Wednesday Open Thread

I've got another really busy work day. Here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Tuesday Open Thread | What's Next for Justin Bieber? >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    AN AXE LENGTH AWAY, vol. 255 (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 22, 2014 at 09:20:13 AM EST
    Left you a comment (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Zorba on Wed Jan 22, 2014 at 09:44:21 AM EST
    over there, D.

    Wordpress (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jan 22, 2014 at 10:17:30 AM EST
    I don't understand how it works, I have an account for the new TL long ago, but every time I login anywhere I have to reset the password to the same thing it's always been.

    Anyone know how Wordpress works and why I keep having to reset my password ?

    I tried to comment there as well and I hate using Google because I don't want all my idiotic comments on the net traced back to that account or to Google+.

    That is what I use for professional comments, which are few are far between.


    Set up a separate (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Zorba on Wed Jan 22, 2014 at 01:55:53 PM EST
    Google email account without using your actual name.  I have one with the email I use that is available on my profile, and the "name" that I created the account with is "Zorba Greek."  Plus I do not have a Google email account under my real name.
    Of course, they can probably easily trace it back to me if they want, just from my IP address, if nothing else.  But it will involve a few extra steps for them, or anyone else.
    I also try to use DuckDuckGo as a search engine, rather than Google.
    As for Wordpress, who the heck knows how it works, although I do not have to reset my password every time I use it.

    Good Idea... (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jan 22, 2014 at 02:09:27 PM EST
    ...but since the new TL uses WordPress it would seem advantageous to figure it how it works.

    I should be able to use one WordPress ID for all WordPress forums I would think.


    I wish I could help you (none / 0) (#4)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 22, 2014 at 11:06:28 AM EST
    But I'm as clueless as the next tech moron.

    the new site (none / 0) (#15)
    by the capstan on Wed Jan 22, 2014 at 08:27:07 PM EST
    These comments reminded me to go look again.  Found no comment after about Jan 8 or 9.  Are there more?  How do you get them if there are?

    Another case of why elections matter (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 07:01:40 AM EST
    Attorney General Mark R. Herring will announce today that Virginia's ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional.

    Herring will not defend the constitutionality of the ban in federal court in Norfolk, where two same-sex couples are suing to overturn it.

    "The attorney general has concluded that the ban violates the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution on two grounds -- one, marriage is a fundamental right being denied to some Virginians, and two, the ban unlawfully discriminates on a basis of sexual orientation and gender,"

    Good for him (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by jbindc on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 07:11:09 AM EST
    I am proud to live in Virginia today - between this and Governor Goodhair (II) and Mrs. Governor (nee Former Redskins Cheerleader getting indicted, it's a good thing.

    I think you mean Gov. Goodhair III. (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 02:34:41 PM EST
    Rod Blagojevich, whose term in office in Illinois actually preceded McDonnell's rise and equally spectacular fall from grace, is Gov. Goodhair II.

    Rick Perry, of course, has never been able to shake the mantle of the original Gov. Goodhair, bestowed upon him by the late, great Molly Ivins. I do miss her.

    In a perverse sort of way, I like Mrs. Governor Goodhair III, who reminds me of one of the title characters in the black comedy "Heathers." She's a girl who knows exactly what she wants and isn't afraid to ask for it bluntly. And the men in her life, God bless 'em, fall all over themselves at her command to do her bidding.

    And I'm sure that being a former cheerleader, for that football team from Washington whose racially derogatory nickname will never again be mentioned by me until they change it, probably helped Mrs. Governor Goodhair III hone and perfect that particular skill, which got her to where she is today -- standing in the docket in federal court, pleading not guilty to public corruption charges.



    Gimme an N (5.00 / 2) (#56)
    by jbindc on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 02:40:54 PM EST
    Gimme an O!

    Gimme  a T!


    Gimme  a G!

    Gimme  a U!

    Gimme an I!

    Gimme an L!

    Gimme a T!

    Gimme a Y!


    LOL! (none / 0) (#72)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 04:18:58 PM EST
    I think we missed our calling, which is writing B movie screenplays in Hollywood. Anyway, we'll see, soon enough. That's why they empanel trial juries.

    I really, really hope that (none / 0) (#50)
    by Zorba on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 01:19:18 PM EST
    the court overturns the ban.  Fingers crossed for luck!
    Ken Cuccinelli must be having a serious case of heartburn right about now.  At least, I certainly hope he is.

    Given that Cuccinelli also ... (none / 0) (#73)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 04:25:41 PM EST
    ... received illegal gifts from the guy who so lovingly indulged Gov. and Mrs. Goodhair III, I'd like to think that he has more important concerns on his mind right now -- like, "Oh Lord, please don't let them indict me, too!"

    He apparently doesn't (none / 0) (#74)
    by jbindc on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 04:35:56 PM EST
    He's running around saying Christie should step down from the RGA.


    "I think just from the perspective of setting aside this as an issue in other races, it makes sense for him to step aside in that role," Cuccinelli said. "He does not serve the goals of that organization by staying as chairman. That doesn't mean any of the charges, political or otherwise, are substantive or not. It doesn't matter, perception is reality."

    Oh, dear! (none / 0) (#82)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 06:07:24 PM EST
    Given the public record, you sure have to give him points for chutzpah.

    From our "Unintended Prescience" file: (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 02:16:13 PM EST
    Lo and behold, the NFL had mic'd up both Richard Sherman and Michael Crabtree for last Sunday's NFC championship game in Seattle between the Seahawks and the 49ers.

    And today, the league finally released the video of that final play and its aftermath, with its accompanying audio. It corresponds with Sherman's version of events, prior to his intemperate remarks to that Fox Sports reporter immediately following the end of the game.

    Sherman broke away from the end zone celebration and ran up to Crabtree, patting him on the rear and then holding out his hand to him while saying,"Helluva game, helluva game ..." -- and Crabtree's response to the gesture of sportsmanship was to shove Sherman roughly in the face.

    When we see Sherman's outburst in its full context, the incident takes on an entirely different perspective -- at least, it sure does for me. I think he's been unfairly targeted and maligned by some people with an axe to grind, and it makes me wonder why the NFL didn't release this video earlier.


    If he's mic'd up (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 02:31:51 PM EST
    release everything he said the enire game or it's cherry-picked and meaningless.

    I'd respectfully disagree. (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 03:35:39 PM EST
    Further, I'd argue that if this video is "cherry-picked" as you say, then at the very least, it's no more so than those endless loops of Sherman's rant, which have been playing repeatedly on all the major networks and sports channels for four days running now.

    Look at what's been said about Sherman as a result of those clips, such as this from USA Today: "An hour after Richard Sherman mocked him in the end zone then ripped him in a memorable postgame interview, ..."

    Simply put, where was the mockery in the end zone? That USA Today article unintentionally established a false narrative from its very outset, by first making an assumption merely on the basis of what we all saw postgame on Fox, and then stating it as though it were fact. And obviously, they weren't the only ones who did so. But as the NFL video and audio shows, that initial assumption was wrong.

