Tuesday Open Thread

I've been working all weekend on my powerpoint for my talk on Email and Social Media Evidence: Uploading Guilt, Downloading Impeachment. I have to have it done by Weds when i leave for Aspen and NORML's Legal Seminar.

I'm sure there will be news, so here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

< George Zimmerman Hearing | Jeremy Hammond Pleads Guilty to Stratfor Hack >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    "Conscious vs. Subconscious" vol. 10 (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Dadler on Tue May 28, 2013 at 09:15:09 AM EST
    oops, misnumbered, this is vol. 11 (none / 0) (#2)
    by Dadler on Tue May 28, 2013 at 09:56:18 AM EST

    Not your average weekend (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by KeysDan on Tue May 28, 2013 at 02:25:44 PM EST
    television fare, the biopic of Liberace, "Behind the Candelabra" shown on HBO Sunday night (with re-runs during the week).

    Less light from the candelabra on his piano than from the flaming and flamboyant behavior of the performer. Based on the book of Scott Thorsen,  one of a series of Liberace's May/December sugar-daddy/sugar-baby relationships.

    Starting as a strange co-dependent love, or, at least attraction, where the rootless Scott's holes in his head nicely matched the rocks in the internally oppressed Liberace.  Of course, this relationship does not end well, but the "in-between"  takes several turns including Scott's plastic surgery so as to look like Liberace, but winding up looking more like a perfumed eunuch from eighteenth century France.

    Liberace, whose sexual affections were hiding in open sight in a doorless closet, was famous for his flair more than his piano skills (although they were certainly not insignificant, just not enough for success with his early classical training), and was flamboyantly gay without being famous for being gay.  Indeed, his fans of the era seemed to be either in denial or just entertained, if not endeared,  by his schmaltz, never missing a call-out to "Mom".  

    The HBO presentation is a work of the director Steven Soderbergh with cinematography found in the old movies. Given the subject matter and the subjects that matter, it would be difficult for the movie not to be campy, but it turns out to be, in my view, camp as high art.

    Michael Douglas' Liberace was incredible as was the powerful performance of Matt Damon as Scott--a pitiable portrayal of a born down-on-his luck story characterized by Liberace as complete except for the orphanage burning down part.

    Debbie Reynolds played Liberace's mother, in a memorable, if not unrecognizable role. Rob Lowe was perfect as the Hollywood plastic surgeon quack.  Did not note that the smarmy agent/consigliere was Dan Aykroyd until the credits rolled.

    The movie was sexually frank but not pron explicit.  It was probably picked up by HBO rather than for movie distribution owing to the likelihood that those under 40 don't know about Liberace, those over 65 might think it too racy, and the remaining window too market limiting.  All the better for cableTV. Liberace was weird, laughing all the way to the bank.  Reminding me of Hunter Thompson's line: "when the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."

    Love your write-up! We liked it but Mr. Angel (none / 0) (#60)
    by Angel on Tue May 28, 2013 at 04:26:34 PM EST
    said last night that once was enough.  Michael Douglas was great but I thought Matt Damon was better, and I thought Rob Lowe dead on nailed the sleaze of the surgeon character.  I had no idea that was Dan Aykroyd.  I kept thinking to myself that he seemed familiar.  

    One can't make a film about Liberace ... (none / 0) (#67)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue May 28, 2013 at 06:21:56 PM EST
    ... without possessing a definite camp sensibility. After all, the late entertainer was the absolute essence of high camp, and one can argue that his entire success in show business was really predicated upon his self-deprecating ability to become his own best parody.

    I agree fully with your assessment that unless you're actually old enough to remember Liberace (who died of AIDS 26 years ago) and know who he was, his life isn't going to hold much interest for you, particularly in this day and age when flamethrowing queens are seemingly a dime a dozen.

    But back in his day, Liberace's quick wit and debonair flamboyance was both mocking and daring for its time. He certainly knew how to schmooze and seduce his targeted audience, and he's been credited with having coined the now-oft-quoted quip, "I cried all the way to the bank," as his contemptuous response to his many music critics, whose scathing opinions were obviously ignored by the showman and his loyal fandom. It's what made him really stand out in the entertainment field, and how he became the highest-paid performer of his era.



    Jeralyn, would you consider posting your (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by oculus on Tue May 28, 2013 at 03:08:47 PM EST
    presentation here?  Interesting topic.

    No, I won't post it (none / 0) (#54)
    by Jeralyn on Tue May 28, 2013 at 03:29:25 PM EST
    because people pay to attend the seminar and hear it. It wouldn't be fair to them. I may blog some more about it though

    That's a great title, Counselor. (none / 0) (#72)
    by Mr Natural on Tue May 28, 2013 at 09:54:16 PM EST
    "Uploading Guilt, Downloading Impeachment"

    Wow, Obamacare bringing great things (5.00 / 3) (#65)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 28, 2013 at 06:14:50 PM EST
    to employer-sponsored health insurance.

    Obamacare attempts to change this dynamic. Under the law, health plans that cost over $10,200 for an individual or $27,500 for a family will have to pay an excise tax of 40 percent on every dollar that they exceed that cutoff beginning in 2018. As Jonathan Gruber, an MIT economics professor who helped design the law, explained to the New York Times, the tax is meant to reorient the way that employers approach their workers' health problems and their associated costs. "It's focusing employers on cost control, not slashing," said Gruber.

    Companies aren't waiting until 2018 to shift their health care models. Some are increasing their use of high-deductible health plans (HDHPs) -- which charge workers low monthly premiums but high annual deductibles -- in an effort to raise employees' awareness of how much their health care consumption costs.

    On their own, HDHPs may not be particularly beneficial to workers. But employers are linking these plans with in-house doctors, on-site health clinics, and wellness programs meant to improve workers' health and reduce their need for more expensive treatments later on. link

    Somehow I doubt that the majority of companies are going to have on-site health clinics that cover an employee and his families actual health care needs. You or a family member break your arm or leg, you get to eat the entire cost (think in thousands of dollars) of the emergency room, the orthopedic surgeon and any and all medical devises and physical therapy. Your kid needs stitches, has an ear infection or needs ear tube you better be able to come up with several hundred or thousands.

    Yes, isn't this (5.00 / 2) (#68)
    by Zorba on Tue May 28, 2013 at 08:27:57 PM EST
    just great?  (Yes, this is snark.)
    Medicare For All.  Single-Payer.  Universal Health Care.
    I don't care what the he!! you call it, we need some rational version of these.   Not what we have, nor what we are getting.

    This is being heralded as a great way (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 28, 2013 at 09:16:53 PM EST
    to promote workers health.

    It's focusing employers on cost control, not slashing," said Gruber.

    It is not "slashing" health care benefits. An employee can have all the actual health care that the employee can afford to pay for out of pocket.

    Steps to take if your husband is having a heart attack: Step one: check and see how much you have in the bank. Step two: call all the hospitals in the area and determine which will treat your husband for the lowest cost. Step three: Is your husband still alive. If no, cease pursuing treatment. If yes, do you have the funds available to pay for treatment. If yes, take husband to the lowest cost provider. If no, pray.


    Yes, sadly (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by Zorba on Tue May 28, 2013 at 09:43:23 PM EST
    People who are heralding this plan do not live in the real world.
    And just contemplate the example that you gave, MO Blue.  Getting health care is not like buying a new car.
    I wonder what Jonathan Gruber's health care plan is like.  Probably better than the average American's.
    And he is 47 years old.  I would imagine he has not had any real health emergencies yet.
    Oh, and, BTW, here is what is available to MIT employees.  Nice choices.  For him.

    Interestingly, (none / 0) (#92)
    by jbindc on Wed May 29, 2013 at 10:34:36 AM EST
    Wal-Mart is trying out something novel with their health plan - sending its workers to top tier hospitals.

    as (5.00 / 3) (#96)
    by NYShooter on Wed May 29, 2013 at 10:57:25 AM EST
    second, or third jobs?

    The only thing high-deductible plans do (5.00 / 2) (#86)
    by Anne on Wed May 29, 2013 at 09:38:00 AM EST
    is discourage people from seeking treatment because they fear not being able to afford it.  How is this not obvious?  

    I'm to the point where I'd prefer if the health insurance executives would just say, "Look - you people are cash cows, and our goal is to milk you for as much as we can, as often as we can, so that we can continue to rack up huge profits which we will use to pay enormous salaries and benefits to our executives and nice dividends to the stockholders smart enough to invest with us.  That's the reality, folks: we're in this to make money."

