being played at Cowboys Stadium, I am going to temper my confidence that they will prevail. It's a very different game playing in a football stadium. So I will temper my enthusiasm. I still think they can win, but in a normal arena I think they are massive faves. In the 90,000 seat football stadium, gonna be much more difficult.

    Also, Ben Howland is an inept offensive coach, always has been. Inept. And he is simply a coach too many players do not like to play for.

    The trend in college hoop coaches is a good one: toward player-friendly and respectful leaders and away from "my way or the highway" screamers and ranters. And good for it. Mike Montgomery here at Cal disappointed me greatly when he shoved a player recently. That sh*t is gonna get a coach decked very soon if it continues, and the kid will be justified but will NEVER get the benefit of the doubt these maniac coaches do.

    There is a young, talented coach out there who will take UCLA over the top. Not take it back to where it once was, but simply take it where it should always be. And the idea that Howland was going to be that coach -- a guy that too many of his kids just could not stand and who was always, to repeat, and inept offensive coach -- has been wishful thinking for too long.  

    Seriously, the FGCU players are chanting their coach's name after the game. That speaks VOLUMES, and obviously so. I only hope Enfield got outta Wall Street because it made him sick and not just relatively wealthy. A dude can dream, can't he?

    Parent

    Here are your current Vegas lines (none / 0) (#48)
    by CoralGables on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 12:55:11 PM EST
    for the Sweet 16

    Thursday:
    Indiana -5.5 vs Syracuse
    Miami -5.5 vs Marquette
    Ohio State -3.5 vs Arizona
    Wichita State -4 vs LaSalle

    Friday:
    Louisville -10 vs Oregon
    Duke -2 vs Michigan State
    Kansas -2 vs Michigan
    Florida -13 vs Florida Gulf Coast

    Parent

    I think the Florida/FGCU line... (none / 0) (#56)
    by Dadler on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:00:48 PM EST
    ...is probably a little generous to the Gators. I would put that line at about 8, but they are basing it on what people are putting money on, so what do I know?

    Not much.

    Parent

    WTF? Why in the world would ... (none / 0) (#65)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:52:01 PM EST
    ... they EVER schedule a basketball game for the caverns of Cowboy Stadium? I once went to an NCAA regional basketball game in Seattle's old Kingdome when I was at UW, and it was a miserable fan experience for most in attendance -- and the Kingdome was less than two-thirds the size of Cowboy Stadium.

    What a ridiculous and self-indulgent thing for the NCAA to do! Pity the poor effin saps who plunk down a chunk of good change, and end up in the high seats where the players all look like scurrying mice down below. You're far better off saving your money and watching the game on television at home -- at least there, you don't need binoculars to see the action, and it doesn't cost you $16 for a beer and a bag of popcorn.

    Parent

    I HATE basketball in Domes and stadiums (none / 0) (#67)
    by Dadler on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:53:30 PM EST
    Just hate it. Screws up shooters, TV angles, bad for the crowd in attendance, I just don't get it. TV revenue is everything, and I refuse to believe the extra ticket sales amount to squat comparatively.

    Parent
    And the Final Four will be there (none / 0) (#71)
    by Dadler on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:58:45 PM EST
    In 2015, I think. Sigh...

    Parent
    While I agree with you... (none / 0) (#75)
    by CoralGables on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 03:21:44 PM EST
    the reason for it is obvious. It will bring in over $5 million more in ticket sales for the two days in Arlington alone. The midwest regional is being held in Lucas Oil Stadium.

    The minimum requirement for seating to be considered for a Final Four now is 70,000

    2013 Georgia Dome
    2014 Cowboys Stadium
    2015 Lucas Oil Stadium
    2016 Reliant Stadium

    I suspect it won't be long before all the Sweet 16 games are played in venues above 70,000 thus giving them a leg up on a Final Four in the future.

    Parent

    Don't Forget... (none / 0) (#83)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 04:03:55 PM EST
    ...the Spurs spent a decade in a football stadium that was built because San Antonio had convinced itself "if they build it, the NFL will come".

    Parent
    And come they did, when ... (none / 0) (#94)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 06:58:26 PM EST
    ... they needed an alternate venue for the New Orleans Saints to play after 2005's Hurricane Katrina. After that, it was simply "Thanks! See ya 'round!"