    If you're looking for full context, there's little doubt that there's been some bad blood boiling between Sherman and Crabtree over the past two seasons, which well predates this particular game. And I'll freely admit, Sherman is overtly brash and sometimes intemperate. That choke gesture he made toward 49ers' QB Colin Kaepernick following the game-deciding interception was certainly uncalled for, and further constituted a violation of NFL rules. He doesn't enhance the Seahawks' public image when he makes it all about him.

    But then, the bad blood between Sherman and Crabtree also has its own context, as part of the larger storyline about the suddenly explosive rivalry that's developed between the Seahawks and 49ers. What happened last Sunday certainly underscores that there's no real love lost at all between these two high-caliber teams.

    I don't expect the media to apologize for once again manufacturing a controversy out of whole cloth, which sells papers, garners viewers and brings eyeballs to their respective websites. I daresay a good portion of our own discussions over the years here at TL have concerned themselves with the antics of a manipulative and disingenuous American media

    But I would hope that the rest of us can look at this particular NFL video, which I think speaks for itself, and realize that a lot of people have gotten the wrong take on this so-called controversy. And I'd really like to believe that we can do so, without raising the bar by demanding further evidence, before we consider disabusing ourselves of our own previously-held negative views and opinions on Richard Sherman, which were grounded solely upon a mistaken first impression.



    "our?" (none / 0) (#81)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 06:06:54 PM EST
    own previously-held negative views and opinions on Richard Sherman, which were grounded solely upon a mistaken first impression.
    Maybe such views and opinions were not universal among "us."

    I wasn't necessarily talking about you. (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Jan 25, 2014 at 01:30:14 PM EST
    Rather, I was speaking about those of us who did harbor that mistaken impression of Sherman's rant, of which I was one, hence the first person possessive. Sorry for the confusion.

    Meaningless, Yes... (none / 0) (#65)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 04:00:37 PM EST
    ...but it does coincide with Sherman's version, but it certainly doesn't put it in context.

    It's a big to do about nothing, the tape recording only proves both are poor sportsman, which in the NFL covers most, including some fans.  We all have our not made for TV moments.

    Now, can we talk about something important, like Beiber or cankles.


    Bieber! (none / 0) (#67)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 04:04:18 PM EST
    I liked cankles... (none / 0) (#123)
    by unitron on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 03:52:08 PM EST
    ...most recent album much more than I did Beiber's.

    : - )


    Hear! hear! (none / 0) (#76)
    by oculus on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 04:37:25 PM EST
    Let's see . . . (5.00 / 2) (#78)
    by nycstray on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 04:57:07 PM EST
    You've just helped eliminate a team and player (who you admit to having an issue with) from the SB, and you don't think that maybe he's not quite ready for you to get all up in his face? Really, if he meant it in a good way, he should have saved it for another 20 seconds when the players generally shake hands and walk away. Judging by what he said immediately after the game (and the choke sign directed at the QB), sincere doesn't really pop to mind. And if he did mean it in the most sincere way, why wasn't he a bit more gracious during the interview?

    This kinda crap must happen all the time, and you rarely see other winners acting like that . . . if you did, I doubt social media would have exploded the way it did. Nor do I think his coach would have had a sit down with him . . .


    Would you be gracious ... (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 05:58:28 PM EST
    ... in talking about someone who had just put his hand in your face and shoved it? If you would, then you'd certainly be a better person than me or most other people.

    I'm not saying what Sherman did was right. And I freely admit that I did not like what I saw from that afternoon after the game, and thought his outburst to be both juvenile and self-aggrandizing.

    But I'll also admit that perhaps I jumped the gun in my initial judgment of him, because given its context in the NFL video, I now find his emotional reaction to be perfectly understandable.

    And because of that, I'd really like to see the media at least move on from their now-unraveling "Sherman = thug" storyline, and not continue to belabor the issue at his expense.



    I would (none / 0) (#83)
    by nycstray on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 06:07:36 PM EST
    but it would be rare if someone did that to me. Now if you look at sports, especially football, these guys should be able to handle it. Especially if they had just scored a HUGE win and were SB Bound.
    Seriously, if you didn't know the score, you'd think Sherman was a poor loser :)

    For the record, I have never called him a thug or anything else. I just think he should have a better handle on his professional behavior.


    That should be, I would not! :) (none / 0) (#84)
    by nycstray on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 06:08:17 PM EST
    before that play? Might add some needed context.

    Sherman said something about (none / 0) (#58)
    by jondee on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 03:30:02 PM EST
    being annoyed about something Crabtree said to him
    "last year", which makes me think he and my wife should get together..

    LOL! (none / 0) (#61)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 03:47:20 PM EST
    But to be fair, I think there are a lot of spouses who don't mind nursing petty grievances against their significant others for extended periods. Not that I'm thinking of anyone in particular, but let's just say that it's a good thing she doesn't read this blog.



    I line up with you, DfromH, on this. (none / 0) (#91)
    by Green26 on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 12:42:37 AM EST
    While I too was put off by how he sounded and what he said in the post-game interview(s), the more I read about him, the more I like him and believe he's been unfairly judged. No. 2 in his high school class. Started a masters program his last year at Stanford. Does considerable charitable work. Also, having played cornerback in college, I view his game-saving play, which was incredibly hard to execute, as one of the best plays by a corner that I've ever seen. He was in perfect position, he looked up quickly, and despite being pushed in the back by Crabtree and having his momentum go away from the trajectory of the ball, he was able to go up high at the right time, turn his body and shoulder back, reach up and back with strength, and make the play. Otherwise, SF wins the game.

    Yes, an incredible play. (none / 0) (#138)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Jan 25, 2014 at 01:53:02 PM EST
    I played baseball in college, and that was easily the equivalent of robbing someone of a walk-off home run at the right-field wall in the bottom of the ninth.

    What will progressive public policy (5.00 / 2) (#101)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 10:30:05 AM EST
    look like when half the jobs are gone?

    Two hugely important statistics concerning the future of employment as we know it made waves recently:

    1. 85 people alone command as much wealth as the poorest half of the world.

    2. 47 percent of the world's currently existing jobs are likely to be automated over the next two decades.

    Combined, those two stats portend a quickly-exacerbating dystopia. As more and more automated machinery (robots, if you like) are brought in to generate efficiency gains for companies, more and more jobs will be displaced, and more and more income will accumulate higher up the corporate ladder. The inequality gulf will widen as jobs grow permanently scarce--there are only so many service sector jobs to replace manufacturing ones as it is--and the latest wave of automation will hijack not just factory workers but accountants, telemarketers, and real estate agents.

    That's according to a 2013 Oxford study, which was highlighted in this week's Economist cover story. That study attempted to tally up the number of jobs that were susceptible to automization, and, surprise, a huge number were. Creative and skilled jobs done by humans were the most secure--think pastors, editors, and dentists--but just about any rote task at all is now up for automation. Machinists, typists, even retail jobs, are predicted to disappear.