    The government could chime in, and say, "The truth is that these companies own us, and without them, most of us would be out on the street looking for work.  They fund political campaigns, and if we scratch their backs by passing legislation they like, we are pretty much guaranteed jobs with fat paychecks when our government pay isn't cutting it anymore.  It's great - we can collect our pensions, get health care for life, and rake in millions - so, when it comes to making decisions, we'd be crazy to go against the people with the real money, don't you think?"

    I'm sick of it, but the cure for what ails me can't be found in the doctor's office, sadly.

    Five more years until I'm eligible for Medicare - assuming it even still exists, or that it hasn't turned into a voucher program that will make me captive to the private market.  I'm currently paying almost $600/month for my individual plan (my husband has full - and free - coverage through the VA, thank God) - imagine what the effect on the economy would be if the millions of people like me could have even $5,000 of those premiums to save for retirement, or put back into the local economy...

    I should stop now before I start throwing things.


    Even without Medicare going to a (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 29, 2013 at 10:22:57 AM EST
    voucher system, Obama has plans to shift the costs for actual care from Medicare to the insued While the chained CPI is getting the majority of the attention, the changes that Obama wants to make to Medicare have the potential to reduce a seniors retirement income by thousands of dollars per year. Some of cost shifts Obama wants to make to Medicare:

    Higher Cost Sharing for New Medicare Beneficiaries

    In 2017, 2019 and 2021, new Medicare beneficiaries would have to pay an additional $25 for their Part B deductible, for a three-year total of $75 to be added on to the cost of the Part B premium, which in 2013 is $147.

    The administration says the change would "strengthen program financing and encourage beneficiaries to seek high-value health care services." Seniors advocates say it's an additional cost to people already struggling on fixed incomes. In 2012, nearly half of Medicare beneficiaries had annual incomes of below $22,500.

    Also starting in 2017, Obama's plan would require new Medicare beneficiaries to pay $100 for five or more home health care visits that are not preceded by a stay in the hospital or another medical facility, such as a nursing home or a rehabilitation hospital. Home health care is one of the few areas in Medicare that does not have cost sharing, and its rapid growth in recent years has led panels like the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) to recommend beneficiary cost sharing.

    Beginning in 2017, new beneficiaries who purchase supplemental insurance, known as Medigap, with particularly low cost-sharing requirements ­­- such as "first-dollar" coverage - will face a surcharge equivalent to approximately 15 percent of the average Medigap premium. The thought is that more generous Medigap plans encourage overuse of services, but seniors rely on these generous plans to shield them from unanticipated costs.
    2. Wealthier Beneficiaries Pay More

    Current law already requires individual beneficiaries whose incomes are $85,000 and above ($170,000 and above for couples) to pay a larger share of Medicare Part B (outpatient services like doctor visits and laboratory services) and Part D (prescription drugs) premiums. While most beneficiaries pay 25 percent of their Part B premiums, higher-income beneficiaries pay between 35 to 80 percent, depending on their income.

    Obama's plan would increase the lowest income-related premium to 40 percent and cap it at 90 percent. His plan would also maintain the current income thresholds until a quarter of Part B and Part D beneficiaries are paying the higher income-related premiums.

    In a 2012 analysis, the Kaiser Family Foundation found that if the proposal to have a quarter of all beneficiaries pay the higher premiums were implemented last year, beneficiaries with incomes at or above $47,000 for individuals and $94,000 for couples would be paying higher income-related Medicare premiums. (KHN in an editorially independent program of the Foundation.)

    The Obama administration says the proposal would help improve Medicare's financial stability by reducing how much the government spends on Medicare for beneficiaries who can afford to pay more. But the Center for Medicare Advocacy fears asking higher-income people to pay a greater share of premiums "might lead to more people choosing not to participate in Medicare. Fewer participants in [Medicare] B and D would result in increased costs for the remaining participants." link

    You may want to note that while Obama not only increased the amount of money that was exempt from inheritance tax that amount increases each year using the current COLA adjustment. OTOH, His Medicare plan would freeze the current income thresholds until a quarter of Part B and Part D beneficiaries are paying the higher income-related premiums.


    He's back! sort of like (none / 0) (#83)
    by KeysDan on Wed May 29, 2013 at 08:33:01 AM EST
    Freddy Krueger.   Jonathan Gruber, the economist who fancies himself, as did the Obama Administration, as an expert not only on  health care economics, but also, health care, is the guy who put the "affordable" into the affordable health care act.  To do so, he claimed there was money there in most families to pay for the costs of health care.   And, of course, the trouble with health care is that there is too much care.

    The trouble with health care is (5.00 / 2) (#84)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 29, 2013 at 08:53:39 AM EST
    that the insurance companies now have to pay for at least some of the cost of actual care.

    Never fear, the government is here to fix that. It is now being structured so that the insurance company collects the mandated premium and but the insured must pay out of pocket if they want any actual health care.


    It's so f*ckin' true... (none / 0) (#88)
    by kdog on Wed May 29, 2013 at 10:08:32 AM EST
    one of the options being discussed here is a new plan with a 25 hundo deductible...what planet are these people on to think working people with medical issues have 25 hundo laying around to go out of pocket every year, plus the 30 bucks a week already being deducted as our employee contribution?  So Mr. Oxford can keep making 5 million a year?  It's insane.

    To keep out current plan our employee contribution might go up to 40-45.  More blood from stones.


    I don't have an employer plan (none / 0) (#91)
    by jbindc on Wed May 29, 2013 at 10:32:40 AM EST
    I have an individual plan (Care First BCBS).  I had a $5000 deductible until the first of the year, when my premium increased by $50/month, to over $300.  So, changed my deductible - it's now $10,000. I'm fairly healthy, and one good thing about Obamacare is that my yearly, um, female exams are covered. I take one prescription, so my plan covers that where it only costs me about $40 every 3 months.

    But I figure I will gamble with the $10,000 deductible, since a hospital stay will cost me more than that.  If something should happen, I will work out some kind of payment plan for the first $10K. (And that $10,000 deductible plan still costs me $230 / month).


    You are fairly healthy now (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 29, 2013 at 11:06:16 AM EST
    You are making an assumption that you might encounter a one time event that will cost you $10,000. A younger friend took the same gamble and now has an illness which requires ongoing treatment. IOW, $10,000 deductible each and every year. Since she does not have the funds to reduce her income by that amount every year, the hospital is having to write off her deductible and everyone is now paying for her gamble through increased hospital costs.

    As long as... (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by kdog on Wed May 29, 2013 at 11:14:12 AM EST
    stiffing the actual healthcare provider is still an option...I guess it could be worse.  How long before we do away with the hypocratic oath and hospitals go full-on C.O.D.?  Or bring back debtors prisons ;)

    When the systems in place are so irresponsible, I can't see how we can hold it against individuals who are "irresponsible", or just plain broke. Hate the game, not the player.


    They Will Just Give You a Deadly... (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by ScottW714 on Wed May 29, 2013 at 11:34:54 AM EST
    ...virus and if you don't pay in a year, no life life saving shot for you.

    For some folks who actually get infected at the hospital, it's already a reality, sans the year to dig up the scratch.


    Well no, you are not stiffing the (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 29, 2013 at 12:03:08 PM EST
    actual healthcare provider. The hospitals just make up the difference by charging everyone else more to cover what others do not pay. That is the reason you pay $3.50 or more for 1 ibuprofen when in the ER or the hospital. They mark up everything for those who pay to make up for those who do not pay.

    It's a stiff chain... (none / 0) (#105)
    by kdog on Wed May 29, 2013 at 12:27:08 PM EST
    uninsured or underinsured person can't pay the bill, so the hospital raises the bills to others, others then can't pay the bills, raise the prices again, to infinity and beyond.

    So is the answer for everybody but the 1% to cancel their insurance and ignore their medical bills?  Let the 1% pay 500 grand for an ibuprofen? Sounds good to me.


    Better yet we could (5.00 / 2) (#107)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 29, 2013 at 12:32:52 PM EST
    join the majority of the civilized world and implement a single payer system where everyone gets affordable health care rather than expensive insurance instead of health care.

    I hear ya... (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by kdog on Wed May 29, 2013 at 12:37:48 PM EST
    but in our broken and thoroughly corrupted political system that appears to be impossible.

    We have control over whether we pay our bills or not, we have no control over the politicians...thinking of some kind of people power civil disobedience solution.  What would happen if we all stopped paying our insurance premiums?  