    Parent
    That's simply awful, just terrible. (none / 0) (#93)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 06:54:01 PM EST
    I'm sorry, but staging college basketball games in football stadiums -- and on the decks of aircraft carriers docked in San Diego, for that matter -- is way beyond ridiculous. It's the stuff of high camp, just like arena football.

    Further, given the horrible views of the court from the high altitude sections, it amounts to a knowing and wholesale fleecing of any ticketholder beyond 25,000 in attendance. I know there's a lot of truth in the old adage about fools and their money being soon parted, but really ...

    Basketball is no more meant to be played in football stadiums, than football should be played at Staples Center or Madison Square Garden. Boo. Hiss.

    Parent

    It's still drop in the bucket money... (none / 0) (#98)
    by Dadler on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 09:59:21 AM EST
    ...compared to the TV deal, squirrel nuts. These venues represent rank disrespect for the game, the players and the fans. I wish some coach had the balls to speak up and talk about how idiotic it is, how it takes away from the championship, because it does. Hey, football is even more popular, so why not build a million seat stadium for the BCS title game?

    Parent
    And here's a name UCLA will offer (none / 0) (#66)
    by Dadler on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:52:34 PM EST
    Andy Enfield. Obviously. I think he'll be the first offer they make, as soon as FGCU is out of the tournament.

    Parent
    And I find it hard to believe... (none / 0) (#69)
    by Dadler on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:54:43 PM EST
    ...he wouldn't take it.

    Parent
    But maybe they offer Shaka Smart first (none / 0) (#70)
    by Dadler on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:55:26 PM EST
    From VCU, but he's got new facilities in the works, east coast ball is where it's at, I don't think he'll jump like Enfield would.

    Parent
    Given that Shaka Smart and Brad Stevens ... (none / 0) (#95)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 07:27:08 PM EST
    ... have both got young families to think of and support; that the average tenure of a basketball coach at UCLA since John Wooden's 1975 retirement has been less than five years; that Stevens signed a contract extension with Butler through the 2012-22 season at Butler worth $1.1 million annually plus bonuses; and that Smart did the same with VCU through the 2019-20 season worth $1.2 million annually plus bonuses, both those guys would have to have gravel for brains to trade their job security at their respective schools for the unmedicated bipolarity of UCLA athletics right now.

    Parent
    That depends. (none / 0) (#96)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:00:07 PM EST
    Enfield is independently wealthy, so I don't think money would likely be a big factor in any decision to leave FGCU.

    Further, I think we're prematurely assuming, without even really knowing the guy, that he's hot to trot to bolt Fort Myers, FL for the limelight of L.A. Maybe he and his supermodel wife like it in southern Florida. Not everybody is necessarily motivated by money, and not everybody is enamored with Southern California.

    I remember when San Diego Chargers Head Coach June Jones unexpectedly fell right out of the blue and landed neatly into the University of Hawaii's lap in late 1998, within mere days after the team went 0-12 and Coach Fred von Appen was canned. Even a subsequent offer from the Chargers' owner Alex Spanos that was sixfold what UH could offer failed to dissuade him from heading to Honolulu to take what he called his "dream job." And he'd undoubtedly still be here, too, had not that jackass of an A.D. UH had hired from Alabama back in 2005 driven him off after the 2008 Sugar Bowl.

    Parent

    You think a guy who made a fortune... (none / 0) (#99)
    by Dadler on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 10:18:44 AM EST
    ...in Wall Street so he could become a D-1 head coach wants to stay in Ft. Myers FL in the Atlantic Sun conference?

    Not me. And UCLA will be the best job open, so...

    He'll get offered and he'll take it, IMO. No one goes to that level of a profession without a profound ego to stroke. Period.

    BTW, June Jones left Hawaii for SMU, of all places. He had been only interim HC of the Chargers during a time when they were awful and NO ONE wanted any part of that franchise, see Eli Manning.

    Parent

    I'm not Jewish (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by jbindc on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 06:32:18 AM EST
    But my BF is half (although not religious and not raised Jewish, as his mother was Episcopalian).  Sunday night I made a Passover meal including a KILLER brisket, but we had the maror (romaine lettuce), charoset (made by me!), karpas (celery), Z'roa (bone), beitzah (hard boiled egg), and matzoh. {No, I didn't go Kosher, and the meal wasn't Kosher as I made mashed potatoes with butter to go with the brikset).  We even did a (very abridged version) of the ceremony, including lighting candles, drinking the four "cups" of wine (sips, in my case, as I don't like wine), told the story of the four children, etc.