    Seems to me that those who have the most power to shift policy in a direction more focused on the not-elite population have to see the current trend as a problem that needs fixing - and I'm not sure they do, exactly.  They can talk about income inequality, but what, if anything will they do - what can they do?  What do we do?

    My governor - O'Malley - wants to raise the minimum wage here in MD, but the whining and moaning from the corporate community is pretty loud, so it remains to be seen whether this will ever happen.

    As of January 15th ... (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by christinep on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 12:25:04 PM EST
    at least 3 million enrolled in private healthcare policies under the ACA.  (Plus millions more per expanded Medicaid under the ACA.)  A positive glimpse of an important reality.

    Too bad (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by jbindc on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 12:27:29 PM EST
    A majority of those 3 million people already had health insurance.

    Surely, jbindc, you can invent (none / 0) (#109)
    by christinep on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 12:35:34 PM EST
    a rejoinder stronger than a misleading canard.  In any event, it will be interesting and instructive to hear the State of the Union speech next week.

    Hey (none / 0) (#110)
    by jbindc on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 12:39:00 PM EST
    It was all over the news about the study put out by Mckinsey & Company last week - not that many people who have signed up so far were actually uninsured.

    I can't help it if you don't read the news.

    And as for the State of the Union - words, just words.  We all know with Mr. Obama that those rarely translate to action. Remember "Win the Future?"  (WTF?)


    Speaker Borhner takes Pres. (none / 0) (#112)
    by oculus on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 12:58:31 PM EST
    Obama at this word:

    "I told my colleagues in July I didn't think shutting down the government over Obamacare would work because the president said, `I'm not going to negotiate,' " Boehner said. But other Republicans insisted on going ahead. "When I looked up, I saw my colleagues going this way. And you learn that a leader without followers is simply a man taking a walk.... So I said, `You want to fight this fight? I'll go fight the fight with you.' "

    Reminds me of the story about... (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by unitron on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 03:40:03 PM EST
    ...the French politician back around revolution time who leaped up from his seat in the cafe to run after a crowd, saying "There go my people, I must find out where they are headed so that I can lead them."

    Jamie Dimon gets a raise - a 74% raise. (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 01:44:27 PM EST
    You're not shocked by this are you?  I mean, the guy took a pay cut the year before, all the way down to 11.5 million.  

    New compensation: $20 million; course, $18.5 million of that is in stock, so he'd best put his shoulder to the wheel and keep making those deals with the SEC and the feds, huh?

       The increase brought Mr. Dimon's pay for 2013 to $20 million from the $11.5 million he pulled in for 2012. The board that year halved Mr. Dimon's pay due to a trading fiasco that cost the bank billions, saying that he had "ultimate responsibility for the failures that led to the losses."

        In approving the 2013 package, which included $18.5 million in stock, the board cited the company's long-term performance, gains in market share and "the regulatory issues the company has faced and the steps the company has taken to resolve those issues."

        Mr. Dimon's pay raise caps a tumultuous year for the nation's largest bank by assets, where several settlements with numerous government agencies included a record $13 billion pact with the Justice Department in November.

        The legal problems also acted as a drag on earnings for J.P. Morgan, which posted the first-ever quarterly loss under Mr. Dimon and slipped behind Wells Fargo & Co. as the bank with most annual profits. Net income dropped 16% during 2013 to $17.9 billion. Revenue was down 2%.

    But it beats going to jail, right?

    Ahhh...good times.

    As my mother used to say (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by jondee on Sat Jan 25, 2014 at 09:51:23 AM EST
    (before Roseanne Roseannadanna) it's always something. If it's not one thing, it's somethin' else..

    And of course, if you're anything like me, with age comes a much more acute awareness of the fragility of life in general. Ain't it a gas?

    Since it is the anniversary of Roe v. Wade (none / 0) (#5)
    by jbindc on Wed Jan 22, 2014 at 11:31:39 AM EST
    Interesting how opinions have not really changed since the case was decided in 1973, and how most people don't view it as their most important issue.

    How central is the issue of abortion for most Americans today? Judging from the enormous amount of press coverage the issue receives--especially on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, decided 41 years ago Wednesday, you might guess that the issue is a major one in most households. But that isn't the case. Just recently Gallup asked people to tell them what the most important problem facing the country was. It is a question Gallup has been asking for decades and it is a revealing one because people can give the pollsters any answer they like. Only 1 percent mentioned abortion, and it's rarely been any higher.

    This is one of the many misconceptions about public opinion on abortion. We have been studying the issue for years and each year we compile data from the major pollsters to present a comprehensive picture of attitudes. We don't take any polls of our own. We rely on the work of pollsters that are household names, including Gallup, Harris, and Pew. The data from the pollsters are remarkably clear and they present a picture that is far more nuanced than pro-life or pro-choice activists suggest.


    Pro-life and pro-choice activists don't see the shades of gray that most Americans see on the issue. Neither their actions nor court decisions have altered public opinion in any significant way since Roe was decided more than four decades ago. Abortion will never be far from the headlines because the activists on both sides are noisy and passionate, and the media is attracted to controversy. But for most of the public, the issue is complex and cloudy.

    I still consider Roe v. Wade (5.00 / 4) (#8)
    by Zorba on Wed Jan 22, 2014 at 02:00:46 PM EST
    pretty d@mned important, and am alarmed at the chipping away of it, state by state.
    But then, I am old enough to have a couple of friends who were desperate enough, in the pre-Roe v. Wade days, to have gotten illegal abortions.  One of them almost died, and was left permanently infertile afterwards.
    So yes, it's important to me.

    Agreed... (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jan 22, 2014 at 03:07:52 PM EST
    ...it's an important issue, say like the 1st Amendment, that might not show up in polls or discussed every day, but when something happens that is related, it sits front and center.  Like Wendy Davis; who doesn't know who she is and why we know her name.

    It would be useful to know people though was important problem facing the country.  Which I would imagine is always related to whatever is making the news cycle that week.  Like this week, maybe terrorism and relations with Russia, last week maybe abuse of power by government officials.  And just because people don't find abortion to be 'the most important problem facing the country', doesn't mean it's not in the top 5.

    The better measure of what is an important problem facing the country is by the debate.  Things like guns, abortion, taxes, politics, and religion are always fire-starters because people think they are very important issues and are willing to go toe to toe for them.  Where as other, but less important, issues people are more likely to let it go in order to keep the peace.

    Plus it's all relative, dependent on what else is or isn't happening in the world.  Russia moves a missile to Cuba and ain't no one thinking about abortion...  But someone lunatic kills an abortion doctor and everybody is thinking about it.


    Yes, it is true (none / 0) (#13)
    by Zorba on Wed Jan 22, 2014 at 05:08:50 PM EST
    that it's all relative, Scott.
    I got deeply involved with the anti-Vietnam War movement after I met and became friends with a paraplegic Vietnam vet attending my college, when I was an undergraduate in the late 60's.
    He really opened my eyes as to what was really going on, and I became an anti-war activist.
    Although, I must say that I keep an eye on things that may not be "sexy" (or whatever) in the news.