    And then there's Rick Perry....... (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by NYShooter on Wed May 29, 2013 at 05:09:08 PM EST
    I try, I really do try, to not be a judgmental person about people I don't understand. "Live and let live" is a motto that's been around a long time and I hope it stays with us for a long time to come. But, there come times when people behave in ways that are so irrefutably stupid that words truly don't, can't, suffice.

    If only one person in America was so void of cognitive abilities that he/she became a danger to him/her self, or those around them, that would be one person too many. So, how do you explain Texas? And, I know there are a few Texans who don't fit that bill. (We have a few right here at TL) But, boy, Texas sure seems to have a lifetime's quota already filled.

    They keep electing a sociopathic mutant for Governor who is living proof that there can't possibly be a God.

    Read it and weep:

    " He supported a bill approved in the state legislature on Sunday that will refuse some $7 billion in federal money for Medicaid expansion and thus deny coverage to 1.5 million low-income Texans."  

     "..the Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that the collective incremental cost to states for expanding Medicaid under health care reform is $8 billion, a 0.3 percent increase through 2022. In exchange, federal spending on Medicaid will increase by $800 billion, or 21 percent.
    So, the State's increase their share of the Medicaid expansion by three tenths of 1 percent, and the federal Government increases their input by 23%.

    The Honorable Rick Perry:(who they keep re-electing)

    "Texas will not be held hostage by the Obama administration's attempt to force us into this fool's errand of adding more than a million Texans to a broken system," said Mr. Perry.


    He's not the only GOP Governor (none / 0) (#143)
    by CoralGables on Wed May 29, 2013 at 05:22:01 PM EST
    brain dead on this issue. Some GOP Governors have conceded though, admitting it's a good thing which has the lower GOP lifeforms up in arms.

    I believe the GOP Governors that have signed on are New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, North Dakota, Tennessee, and Florida


    There are a few more (none / 0) (#144)
    by CoralGables on Wed May 29, 2013 at 05:25:51 PM EST
    There are 19 doing nothing so far, so at least 11 GOP Governors are leaning towards getting in or using an alternative model in hopes of getting federal funds with approval. (I think)

    Arizona governor wants in (none / 0) (#145)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 29, 2013 at 05:48:48 PM EST
    Republican state legislators say no. Brewer decides to play hard ball.

    Jan Brewer Vetoes Bills After Vowing Not To Sign Legislation Until State Passes Medicaid Expansion

    Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) vetoed five bills Thursday, the first to reach her desk since she vowed to veto all legislation until the state Legislature addresses Medicaid expansion and passes a state budget.
    "I warned that I would not sign additional measures into law until we see resolution of the two most pressing issues facing us: adoption of a fiscal 2014 state budget and plan for Medicaid," Brewer wrote in letters to state lawmakers explaining her actions, according to azcentral.com. "It is disappointing I must demonstrate the moratorium was not an idle threat."

    Tough Politics, Easy Math. (none / 0) (#146)
    by Angel on Wed May 29, 2013 at 06:04:02 PM EST
    Kinda weird, (5.00 / 1) (#147)
    by NYShooter on Wed May 29, 2013 at 08:41:49 PM EST
    after all that I know about Jan Brewer, she does this one "right" thing and I go all weak kneed.

    Maybe there's hope for this country yet.


    They Would be Charging That... (none / 0) (#112)
    by ScottW714 on Wed May 29, 2013 at 12:45:25 PM EST
    ...if everyone could pay.  SI have an extremely hard time believing they are a charitable organization and that doesn't rape every customer that comes through the door in the name of profits.

    When I had knee surgery a long time ago, I could not believe how fricken petty the bill was.  Here is a group of people performing something pretty critical to my well being and they want me believe they are counting sponges and gauze.

    I know they don't, if they did, they wouldn't get left in people to fricken often.  But even if they did, what a complete waster of time, professionals making good money counting items that cost me, the consumer, a quarter.  But jack up the prices to 100 times their actual costs, and people will believe you count them and that it's more efficient than just having a flat rate.

    Imagine going to a mechanic and they include on an invoice, every rag, every drop of oil(@ $2.50), every nickel and dime item that goes into a repair.  They price it and if they run into an issue, adjust and move along.  Better yet, imagine going to a mechanic and them not telling you how much it will cost, then they make you sign a form that says you will pay, even if they farm out some of the work to other companies.  Which I would imagine breaks just about every customer protection law there is.

    There is a reason health care is like no other industry, and it ain't handing out free health care to those who can't pay.  The suggestion is that if they only took insured folks that ibuprofen would cost a nickel, which is still a ridiculous markup.  No fricken way.


    Oh, trust me I know (none / 0) (#106)
    by jbindc on Wed May 29, 2013 at 12:31:33 PM EST
    You are making an assumption that you might encounter a one time event that will cost you $10,000.

    It's one of several things that keep me up at night.


    This is interesting... (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by kdog on Wed May 29, 2013 at 11:38:33 AM EST
    maybe instead of a 10 large deductible plan, you'd be better off finding a general practitioner like this doc in Maine, who no longer accepts insurance of any kind.  Cash only, and was able to cut his prices in half by cutting out the insurance company bullsh*t.

    Then just fly me to Mexico annually and I'll pick up all your scripts for pennies on the dollar;)


    We're all getting robbed blind... (none / 0) (#93)
    by kdog on Wed May 29, 2013 at 10:35:55 AM EST
    gotta be a better way...but that better way will surely involve the insurance company ceo's getting by on six figures instead of seven...so I guess we can forget about it.

    "..six figures instead of seven..." (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by NYShooter on Wed May 29, 2013 at 12:37:08 PM EST
    You're waaaay behind the times, kdog.

    Try 8 figures, some even NINE. Health Care CEO'S are the highest paid executives in all business.



    Ouch... (none / 0) (#110)
    by kdog on Wed May 29, 2013 at 12:43:00 PM EST
    that stings.

    But I'm a reasonable man, if they'll take 6 figures I'll throw in "Living the good life on peanuts" lessons gratis.


    Trying to Figure out.... (none / 0) (#114)
    by ScottW714 on Wed May 29, 2013 at 01:00:16 PM EST
    ...this means: "his fellow physicians would describe as radical".

    Is it radical to not except insurance or to post your prices online ?  1 in 6 people have no insurance, so plenty of doctors taking uninsured people.

    So it only leaves the visible prices.  That's radical I guess in the medical profession, but when compared to every other industry in the world, not listing prices is the radical part.  

    There is no other place I use in which I am only informed of the prices after the fact.  Which as mentioned above, seems to violate a lot of consumer protection laws IMO, especially since they make you sign a statement that you will pay.


    My experence (none / 0) (#153)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 30, 2013 at 07:07:46 AM EST
    was that the hospitals tell you how much you are going to pay them based on how much you owe. If you owe them 10K, they are going to demand something like $500 a month in payment or more whether you can afford it or not. My bill had to go to collections to work out a payment plan. I had no idea about all this and thought what you are thinking until i actually had to go into the hospital TWICE.

    Too funny. (And predictably icky) (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by shoephone on Tue May 28, 2013 at 10:18:44 PM EST
    ... Jack Nicholson's curmudgeonly best-selling author in As Good As It Gets, in which he responds to someone asking how he's managed to successfully articulate a woman's perspective: "I think of a man -- and then I take away reason and accountability."

    I remember thinking "That's really not very funny," right before I laughed out loud.


    Here's one from the (5.00 / 2) (#111)
    by Zorba on Wed May 29, 2013 at 12:43:25 PM EST
    "Well, gee, what could possibly go wrong?" file.

    Couple plans a dolphin assisted birth.

    I wonder if they realize that dolphins are carnivorous?

    {{Shaking head, while rolling eyes}}

    I don't know... (none / 0) (#113)
    by kdog on Wed May 29, 2013 at 12:51:50 PM EST
    maybe they're uninsured and can't afford an obstetrician...dolphins ain't the only carnivores to worry about, and they work for fish;)

    If I Had to Guess... (none / 0) (#115)
    by ScottW714 on Wed May 29, 2013 at 01:06:17 PM EST
    ...The Sirius Institute isn't doing it for anywhere near free.  Dumb a$$ honkeys and their new age BS, IMO.  Which is never, ever cheap.

    I know insurance ain't covering it.


    I agree.. (none / 0) (#118)
    by kdog on Wed May 29, 2013 at 01:16:12 PM EST
    just kidding, but to each their own.

    That "Business Insider" source is really down on dolphins, gang rape?  really?