    As a born and raised Catholic, it was a very interesting (although, in our case, very informal) ceremony, and can I say it again?  I made a KILLER brisket.  :)

    Brisket (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:29:52 AM EST
    I never had brisket before I moved to Texas, D-licious. I luvs me sum brisket.  

    Wolowitz, from BB Theory, is always talking about him mom's brisket and he such a goofball that I laugh every time he mentions brisket and  turbriskefilte.

    Parent

    My brisket: (none / 0) (#19)
    by the capstan on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:44:42 AM EST
    It is called (Donald) Hawaiian style--not true, but So good!  I cooked it till done i(adding cabbage toward the end) in a crockpot, then slathered it with (southern-style) mustard/brown sugar and stuck it in the oven.  Never met anyone who did not love it.  Don't think I can get the corned beef brisket at the store anymore--and I can't do justice to the whole thing anyway.

    Parent
    Yummy! (none / 0) (#20)
    by jbindc on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:58:16 AM EST
    I did an easy one.

    2 lb. brisket (it was just the two of us, so that was plenty).  I scored the meat with a knife.

    Put some onions and chopped garlic on the bottom of a crock pot.  Mixed a packet of Onion Soup Mix with ketchup and water - to the consistency of the original ketchup.  Placed the brisket on the onions and garlic, put the soup / ketchup mix on top.  Turned the crock pot on high for 4 hours - it fell apart and melted in our mouths.

    Easy peasy.  :)

    Parent

    Real Hawaiians ... (none / 0) (#72)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 03:05:05 PM EST
    ... never use crock pots.
    ;-D

    Parent
    You don't need a crockpot (none / 0) (#92)
    by the capstan on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 06:45:40 PM EST
    for spam!  (The crockpot was my addition to the recipe; also good for fixing southern green beans with shellies and seasoning meat: cooked till beans are limp and delicious.

    Parent
    Passover to me... (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by Dadler on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:03:57 PM EST
    ...as the son of a man raised orthodox, is really, ahem, about memories of getting picked last at kickball in elementary school. "Pass over Adler, that little sh*t is terrible." True story.

    Parent
    Remember that Medicaid expansion (5.00 / 3) (#55)
    by sj on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 01:54:56 PM EST
    that was one of the truly good parts of the ACA?

    The White House is encouraging skeptical state officials to expand Medicaid by subsidizing the purchase of private insurance for low-income people, even though that approach might be somewhat more expensive, federal and state officials say.
    See that?  The WH is encouraging the "expansion" of Medicaid by using those funds to buy private insurance.  Or, as lambert succinctly describes it:
    Just an outright transfer of public money (taxes) to private entities (health insurance companies) despite the fact that thirty cents of every dollar pumped through blood-gorged bellies of the health insurance companies goes to overhead, CEO bonuses and salaries, and profit.


    Reports I read indicated (5.00 / 2) (#59)
    by MO Blue on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:05:54 PM EST
    that it would cost $3,000 more per person to privatize Medicaid. Much more costly, less likely to be able to continue funding expansion and an extremely bad precedent.

    No question the legislation was written by and for the insurance industry.

     

    Parent

    Larval Caterpillar looks like Donald Trump's wig (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by Dadler on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 03:13:46 PM EST
    Sadly (or not?) (none / 0) (#74)
    by sj on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 03:20:08 PM EST
    that's not a wig.  It's a combover.  And that second picture of Trump (caught in the wind) looks remarkably like your caterpiller.

    Parent
    Motion For Sanctions (none / 0) (#8)
    by P3P3P3P3 on Mon Mar 25, 2013 at 10:52:08 PM EST
    have been filed today in Court by Mark Omara in the George Zimmerman case, which is long over due, the way the Prosecution has been handling things

    thanks, just finished reading it (none / 0) (#9)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Mar 25, 2013 at 11:17:52 PM EST
    and will have a post up late tonight or tomorrow on it.

    Parent
    How goes the New Site?? (none / 0) (#14)
    by DebFrmHell on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 06:50:07 AM EST
    I haven't been able to figure out where it is or if it is up and running yet.

    I would love to see an update on the progress and and looking forward to your big Zimmerman blog.  I hope the Motion for Sanctions hasn't thrown that one for a loop, Jeralyn, because I learn a lot from you.

    TIA!

