Tuesday Open Thread

Time for an open thread. All topics welcome except the Zimmerman case (and related and unrelated race issues) which have their own threads.

The House may vote later this week on repealing authority for the NSA Surveillance Program. The ACLU says call your representatives and tell them to vote Yes on the Amash Amendment.

The Amash Amendment would prevent the NSA from indiscriminately collecting the phone records of most Americans, including who we talk to, for how long, and how often.

Instead, it will limit the NSA's ability to collect these records to people who are actually under investigation under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act

Anthony Weiner is apologizing again and about to hold a press conference. [Added: He's staying in the race for Mayor.][More..]

The police officer who leaked photos of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has been placed on restricted duty pending further investigation.

More battles over a path to citizenship.

Again, all topics welcome except Zimmerman (and race issues.)
< Kate, William and the Royal Baby | No Money for Federal Defense But Costa Rica Gets New Computers >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    AN AXE LENGTH AWAY, vol 76 (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Dadler on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 04:57:32 PM EST
    A federal judge (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by jbindc on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 05:08:37 PM EST
    Orders Ohio to recognize the out of state same-sex marriage.

    James Obergefell has lived with the love of his life for 20 years before they married two weeks ago.

    They also hoped to be buried next to each other, to spend eternity together, but the state of Ohio and his spouse's relatives won't let him - because he married another man, John Arthur.

    Last week, the two men sued Ohio Gov. John Kasich, Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine and the Cincinnati doctor responsible for approving death certificates. Obergefell and Arthur asked a judge to overturn existing Ohio law - which doesn't recognize same-sex marriage - to allow Obergefell to be listed as surviving spouse on Arthur's death certificate and for it to show that Arthur's marital status at death as married.

    That's what U.S. District Magistrate Judge Tim Black did late Monday afternoon, granting a temporary restraining order - but noting it was specific to Obergefell and Arthur only.
    Without that official designation as Arthur's spouse, Obergefell told Black, he won't be able to be buried with him in Spring Grove Cemetery. Arthur's family plots are in that cemetery and his grandfather previously stipulated in documents that only the family's direct descendents and their spouses can be buried in the family plot. With Black's ruling, Obergefell can be buried next to Arthur.


    Arthur has ALS, a progressive neurodegenerative disease that has no known cure and is fatal, and is "days maybe weeks if we are lucky" from death, Obergefell testified.


    Black found that the Ohio Constitution on the issue "violates rights secured by the ... United States Constitution in that same-sex couples married in jurisdictions where same sex marriages are valid who seek to have their out-of-state marriage accepted as legal in Ohio are treated differently than opposite sex couples who have been married in states where their circumstances allow marriage in that state but not in Ohio."

    Good for the judge.

    ... for being buried in our family plot in Southern California -- which as of this writing has a limited number of available spaces -- was literally "first come, first served." Can't say that they never had a sense of humor.

    My sympathies and thoughts are with James Obergefell and John Arthur. My aunt succumbed to ALS in Jan. 2010. I'm thankful that she lasted only a few months beyond her initial diagnosis and went relatively quickly, as compared with so many other ALS patients who can linger for several years in a helpless state. It's a rather brutal way to depart this world, and I wouldn't want that for anyone.

    (And yes, she's buried in the family plot.)



    Good for that judge (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by TeresaInPa on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 06:02:54 PM EST
    I love how one circumstance after another, things that no one particularly thought of like need of a place in a family burial plots, are chipping away at the ban on same sex marriage.  It is a very sad circumstance, but look at the good that will come from this.

    Yes. (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Zorba on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 06:07:47 PM EST
    I hope that this at least a baby step towards recognizing same sex marriage.

    Meanwhile, our elected 69-yr. old county clerk: (none / 0) (#10)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 07:04:39 PM EST
    Oh, honestly, oculus! (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 07:33:30 PM EST
    What in the world is going on with you guys down there on the border?

    Is there perchance something in the water? Is it your too-close proximity to Tijuana and cheap tequila? Not enough crazy right-wing whackjobs moving to Arizona where they belong? PTSD from having to fly in and out of Lindbergh Field? All of the above? What, exactly?

    Inquiring minds want to know. ;-D


    And meanwhile, our county clerk (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by Peter G on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 12:40:59 AM EST
    in my Pennsylvania suburban county says, who needs to wait for a court ruling? Phooey on our state's unconstitutional DOMA.

    Wow (none / 0) (#36)
    by Yman on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 07:37:46 AM EST
    Gutsy move for a county official.

    Chester County (none / 0) (#94)
    by chrisvee on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 06:56:16 PM EST
    Unfortunately I don't see anyone in my county trying such a gutsy move.

    Five licenses issued for same-sex couples (none / 0) (#102)
    by Peter G on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 08:48:11 PM EST
    on the first day after the County Clerk announced his position. There are two liberal Democrat, out of our three County Commissioners, so I don't think he will be ordered to stop. And the state attorney general refuses to enforce the state's DOMA, so she won't try to stop him either. I wonder what will be next?

    Corbett (none / 0) (#117)
    by chrisvee on Thu Jul 25, 2013 at 05:57:26 AM EST
    Has announced his displeasure via his Press Sec and various state Reps are warning about anarchy if elected officials start flouting laws.

    Gotta love that. Anarchy.


    Little by little (none / 0) (#96)
    by chrisvee on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 07:01:39 PM EST
    It might not be consoling to those whose rights are being withheld but it does truly feel like the tide is turning.

    I figured (5.00 / 3) (#14)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 07:30:10 PM EST
    this was going to happen. Georgia for example recognizes marriages from other states. If all of a sudden they declare marriages from places like MA as being unrecognized, they are going to invalidate a lot of heterosexual couples.