    So, what does the dolphin actually do? (none / 0) (#148)
    by NYShooter on Wed May 29, 2013 at 08:49:19 PM EST
    I got this picture in my head where they reach up, tie this little velvet rope around the baby's ankle, other end to dolphins tail, and all yell, "Swimmm, Orky!"

    And the baby pops out, big ear to ear smile, yelling wheeeee! Do it again"

    (Yes, in case you're wondering, I am ill.)


    What does the dolphin actually do? (none / 0) (#162)
    by Zorba on Thu May 30, 2013 at 01:04:34 PM EST
    Ummmm......maybe eat the baby?

    are very sexual. And lethal. If this couple is planning to have their child in the water with the dolphin, well, I don't really know what to say.

    See, (none / 0) (#116)
    by jbindc on Wed May 29, 2013 at 01:06:19 PM EST
    This is why I think who gets to be a parent should be regulated - and there should be tests beforehand.

    LOL! (none / 0) (#124)
    by Zorba on Wed May 29, 2013 at 01:57:29 PM EST
    I have often thought the same, jb.   ;-)

    See, (none / 0) (#117)
    by jbindc on Wed May 29, 2013 at 01:06:19 PM EST
    This is why I think who gets to be a parent should be regulated - and there should be tests beforehand.

    Well that would definitely help (none / 0) (#138)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 29, 2013 at 03:07:17 PM EST
    reduce over population.

    Of course, here in the good old U.S.A. with such a high rate of unplanned pregnancies, I'm not sure how you would implement the policy.


    Oh my god... (none / 0) (#156)
    by kdog on Thu May 30, 2013 at 09:55:56 AM EST
    I hope you're not serious pal...of course some people have no business being parents, but any attempt to forbid or regulate procreation is a level of tyranny that shouldn't even be complicated.

    Just look at China and the one child policy...or the sordid history of sterlization without consent or by force...truly evil sh*t.

    The only thing worse than really bad parents is the authorities deciding who can and can't be parents.


    I was kidding, (none / 0) (#157)
    by jbindc on Thu May 30, 2013 at 10:02:12 AM EST
    sort of.

    I just want to be the decider.  :)


    Phew... (none / 0) (#158)
    by kdog on Thu May 30, 2013 at 10:23:42 AM EST
    Just checking ;)...some people go off the deep end with ideas for "solutions" to awful parenting and/or over-population.  

    I wouldn't want to limit parenting (none / 0) (#159)
    by CoralGables on Thu May 30, 2013 at 11:49:37 AM EST
    or number of children, but would have no problem with limiting tax deductions to 2 children.

    That's cool... (none / 0) (#160)
    by kdog on Thu May 30, 2013 at 11:57:09 AM EST
    I'd go so far as to abolish tax deductions for kids...not encouraging an activity is a different animal than banning/regulating an activity.

    Oh heavans to betsy (none / 0) (#166)
    by jondee on Thu Jun 06, 2013 at 02:05:57 PM EST
    don't limit parenthood: that what the Child Protective Services and the correctional and mental health system are for..

    Parenthood is the first activity that should be limited. What's parenthood? some inherently sacremental phenomenon; an expression of mankind's "dominion", like the freedom to despoil lakes and rivers?

    Tyranny, schmyranny..


    Sorry, but the theoretical-abstract (none / 0) (#167)
    by jondee on Thu Jun 06, 2013 at 02:10:12 PM EST
    evil of regulation doesn't trump generations of actual human suffering on the ground..

    Summer Concert Series... (none / 0) (#3)
    by kdog on Tue May 28, 2013 at 10:15:37 AM EST
    On a ticket-buying binge party people, going broke never felt so good!

    Trombone Shorty & Orleans Ave. 7/22 in Central Park...lock it up!

    Bob Dylan, Wilco, My Morning Jacket, & Ryan Bingham 7/26 on the Hoboken Pier...lock it up!

    Days 3 & 4 of the Gathering of the Vibes Festival in CT with The Funky Meters, The Roots, Phil Lesh & Friends, Fishbone, The Black Crowes and many more...lock it up!

    Series kicks off in earnest tomorrow night with the legendary guitar stylings of Mr. Dave Davies...then next week 4 full days of Mountain Jam!!!  

    Need another paycheck or 3 to do more damage...got my eyes on Leon Russel 7/19 at the intimate Stephen's Talkhouse amongst others. It's the most wonderful time of the year;)

    Trombone Shorty is here this summer (none / 0) (#6)
    by Dadler on Tue May 28, 2013 at 10:43:11 AM EST
    Thinking of taking Eli, tho he's playing Outdoor Lands, and I don't know if Eli is ready for a huge festival yet. Tell me how Dylan sounds, I haven't seen him in years, since back when I was a fanatic and have every lyric memorized. I remember seeing him in San Diego, and the Pogues opened for him, which was an odd pairing. It was the first tour when Pogues frontman Shane McGowan became too alcoholic to travel anymore. No one was happy to see tin whistler Spider Stacy singing lead. But Dylan that night, awesome. Had G.E. Smith and Charlie Sexton playing with him. Small venue, as well.

    Have a great summer of son, my man.


    I say take him... (none / 0) (#11)
    by kdog on Tue May 28, 2013 at 11:04:18 AM EST
    on a walk on the wild side D;)  My sister & her husband are bringing my nieces ages 9, 11, & 13 along to Mountain Jam next week, after we saw so many kids having a ball last year while their parents and/or grandparents rocked out.  

    It takes a village, and you'd be hard-pressed to find a friendlier temporary village than Mountain Jam.  Can't speak to the Outdoor Lands scene, but with T-Shorty on the bill I'd imagine it's gotta be chill.  But I guess it's easier on a parent's nerves with multiple kids to keep an eye on each other.


    Outside Lands looks like this (none / 0) (#19)
    by Dadler on Tue May 28, 2013 at 11:21:39 AM EST
    Lots of mischief... (none / 0) (#21)
    by kdog on Tue May 28, 2013 at 11:27:49 AM EST
    for the lad to get into...do it! He'll have the time of his young life;)

    You're talking me into it (none / 0) (#23)
    by Dadler on Tue May 28, 2013 at 11:57:20 AM EST
    Thank you. Seriously.  

    And it's a good day when your team has a game 7 in the Stanley Cup playoffs. Nothing like an NHL game 7. Nothing. Go Kings!


    And what do you think of the comics? (none / 0) (#24)
    by Dadler on Tue May 28, 2013 at 11:59:21 AM EST
    They making you laugh or just average?

    Hit and miss... (none / 0) (#30)
    by kdog on Tue May 28, 2013 at 12:39:18 PM EST
    with more hits than misses...some I'm not getting, to be frank.



    lemme know which ones don't register (none / 0) (#35)
    by Dadler on Tue May 28, 2013 at 01:15:36 PM EST
    whenever you think about it. seriously, i'm always curious to see how my stuff goes over with great minds. Yours being one of them, of course. ;-)

    Today's #11... (none / 0) (#39)
    by kdog on Tue May 28, 2013 at 01:34:22 PM EST
    has me confused actually...I'm missing something.

    Playing off the reality that... (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by Dadler on Tue May 28, 2013 at 02:49:58 PM EST
    ...private companies have patents on your genetic material. I was also hoping you'd realize she was drunk saying the stuff she was, and how weird it would be if booze companies hired geneticists to patent the exact gene that Jim Beem hits.

    Love when the explanation is longer than the actual thing. Uh...


    I see... (none / 0) (#52)
    by kdog on Tue May 28, 2013 at 03:13:02 PM EST
    said the blind man!

    I wouldn't guess you... (none / 0) (#32)
    by kdog on Tue May 28, 2013 at 12:45:02 PM EST
    a helicopter dad...and besides, don't all kids have tracking devices now?

    Then again, you're talking to a guy whose father used to intentionally "abandon" me in downtown Flushing or the track just to test how I'd react to being lost & alone in the pre-tracking device days.  I'm here, so I guess I passed the tests;)


    trust me, if you actually had a kid (none / 0) (#34)
    by Dadler on Tue May 28, 2013 at 01:14:21 PM EST
    you'd do exactly the opposite of your old man. My dad did the same as yours, only I was left to wander downtown L.A.'s skidrow while he was filming an indie movie about winos, with him playing a drunk named Moses. If my mom knew my dad had picked me up for a weekend, all so I could wander alone at 12 into the original skidrow Hard Rock Cafe (think the most intensely Bukowski wino bar, with everything made of dirty concrete -- floor, ceiling, giant horseshoe shaped bar...