    Deb, here's the link to the new site: (none / 0) (#15)
    by Anne on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 08:07:05 AM EST
    Talk Left Premium

    Jeralyn's been putting posts up there, and for now, the content and commenting is free while she works out the kinks and adds features.

    Parent

    We need to elect... (none / 0) (#18)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 09:31:35 AM EST
    more pub owners to office...the town of Kilgarvan on the Emerald Isle legalizes some drinking and driving to promote socializing and to prevent rural isolation and suicide.

    Sounds reasonable to me.

    what (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by nyjets on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 10:16:49 AM EST
    So it is reasonable to put people at risk by allowing people to drive drunk. I am sorry, that is the most silly think I have every read.


    Parent
    It is reasonable.... (none / 0) (#26)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 10:29:50 AM EST
    to realize that "safety", or more accurately the illusion of safety, is not the be all end all.  In a very rural community with limited auto traffic, where suicide and social isolation are bigger problems than drunk driving, this seems most reasonable.

    I found it refreshing to see a local government somewhere in this world that realizes that there is more to governing than criminalizing and punishing.

    Parent

    Of course it does... (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Anne on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 10:32:22 AM EST
    but it's stupid, really stupid.

    It couldn't be that the pub owner cares less about isolation and suicide and more about improving his bottom line, could it?

    I live in the country, and I can tell you that the last thing I want to encounter coming around a blind curve on a windy, twisty, and narrow road with no shoulder, is someone who's not just coming home after a couple of pints, but has a permit to drink and drive.

    ::rolling eyes::

    Parent

    And I thought I was cynical;)... (none / 0) (#30)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 10:46:56 AM EST
    or we can take him at his word...preserving pub culture. And understanding his constituency's needs.

    But fear not...the authoritarians will win in the end, especially now that it has hit the news....recriminalization is right around the corner I'm sure.

    Parent

    How is (none / 0) (#31)
    by jbindc on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 10:51:43 AM EST
    Allowing people to drive drunk going to prevent suicide?  Is he saying that if they are not allowed to drive drunk from the pub, they will stay home and kill themselves?  Seems like a HUGE leap in logic.....

    Parent
    Social isolation... (none / 0) (#33)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 11:13:29 AM EST
    can lead to depression and suicide...I think the idea is to get the lonely folks drinking alone at home out to the pub for social stimulation, without them having to worry about breaking out in handcuffs on the way home.

    Whether is is really necessary I don't know...I would think no law is gonna keep an Irishman away from his pub.

    Parent

    To Me... (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 12:09:52 PM EST
    ...killing oneself is preferred over killing someone else.  IOW, the 'cure' is worse than the disease.

    How about keeping the DD illegal and sending out a van to pick up the same folk and take them home at night. Surely the additional business could support the costs.

    And not to point out the obvious, but alcohol is a depressant, so encouraging depressed people to drink, even in social situations might sound good, but it's counter-intuitive if depression is what you are trying to cure.

    If I had to guess, I bet many of those suicide victims were under its influence when they decided suicide was the answer.  

    And lastly, a DD can just as easily kill themselves without the aid of another car, so if these people's lives are really his concern, he should find alternative transportation and not act like DD is a contact-free sport.

    Parent

    Then there's this (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by jbindc on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 12:17:41 PM EST
    Amid governmental and local backlash, Healy-Rae says the law isn't supposed to apply to everyone, mainly "elderly people who live in very remote places."

    So, since he helped write the law, does he mean only "elderly people who live in very remote places" can drive drunk?

    Seems like an awful lot of risk of injury and property damage for nothing.

    Parent

    There is more to life.... (none / 0) (#49)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    than being alive Scott.  This is a quality of life measure.

    Parent
    Being able to drink and drive is (none / 0) (#52)
    by Anne on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 01:38:34 PM EST
    not a "quality of life" measure; it's like saying that giving Wall Street and the banksters a pass on what they did to the housing market and the economy was just a quality of life measure, too, right?

    I mean, so what if it was at the expense of others?  Psshhht!  The only thing that matters is their quality of life, right?

    And for what it's worth, that people believe they are "okay" to drive, that they drive well when they've had a couple, has pretty much been debunked time and again by putting them in simulated driving situations, under various levels of influence, and measuring their reaction times and coordination.

    We all think we're smarter, better looking, funnier, and sharper with a couple of drinks in us; problem is, we aren't.

    There are a lot of really dumb laws and restrictions, I agree.  Here's one that might make your head explode: a community association in Florida that has banned outdoor play of any kind by children, unless in the company of an adult, in order to keep them safe.