    Interesting twist (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 10:35:30 PM EST
    Or ... (none / 0) (#32)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 01:03:52 AM EST
    ... interestingly twisted.

    Some heterosexual couples might welcome (5.00 / 3) (#25)
    by MO Blue on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 10:49:36 PM EST
    the news. Not all marriages performed in MA were made in heaven don't ya know.;o)

    Guess the military industrial complex (5.00 / 3) (#26)
    by MO Blue on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 11:16:06 PM EST
    and the contractors are not getting enough of the pie or we haven't killed or maimed enough U.S. soldiers or enough Muslims lately.

    U.S. Senator Wants Resolution Authorizing War With Iran If `Nothing Changes' In Two Months

    Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said on Tuesday that he plans to introduce a resolution authorizing war with Iran if "nothing changes" regarding the Islamic Republic's nuclear program by the end of the year.

    "If nothing changes in Iran, come September, October, I will present a resolution that will authorize the use of military force to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear bomb," Graham told a "cheering" audience at a conference put on by the right-wing group Christians United for Israel, according to CQ Roll Call.
    But experts and former top officials have been warning that ratcheting up pressure and rhetoric against Iran -- particularly after Iranians just elected the most moderate presidential candidate available to them -- would be counterproductive. link

    I have always completely disliked the meme of "haters" but these politicians continually advocating for more and more wars could definitely turn me into one.

    Is he up for reelection next year? (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by shoephone on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 12:13:44 AM EST
    What an embarrassment.

    Yep in 2014 (none / 0) (#65)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 02:56:09 PM EST
    A conservative South Carolina group launched a grassroots campaign Wednesday that aims to defeat Sen. Lindsey Graham in the 2014 GOP primary and replace him with a more conservative alternative.

    Carolina Conservatives United, a nonprofit organization, said Mr. Graham has made a habit of saying one thing but doing another, selling out their limited government principles and showing "contempt" for small-government advocates.
    Despite the rumbling among the grassroots, Mr. Graham appears to be in relatively good shape as he looks toward winning a third term. As of June 30, he had $6.3 million cash on hand for re-election, and polls have shown he is on sturdy footing.

    Sen. Ron Wyden (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by MO Blue on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 11:49:44 PM EST
    "If we do not seize this unique moment in our constitutional history to reform our surveillance laws and practices, we will all live to regret it," Wyden said during a keynote address on the National Security Agency's data collection programs hosted by the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

    "The combination of increasingly advanced technology with a breakdown in the checks and balances that limit government action could lead us to a surveillance state that cannot be reversed," he added
    But Wyden claims "there is nothing in the Patriot Act that limits this sweeping bulk collection to phone records." He said the government could use its authority under the law to collect and store sensitive information such as medical records or credit card purchases, or "develop a database of gun owners or readers of books and magazines deemed subversive."

    "This means that the government's authority to collect information on law-abiding American citizens is essentially limitless," he said. link

    Yep, MO Blue (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by Dexter on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 12:26:40 AM EST
    Retroactive immunity was just the beginning.  I swear I called my senators and rep every single day.  It has made my head explode for years and it has only gotten worse.  Just give me my privacy and leave me the heck alone.  

    Will the NRA bite? (none / 0) (#28)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 11:56:50 PM EST
    Snowden Update (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 07:07:00 AM EST
    He may have left the airport today. He may be free to roam or he may be restricted to the refugee center depending on who is quoted. He has changed his request has now suggested he wants to stay in Russia permanently.

    He hasn't been granted asylum in Russia and even though his lawyer says he now wants to stay permanently his request is still for temporary asylum for one year (which is renewable for another year). No answer expected on that for another month.

    Updated final Resting Spot (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 07:19:40 AM EST
    1. Venezuela
    2. The embassy of Venezuela, Nicaragua, or Bolivia in Moscow (up 3)
    3. Langley or JFK
    4. Russia (returns to list)
    5. Nicaragua (down 1)
    6. Iceland (the dark horse returns)

    Midday Update (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 10:54:58 AM EST
    Never trust the lawyer of the person you're tracking.

    1. Venezuela
    2. The embassy of Venezuela, Nicaragua, or Bolivia in Moscow
    3. Langley or JFK
    4. Sheremetyevo Airport Transit Area (up 4)
    5. Russia (down 1)
    6. Nicaragua (down 1)
    7. Iceland (down 1)

    Snowden remains stuck in the transit area. All the talk of leaving today turned out to be nothing more than his lawyer talking, who now admits...maybe he's still stuck. Snowden's Russian lawyer did say he'd be out in 3 days a week ago. Because of that...

    I should have known not to be sucked in. And in the future I will follow the immortal words of George W


    Girl, if they ever get him moved (none / 0) (#42)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 11:00:50 AM EST
    Out of there it will involve snowing someone:)

    White House `seeking clarity' (none / 0) (#68)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 03:00:30 PM EST
    from Russia on Snowden's legal status

    White House press secretary Jay Carney on Wednesday said the administration is pressing Russian officials to clarify the status of National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden, amid reports he has been granted permission to leave the Moscow airport.

    "We are seeking clarity from Russian authorities about Mr. Snowden's status and any change in it," Carney said in a press gaggle aboard Air Force One. link

    Not that (none / 0) (#70)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 03:05:48 PM EST
    this kind of thing should be governed by polls, but in contradiction to the Quinnipiac poll out a couple of weeks ago, more than half the people surveyed believe Snowden should be arrested and face criminal charges.