    These things (none / 0) (#21)
    by jbindc on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 07:16:18 AM EST
    Things like guns, abortion, taxes, politics, and religion are always fire-starters because people think they are very important issues and are willing to go toe to toe for them.  Where as other, but less important, issues people are more likely to let it go in order to keep the peace.

    Flare up from time to time because, as you said, they are fire starters (and help each party raise a huge amount of money).

    But if you ask people what they really care about, abortion probably doesn't even make the top 10.  That's because what people really care about these days are jobs, health care, whether they can pay their bills, (right now) whether they can keep the heat on, whether they can keep their houses, and whether they can eat and afford their medicine.  Things like abortion become "more important" to people when times are good.  Unless it affects someone directly (unfortunately), this kind of thing is moved to the way back of peoples' minds.


    Agreed... (none / 0) (#26)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 08:43:45 AM EST
    ...but that is the difference between 'really care about' and 'important'.  I would say that the Bill of Rights is really important, but if you asked me what I really cared about, more personal and day to day stuff would come to mind.

    What I was saying is that the polling would be different today than the week, especially here in Texas, that Wendy Davis filibustered.

    And I suspect that 1% above just might the same percentage of people having pregnancy scares.


    Interesting read (none / 0) (#37)
    by jbindc on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 09:58:52 AM EST
    I had a classmate in my ... (none / 0) (#51)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 01:54:31 PM EST
    ... graduate program when I was pursuing my master's in history, and she made a presentation that argued the very same points as the author of this article. I found her talk very enlightening at the time, and it made me realize that 98% of the argument against legal abortion is based upon emotion and not fact.

    I actually enjoyed two of the readers' comments at the bottom of the article:

    "mangymut wrote: 'Many of the same people who are against abortion are also against birth control and against educating teens about birth control. This makes no sense to me, preventing pregnancy is far better than abortion.'

    "CoreyinSavannah responds: 'They want to punish people. They are aliens who require misery to feed their life force. It is the ONLY answer that makes any sense.'"



    You know, (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by Zorba on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 03:23:02 PM EST
    as I well remember, back before abortion was legal in this country, there were any number of women who would fly to other countries to get abortions.  Women of means, of course, because women with very little money could not afford to fly to Denmark, or wherever.
    And many of these women, and their relatives, were consistently voting for politicians who were opposed to legalizing abortion, or were opposed to many women's rights.
    Hypocrites.  I hate hypocrites.

    "We have, in fact, ... (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 04:01:57 PM EST
    ... two kinds of morality, side by side: one which we preach but do not practice, and one which we practice but seldom preach."
    -- Bertrand Russell, "Eastern and Western Ideals of Happiness," Skeptical Essays (1928)

    Land of 7 Billion Dances (none / 0) (#6)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 22, 2014 at 11:36:04 AM EST
    Oakland's own Boots Riley and his crew The Coup, lay it down with the help of some talented city kids who can bend it way, Way, WAY better than Beckham. (link):

    If this your first time here, raise your hand
    If the police come, hide your contraband
    We all leave in a box in a long sedan
    How you want your name read by the anchorman?

    More nasty tech (none / 0) (#10)
    by Mikado Cat on Wed Jan 22, 2014 at 02:16:50 PM EST
    Listening to NPR the other day in the car they said protesters in Ukraine were located by cell phone tower info and sent SMS messages telling them they were registered as being in protest (using the words that make it an illegal activity).

    Buried a bit down in this NYT story.

    I guess I'm going to have to read (none / 0) (#12)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jan 22, 2014 at 04:18:25 PM EST
    the Gates book now, even though I didn't initially want to.  I'm pretty tired of reading wartime books.

    He says on the Daily Show that quotes have been cherry picked for conflict purposes. Stewart says congress comes out looking venal and small in the book, which he thought, "Boy that's accurate".

    Gates says in recent decades President's have been too quick to reach for guns.  Sending in American troops is usually not the answer.  Kind of putting me on the hook to read his book.

    He also says that in a book he wrote 15yrs ago he wrote, " The dirty little secret in Washington is the biggest doves wear uniforms because they have seen war, seen political will dry up etc etc etc.  Will I have to read two books now?

    Russia hacking into western & Asian (none / 0) (#14)
    by Politalkix on Wed Jan 22, 2014 at 07:59:43 PM EST
    companies. link

    Hear! Hear! (none / 0) (#16)
    by Politalkix on Wed Jan 22, 2014 at 10:53:56 PM EST

    Tolokonnikova said that Edward Snowden, the fugitive former U.S. contractor living in Russia after leaking classified National Security Agency documents, now "finds himself in the conditions of a global jail."

    "If you are Snowden and a man who uncovers information and policy with the media function and comes to Russia and sees that the media and information policies work 100 times less clearer than the U.S., then it is your duty to see and uncover how they work in Russia," she said. "But obviously he cannot speak about the situation of Russia because these are the conditions of his stay."

    While Putin has said Snowden is free to attend the Olympics, Tolokonnikova and Alekhina said they have other plans. "We are going to Mordovia to visit prisons," Tolokonnikova said, referring to the region about 450 kilometers (280 miles) southeast of Moscow where she spent time in a labor camp. "That is more interesting than the games."

    "Hear! Hear!" what? (5.00 / 4) (#17)
    by Anne on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 06:36:33 AM EST
    Snowden didn't "come to Russia;" he got stuck there because his own country revoked his passport.  His choice was reduced to seeking asylum and accepting the conditions of that asylum, or surrendering himself to American authorities, many of whom we now know would like nothing more than to kill him.

    Would Pussy Riot like Edward Snowden to lift the veil off the Russian government's policies and actions?  Sure sounds like they would, but even they recognize that he's not in a position to do so - that's the part you didn't put in bold.  Wonder why that was?

    It's nice, though, that Pussy Riot is apparently free to travel the world, including visiting the US, huh?  "Hear, hear" to that.


    No (none / 0) (#18)
    by Politalkix on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 07:00:58 AM EST
    Snowden travelled from China to Russia after his passport got revoked. Revocation of passport is a lame excuse. Snowden and the people and governments helping him have scant regard for international law in this regard.

    You know very well that Snowden will not get "killed" if he surrenders to American authorities and stands trial. However, you are stuck repeating the lie that he will get killed by extra legal methods to justify his avoidance of a trial. Pathetic!

    Lots of people (not just the FSB but the ultraorthodox in the Russian Church and Russian ultranationalists)also wanted the Pussy Riot team to get killed by extra judicial methods. Putin, also put them in Russian labor camps and imprisoned atleast one member in Siberia. However, the Pussy Riot group was courageous enough to stand trial in Russia. They have earned their street credentials about activism.



    What was the point of your posting the (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by Anne on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 07:20:49 AM EST
    Pussy Riot comment?

    Do you have an actual point, or are you now just on a mission to find and post anything and everything that damns Snowden, Greenwald and Assange?