    Rule No. 4 states: "Minor children will not be under the direct control of a responsible adult at all times. Children will not be permitted to run, play tag, or act boisterously on the association property. Skateboarding, `Big Wheels,' or loud or obnoxious toys are prohibited."

    The rule also states that children aren't allowed to play in driveways or the front or rear areas of other units.

    Those who violate the rule will be hit with a $100 fine.

    So much for the fun of being a kid, huh?

    Parent

    They better correct their language first (none / 0) (#53)
    by jbindc on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 01:44:05 PM EST
    "Minor children will not be under the direct control of a responsible adult at all times."

    They will not be under the direct control of a responsible adult?

    Parent

    Yeah, I saw that, too. At first I thought it (none / 0) (#54)
    by Anne on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 01:52:30 PM EST
    was a lead-in to why the outdoor play was being banned, except that only makes sense if it starts with "since," or "because," and connects to what follows.

    And it doesn't really say that play is allowed when an adult is present.

    I just thought the whole thing was beyond ridiculous.

    Parent

    Bad analogy... (none / 0) (#60)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:07:30 PM EST
    Wall St. left victims in their wake....a .08 BAC is not inherently harmful, reckless driving is.  Two different things.

    Don't get me wrong, I get it...drunk driving is not cool.  I'm just not sold that is has to be a crime....and for once I am not alone, some people in Ireland agree.  No help to the stereotype of the drunken Irishman though! ;)

    Now let us agree...Community associations are some of the most tyrannical petty authoritarian outfits the world has ever seen...and that is a new low.  Why don't they just ban kids from the community alltogether?

    Parent

    Speak for yourself, Anne. (none / 0) (#76)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 03:30:09 PM EST
    Anne: "We all think we're smarter, better looking, funnier, and sharper with a couple of drinks in us; problem is, we aren't."

    Apparently, I was pretty friggin' hysterical back in the day after some drinks. To this very day, I've had distant relatives tell me that they distinctly remember me from a cousin's wedding 30-plus years ago, because they never laughed so hard as when I dove in front of the ladies when the bride tossed the bouquet and snagged it for myself, and then later rolled down an entire flight of stairs.

    And I can't begin to tell you how many times the girls got prettier the drunker I got -- or was it, the drunker girls got the prettier I thought I was getting? Whatever, it was one of those, or maybe even a combination of the two.

    Now, mind you, I'm not claiming that I was acting in a wholly dignified manner when I was schnockered -- but then, you didn't list "dignified" in your criteria above. But no question, I was definitely funnier when I was three sheets to the wind, because people were laughing at me all the time.

    Remind me next time to tell you about that time in high school when I got on a trampoline at one in the morning at my girlfriend's house, or that other time in college after a six-pack of St. Pauli Girl, when I got into a fistfight with someone because we disagreed about what to play next on the stereo at a party.

    Thankfully, we didn't have smartphones back then to record those illustrious events for posterity. And at 52 years old, it still never ceases to amaze me how I ever got out of my adolescence and young adulthood alive and in one piece. The kids today ain't got nothin' on me.

    Aloha. :-D

    Parent

    It helps if everyone else is drunk... (none / 0) (#78)
    by Anne on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 03:42:06 PM EST
    and it sounds like you and I were at some similar events...remind me to tell you about the time there was so much beer on the frat house floor that we were hydroplaning across it in our flip-flops...

    Parent
    LOL! The kids today probably ... (none / 0) (#80)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 03:50:09 PM EST
    ... ain't got nothin' on you, neither.

    Parent
    Good idea Scott... (none / 0) (#97)
    by fishcamp on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 08:33:39 AM EST
    Aspen has a Tipsy Taxi that many people use and it's free.  Of course it's a small town so the taxi doesn't have to go far to get the tipsy people home.

    Parent
    So drink at the pub (none / 0) (#34)
    by jbindc on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 11:15:41 AM EST
    And get a ride home.  Work with townspeople to offer rides.  Offer a bed in the pub (if he's so concerned about suicide) to flop and sleep off the drunk.

    This is just a dumb idea that will only lead to bad results.

    Parent

    You're entitled to your opinion... (none / 0) (#37)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 11:18:30 AM EST
    I think it's great their bucking the worldwide trend...very proud of the Irish side of my heritage today.