    Public attitudes have shifted against Edward Snowden, with more than half of Americans now supporting criminal charges against the former security contractor who's disclosed details of surveillance by the U.S. National Security Agency. And while most doubt that the NSA's efforts enhance security, most also don't see them as unjustified intrusions on privacy rights.

    The public by 57-39 percent in a new ABC News/Washington Post poll also says it's more important for the government to investigate possible terrorist threats than for it to protect privacy rights - a substantial margin, albeit the narrowest in polls since 2002.

    A plurality thinks Snowden's disclosures have harmed national security (49 percent say so, 37 percent not, with the rest unsure). And 53 percent now support charging him with a crime, up from 43 percent last month, with a 13-point rise in "strong" support. People who think Snowden has harmed security are far more apt than others to favor criminal charges

    And yet, the same poll shows (5.00 / 2) (#93)
    by shoephone on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 06:40:07 PM EST
    that 74% believe the NSA intrudes on our privacy. Go figure.

    The poll gives no indication of why the shift has occurred. On what basis do those polled conclude Snowden has harmed national security? No reasoning  or actual facts of harm to national security are noted.


    In a strange way (none / 0) (#86)
    by christinep on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 04:52:46 PM EST
    Snowden's stay in Russia for a longer time -- especially when accompanied by whoever-wrote-the-statements about his wanting to study Russian and Russia's culture -- could prove to be a long-term positive for the WH in that the sojourn detracts from Snowden's professed intent in the early stages of his run.  Meantime, Putin has further opportunity to play it for what its worth ... before dealing with the US about the "cost" of mutually acceptable resolution.  

    The choice of literature selected (none / 0) (#85)
    by christinep on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 04:46:05 PM EST
    by the lawyer for Snowden's reading pleasure -- Dostoyevsky's "Crime & Punishment-- is telling in many ways.  (Though, Russian Intelligentsia used to make a practice of communicating via literary publications, the unnamed Chekhov play would be interesting to know.)  Ah well, maybe no hidden meaning there...other than the anguish of a Raskolnikov or the sense of a lost past & uncertain future in Cherry Orchard.  

    Let's wait to seen if any of the old satires written by later Gulag residents show up.  (Daniel & Sinyavsky?)


    I know there's a separate thread on the (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by Anne on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 09:21:48 AM EST
    Amash amendment to the Defense Appropriations Bill, concerning the NSA's massive collection of data, but since no one's commenting about it there, I thought I would bring something in here for your consideration.

    This is the White House's statement on the Amash Amendment:

    "In light of the recent unauthorized disclosures, the president has said that he welcomes a debate about how best to simultaneously safeguard both our national security and the privacy of our citizens," the statement said. "However, we oppose the current effort in the House to hastily dismantle one of our intelligence community's counterterrorism tools. This blunt approach is not the product of an informed, open, or deliberative process."

    I seriously don't know whether to laugh or cry at that last sentence.

    As if there was ever going to be an "informed, open or deliberative process."

    Seems that the blunt approach worked (5.00 / 3) (#39)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 09:31:14 AM EST
    extremely well establishing and expanding this monolithic monster. So I don't see why we can't use a blunt approach to dismantle it.

    That was exactly (none / 0) (#52)
    by sj on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 12:11:09 PM EST
    my thought. But your words are better.

    Pierce on an informed, open, (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 03:50:19 PM EST
    deliberative process.

    A bill is being proposed and debated in a public session of the national legislature and that's not an "informed, open, or deliberative process." As opposed to what, a secret program, validated on the basis of secret evidence, by a secret court? H&ll, the Amash bill is the only informed, open and deliberative thing about this whole mess. If you're welcoming a debate, then welcome the debate. If you don't, then don't. But don't throw out laughable statements like this one. You sound like a bunch of East Germans. link

    Pierce and digby often say things that I am thinking, but always say them better than I could.


    Charlie's become a daily fix for me; (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by Anne on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 03:57:27 PM EST
    I can always count on him to cut right to the heart of what's going on.

    His comments on the president's speech today are another example of that:

    Of course, all of what he's railing against here has been going on since 2010, whe nthe American people put their brains in a jar and elected a House Of Representatives full of Louie Gohmerts and a Senate minority for which Bob Bennett of Utah was Che Guevara. The president has paid a fearsome price for neglecting his primary duty as the leader of his party -- to make the Republican party pay an even more fearsome price for rendering itself into the retrograde monkeyhouse. If he had fulfilled that duty as leader of his party, he would have been better able to fulfill his duties as leader of the country. Now, he's pushing back against a resistless tide of complete, unfettered vandalism and lunacy, as best expressed in the lead story in today's Times, in which the House majority produced its wish-list that absolutely will become law the first chance they get to enact it. They do no bluff. This was no posturing. This is what they believe good government is, and it is what they will do to the country if they ever get the power. This was the trailer for the eventual disaster movie.


    By now, though the president is loath to point it out, it's obvious that, in terms of addressing the country's real problems, there was no particular point in having elected him twice, because there was no serious intention on the part of the opposition to recognize his administration as being possessed of a legitimate mandate to do anything, and no serious attempt on the part of the courtier press to push back against the very real danger of what that situation implies.

    Maybe he was too busy managing all these data-hoovering programs...


    He is hands on re drone targets. (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 03:59:17 PM EST
    AN AXE LENGTH AWAY, vol. 77 (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by Dadler on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 10:32:38 AM EST
    If a president does it, it is legal (5.00 / 4) (#44)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 11:11:44 AM EST
    If a bank does it, it is legal.

    Bank fraud, money laundering and breaking into people's houses and stealing their stuff is no problem if you are a bank.