    Hear, Hear... (5.00 / 5) (#28)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 08:53:23 AM EST
    ...with what Anne said, is there a point ?

    You could save us all a lot of agonizing reading by just posting that you hate Snowden, Greenwald, Obama, Assange, any Clinton, and Russia, five times a day.  Better yet, just state that you hate everything all republicans hate, no need to try and connect invisible dots and imaginary what if's.

    Trust me, we get it.


    That Should Have Been Posted (none / 0) (#29)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 08:54:51 AM EST
    ...in reply to Politalkix.

    What a crazy comment! (none / 0) (#87)
    by Politalkix on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 08:07:40 PM EST
    Reply to ScottW714.

    "[L]ike nothing more than to kill (none / 0) (#24)
    by oculus on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 08:33:35 AM EST

    See this, from the other day: (none / 0) (#36)
    by Anne on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 09:53:35 AM EST
    Multiple officials within the United States government have told a reporter of their interest in murdering Edward Snowden. A killing that would take place outside of any legal proceeding or formal process. The US government officials not only expressed a desire to do it for their national security concerns but also a sense of personal satisfaction they would receive from completing the task.

    There's more at the link, here.


    To be clear (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:32:15 AM EST
    I read that as...

    a blog writes that an anonymous reporter says anonymous officials have said....


    Unless Snowden gets hired... (none / 0) (#64)
    by unitron on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 03:59:50 PM EST
    ...by the Russian equivalent of the NSA, and they're as sloppy as we were about security, I don't think he'll be able to tell us anything about the place that we don't already know anyway.

    exactly (none / 0) (#77)
    by ruffian on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 04:53:07 PM EST
    He only got what he got because of the job and access that he had. As far as I know, he is not a hacker.

    Excellent. (none / 0) (#23)
    by jbindc on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 08:09:49 AM EST
    Obama launches initiative to combat sexual assault on college campuses

    "I want every young man in America to feel some strong peer pressure, in terms of how they're supposed to behave and treat women," Obama said on Wednesday. "That starts before they get to college. Those of us who are fathers have an obligation to transmit that information. We can do more to make sure that every man out there -- in junior high, high school, and college -- understands what's expected of them, and what it means to be a man, and to intervene if they see someone else acting inappropriately."

    Here's the actual statement

    I would have expected the Pres. to task (none / 0) (#25)
    by oculus on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 08:40:54 AM EST
    every mother with the same responsibility.

    Am also curious as to why the Pres.decided to address this particular issue at this time.


    Ummm (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 08:51:00 AM EST
    also curious as to why the Pres.decided to address this particular issue at this time.

    Don't be joining the keyboard psychoanalyst club :)


    Anticipated my comment might generate (none / 0) (#30)
    by oculus on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 08:55:27 AM EST
    Obama-dissing replies.

    Lawsuits (none / 0) (#33)
    by jbindc on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 09:09:02 AM EST
    and a new report on sexual violence on campus.

    The president placed the issue in context of a larger push to address sexual violence, noting that his administration has already cracked down on the rapes that occur in the military and expanded the protections in the Violence Against Women Act. He called for reforms to the criminal justice system, like ending the rape kit backlog, to ensure that sexual assault cases are taken more seriously.

    But Obama specifically emphasized the sexual assault crisis on college campuses, an issue that has gained prominence over the past several years as college activists have filed dozens of federal complaints against their universities for failing to protect victims. Citing the one in five statistic in the new report, Obama called the sexual assault rate among college students "totally unacceptable."

    AN AXE LENGTH AWAY, vol. 256 (none / 0) (#31)
    by Dadler on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 09:05:27 AM EST
    Steve Martin called it Humanis De Fillet, and she'd agree. (link)

    v. 255
    v. 254

    Happy Thursday, my friends. Dealing with a health issue with my wife that has me worried. (And our corporate doctors, while nice folks, aren't helping as they should be, basically taking a week to figure out what I did with a few keystrokes. And my wife's file isn't even nearly up to date or reflective of her history regarding this matter, ridiculous. IOW, as usual, I have to spend time being a very squeaky wheel in the big machine. Corporate medicine, hooray! But...I know we're luckier than most.) I'm sure it'll be alright, but when it's your dearest darling you'd trade places with them in a heartbeat, and I wish I could.

    Peace, y'all, and forgive me for being quite dickish lately in some comments. Happens to the most average of us, as I am.

    So sorry about your wife, D. (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Zorba on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 09:51:16 AM EST
    I hope that everything turns out well for her.

    Good luck (5.00 / 3) (#40)
    by Mikado Cat on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:36:34 AM EST
    Everybody needs someone to act as their advocate on medical issues, the system doesn't work well without constant thoughtful pushing, and few can do that for themselves.

    As non medical professionals we lack the broad knowledge, but have the advantage in being able to spend many hours researching a specific issue.


    Your wife is lucky to have you in the (5.00 / 3) (#45)
    by Anne on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:58:31 AM EST
    role of the "squeaky wheel;" I often wonder what people do who don't have anyone to take on that role.

    Years ago, my dad was an inpatient at Johns Hopkins Hospital, which even then was so big it was like a small city.  He had been transported down into the bowels of the hospital complex for an MRI, seemingly miles from his room, and when his test was finished, they parked him outside in the hallway to await "transport" back to his room.  He waited and waited and waited...meanwhile, there was another patient also waiting in the hallway, on a gurney - Dad couldn't tell if he was asleep, or even alive, but he did note that the guy had been there when they first brought my dad down, so who knows how long he'd been there?

    After a couple inquiries at the desk, and being told "transport had been notified," he finally just said, fk it, got out of the wheelchair, walked over to the desk and told the woman sitting there that he was through waiting, and that if anyone from transport ever did come for him, they should tell him he'd walked back to his room.  "Sir?  Sir?  You can't do that - you have to wait for transport!"  Dad: "Like hell I do!"

    Dad was convinced that the man on the gurney was probably still there, hours - maybe days - later, because there was apparently no one who could raise any hell on his behalf, and he wasn't in any condition to advocate for himself.

    So, don't apologize for being the squeaky wheel - you just keep making noise!

    Will keep good thoughts for your wife - and you; keep us posted, okay?


    Justin Bieber (none / 0) (#32)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 09:07:08 AM EST
    arrested last night for {alleged} DUI and drag racing on Miami Beach.

    Photo released

    Hmmm. I wonder. (none / 0) (#62)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 03:49:10 PM EST
    At what point is The Biebs officially deportable?

    When Someone Over 14 Gives a Damn (none / 0) (#63)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 03:51:42 PM EST
    LOL! (none / 0) (#68)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 04:12:18 PM EST
    Well, he's all the rage today. I'd like to think that out there somewhere, there's a father figure that Bieber looks up to and respects, someone who will quietly pull him aside and then go all Marlon Brando to Al Martino on him. 'Cause this guy's a bad accident waiting to happen.

    This could do it (none / 0) (#69)
    by jbindc on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 04:13:44 PM EST

    Police said a dazed Bieber, who is too young to legally drink, smelled of booze and started cursing at the officer who pulled him over.