    Parent
    No question that isolation can lead to (none / 0) (#40)
    by Anne on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 11:36:00 AM EST
    depression, but alcohol is a depressant, so making it easier for depressed people to drink is not the answer.  

    It isn't the alcohol that eases depression, it's the social interaction with others.

    Parent

    Agreed... (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 11:44:42 AM EST
    and social interaction in Irish culture is most likely to occur in two places, both of which happen to serve alcohol...the pub and the church.  Somethings gotta give.

    Parent
    If you indulge, kdog, you have ... (none / 0) (#77)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 03:39:53 PM EST
    ... to know your limits, especially as one gets older. I can laugh at myself about my past antics when I was a young lad, and I still enjoy a drink or a glass of wine every now and then, but I definitely know my limits now and I am a very strict self-enforcer.

    When I'm out in public at a restaurant, nightclub or pub, I don't drink at all if I'm driving, and I hold myself to no more than two drinks when I'm not. I don't have to get inebriated to have a good time. And nothing's worth a DUI.

    Parent

    Oh, I'm a very cynical person...I just (none / 0) (#38)
    by Anne on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 11:29:29 AM EST
    don't see the altruism in "preserving pub culture;" I see dollars and cents (or pounds and pence)for the pub owners.

    And, as anti-authoritarian as I can be, I don't see drinking-and-driving as libertarian, I see it as stupid and dangerous.  The legal limits we have here already accommodate some amount of alcohol, don't they?  We're not at zero tolerance, and neither, I don't think, is Ireland.  Interesting that they have different limits for experienced drivers v. inexperienced ones.

    Look, I know there's all kinds of danger out there, and we can never be 100% safe from anything, but this is just asking for trouble.  And who needs that?

    Parent

    Don't get me started... (none / 0) (#41)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 11:39:55 AM EST
    on our ridiclously low BAC limits...every drinker is different, and for many drinkers 0.08 is not even buzzed, let alone drunk.

    I agree it's never a good idea...we should all drive at full attention, at full mental & physical capacity, with our hands at ten and two.  That's maybe what, 5% of the drivers on the road at any given time?

    We don't need to criminalize anything & everything less than that.  I'm much concerned with the actual, ya know, driving...not the BAC or anything else in the blood.  And reckless driving laws cover that.  

    I'd like to think society has other ways of discouraging drinking & driving, or any less than safe or desirable behavior, than the tired barbaric chains and cages.

    Parent

    Wow (none / 0) (#46)
    by jbindc on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 12:18:09 PM EST
    We don't need to criminalize anything & everything less than that.


    Parent
    CA Prop 8 in trouble at SCOTUS? (none / 0) (#21)
    by CoralGables on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 10:00:18 AM EST
    Early morning reports are both Roberts and Kennedy are hitting hard at the Prop 8 backers.

    Very knowledgeable and savvy observers (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by Peter G on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 01:36:46 PM EST
    from SCOTUSBlog, one an atty who specializes in S.Ct. litigation, the other a very experienced S.Ct. journalist, both suggest that it seems unlikely the Supremes will either uphold or strike down Prop 8 on the merits. Suggestion is that the Court seems to be much more likely to either dismiss the S.Ct. appeal as "improvidently granted" (leaving the 9th Circuit's invalidation in place) or hold that the Calif. state S.Ct. cannot confer "standing" on the Proposition's proponents to defend it in federal court (thus leaving the district court's invalidation in place). Either disposition would uphold same-sex marriages in California, but be nonbinding (and of little precedential value) elsewhere. In fact, if only the district court ruling stands, it would technically not be binding for the benefit of anyone but the two couples who brought the challenge initially (because it is not a class action). You can read the transcript of argument here, or listen to the audio of the argument here.

    Parent
    Thank you. (none / 0) (#61)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:16:35 PM EST
    I don't have much confidence in (none / 0) (#22)
    by Anne on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 10:11:25 AM EST
    the SC on this one - nor do I feel great about how they may rule on the Voting Rights Act.

    I guess we'll find out in June or so.

    I can't for the life of me understand why we all can't have the same basic rights; why do I, as a straight woman, have the right to marry a man, but if I were gay, I wouldn't have the right to marry a woman?  Who is being hurt?  How is anyone ele's marriage threatened?

    I don't get it.

    Parent

    Newest rumor from Scotusblog (none / 0) (#29)
    by CoralGables on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 10:39:50 AM EST
    now saying there may be no up or down ruling, but possibly kicked back to CA where Prop 8 is invalidated but a stay remains in place.