    It turns out the bank sent someone to repossess the house located across the street from Barnett's house, but by mistake broke into hers instead.  "They told me that the GPS led them to my house," Barnett said. "My grass hadn't been mowed and they just assumed." She called the McArthur Police about the incident, but weeks later, the chief announced the case was closed. Barnett said that according to the bank president, this was the first time something like this has happened. She presented him with an $18,000 estimate to replace the losses, but the president refused to pay.  "He got very firm with me and said, `We're not paying you retail here, that's just the way it is,'" link

    Items in her house had been hauled away, others were sold, given away and trashed. Basically the bank broke into her house and removed her possessions without any legal reason to do so, yet the police closed the case.

    I just read this at Charlie Pierce's (5.00 / 3) (#46)
    by Anne on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 11:28:20 AM EST
    and wish I could say I was more surprised than I am, but, really - we didn't punish any of the banks and mortgage companies and servicers in any appreciable way for their lapses, failures, fraudulent actions and practices, so why wouldn't they continue to act with impunity?

    Atrios puts it in perspective (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 05:16:21 PM EST

    Pretty sure that if I break into your house, steal all of your stuff, and then sell it then I'm going to go jail. But I'm not a bank, so laws actually apply to me.

    Isn't a bank now a "person"? (none / 0) (#88)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 05:19:12 PM EST
    See "Citizens United."

    If you did an organization chart of U.S. (5.00 / 2) (#91)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 05:35:27 PM EST
    The top position would be labeled: Wall St./Bank
    2nd. position: President of U.S.
    right down the line. You would have to read the fine print on the last page to find We the People.  ;o)

    That's unbelievable. (none / 0) (#83)
    by Teresa on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 04:11:58 PM EST
    Would a homeowner's policy cover something like that, even though the bank should? I'd refinance if I had a home financed through that bank.

    Oh we're so sorry, the GPS did it.


    Not so unbelievable. This is not the first (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by caseyOR on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 10:49:45 PM EST
    time a bank's minions have broken into the wrong house, stolen people's belongings and sold them off. It has happened several times over the last few years. I know of not a single case where the bank and/or its minions have been held accountable by the law.

    (Sigh!) That's what civil court ... (none / 0) (#99)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 08:05:21 PM EST
    ... and attorneys are for. Why this rather blatant case should ever have to come to that is probably a crime in itself.

    That said, I would also strongly advise anyone here who ever runs into a related problem in which local authorities are sitting on their hands, to also contact your state's attorney general.

    Frequently, the state has more resources to pursue such cases than do the local authorities. Further, it helps to bring in some outside third party with fresh eyes and no local links, perchance the local police chief and bank president so happen to be neighbors, golfing partners, coaching the other guy's kids in Little League, schtupping each other's spouses, etc.

    I'm not saying that's always the case, but in small or insular communities, you'd be surprised at the unseen / unknown quid pro quo personal relationships that are sometimes in place and reinforce the local status quo, to an aggrieved party's consternation.

    Don't ever be afraid to go over people's heads and climb the chain of command, until you either get satisfaction or you run out of rungs to climb. Personally, I've made that particular course of action a specialty of mine in my work, and 90% of the time, I eventually get what I want.



    As to those (none / 0) (#109)
    by melamineinNY on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 10:11:10 PM EST
    unseen / unknown quid pro quo personal relationships that are sometimes in place and reinforce the local status quo, to an aggrieved party's consternation.

    I once consulted a lawyer about malpractice against some dental specialists (similar problem of professional loyalties vs. patient). I could not get a second opinion in good faith, or a diagnosis or treatment because of those inbred professional loyalties. Unlike the conversation I had with this attorney by phone before the appointment, he acted strangely cold and disinterested when I met with him, though acquisitive enough for certain information. I learned later that he was the brother of the president of the Dental Society. So it didn't even help that I went to another city in this case(within the same Dental Society District) to look for an attorney or to find an honest dental specialist. I ended up having to go to Mayo Clinic, thousands of miles away, just to get a diagnosis.


    Sweet Claire (5.00 / 4) (#45)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 11:24:51 AM EST
    Apologizes to the Clintons

    "I said a lot of things in the last 30 years that I'm not particularly proud of. I mean there have been things that I've said that I wish I could take back," McCaskill said at an event in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday night sponsored by BuzzFeed. "It was gratuitous and hurtful and I have apologized to both President Clinton and Hillary Clinton for saying it."

    She conceded that her decision to endorse Barack Obama in the 2008 election was controversial, but she's now thrown her support behind Hillary Clinton.

    "I couldn't be more enthusiastic for her to be president now," the Missouri Democrat said in an interview with BuzzFeed's John Stanton, "and I can't wait to work as hard or harder for Hillary Clinton."

    McCaskill attributed her Obama endorsement to a conversation with her children, who she said, "got in my face a little bit."

    "It was impressive that my kids were able to crystallize the notion that I was worried about the implications of endorsing Barack Obama not because I didn't think he'd be a wonderful president and inspiring for our country and do something that no other candidate could do for the United States of America," she said, "but I was worried about endorsing him because of my career."

    Somebody's looking ahead to garner favor and be a power player if HRC decides to run and wins....

    Boy, Hillary has already proven herself a (5.00 / 4) (#48)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 11:38:37 AM EST
    very forgiving person. But this might be a bridge too far.

    The phrase, "Bless your heart," (5.00 / 3) (#50)
    by Anne on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 11:57:10 AM EST
    is what comes to mind...

    But, this is politics, and I would guess this is a bridge that won't get burned just yet.


    Have to agree (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 12:05:09 PM EST
    ..I would guess this is a bridge that won't get burned just yet.

    Bwahaha! (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by Zorba on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 01:44:50 PM EST
    I love the "bless your heart" phrase.  Passive aggressiveness at its best.  