    But I'm here, too, so...


    This is Tom Waits (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by Dadler on Tue May 28, 2013 at 01:19:12 PM EST
    DVD is on Amazon... (none / 0) (#40)
    by kdog on Tue May 28, 2013 at 01:42:28 PM EST
    I hate Amazon but this may call for an exception!

    It ain't a great movie... (none / 0) (#41)
    by Dadler on Tue May 28, 2013 at 01:45:38 PM EST
    ...but it's sweet and truthful, and my old man has one great scene with Donald Moffet in a Rescue Mission, where pops goes into his wino best. And the finale, with all the drunks singing "Waltzing Matilda" was the day I was there wandering around skidrow. It was the passion project for Ralph Waite, dad from The Waltons tv series.

    I like to think (none / 0) (#38)
    by kdog on Tue May 28, 2013 at 01:32:46 PM EST
    I wouldn't, but I'm sure you're right...I'd be as bad as my sister with the sheltering, in fact I'm shocked she's is actually going through with bringing the kids to Mountain Jam.  She just started letting them walk three blocks to the store by themselves in a group...eldest is 13!  

    But I'm fairly convinced such over-protection is for the parents benefit, and the childs detriment...one of those easier said than done things I guess.


    No doubt, most of the time (none / 0) (#42)
    by Dadler on Tue May 28, 2013 at 01:51:47 PM EST
    I have no problem letting him disappear for the day on his bike with his buddies, and they go on twenty-plus mile rides most of the time. That festival is in Golden Gate Park, tho, in The City, and what can I say? I'm a Jewish mother trapped in the body of an atheist father. But we'll probably take him, he loves Shorty and I know he'd have a great time.

    This Weekend in Houston (none / 0) (#8)
    by ScottW714 on Tue May 28, 2013 at 10:47:11 AM EST

    2 day festival that includes Iggy Pop, whom I have never seen and Gogol Bordello which is easily the best live band ever.

    Wish the weather would down a bit, we totally missed spring this year.  It will be in the 90's this weekend.


    Dude...eclectically sick lineup! (none / 0) (#18)
    by kdog on Tue May 28, 2013 at 11:18:26 AM EST
    Alabama Shakes! Social Distortion!

    And not just Iggy...Iggy & The F*ckin' Stooges!  That's a monster right there.


    Trombone Shorty & Orleans Ave. (none / 0) (#12)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 28, 2013 at 11:07:26 AM EST
    played here in St. Louis Friday night as part of our annual free blues fest. Some great blues performers/bands could be heard from Friday through Sunday.

    Anyone in the neighborhood of St. Louis any Memorial Day weekend should come and check it out.


    Some Mavis Staples action too... (none / 0) (#20)
    by kdog on Tue May 28, 2013 at 11:23:45 AM EST
    we're rocking from coast to coast now...God Bless America!

    Hermitude implodes! (none / 0) (#31)
    by oculus on Tue May 28, 2013 at 12:42:33 PM EST
    Where do you think... (none / 0) (#33)
    by kdog on Tue May 28, 2013 at 12:52:33 PM EST
    all this cash came from, winter/spring semi-hermitude.  I'm off the wagon baby!

    But whatever happened to that ouzo special lady? (none / 0) (#49)
    by oculus on Tue May 28, 2013 at 03:05:27 PM EST
    Scratch "ouzo"!!!!! (none / 0) (#50)
    by oculus on Tue May 28, 2013 at 03:06:24 PM EST
    Still special;) (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by kdog on Tue May 28, 2013 at 03:41:00 PM EST
    She's supposed to come up to visit in July, but getting her to nail down days is like pulling teeth!  Medical conference this week, patient due that week...

    I bought ducats for her for T-Shorty, Dylan and the Vibes cuz tentatively it's gonna be the 18th-31st...Goddess Venus willing.


    NonCW news (none / 0) (#4)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Tue May 28, 2013 at 10:21:16 AM EST
    And honest accounting of financial matters.. (none / 0) (#9)
    by Dadler on Tue May 28, 2013 at 10:49:02 AM EST
    ...isn't even possible in this corrupt nation. Are you really unaware of this?  The Fed is essentially a secret society. And that's what corporate kleptocracy's do, they lie, cheat and steal and CONCEAL. That is why the vast majority of this nation's "money" is wrapped up in degenerate bets and con games that aren't taxed or even regulated.

    Spare me the NYT's pitiful excuse for analysis.

    Average wages have been plummeting for decades, while corporate profits have skyrocketd. Corporations haven't come CLOSE to paying what could humanely be considered a "fair share."


    Their Analysis Amounts... (none / 0) (#16)
    by ScottW714 on Tue May 28, 2013 at 11:13:46 AM EST
    ...to interpreting the financials produced by the companies.  The equivalent of asking a murders mom if he did it, a bit biased.

    ok (none / 0) (#28)
    by bocajeff on Tue May 28, 2013 at 12:14:50 PM EST
    in percentage terms what would the "fair share" be? 30%? 80? 27.25%?

    I need a number, not a bumper sticker.


    Come On... (none / 0) (#14)
    by ScottW714 on Tue May 28, 2013 at 11:09:12 AM EST
    The industry "lumps together U.S. and foreign taxes. It includes taxes that are deferred and thus not paid yet. U.S. companies must pay taxes on profits earned abroad, but they can defer these taxes until they bring the cash into the country."  

    Clearly you believe the effective tax rate and dollars paid to the US Government are one in the same, they are not.  But I am sure you already knew this.


    Sure (none / 0) (#17)
    by Yman on Tue May 28, 2013 at 11:16:35 AM EST
    I don't include or exclude (none / 0) (#25)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Tue May 28, 2013 at 12:04:45 PM EST

    The article is in the New York Times.  If it is inaccurate or misleading that is an issue for that publication.  Wow! A multinational paying taxes in other countries it operates in, what a scandal.



    What ? (none / 0) (#85)
    by ScottW714 on Wed May 29, 2013 at 09:00:52 AM EST
    Your words, not the times:
    Contrary to conventional wisdom it seems the big oil companies not only pay a big chunk of taxes, they do so at higher than average effective rates.

    You have been presented with evidence that refutes your nonsensical claim and you blame it on the source's material you deliberately twisted to fit what you believe, even though it's clearly inaccurate.

    Big Oil is not paying the taxes they owe, period.


    Actually, you went further ... (none / 0) (#87)
    by Yman on Wed May 29, 2013 at 09:55:55 AM EST
    ... than that:

    Contrary to conventional wisdom it seems the big oil companies not only pay a big chunk of taxes, they do so at higher than average effective rates. big chunk of taxes.

    Is that what it "seems like" when you simply repeat the numbers the oil companies tell you?



    Rick Perry is at it again. (none / 0) (#5)
    by Angel on Tue May 28, 2013 at 10:31:07 AM EST
    Would (none / 0) (#10)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue May 28, 2013 at 11:02:33 AM EST
    you expect anything different from the most corrupt state in the nation?

    I don't know that we're the most corrupt, but (none / 0) (#13)
    by Angel on Tue May 28, 2013 at 11:08:26 AM EST
    we're definitely close.  I love my state but I'm really, really tired of all the republican thuggery and hate.  

    I Second That... (none / 0) (#15)
    by ScottW714 on Tue May 28, 2013 at 11:10:54 AM EST
    ...a small minority of corrupt conservatives really control the state and it sucks.

    Hang in there, (none / 0) (#149)
    by NYShooter on Wed May 29, 2013 at 08:52:16 PM EST
    I keep reading that the demographics show Texas going "Blue" before too long.

    Mr. Lemon (none / 0) (#7)
    by jbindc on Tue May 28, 2013 at 10:46:21 AM EST
    Of the watershed Lemon v. Kurtzman Supreme Court case, which gave us the famous constitutional principle regarding the "separation of church and state" AKA, the "Lemon Test", has died.  


    Raed that too quickly (none / 0) (#22)
    by Yman on Tue May 28, 2013 at 11:36:22 AM EST
    Thought you meant the metaphorical "Mr. Lemon" was dead and the SC overturned the Lemon Test.



    My sentence was awkward (none / 0) (#26)
    by jbindc on Tue May 28, 2013 at 12:07:46 PM EST
    I kept staring at the screen and having a spaced out moment about how to write it, but it still didn't work out.

    Hope you eventually got the drift!