    Parent
    Not a rumor, but rather (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Peter G on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:53:42 PM EST
    an expert analysis and opinion, based on the oral arguments.  See my comment #51 above.

    Parent
    Do you think (none / 0) (#102)
    by CST on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 04:13:28 PM EST
    they will have a harder time kicking the can down the road with the other DOMA challenge in US. vs. Windsor?  That has always seemed to my non-legal eyes like a much more straightforward federal challenge.

    Parent
    Yes, I do (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by Peter G on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 05:34:06 PM EST
    See erudite "Plain English" commentary today at SCOTUSBlog.  Not much like yesterday's discussion at all.

    Parent
    This morning's Supreme Court (none / 0) (#23)
    by jbindc on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 10:13:35 AM EST
    A ruling in another dog sniffing case - Florida v. Jardines, where, in a 5-4 ruling, the Court held that bringing a drug sniffing dog onto a private resident's porch to sniff for drugs constituted a search for the purposes of the Fourth Amendment.

    Without looking, see if you can guess who wrote the majority opinion, who was in the majority, and who dissented!

    Wallowing in an earlier BB Theory reference (none / 0) (#25)
    by CoralGables on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 10:21:57 AM EST
    Bazinga

    Parent
    Not sure how he knows (none / 0) (#28)
    by jbindc on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 10:39:06 AM EST
    (And keeping in mind how wrong everyone was about the Obamacare case ruling), Tom Goldstein at Scotusblog tweeted this about the Hollingswroth (California Prop 8 case):

    Arguments done. #scotus won't uphold or strike down #prop8 bc Kennedy thinks it is too soon to rule on #ssm. #prop8 will stay invalidated.


    More analysis from Tom Goldstein (none / 0) (#36)
    by jbindc on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 11:17:18 AM EST
    SCOTUSblog

    Several Justices seriously doubt whether the petitioners defending Proposition 8 have "standing" to appeal the district court ruling invalidating the measure.  These likely include not only more liberal members but also the Chief Justice.  If standing is lacking, the Court would vacate the Ninth Circuit's decision.

    The Justices seem divided on the constitutionality of Proposition 8 on ideological lines, four to four - i.e., all the members other than Justice Kennedy.  For the more liberal members of the Court, there was no clarity on how broadly they would rule.

    But Justice Kennedy seemed very unlikely to provide either side with the fifth vote needed to prevail.  He was deeply concerned with the wisdom of acting now when in his view the social science of the effects of same-sex marriage is uncertain because it is so new.  He also noted the doubts about the petitioners' standing.  So his suggestion was that the case should be dismissed.



    Parent
    Amanda Knox to be retried: (none / 0) (#32)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 11:11:21 AM EST
    NYT

    She's nuts... (5.00 / 2) (#35)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 11:16:15 AM EST
    if she ever steps foot in Europe again...I sure as hell wouldn't go back to face the revived charges.

    Parent
    Her attorney says they'll fight. (none / 0) (#39)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 11:33:34 AM EST
    Her media spokesperson says she will not appear n think Polanski.

    Parent
    Italy has a hard on for her scalp... (none / 0) (#42)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 11:42:00 AM EST
    much like California and Polanski.  

    Parent
    Except that Polanski was never ... (none / 0) (#79)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 03:48:38 PM EST
    ... acquitted in court, as Amanda Knox was. I think it's unfair that prosecutors in Italy get several bites at the same apple, but then, I'm not Italian.

    At the very least, young Ms. Knox made some very foolish personal choices when last in Europe, and she'd now only compound her initial foolishness by ever setting foot in Europe again.

    Parent

    Or any place with an extradition treaty (none / 0) (#87)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 05:07:37 PM EST
    W/Italy. Hmmmm.  Does U.S. have one?

    Parent
    Yes. (none / 0) (#88)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 05:09:07 PM EST
    Would they send her back? (none / 0) (#89)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 05:48:45 PM EST
    This morning, news said that all evidence in that particular case was circumstantial.

    Parent
    I've been reading around the intertoobz. (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by caseyOR on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 06:22:25 PM EST
    It seems that Amanda Knox will not have to return to Italy for the new trial by the appellate court. The trial will go on without her.

    Where it gets sticky is if she is convicted at the new trial. If the appellate court reverses itself and convicts this time, then Knox can appeal to the Italian Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court upholds that conviction then Italy, which has an extradition treaty with the U.S., can ask the U.S. to extradite her. Given that the charge is murder, it seems likely that Italy would want her extradited back to to serve time.