    Bieber said he'd just come from recording music at a studio and failed a field sobriety test, according to police records. When the officer tried to arrest Bieber, he resisted, pulling his arm away, the arrest report said.

    Police Chief Ray Martinez said at a news conference that the singer also had an invalid Georgia driver's license and admitted to smoking marijuana, taking prescription medication and drinking.

    In addition to the drunk driving and resisting arrest without violence charges, Bieber was charged with having a suspended license. No drug charges were filed.

    Although the charges are misdemeanors, some attorneys said that Bieber could be in serious trouble if he gets rapped with a drug charge.

    Bieber has made himself inextricable from American pop culture, but he is not actually American. A Canadian citizen -- reportedly in the U.S. on an O-1 performer's visa -- he can be deported if convicted of a serious crime or if officials deem him a big enough troublemaker, attorneys say.

    And there's this:

    When Bieber was arrested early Thursday morning, he was already under investigation on suspicion of egging his neighbor's house in Calabasas earlier in January.

    The Los Angeles County sheriff's investigation brings the possibility of felony charges after Bieber's neighbor claimed at least $20,000 in damages. Officials with the sheriff's department also said drugs were found in Bieber's home during a warrant raid. Bieber has not been charged


    Carl Shusterman, a Los Angeles attorney specializing in immigration law and a former immigration prosecutor, added that if Bieber admitted to police that he abused drugs, it could be a big problem.

    Shusterman pointed to a provision in U.S. immigration law that states, "Any alien who is, or at any time after admission has been, a drug abuser or addict is deportable."

    Immigration law also allows U.S. officials to deport visitors for "moral turpitude," which is a hazier area of U.S. law, immigration attorneys said.

    So Canada has seceded from (none / 0) (#75)
    by oculus on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 04:36:33 PM EST
    North "America"?

    I have a theory that (none / 0) (#103)
    by jondee on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 11:33:53 AM EST
    the more dancers a singer requires occupying the stage with them, the less vocal talent they have.

    New upward mobility study. (none / 0) (#34)
    by Green26 on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 09:45:37 AM EST
    It would be interesting to have a discussion/thread on this topic. The basics are that rates of mobility in the U.S. have not changed in the past 50 years, and absolute mobility rates have increased in recent decades. A very large amount of data was used. The lead on the study is an economist at Harvard.

    The definitions will be interesting. (none / 0) (#38)
    by EL seattle on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:28:55 AM EST
    A lot has changed since 1964.

    Jobs, housing, and family structure, for instance.  I think that it's hard to bundle all those into one item that can be effectively compared then-to-now.


    Follow the money (none / 0) (#42)
    by Mikado Cat on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:50:51 AM EST
    is a dandy way to learn about how a system works. Tracking income levels over generations etc.

    Generational poverty is a real trap for many, many never break out of it for long. Its not being poor that holds people down, as many come to this country poor and work their way to middle or upper middle class in a generation.

    Parents work their lives in hard manual labor jobs, but all the kids go to college and get white collar jobs.

    I like to learn this kind of stuff, is it a good study?


    Unfortunately, socio-economic mobility ... (5.00 / 3) (#119)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 02:58:10 PM EST
    ... in the United States sure ain't what it used to be. You really need to start living in the here and now. This isn't the mid-20th century, and "My Three Sons" and "Happy Days" have been off the air for a long time ago.

    When I was going to college in the early '80s, the share of public university revenues derived from college tuitions was about 23%, which meant that the public financed two-thirds of a student's education at a public college or university.

    This used to be called an investment in our society's future before Ronald Reagan and the Republicans started playing the politics of resentment and envy, in which they've successfully mischaracterized it over the years as some sort of undeserving public giveaway to freeloaders and left-wing intellectuals.

    As of 2012, that share of public university revenues from tuition stood at 47%. This means that accounting for inflation, student tuitions at public universities have effectively more than doubled in the quarter century since I was in college. Correspondingly, and again accounting for inflation, legislative appropriations to our public universities have declined over the last three decades by about 25-30%.

    The net result of this radical shift in public higher ed funding has rendered a college education evermore unaffordable for increasing numbers of young people from middle- and working-class backgrounds.

    For those students who are determined to pursue higher education many are compelled to borrow significant sums to pay steadily increasing tuitions, which has saddled no small number of them with enormous debt right out of the starting gate at graduation.

    The only ones who've been making out handsomely in this particularly inequitable arrangement are the banks.



    You know what's funny? (none / 0) (#41)
    by Dadler on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:46:54 AM EST
    When you peruse your previous comments and realize a comment you tried to post but thought had failed to post...didn't fail to post and was sitting there. And then you realize that, a day later, you reposted the same thing again as if you'd never posted it in the first place. Then you see the previous one posted, and you feel like a blackout drunk, or just plain old.


    Maybe you know the joke (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by Mikado Cat on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:52:14 AM EST
    If I ever start repeating myself like that just shoot me.

    You said that five minutes ago.


    Or... (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 11:16:45 AM EST
    ...you start a post, get busty with something else, then finish and post it only to find out your post makes no sense because 10 people have posted since.

    And the worse, same as above, but when you go to post, it keeps saying 'error' and it's something you really put a lot of thought into and can't figure why it won't post.

    It happens when the thread is full or when a comment has been removed, really sucks.

    And lastly, when comments get out of order because of rankings and you are posting to this comment but it looks like it's for another and all hell breaks lose because no one's post makes sense because they aren't in the original order.


    LOL (5.00 / 4) (#48)
    by jbindc on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 12:17:12 PM EST
    you start a post, get busty with something else,

    Do tell.....  :)


    I can see where that would be distracting... (5.00 / 3) (#49)
    by Anne on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 12:40:25 PM EST
    [and yes, I'm snickering at my own joke...]

    My Version of... (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jan 27, 2014 at 10:57:12 AM EST
    ...getting jiggy with it.

    Don't you mean "jiggly?" (5.00 / 2) (#144)
    by Anne on Mon Jan 27, 2014 at 11:31:48 AM EST
    [still snickering]

    Scott might want to travel (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by jbindc on Mon Jan 27, 2014 at 11:36:37 AM EST
    You Guys Are Cracking Me Up (none / 0) (#147)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jan 28, 2014 at 11:45:43 AM EST
    And FYI, Dolly was probably half my grade school humor repertoire.  Remember the drawings, "That's Dolly behind a telephone pole..."  

    There is a Johnny Carson special on Netflix, I think, in which Johny says to Dolly, something like "I would give about a years salary to have a peak there" referring to her blouse or dress, can't remember.  But it was pretty funny.  also very odd to see people smoking on a talk show.

    I am old enough to remember Carson, but not old enough to know the details of his life, like the guy was a serious player.  But he was a damn funny guy and I don't say that about many of people of past eras.


    Reuters: NSA snooping Illegal, Useless, and (none / 0) (#43)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:50:58 AM EST
    should end, says Federal Privacy Watchdog.