    LOL! (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jul 25, 2013 at 03:18:14 AM EST
    Not unlike Dana Carvey's Church Lady on SNL, before she drops the hammer: "Well, isn't that special?"

    Probably true...no bridge too far if it leads to (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 07:26:14 PM EST
    1600 Penn Ave.

    Well my sweet Claire got this right at least (5.00 / 7) (#49)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 11:50:06 AM EST
    She has definitely said a lot of things in the last 30 years that she should not be proud of. Some of those things were attacks on people and some of them had to do with policies that effect the lives of millions of people.

    Hopefully Hillary just smiles sweetly at Claire without making any future commitments. I have the same hopes for Claire that I had for Lieberman. That sometime in the not too distant future she is replaced by someone more progressive than she is and that she quickly fades from public scene.

    Unfortunately, so far Holy Joe has not yet faded into complete obscurity. A girl can only hope.


    Huh? (none / 0) (#105)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 09:27:33 PM EST
    Shirley, you jest. Replaced by someone MORE progressive -- in Missouri?

    Jeez, Blue, it was only last year that the Missouri GOP nominated as your sweet Claire's opponent Congressman Todd Akin, who tried to define the concept of "legitimate rape" as it pertains to how lady parts work. And even with that crackpot biology lesson, he still took nearly 40% of the friggin' popular vote!

    Honestly, I don't expect progressive from Missouri anymore. I've learned to just be happy if they don't elect total double-live gonzo, too cuckoo for cocoa puffs crazy.



    What say you on Hanabusa? (none / 0) (#106)
    by shoephone on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 09:34:47 PM EST
    who, incidentally, voted "no" on the Amash amendment (no surprise there)? She seems to be fairly useless as a Democrat.

    Well, Colleen was certainly useless as ... (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jul 25, 2013 at 02:52:55 AM EST
    ... State Senate President for four years, from my perspective. She's an old guard Inouye Democrat, the type who loves to seek power, and then functions on cruise control at 60% capacity once he or she has it.

    Colleen's my congresswoman, and she knows all the right buzzwords as a Democrat, but does the bare minimum necessary to make people think that she's actually doing something. She's certainly better than her opponent and predecessor, Republican Charles Djou -- but frankly, that's sort of like saying that catching a cold's better than coming down with the flu.

    The Spouse and I hosted a fundraiser for her here in East Honolulu back in 2010 when she was first running for the First District seat, and she showed up an hour late, stayed for only 15 minutes, and acted like she was entitled to our support. You don't do that when people are paying $100-250 per person to meet and support you. I was personally embarrassed, told her campaign staff as much, and now she won't talk to me.

    She's now running against Sen. Brian Schatz because she's miffed that she wasn't appointed to Inouye's successor as the old man supposedly wanted. We deserve better, and that's why I'm supporting Schatz in 2014.

    In short, phuque her. Hope that answers your question.



    LOL. I'd say that answers my question! (none / 0) (#118)
    by shoephone on Thu Jul 25, 2013 at 10:13:30 AM EST
    The pols who think they're Gawd's gift to us are exceedingly irritating.

    Go Schatz.


    The fact that Todd Akin was her opponent (none / 0) (#108)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 09:59:24 PM EST
    is probably the only reason that she retained her seat. She was at one time considered the most vulnerable Dem Senator.

    Never give up hope.  We kept our Dem governor. Things can always turn around in MO as the older more conservative folks go to their heavenly reward and a more liberal younger generation becomes the voting population.

    Key phrase in my comment:

    sometime in the not too distant future

    There's a joke in here (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 12:20:32 PM EST
    Wow the House really knows how to hurt a guy (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 03:35:10 PM EST
    WASHINGTON -- Republican lawmakers are threatening to withhold salary representing less than one-sixteen thousandth of multimillionaire Secretary of State John Kerry's net worth.

    The House Appropriations Committee's measure demands Kerry's agency implement recommendations of a U.S. investigator for Afghan reconstruction. If the State Department doesn't report progress, he loses a quarter of his salary for three months next year. link

    I bet that Kerry, whose assets total at least $184 million, is seriously losing sleep over this threat. Do we really have to pay clowns in the House a salary? Maybe we should be charging them rent instead. They are completely worthless.

    Caroline Kennedy (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 03:46:06 PM EST
    This has been (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by Zorba on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 05:30:56 PM EST
    speculated about for awhile.  I'm not surprised.

    And because Anthony Weiner is in the news again... (none / 0) (#2)
    by Dadler on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 05:01:26 PM EST
    Here's a link to a short piece of satirical fiction I wrote a few years ago, when the first Weiner story broke. Ahem.

    It's called GOVERNMENT SALAMI. (link)

    WARNING: the story does contain a talking phallus who is sick of all the attention he never asked for. So if you have an aversion to speaking parts for genitals, you may want to steer clear.

    We are all Carlos Danger. (none / 0) (#7)
    by scribe on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 06:05:26 PM EST
    C-Dang, I like to call him (none / 0) (#9)
    by Dadler on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 06:39:47 PM EST
    You know, for the kids.

    Gotta wonder if he's related (none / 0) (#11)
    by scribe on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 07:05:42 PM EST
    to D.H. Peligro, from the Dead Kennedys.

    Maybe he half-Anglicized his name....


    Punk Weiner (none / 0) (#13)
    by Dadler on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 07:24:00 PM EST
    Moshing the ballroom.



    "C-Dang" sounds like something ... (none / 0) (#16)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 07:37:04 PM EST
    ... you'd wake up with after a night of gratuitous barhopping in Juarez.