    No, it made sense (none / 0) (#27)
    by Yman on Tue May 28, 2013 at 12:14:23 PM EST
    I just had a "Holy $h1t!" moment that lasted a few seconds - was trying to figure out whether this SC just tossed the whole doctrine or came up with some new test!  :)

    I love (none / 0) (#29)
    by jbindc on Tue May 28, 2013 at 12:36:27 PM EST
    My sweet Claire (none / 0) (#37)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 28, 2013 at 01:26:06 PM EST
    sides with Republicans once again to try and take away benefits from the poor.

    The Senate rejected a proposal to end a federal cellphone subsidy in a mostly party line 46-to-53 vote.

    The proposal, offered by Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), would have been an amendment to the budget resolution. The proposal was non-binding, but was an important test of support for the cellphone subsidy, which is managed by the Federal Communications Commission.

    Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) joined the Republicans in supporting the amendment in the early Saturday morning vote.
    "The Lifeline program has helped some of our most vulnerable citizens connect to emergency services, doctors and family in times of crisis," he said. "It has been a literal lifeline for these Americans -- and in today's era, with a third of Americans having cut the cord to wireline phone service, it's appropriate that Lifeline supports wireless service." http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/290121-senate-rejects-bid-to-end-cellphone-subsi dy#ixzz2Uc427EIq

    These phones are also the only means for the poor to pursue employment or for the homeless to find emergency shelter.

    Senators -- some of the richest people in America (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by shoephone on Tue May 28, 2013 at 02:42:51 PM EST
    Aren't all of them millionaires, with the possible exception of Bernie Sanders? These incompetents not only make between $174,000-$210,000 per year, they get one of the biggest federal subsidies there is: the majority of their health care costs are covered by the U.S. taxpayers. And then there are their long term care plans, their "for life" pensions at roughly 80% of their former congressional pay (while enjoying post-congressional $million+ salaries as lobbyists), and their travel, which is also subsidized by taxpayers, and often skates a very thin line between personal and government trips...the list goes on and on. So, it's no wonder these leeches have no understanding of life's basics -- like telephone access for a homeless person -- because they have had everything done for them, with all attendant costs covered, for years.

    They are all a lot closer to Mitt Romney's lifestyle than to yours or mine.  


    The 2013 list (none / 0) (#53)
    by jbindc on Tue May 28, 2013 at 03:17:13 PM EST
    Is about to come out (I think), but the richest members of Congress from 2012 is here.

    The top ten Senators were (again, for 2012)

    1.  John Kerry (D-MA)
    2.  Mark Warner (D-VA)
    3.  Jay Rockefeller (D-WV)
    4.  Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)
    5.  Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
    6.  Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
    7. Bob Corker (R-TN)
    8. James Risch (R-ID)
    9. Claire McCaskill (D-MO)
    10. Ron Wyden (D-OR), and
    11. Ron Johnson (R-WI).

    (FYI...the richest person in 2012 was Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), who I believe heads the list again this year).

    Yes, well (none / 0) (#56)
    by Zorba on Tue May 28, 2013 at 03:45:42 PM EST
    the "sweet Claire" vote is not exactly surprising.  Disappointing, but not surprising.  So many times, she has shown herself to be a "Democrat in Name Only."  So sorry, Mo Blue.  :-(

    Meanwhile, it's looking ... (none / 0) (#43)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue May 28, 2013 at 02:21:06 PM EST
    ... increasingly possible that rather than offer an all-encompassing and definitive judicial ruling in a few weeks on the subject of marriage equality, Chief Justice Roberts and The Supremes may punt Perry v. Brown (Schwarzenegger) on a technicality, by determining that the private parties defending Prop. 8 lacked sufficient legal standing to do so.

    Effectively, this could invalidate the 9th Circuit Court's narrowing interpretation of the law upholding Judge Vaughn Walker's original (and more expansive)?) ruling intact, and leave Walker's ruling as the prevailing legal guideline in California.


    You mean (none / 0) (#46)
    by jbindc on Tue May 28, 2013 at 02:43:13 PM EST
    Hollingsworth v. Perry, which is now the correct name of the case.

    And this isn't new (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by jbindc on Tue May 28, 2013 at 02:52:54 PM EST
    Many legal commenters at the time predicted that there was a very good chance the Court would punt on this case.

    Thank you for the correction. (none / 0) (#58)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue May 28, 2013 at 04:17:23 PM EST
    And I agree with you about the Supremes punting. Sadly, it seems as though Roberts & Co. are only willing to be bold and sweeping when it comes to overturning a century's worth of campaign finance law on behalf of corporate interests. It will be interesting to compare this ruling with their upcoming expected blow against the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

    FWIW (none / 0) (#75)
    by NYShooter on Tue May 28, 2013 at 10:36:53 PM EST
    Glen Greenwald, who many hold up as some kind of Progressive hero (I said good-by to Glen when he took up the baton for the "Hillary Must Go" brigade in the Primaries) was a big supporter of the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision.



    FWIW (none / 0) (#103)
    by Dadler on Wed May 29, 2013 at 11:54:59 AM EST
    Here's Greenwald's actual column. (link) It's a tad more conflicted than the commentary about it would indicate, not that I agree with everything Greenwald says at all, because I don't. And I don't think it's all that odd that a contrarian like Greenwald would confound here and there.

    So it goes.


    Sad, it is (none / 0) (#69)
    by MKS on Tue May 28, 2013 at 08:46:22 PM EST
    Roberts and Kennedy know that they do not want to go down in history as authors of the modern day version of Plessy v. Ferguson.....

    They do not want to be mocked by history, and they know marriage equality is the future.

    But it appears they can't quite bring themselves to do the right thing, so they punt.  And they will punt on DOMA too on a similar dodge.

    It is sad because they could be the authors of the modern day equivalent of Brown v. Board and secure their place in history.



    The Boston Strong Benefit Concert (none / 0) (#57)
    by CoralGables on Tue May 28, 2013 at 03:59:35 PM EST
    is at the TD Garden tonight with James Taylor, Aerosmith, The J. Geils Band, Boston, New Kids on the Block, Extreme, Dropkick Murphys, Dane Cook, Steven Wright, Jimmy Buffett, Carole King, and Jason Aldean.

    Correction (none / 0) (#59)
    by CoralGables on Tue May 28, 2013 at 04:19:50 PM EST
    I've lost track of my days. It's Thursday night.

    Thursday night seems (none / 0) (#73)
    by shoephone on Tue May 28, 2013 at 10:08:41 PM EST
    "So Faaarrr Away..."

    Sorry, couldn't resist,


    "So far away..." Carole King was awarded (none / 0) (#77)
    by caseyOR on Tue May 28, 2013 at 11:43:28 PM EST
    the Library of Congress Gershwin Prize for Popular Song this year. PBS aired the White House concert for that award tonight.

    It was great to see Carole and hear so many of her amazing songs. Artists have been recording songs written all or in part by Carole King for the past 50 some years. One thousand artists, according to what was said tonight, have recorded songs written by Carole King.

    She started at the famed Brill Building writing songs with, among others, her husband at the time Gerry Goffin. The King/Goffin team wrote one of the greatest songs ever, "Up On the Roof" which was recorded by The Drifters.

    A special treat tonight was seeing Gloria Estefan and Trisha Yearwood and Emile Sande singing the Shirelles hit "Will You Love Me Tomorrow"  '60s girl group style complete with little dance steps.

    Carole's album "Tapestry" is still in my regular album rotation. There isn't a song on that album I do not like. "It's Too Late" is a fave, but I think my all time favorite Carole King song just might be "(you make me feel like) A Natural Woman."

    Here is Aretha Franklin singing that very song.

    And here is Carole singing "So Far Away."


    Did you know they wrote the song (none / 0) (#78)
    by shoephone on Wed May 29, 2013 at 12:40:02 AM EST
    "Locomotion" about their then 2-year-old daughter Louise? And they had their housekeeper -- Little Eva! -- record it, and she made a hit out of it. The rest, as they say, is history.

    I did not know that. (none / 0) (#79)
    by caseyOR on Wed May 29, 2013 at 02:06:10 AM EST
    I did know that Little Eva recorded the song, and I knew it was written by Goffin/King. I did not know that part about their daughter.

    Billy Joel sang "Locomotion" at the White House event.


    Tapestry is still one of my all time (none / 0) (#80)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 29, 2013 at 06:55:00 AM EST
    favorite albums and gets played on a regular basis.

    A Natural Woman is also my favorite and I particularly like Way Over Yonder.

    My all time favorite line in a song comes from Smackwater Jack.

    You can't talk to a man
    When he don't want to understand.