    There does not seem to be agreement on whether or not the U.S. would comply with the extradition request. I've read opinions from legal experts that claim she won't be extradited because it would violate the U.S. standard for double-jeopardy. I've read others that say she would be extradited because the U.S. would feel bound to honor its treaty with Italy.

    If the U.S. refuses to extradite her, Knox will need stay away from all countries in the European Union. Anyone of the EU countries could, and I think would, send her to Italy quickly.

    Parent

    Almost every case's evidence (none / 0) (#90)
    by jbindc on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 06:06:02 PM EST
    is circumstantial.

    Parent
    The two are not at all equivalent. (none / 0) (#86)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 04:21:47 PM EST
    The cases and crimes, no... (none / 0) (#100)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 10:21:56 AM EST
    Knox is most likely innocent, imo.  Polanski was guilty, imo.  

    The similarity is the zeal to "get their (wo)man", and not knowing when to give up.

    Parent

    Technically (none / 0) (#101)
    by jbindc on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 10:45:11 AM EST
    They already "got her" - Knox was convicted  (and that conviction upheld) of slander, because she tried to pin the murder on a local pub owner, who spent 2 weeks in jail because of her accusation, but was finally released when the evidence didn't point to him.

    Seems weird that someone who had nothing to do with a crime would try and pin it on someone else, instead of just maintaining their innocence....

    Parent

    North Dakota (none / 0) (#50)
    by jbindc on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 01:14:08 PM EST
    Governor signs most restrictve abortion law in US, plus two other abortion bills.


    North Dakota became the nation's most restrictive state on abortion rights on Tuesday as Republican Gov. Jack Dalrymple signed a measure banning the procedure if a fetal heartbeat can be detected.

    Dalrymple signed two other abortion bans Tuesday that were approved by the state's GOP-led legislature.

    The first would ban abortions based on genetic defects like Down syndrome - the first such measure in the country - and on gender selection. The second would require that any doctor performing abortions in the state be a physician with hospital-admitting privileges.



    Plainly unconstitutional (none / 0) (#58)
    by Peter G on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:05:03 PM EST
    under current precedent.

    Parent
    Yep (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by jbindc on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:31:43 PM EST
    Which is why he said this:


    Dalrymple said in a statement that the bill is a direct challenge to the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which legalized abortion until a fetus was considered "viable" - usually between 22 and 24 weeks.

    "Although the likelihood of this measure surviving a court challenge remains in question, this bill is nevertheless a legitimate attempt by a state legislature to discover the boundaries of Roe v. Wade," Dalrymple said. "Because the U.S. Supreme Court has allowed state restrictions on the performing of abortions and because the Supreme Court has never considered this precise restriction ... the constitutionality of this measure is an open question."

    He's spoiling for a fight.

    Parent

    Well, I hope the ACLU and the (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by Peter G on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 02:50:10 PM EST
    Center for Reproductive Rights make a pretty penny in attorneys' fees from the State for winning the lawsuit, as they will, against this foolish, ideological adventure by the state legislature.

    Parent
    Obama today (none / 0) (#81)
    by CoralGables on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 03:54:56 PM EST
    named Julia Pierson as the first ever female director of the Secret Service.

    That's pretty cool (none / 0) (#82)
    by sj on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 03:58:05 PM EST
    I'm off to learn more about her.

    Parent
    Looks like there's (none / 0) (#84)
    by CoralGables on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 04:13:06 PM EST
    not a lot out there to find on her. Graduated from the University of central Florida.  With the Secret Sevice for 30 years, and a former police officer from Orlando, FL.

    Statement from Obama:

    "Julia is eminently qualified to lead the agency that not only safeguards Americans at major events and secures our financial system, but also protects our leaders and our first families, including my own. Julia has had an exemplary career, and I know these experiences will guide her as she takes on this new challenge to lead the impressive men and women of this important agency."


    Parent
    Yeah, that's what I'm finding (none / 0) (#85)
    by sj on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 04:20:28 PM EST
    Looks like there's (none / 0) (#84)
    by CoralGables on Tue Mar 26, 2013 at 04:13:06 PM EST

    not a lot out there to find on her

    Pretty much all the articles are from the same press release.  I expect more info will start to come up in the days to come.  Or maybe not, who knows?

    Parent