    Stop...you guys are killin' me! (none / 0) (#18)
    by shoephone on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 09:23:55 PM EST
    I just spit lemonade out my nose. (none / 0) (#19)
    by shoephone on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 09:24:56 PM EST
    One month ago, my poor L.A. Dodgers ... (none / 0) (#12)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 07:20:23 PM EST
    ... were sitting in last place in the National League's West Division, 12 games under .500 and 10 games behind the then-first place Arizona Diamondbacks.

    What a difference a month makes. With yesterday's 14-5 thrashing of the Toronto Blue Jays, the Blue Studs of Chavez Ravine have now won 21 out of their last 26 games, and have further moved into first place for the first time this season, a half-game ahead of the D-Backs.

    Meanwhile, the defending World Series champion San Francisco Giants have been in a tailspin, having lost 19 of their last 26 games over the last four weeks.

    And oculus, all's well with the world, because your San Diego Padres are once again comfortably ensconced where they've spent the better part of their 44-year history -- in last place. Glad you could prevail upon them that they were playing way over their heads, and really had no business flirting with any pretentions of somehow making the NL playoffs this season.

    And for that state of affairs, you might as well stand in line to blame Mayor Bob Filner, since it looks like he's apparently to be blamed for quite a number of things -- and not just harrassment.


    The season (none / 0) (#17)
    by DebFrmHell on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 09:22:30 PM EST
    is just now starting...wait for final results.

    ((red circle with a slash through it))



    Puig! (none / 0) (#20)
    by shoephone on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 09:25:46 PM EST
    Yep! (none / 0) (#21)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 09:55:08 PM EST
    Puig's numbers have dropped off somewhat after that torrid .400+ start because of an injury, but without question he's been the catalyst for the Blue Crew's current surge. He reminds me a little of "Fernandomania!" in 1981, because like Valenzuela, he's carrying the Dodgers upon his back and has become a serious media darling in L.A., all without being able to speak a word of English.

    Another good thing about the surge is that the "Fire Don Mattingly" bandwagon has since suffered a flat tire.



    Update: Dodgers win again, 10-9, and ... (none / 0) (#23)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 10:14:44 PM EST
    ... yet another woman has gone public with allegations of inappropriate advances by Mayor Filner.

    Coincidence -- or is it?


    UPDATE: A THIRD woman comes forward. (none / 0) (#104)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 09:00:47 PM EST
    Ladies and gentlemen, meet Morgan Rose, school psychologist, who apparently has "bewitching eyes" - that is, when they're not rolling upward nowadays at the mere mention of Bob Filner's name.

    Another update: (none / 0) (#116)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jul 25, 2013 at 03:27:24 AM EST
    The Dodgers scored 6 runs in the top of the 9th tonight to come from behind and beat the Blue Jays again, 8-3, to complete a three-game sweep. Having now won 23 of their last 28, they return to L.A. for a four-game set against the Cincinnati Reds, starting Thursday.

    Squeaky (none / 0) (#22)
    by ZtoA on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 10:00:20 PM EST
    I left you a comment and a compliment on the earlier open thread. Just a heads up.

    Got It (none / 0) (#56)
    by squeaky on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 01:44:29 PM EST
    RIP, Emile Griffith (1938-2013). (none / 0) (#33)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 03:31:02 AM EST
    The flamboyant Hall of Fame middleweight and welterweight boxing champion -- who later in life acknowledged to New York Times columnist Bob Herbert what most fight fans had long suspected, that he was gay -- enjoyed a long and storied career, and often professed his bewilderment over the public's interest with his sexuality.

    However, Griffith is best remembered for, and was forever haunted by, his tragic nationally televised March 24, 1962 title bout with then-world welterweight champion Benny Paret, whom he brutally beat to death after the Cuban-born Paret had earlier that morning taunted him openly at the pre-fight weigh-in with a vile slur, "maricón," a Spanish slang word that's roughly the equivalent of the pejorative "faggot."

    Even the most hardened boxing fans were unprepared for what they witnessed later that evening at Madison Square Garden: a brutal late-round beatdown that author Norman Mailer -- who was ringside that night -- once likened to "a baseball bat demolishing a pumpkin." From Sports Illustrated (April 2, 1962):

    "Suddenly, Emile battered Paret with a plangent right. This time, Griffith resolved to finish him. He began belaboring the suffering Paret with right uppercuts, one after another, an unrelenting fusillade, Emile's hand banging against Benny's jaw as remorselessly as the clapper of a great, dark bell. Paret sagged back against the middle turnbuckle. Griffith's punches drove his head out between the top and middle strands.


    "Benny was helpless, bleeding from his nose and a cut on his right cheek; his puffed eyes were closed. Still Griffith punched him, with mounting and maniacal rage, as though determined, literally, to wipe out both Paret and the memory of his taunt. There were, in all, about 15 uppercuts, followed by several hooks. Then Referee [Ruby] Goldstein was tugging at Griffith from behind, pulling him off. As Emile, berserk, struggling passionately in Goldstein's embrace, was dragged away, Paret, now obviously senseless, crumpled slowly and collapsed. The doctors fluttered into the ring and crouched about him like ravens."

    Mortally wounded with blood clots forming in his brain, Benny Paret was rushed to Manhattan's Roosevelt Hospital, where he soon lapsed into a coma from which he never emerged, and died ten days later. The subsequent inquiry by the New York Boxing Commission later absolved referee Ruby Goldstein, who had been widely criticized for failing to halt the bout earlier, when Paret looked to be an obviously defeated fighter.