    The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, an independent government agency, has shared its conclusions with President Barack Obama, according to reports in the New York Times and Washington Post. The board was not immediately available for comment.

    Its conclusion goes further than Obama, who said in a speech on Friday that he thought the NSA's database of records should be moved out of government hands but did not call for an outright halt to the program.

    Also - reports from The Guardian and Antiwar.com.


    Well (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by jondee on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 11:16:21 AM EST
    I guess people are going to be even less likely to talk back to, or "resist" the pigs in the Fullerton now..

    The White House press secretary, (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 03:31:23 PM EST
    Jay Carney, says "we simply disagree with the Board's analysis on the legality of the program."  The chair of the House Intelligence Committee, Mike Rogers (R. MI), made his opposition known to the watchdog report that the program is "illegal and should end."

    President Obama said earlier (June, 2013) that he "welcomed" the surveillance debate--the one that was triggered by Edward Snowde-- and it appears that he has been taken up on that welcoming, even if he continues to disagree with key findings and is circumspect in the details of the recommendations.

    The Board's legal criticism included the chair, David Medine, a former FTC official in the Clinton Administration, Patricia Wald, retired federal appeals court judge, named by President Carter, and James Dempsey, a civil liberties advocate and technology expert.  

    The other two members, Rachel Brand and Elisebeth Cook,  DOJ attorneys in the Bush II administration, dissented.  In their separate dissents, Ms. Brand and Ms. Cook felt the Board should have focused exclusively on policy and left legal analysis to the courts (which are so far, split). Ms. Brand believed the legal issues were "difficult" and that the government's legal theory was at least a reasonable reading, made in good faith by two administrations of two different parties.  She also worried that declaring that the officials have been operating unlawfully for years "could damage morale."  

    The Board was unanimous in recommending a series of changes   either as a winding-down (the majority) or incorporated into a continuing program (dissenters).   The Board criticized the (previously secret) legal theory for the program saying it was a subversion of the Patriot Act's intent and that it also violated the Electronic Communication Act.

    It seems, to me, that, in summary, the Board decided that the surveillance programs was illegal and should end (majority) and that the surveillance program was illegal and should continue (dissent).


    Oh Replblicans... (none / 0) (#70)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 04:13:49 PM EST
    ...you say you want to open the party up, but your illustrious leaders just can't control themselves.

    Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee talks Thursday in Washington, D.C., at the RNC Winter Meetings.

    "If the Democrats want to insult women by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of the government, then so be it," he said. "Let us take this discussion all across America because women are far more than the Democrats have played them to be."


    Says the guy who thinks woman don't have the right to decide what is best for them, rich.

    Some day someone could explain the relationship between birth control and abortion to republicans, because it's clear they don't understand it.

    Isn't this clown the leading R candidate for Prez after the Christie fiasco ?

    No (none / 0) (#71)
    by jbindc on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 04:18:22 PM EST
    shorter jbindc (none / 0) (#89)
    by Politalkix on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:27:41 PM EST
    Q) How is Christie going to stop HRC from occupying the WH in 2017?

    Ans)He will try to create a traffic jam in Pennsylvania Avenue.

    Q) How will Christie stop Huckabee from winning the GOP nomination in 2016?

    Ans) He will be the radar controller and refuse to watch Huckabee's radar returns so that he can pretend that the former Arkansas governor is not even in the radar.

    Christie may have to do the traffic and radar control himself as all his aides are getting subpoenaed. He will be busy.


    Looking at the time stamps on your (3.67 / 3) (#95)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 06:41:32 AM EST
    comment and the one jb made, it's really kind of sad and silly that it took you that long to compose a comment that lame - but then again, considering your general body of work, maybe not so surprising after all.

    Seriously - is this all you've got now?  Do you really have nothing better to do than to constantly, and in violation of site rules, fire off troll ratings to those who simply disagree with you?  What do you do in real life - stick out your bottom lip and stamp your foot before slamming the door in a huff?  Do you hang up on people and then prank call them hours later?

    For the love of God, could you just grow the fk up?


    What's the deal, Anne? (none / 0) (#114)
    by jondee on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 01:36:40 PM EST
    is jb some ultra-fragile hothouse orchid; a political Stephen Hawking who has to be treated with the utmost delicacy at all times lest she expire at any moment and all of us be rendered bereft of her unique insights?

    as near as I can tell (5.00 / 4) (#116)
    by sj on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 02:18:52 PM EST
    it isn't jb that's the problem.

    so pol channels Jay Carney.. (3.00 / 2) (#118)
    by jondee on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 02:56:10 PM EST
    it could worse: he could be passively-aggresively
    shilling for Elder Romney or Christie and the difficult-to-support thesis that the GOP is much more reasonable and forward thinking than anyone realizes..

    Sometimes you have the strangest (5.00 / 3) (#120)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 03:04:04 PM EST
    reactions to comments - perhaps that's considered part of your charm.

    But no, I don't see jb as a helpless, hothouse flower at all - I know she's capable of standing up for herself - I just found his comment to be a cheap shot that didn't deserve to stand with any legitimacy.  And I felt like calling him/her on the BS - so sue me.

    If we'd all been standing around in someone's living room, or sitting at the dinner table, and he - or she - had made that cheap-ass comment, I'd have said something in that situation, too.  


    get me out out here (none / 0) (#117)
    by sj on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 02:21:46 PM EST
    Y'all are still bringing out the worst in me...


    I remember when TL sniping didn't bring out the sniper in me...


    Ever think of taking a time out? (3.00 / 2) (#90)
    by nycstray on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 10:51:31 PM EST
    you seem to have ditched your pom-poms and exclamation points for personal attacks . . .

    OMG (none / 0) (#96)
    by Politalkix on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 06:41:49 AM EST
    Don't over analyze a light hearted comment!  

    "Shorter" is a synonym ... (3.00 / 2) (#94)
    by Yman on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 06:18:57 AM EST
    ... for distorted, twisted, and completely made-up?

    Who knew?


    Apparently "shorter" is also ... (none / 0) (#108)
    by sj on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 12:34:12 PM EST
    ... a synonym for much, much longer. And completely made-up.

    And no doubt I'll be leaving TL again when the violations of site troll rating policy (against this comment, as well as yours) are allowed to stand.

    Oh well.


    Those Repub boys... (none / 0) (#107)
    by christinep on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 12:31:40 PM EST
    they just can't help it.  (Even Scott Walker bumbled yesterday on a matter related to obliviousness, when he recognized & congratulated in his State of the State who had two felony convictions as a sex offender.)

    I hear that Rand Paul is next-in-line for leading Repub presidential candidate.  


    Christinep (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by Politalkix on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 06:03:07 PM EST
    I read in DKos that there will be three Republican responses to the President's SoU speech-Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Mike Lee and Rand Paul.

    It was amusing when Michelle Bachmann insisted that there would be a separate Tea Party response, a few years ago. This year, people will have more choices-eccentric, crazy and batsh*t crazy.