    Yeah well that does happen (none / 0) (#123)
    by brodie on Wed May 29, 2013 at 01:54:33 PM EST
    from time to time, a man not wanting to understand I mean, and not be able to talk to him at that particular moment.

    But hey, it was a man after all who wrote the lyrics to Natural Woman.  One Gerald Goffin.

    Whodathunkit ...

    Carole King:  I still have fond memories of seeing her in concert the year after Tapestry, at the Forum L.A., Concert for George McGovern, 1972.  Of the three performers that night -- King, James Taylor and Barbra Streisand, I thought CK was the standout.


    I think CK and Laura Nyro (none / 0) (#125)
    by jondee on Wed May 29, 2013 at 02:02:04 PM EST
    were two creative sisters from different parents..

    I have a bigger soft spot for Laura, but most of that has to do with her sad, untimely passing, and the fact that she's amazingly, rarely mentioned when the great song writers are discussed.  


    I'm with you on that (none / 0) (#133)
    by shoephone on Wed May 29, 2013 at 02:30:50 PM EST
    but I also just believe that Laura Nyro was the most creative composer, pianist and songwriter of that generation, and that soulful voice of hers...To me, she is in a class by herself.

    One of the saddest things about her passing is that she died at age 49 from ovarian cancer, just like her mom -- same age, same disease. When I remember that she wrote the song "And When I Die" when she was only 18 yrs old, it really gives me pause. And  "New York Tendaberry" always brings tears to my eyes. Only a few singers have the ability to reach out and grab me with a song that way.


    And she had a beautiful smile.. (none / 0) (#134)
    by jondee on Wed May 29, 2013 at 02:45:04 PM EST
    I see where her producer asked her "what does surry down to the stone soul picnic mean?" and she said "I just like the way it sounds".  Me too.

    Redyellow gold, sassafras and moonshine..She was one of kind.


    Aww...and "Stoned Soul Picnic" (none / 0) (#137)
    by shoephone on Wed May 29, 2013 at 02:54:46 PM EST
    is my all time favorite song of hers.

    Laura Nyro was the first (none / 0) (#136)
    by shoephone on Wed May 29, 2013 at 02:52:00 PM EST
    singer/songwriter that David Geffen represented as a manager back in...1968? He really helped to get her music out into the world, and she helped make him into a millionaire uber manager. A few years later, after he had become the David Geffen who had Joni, the Eagles, Jackson Browne and others on his roster, she wanted to go in a different direction with her music and life. Didn't want to become part of the Asylum Records group, and so she dropped him. I'm not sure they ever spoke again. (He says to this day he never got over it.)

    Here's one of my favorites from Carole King. (none / 0) (#126)
    by Angel on Wed May 29, 2013 at 02:06:11 PM EST
    Tapestry will forever and always be (none / 0) (#128)
    by Anne on Wed May 29, 2013 at 02:20:18 PM EST
    my freshman year in college...when I hear a song from that album, I am transported right back there.

    Remembering "18" as I look at "60" on the horizon in August is more fun than it used to be, lol...


    you're so lucky, Anne. (none / 0) (#152)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed May 29, 2013 at 10:35:38 PM EST
    When I was a freshman in college, disco was king -- Rod Stewart's "Do You Think I'm Sexy?" definitely marked the end of his time as an artist to be taken seriously -- and the big album everyone was talking about was Michael Jackson's Off the Wall.

    But there were still some real gems from that period, such as Rickie Lee Jones' Chuck E.'s in Love, Supertramp's Breakfast in America, The Cars' self-titled The Cars and Pink Floyd's The Wall.



    Pretty sick hatred (none / 0) (#61)
    by Slayersrezo on Tue May 28, 2013 at 05:18:34 PM EST
    Warning: abandon all faith in humanity, ye who enter here -

    Freaking out over the boyscouts

    The ironic thing is these idiots have easily pushed aside Biblical doctrine when it suited them (divorce isn't supposed to easy Biblically)and they have no guts to risk losing congregants when it comes to things like "living in sin", but they sure know how to beat up on little boys and young men who just happen to be gay.

    These are the worse kind of Christians. Worse even then the "cafeteria Catholics" because at least CC's don't tend to HATE. These idiots pick and choose who to hate.

    Without reading the link... (none / 0) (#63)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue May 28, 2013 at 05:38:48 PM EST
    what's interesting to me is that I was a Cub Scout and Boy Scout as a youth, and both of my kids are in scouts as well, and I've been the top guy at my local Cub Scout Pack for the past 8 years, and not once, not ever, has anyone in any sort of leadership position in scouts ever even broached the topic to me.

    iow, while this no-gay kids unwritten "rule" may have been in place at the top of the national leadership, it never filtered down to me at the local level.


    What you say (none / 0) (#76)
    by NYShooter on Tue May 28, 2013 at 10:49:10 PM EST
    Is undoubtedly true, but, I'm pretty certain that gay scouts, and their parents, are very aware of their official, if unenforced, position. Time to "do the right thing"  and make it official.

    From Our "New Jack City North" file: (none / 0) (#62)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue May 28, 2013 at 05:35:21 PM EST
    The strange and sordid saga of Mayor Rob Ford, chief executive of Canada's largest city, continues its death spiral toward a very bad end. Long known for his eccentric bad-boy behavior and controversial remarks, and rumored to have had ties with the late Anthony Smith, a 21-year-old alleged drug dealer who was apparently gunned down in a drive-by last March, Ford has allegedly been caught on video smoking crack cocaine in the company of some Somali drug dealers, according to the Toronto Star and the U.S. website Gawker on May 17.

    On Thursday, Ford summarily fired his chief of staff Mark Towhey on Thursday, after Towhey reportedly urged his boss to seek help for his condition. And after an 18-month investigation, The Toronto Globe & Mail brought the hammer down on not only the mayor, but also his brother, City Councilman Doug Ford, in a bombshell report that reveals Doug Ford's past life as a major drug dealer in Toronto.

    And just when you decided that such an ugly story could not possibly get any worse, it does. According to The Globe & Mail, it seems that the aforementioned crack cocaine video was in the possession of the late Anthony Smith, and that Smith may have even been killed over it.

    Further, it now appears that none other than Ford's now-former Chief of staff Mark Towhey went to the Toronto police six days before getting the axe. It should be noted that the straight-laced Towhey, who had heretofore been Ford's staunchest public defender, had previously been assured by the mayor that such a tape did not exist.

    However, Towhey subsequently learned from Mayor Ford's Director of Logistics and Operations, David Price (more on him in a second), that members of the mayor's inner circle were not only aware of the alleged crack video's existence, they had been taking proactive steps to retrieve it -- which, according to Price, may or may not have included the murder of Anthony Smith. Towhey ordered Price to not get any further involved in whatever schemes were being hatched, and then went directly to the Toronto police without informing the mayor.

    Sam Rogers (Kevin Spacey): "You're panicking."
    John Tuld (Jeremy Irons): "If you're the first one out the door, that's not called panicking."
    -- Margin Call (2011)

    Yesterday, both Ford's communication director and his deputy communications director announced their resignations. The mayor then announced that the executive assistant to his brother, City Councilman Doug Ford, would be his new communications director.

    According to the The Globe's bombshell report on the Ford family enterprises, we've also come to learn that David Price, the staffer who told Mark Towhey about the attempts to get the crack cocaine tape, was also a former close associate to City Councilman Doug Ford during the latter's drug-dealing days. And reports are that Ford's new Chief of Staff, Earl Provost, is not at all happy at being suddenly thrust into the saddle -- quite understandable, considering the circumstances and where this story is going -- and may be the next guy out the door.

    Stay tuned for the inevitable train wreck.

    Yes, this has got to be (none / 0) (#64)
    by Zorba on Tue May 28, 2013 at 06:10:56 PM EST
    one of the strangest, murkiest and ugliest mayoral sagas in recent memory.  And in Canada, of all places!  Just goes to show, there are ugly people everywhere.
    And also, I must add:  nobody has been either indicted or found guilty in a court of law yet.
    Yet.    ;-)

    Rob Ford looks like the mayor of a (none / 0) (#66)
    by caseyOR on Tue May 28, 2013 at 06:14:53 PM EST
    Rust Belt city circa 1955. Or maybe a Teamsters Union officer of the same era.

    Just sayin'.


    And (none / 0) (#155)
    by jbindc on Thu May 30, 2013 at 09:27:06 AM EST
    Congress will be missing one of the (none / 0) (#81)
    by MO Blue on Wed May 29, 2013 at 07:02:48 AM EST
    "Looney Tunes" characters after the next election.