    As for Griffith, he retired from the ring in 1977, and 15 years later barely survived a vicious gay-bashing outside a Times Square bar, in which his assailants were never caught. In the critically acclaimed 2005 documentary about his life, "Ring of Fire: The Emile Griffith Story," Griffith's shown warmly reconciling with and embracing Benny Paret, Jr., son of the late fighter he had killed 43 years earlier, when the son was but an infant.

    Aloha, Emile Griffith. Rest in peace.

    No one would ever let him forget (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by jondee on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 02:52:38 PM EST
    Benny Paret..

    I'm not buying that Griffith "killed" him..

    As Dylan said in Who Killed Davey Moore? it was a collaborative effort with cuplability shared by the promoter "chomping on his big cigar", the yahoos in the cheap seats, and the decadent Roman senators in the ringside ones..


    Well, Griffith did in fact kill him. (5.00 / 2) (#73)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 03:15:07 PM EST
    That said, I'd offer that there were one helluva lot of enablers that night -- the agents who first arranged the title bout, the members of the state boxing commission who sanctioned the prizefight, fans like Norman Mailer who were sitting ringside and elsewhere at Madison Square Garden, accountants who counting the receipts in the box office, and a national audience that was watching the fight on TV at home, in bars, etc.

    No doubt, Griffith certainly never intended to inflict mortal injuries upon Paret, and it was a tragedy with which, as I said earlier, haunted him until his dying day yesterday.



    He and I... (5.00 / 2) (#82)
    by fishcamp on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 04:01:58 PM EST
    were the same age.  1938,  I'm Dec.2nd so write that down{-)

    Roman (5.00 / 2) (#84)
    by Zorba on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 04:34:33 PM EST
    Coliseum, definitely.
    I simply do not understand professional boxing.  Two men (and, a little bit, women) punching each other.  Seems to me to be like dog fighting.  And yes, I realize that these are humans and have a choice, unlike the dogs.  But still.
    And I'm not terribly fond of football, either, for much the same reasons.  At least, until they make it a whole lot safer.

    Personally, I'm a fan of both. (none / 0) (#100)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 08:10:21 PM EST
    That said, Mme. Zorba, your points are certainly valid ones, and are not readily dismissed. There's an element of bloodlust in both boxing and football that's unseemly.

    Motive was clear. Opportunity was present. (none / 0) (#37)
    by melamineinNY on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 07:41:22 AM EST
    Why wasn't he charged with murder and Goldstein with a negligence charge of some kind? Because it would upset the sport?

    There is an inherent risk in boxing ... (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 02:48:58 PM EST
    ... or any contact sport of incurring significant personal injury, even death. This is something that's universally accepted by participants.

    From a purely legal standpoint, it would be hypocritically obscene for a government agency -- in this case, the New York Boxing Commission -- to sanction a prizefight, with the caveat that one or both participants could subsequently be charged with a crime, depending upon the gnarliness of the outcome. Honestly, if people really don't like what they're seeing, then perhaps we need to seriously consider the sport's abolition.

    (And given the popularity of what's on TV nowadays with so-called "Ultimate Fighting," good luck with that.)

    Nevertheless, the 1962 Griffith-Paret fight was something of a watershed moment in the sport of boxing in the United States, in that afterward for the first time, there was actually a very serious and concerted effort by people to abolish and ban it.

    While that effort ultimately failed, boxing's popularity took a significant hit with Paret's fatal pummeling on nationwide TV 50 years ago. It scared off audience members, television executives and advertisers alike, which rendered the Griffith-Paret bout the very last prizefight to be televised nationally in the United States for well over a decade.



    Also (none / 0) (#67)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 02:57:09 PM EST
    The legal Assumption of Risk doctrine.

    Thank you. (none / 0) (#71)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 03:06:00 PM EST
    For some reason, the name of that doctrine escaped me at the moment.

    Thank you. Still seemed to go beyond (none / 0) (#92)
    by melamineinNY on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 06:24:34 PM EST
    the usual from your description. I guess the public felt the same.

    But they have occasionally occurred. Without a doubt, it's a brutal sport that holds tremendous potential to inflict long-term physical damage that's often unseen or undetected at the time.

    One only has to look at the frail shell of the man who's former heavyweight champion Muhammad Ali, now rendered nearly speechless and in need of long-term care by trauma-related Parkinson's disease, to see boxing's dark side.



    Max Bear. (none / 0) (#111)
    by melamineinNY on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 10:25:42 PM EST
    One of my favorite movies is Cinderella Man even though I don't care for the "sport."

    Baer ! (none / 0) (#112)
    by melamineinNY on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 10:39:21 PM EST
    Mrs. Partridge! (none / 0) (#43)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 11:09:31 AM EST
    I might have to read that one (none / 0) (#47)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 11:36:29 AM EST
    Always liked her, and in my teens thought Jack Cassidy was pretty hot, for an older guy. Liked him better than David, that's for sure.

    Yikes! (none / 0) (#107)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 09:49:47 PM EST
    I'm oddly reminded of a funny scene in the 1975 comedy-drama "Claudine" (starring Diahann Carroll and James Earl Jones), in which a 7-year-old boy's older teenaged sister graphically explains to him the facts of life, "... that's when the man puts his penis in the woman's vagina" -- at which the horrified boy screams in retort, "Not in Mommy's!"



    George Alexander Louis! (none / 0) (#54)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 12:24:32 PM EST

    Oops - wrong thread (none / 0) (#55)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 12:24:53 PM EST
    That's the royal baby's name!

    Hey, it's an open thread! (none / 0) (#58)
    by Zorba on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 01:56:05 PM EST
    Pretty much anything goes on open threads, except the Z word.     ;-)
    I was kind of hoping for James Alexander Michael, myself.  Or James Alexander George.

    My nephew is a James Alexander (5.00 / 2) (#98)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 07:30:35 PM EST
    Always liked it!

    Yeah (none / 0) (#59)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 02:21:56 PM EST
    I was hoping they would work her father's name (Michael) in.  I mean, it's a "normal" name and wouldn't raise eyebrows (unlike say, "North").

    Maybe for a second son....


    It's just so hard to look at that little (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Anne on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 02:36:17 PM EST
    tiny baby, and see "George;" "Alexander" works, but "George" is just too "old" for a little one.

    Oh, well - he'll grow into it, and in the meantime, it may transition via "Georgie."


    Maybe they'll call him (none / 0) (#61)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 02:41:30 PM EST
    "Alex" in private.

    It's not unheard of - King Edward VIII's name was Edward Albert Christian George Andrew Patrick David and family and friends called him "David".


    Sacha More Like It (none / 0) (#66)
    by squeaky on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 02:56:52 PM EST
    I was kinda hoping for Alexander as the (none / 0) (#62)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 02:46:51 PM EST
    first name.

    George was the favorite in the betting pool with 2/1 odds so it will be pay day for a lot of people.


    His given name at birth won't ... (none / 0) (#69)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 03:04:24 PM EST
    ... necessarily be the name little Prince George formally takes upon actually assuming the throne, which will probably be well after you and I and most everyone here are memories and afterthoughts in this world. The given name King George VI, father of the current monarch, was Prince Albert Frederick Arthur George, the Duke of York.

    And I agree with you, "George" is a mature-sounding name far more befitting of someone's grandfather, rather than a little tyke.



    But only (none / 0) (#72)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 03:14:20 PM EST
    3 times in the history of the British monarchy has the monarch adopted a regnal name different than their birth name.

    It has been rumored that Charles might do it and become King George VII, since Charles I was beheaded and Charles II converted to (gasp!) Catholicism.


    Absolutely, he should be George VII. (none / 0) (#75)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 03:24:28 PM EST
    After all, the fate of the two Kings Charles only happened over three centuries ago ago.

    For the horrific crime of being a Roman Catholic in post-Elizabethan England, Charles II was chased from the throne and run off by a Dutch army led by the namesakes of Virginia's College of William and Mary, who were then invited by select English nobility to assume the throne to the not necessarily universal acclamation of the peasantry in the so-called "Glorious Revolution" of 1688.



    Not on my list of things I regret I won't be (none / 0) (#74)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 03:18:23 PM EST
    here to witness.

    Observation:  no nickname comes to mind for "George."


    See if I can be the very first to (5.00 / 4) (#76)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 03:29:25 PM EST
    point out there is, of course, a Seinfeld episode re "Geoge" and nicknames:



    Hahahahahaha! (none / 0) (#89)
    by Zorba on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 05:23:34 PM EST
    "King T-bone."  I like it!      ;-)

    Well, since it seems like (none / 0) (#119)
    by Zorba on Thu Jul 25, 2013 at 10:26:20 AM EST
    many of the Greek men I know, including a whole bunch of my relatives, are named George (it's a very common name among Greeks, since St. George is a popular saint, and one of the patron saints of Greece), it does seem like a pretty normal name to me.  Γεώργιος In Greek, pronounced sort of between Giorgios and Yioryios.
    And after all, the baby's great-grandfather, Prince Philip, was born in Greece, into the Greek royal family, although he's not ethnically Greek.            ;-)

    And (none / 0) (#120)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 25, 2013 at 10:28:23 AM EST
    St. George is the patron saint of England.

    Indeed, (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by Zorba on Thu Jul 25, 2013 at 11:13:09 AM EST
    He is.  Busy saint, between his slaying of dragons and keeping an eye on a whole bunch of countries as patron saint (not just Greece and England).
    Of course,the Greeks had him as patron saint before the English did.       ;-)

    Spain, also, as I recall (none / 0) (#122)
    by christinep on Sat Jul 27, 2013 at 06:40:08 PM EST
    At least, in Barcelona, where Gaudi's Sagrada Familia has only 4 engraved figures inside the magnificent Church at each entrance -- Jesus, Mary, Joseph, & St. George (to guard against all kinds of dragons.)

    Louis, after Lord Mountbatten, Louis Francis (none / 0) (#95)
    by melamineinNY on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 06:56:36 PM EST
    Albert Victor Nicholas Mountbatten, aka "Dickie", mentor and "honorary grandfather" of royal baby's grandfather Charles?

    He from time to time strongly upbraided the Prince for showing tendencies towards the idle pleasure-seeking dilettantism of his predecessor as Prince of Wales, King Edward VIII, whom Mountbatten had known well in their youth. Yet he also encouraged the Prince to enjoy the bachelor life while he could and then to marry a young and inexperienced girl so as to ensure a stable married life.[65]

    That advice sure worked out, didn't it? (none / 0) (#103)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 08:52:22 PM EST
    Lord Mountbatten may have been a great military leader during the Second World War, but he was hardly the equivalent of Dear Abby on the home front, given that example of personal counsel.



    I was thinking the same - we all know (none / 0) (#110)
    by melamineinNY on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 10:21:41 PM EST
    how that turned out. Here's another gem:

    In 1974 Mountbatten began corresponding with Charles about a potential marriage to his granddaughter, Hon. Amanda Knatchbull.[68] It was about this time he also recommended that the 25-year-old prince get on with sowing some wild oats.[68]

    granddaughter + sow wild oats = sacrificial lamb?


    Lord Mountbatten (none / 0) (#123)
    by Politalkix on Sat Jul 27, 2013 at 07:03:01 PM EST
    maintained a stiff upper lip in the home front despite all scandals and gossip.