    Rep. Bachmann says she won't run for re-election

    WASHINGTON (AP) -- Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, a conservative firebrand and a favorite of tea party Republicans, said Wednesday she will not run for another term in the U.S. House.

    Unfortunately, there are plenty more lined up to take her place.

    I'm guessing she'll take her barking lunatic (5.00 / 2) (#82)
    by Angel on Wed May 29, 2013 at 08:28:58 AM EST
    antics to cable 'news.'  

    I hope with an exclusive contract on a network (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by ruffian on Wed May 29, 2013 at 11:05:37 AM EST
    I never watch! Quarantine her off in the psycho ward.

    Michelle Bachmann is Not Running... (none / 0) (#89)
    by ScottW714 on Wed May 29, 2013 at 10:13:45 AM EST
    ...for re-election.

    Good riddance.

    Star Trek: into Darkness (none / 0) (#94)
    by observed on Wed May 29, 2013 at 10:49:38 AM EST
    worst star trek movie ever? I can't fathom the acclaim the movie has gotten.
    Histrionic, non-stop, nonsensical, plotless junk.

    But lots of cool explosions (none / 0) (#95)
    by jbindc on Wed May 29, 2013 at 10:53:36 AM EST
    I don't get the hype about (none / 0) (#132)
    by observed on Wed May 29, 2013 at 02:25:34 PM EST
    Benedict Cumberbatch's scenery-chewing awfulness.
    He was ghastly as Khan.

    (Gasp!) You gave away a plot spoiler! (none / 0) (#139)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed May 29, 2013 at 04:35:38 PM EST
    C'mon, admit it. You're one of those who think that nobody, but nobody, could top Ricardo Montalban's 1982 portrait of Khan as the suave but aging heavy metal rocker hellbent on revenge and destruction, aren't you?

    For the record, I thought Star Trek Into Darkness was a lot of fun. It's certainly not Oscar material, to be sure, but Benedict Cumberbatch was appropriately over the top in a role that called for some truly professional scenery chewing -- and besides, Al Pacino wasn't available and was too old for the part, anyway. And like someone noted, it had lots of cool explosions and stuff, so the franchise endures.

    Hey, I've always been a Trekkie, so I'm a sucker for this stuff and hardly a neutral third party. Sometimes, you just got to go with the flow.



    This has little relation to Trek. (none / 0) (#165)
    by observed on Fri May 31, 2013 at 02:26:13 AM EST
    The science has never been great, but now it's beyond ridiculous.
    With transporters that can move people across interstellar space, why do they need starships?
    And how does someone fall out of a battle near the Klingon planet and end up near earth?
    THis reminds me of that godawful movie, Serenity, where the space between two planets was pictured as being so crowded with ships that one couldn't get through.
    Hint to filmmakers: Space is larger than the lake in Central Park!

    This is Why I Stopped Going to... (none / 0) (#101)
    by ScottW714 on Wed May 29, 2013 at 11:37:13 AM EST
    ...many movies.  Everyone I spoke with said it kicked A.  Even had one friend show me on his phone how cool the Klingon head rings were.

    I really like the last one, but didn't catch it until it was available at the Redbox.


    Lincoln Chaffee (none / 0) (#119)
    by jbindc on Wed May 29, 2013 at 01:43:05 PM EST
    becoming a Democrat:

    Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee has notified senior Democratic Party officials that he intends to switch his party registration and join the Democratic Party, multiple sources familiar with Chafee's decision told POLITICO.

    Chafee, a former GOP senator elected to the governor's office as an independent in 2010, has struggled with low approval ratings and faces a difficult reelection fight in 2014.

    Chafee "absolutely intends to switch his party registration" ahead of 2014, one national Democrat said.

    Great new Move On petition (none / 0) (#120)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed May 29, 2013 at 01:43:30 PM EST

    Go here to sign.

    Dear Hunger Strikers,

    We understand that indefinite detention is not a picnic and that many of you are probably homesick. But the hunger strike is doing nothing to hurt the Congressional Republicans, who are actually the ones responsible for your imprisonment. Meanwhile, the man who has pledged repeatedly to free you is said to be suffering from deep anguish. Obama has your back, but do you have his? Please call off this ill-advised hunger strike.

    P.S. We're serious and if you continue to push Obama, we will call you terrorists and urge the president to throw the book at you.


    That's gotta be a joke.... (none / 0) (#122)
    by kdog on Wed May 29, 2013 at 01:52:17 PM EST
    please tell me that's a joke.

    The Main Problem I Have... (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by ScottW714 on Wed May 29, 2013 at 02:21:38 PM EST
    ...with the modern day republican party, it's impossible to know if it's satire.

    Here's the background on it: (none / 0) (#135)
    by Anne on Wed May 29, 2013 at 02:45:56 PM EST
    Petition Background

    For several years, President Obama has stated his intention to close the prison at Guantanamo, but the Republicans have thwarted him at every turn. Unfortunately, the hunger strikers at Guantanamo - many of whom may be well-intentioned - do not understand how America's political system works. The hunger strike will do nothing to sway the stubborn Republicans who don't care whether the prisoners live or die. But it is causing President Obama - who frankly probably cares too much -- great anguish and tarnishing his awesome presidency. And if the hunger strikers damage Obama and the Democratic Party, they'll be worse off, as will women and gays.

    It has 36 signatures so far, and this is appended to the list:

    Please take off the name of Trayvon Martin. Also a gross misrepresentation of Dave Eggers, Bill Ayers, Janeane Garafalo

    Make of that what you will, but the whole thing does have a feel of "Leave Barack alooooooone!"  :-)


    There is no background (none / 0) (#140)
    by CoralGables on Wed May 29, 2013 at 05:00:41 PM EST
    other than maybe a hack job. It's already been pulled.

    Annnndddd....yet another (none / 0) (#121)
    by jbindc on Wed May 29, 2013 at 01:46:36 PM EST
    accidental shooting - this time in the parking lot at Arlington National Cemetary on Memorial Day, hours before the president arrived to lay a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier.

    Sharon Walker says the gun fell out of a cemetery visitor's car. Walker says the gun fell under the car and as the man tried to retrieve it, a shot went off and struck one of the passengers from his vehicle in the leg.

    The shooting victim was taken to the hospital.

    Bars (none / 0) (#127)
    by ScottW714 on Wed May 29, 2013 at 02:12:50 PM EST
    Top five metro areas in the US by bars per capita:

    1. La Crosse, Wis.-Minn. - One bar per 1,401 residents
    2. Eau Claire, Wis. - One bar per 1,439 residents
    3. Oshkosh-Neenah, Wis. - One bar per 1,644 residents
    4. Duluth, Minn.-Superior, Wis. - One bar per 1,738 residents
    5. Green Bay, Wis. - One bar per 1,910

    Bottom five metro areas in the US by bars per capita:

    1. Logan, Utah-Idaho - One bar per 63,775 residents
    2. St. George, Utah - One bar per 70,833 residents
    3. Dalton, Ga. - One bar per 71,370 residents
    4. Roanoke, Va. - One bar per 77,215 residents
    5. Lynchburg, Va. - One bar per 84,724 residents

    More bar related states HERE.

    Like sure like to drink in Wisconsin! (none / 0) (#130)
    by jbindc on Wed May 29, 2013 at 02:22:38 PM EST
    No wonder my college buddy ... (none / 0) (#151)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed May 29, 2013 at 10:10:57 PM EST
    ... despised his hometown of Lynchburg, VA.

    Having once spent a couple weeks (none / 0) (#154)
    by CoralGables on Thu May 30, 2013 at 08:04:30 AM EST
    in Wisconsin before the thermometer climbed to zero I totally understand this, and in retrospect thank the local tavern owners for letting me help send their children to college.

    Isn't Lynchburg a "dry" town? (none / 0) (#161)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu May 30, 2013 at 12:40:41 PM EST
    Lynchburg, TN (none / 0) (#164)
    by ScottW714 on Thu May 30, 2013 at 02:16:38 PM EST
    Is where Jack or Jim is made and it is dry.

    Like your Healthcare? (none / 0) (#131)
    by Slado on Wed May 29, 2013 at 02:22:49 PM EST
    I can't lose it (none / 0) (#141)
    by CoralGables on Wed May 29, 2013 at 05:03:26 PM EST
    I don't have any. But to be fair, I don't care whether I have it or not. Under ACA I'm obviously going to have it again.