    From crazy to crazier ... each day (none / 0) (#126)
    by christinep on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 07:28:47 PM EST
    And, from funny to funnier (in a strange way.)

    I would say this:  The three responses truly amount to an example of the "when more is less" philosophy.

    Today, it may be possible that the fracture in the Republican party will resemble 1964.  Maybe some--say, Boehner even--have resigned themselves to that acting out.  With a shake of the head, I keep wondering how far removed the Huckabees and the Gohmerts and the Barbours and almost countless Repub state Tea Partiers have finally become.  Then, I really wonder: Is funny actually scary???


    Huckabee (none / 0) (#127)
    by Politalkix on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 08:25:33 PM EST
    Chrostinep, Huckabee is being called a RINO in Red State, right now! They want purer and more purer stuff, thy will be satisfied with nothing else. Some are even talking about crashing and burning the GOP, so that a purer party rises from the ashes.

    Some time during the primaries in 2008 I wrote here that I wanted BHO to win the nomination over HRC because the country needed a JFK before a LBJ.
    It is difficult not to notice the similarities between BHO-HRC and JFK-LBJ. All four of them came from the Senate, which is not very common. JFK won the nomination over LBJ but named the latter as the VP (BHO named HRC as the SoS). JFK and LBJ were initially rivals but worked constructively for the good of the party and the country. IF HRC decides to run in 2016, we will have eerie similarities with the year, 1964.

    By 2016, BHO will firmly set our course in foreign policy. He will avoid war with Iran, thwarting the wishes of hawks in the Pentagon and politicians from both parties just as JFK thwarted a nuclear war with the Soviet Union. Our focus on science and technology jobs to launch a new frontier would also have firmly materialized by that time. If HRC decides to run in 2016, she will get an opportunity to do a lot of good in domestic policy, just like LBJ. We will just have to find a way to rein her somewhat hawkish foreign policy tendencies, so that there is no repeat of a war like Vietnam. That should not be impossible as long as everyone works together.

    We just need the Republicans to find their Barry Goldwater :-). I will wish them a lot of luck in this regard.  


    You think BHO is JFK? (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by nycstray on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 09:26:04 PM EST
    For some reason, reading the (4.33 / 6) (#129)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 10:04:20 PM EST
    comments between PK and christine has the phrase "get a room" running through my head.

    lol!~ :D (none / 0) (#130)
    by nycstray on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 11:34:33 PM EST
    Why just hours ago, Anne ... (none / 0) (#134)
    by christinep on Sat Jan 25, 2014 at 10:16:08 AM EST
    you were casting aspersions on taking your version of a "cheapshot" .... I must have misinterpreted, because it seems to be one thing when an individual disagrees with you or apparent commentator friends and quite something else when others support a view different than your own.  

    Maybe we are all too predictable.  So it goes.


    Oh, paaaahdon me, christine... (3.00 / 2) (#139)
    by Anne on Sat Jan 25, 2014 at 08:05:48 PM EST
    What was I thinking?

    I guess it was bad enough that PK was comparing Obama to JFK, not to mention some of the rest of his stops on the Wacky Logic Tour, but his efforts to rhetorically make out with you got to be too much for me, hence, my feeling that it was all getting a little too intimate for a public conversation.

    Oh dear me, is that a cheap shot?  You're free to think so, just as I was free to think PK's comment to jb was cheap, not to mention pointless.

    I don't have a problem with anyone disagreeing with me - I can hold my own, thank you.  But how sweet of you to be concerned.


    You ask "What was I thinking?" (none / 0) (#140)
    by christinep on Sun Jan 26, 2014 at 01:09:58 PM EST
    I have no idea what you were thinking, Anne.  But, whatever it is, it has a humor all it's own.  And, thank you too.  Have a lovely Sunday.

    I may or may not agree... (none / 0) (#141)
    by unitron on Sun Jan 26, 2014 at 04:47:07 PM EST
    ...with the whole "Obama is to JFK as Clinton is to LBJ" thing (I'll have to think that one over for a few days), but it's a novel, interesting, and thought-provoking point of view.

    BTW, I'm glad you're self-imposed exile/sabbatical from TL has concluded and that you are now back among the fold.*

    *Whether it's more ovine or more lupine depends upon at which instant you squint at it with which eye.  : - )


    it's like all those horrible (none / 0) (#135)
    by jondee on Sat Jan 25, 2014 at 11:37:13 AM EST
    calls the refs always make against the Ravens..

    George Z's new (none / 0) (#79)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 05:12:59 PM EST

    Hmmm. Mark O'Mara's in the news, too. (none / 0) (#93)
    by EL seattle on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 02:23:19 AM EST
    Apparently O'Mara's been named "National Criminal Trial Lawyer of the Year" by some outfit calling themselves The National Trial Lawyers.

    They also gave a Lifetime award to Gloria Allred. So go figure.

    I wonder if the ebay winner of Zimmerman's first painting actually ponied up and paid their full $100 Grand bid. I'd guess that Zimmerman must have gotten something out of that deal, but just how much, well...


    I'd say the verdict on both... (none / 0) (#122)
    by unitron on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 03:47:44 PM EST
    ...should come from their clients, and how happy they were with the outcomes.

    not much worse than a Warhol (none / 0) (#113)
    by jondee on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 01:09:48 PM EST
    and cheaper.

    The photographer who ... (none / 0) (#131)
    by Yman on Sat Jan 25, 2014 at 08:20:48 AM EST
    ... took the picture is not too happy about it.

    Attorney: George Zimmerman stole photographer's work to make painting


    Methinks his "art teacher" should teach (none / 0) (#136)
    by nycstray on Sat Jan 25, 2014 at 11:45:49 AM EST
    him to use a basic digital camera so as not to be stealing other folks work . . .

    And the GOP hits just keep on coming! (none / 0) (#85)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 06:15:33 PM EST
    Conservative author and activist Dinesh D'Souza has been indicted by the feds for campaign finance fraud.

    LOL! (none / 0) (#86)
    by Zorba on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 06:31:06 PM EST
    Sorry to be laughing so hard, but this is hysterical.
    And not entirely surprising.     ;-)

    Yes, I am getting a chuckle too (none / 0) (#88)
    by ruffian on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 08:58:09 PM EST
    Couldn't happen to a finer fella.

    Indicates some investigations have been happening in the quiet. Wonder what else is in the pipeline.


    Jock Spam (none / 0) (#97)
    by CoralGables on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 07:15:54 AM EST

    Jock Spam, eh? A first for TL. (none / 0) (#98)
    by caseyOR on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 07:27:00 AM EST
    Speaking for me only, I would not mind some spammers who gave us recipes. Specifically, food to eat while in the midst of another polar vortex.

    Said recipes should comprise the body of the spam message, no linking to them.


    Toasted Chickpeas (none / 0) (#99)
    by CoralGables on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 07:47:26 AM EST
    with a little kick would be a nice score. Certainly worth 3 points.

    I guess that means you are still in Illinois? (none / 0) (#124)
    by ZtoA on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 04:58:27 PM EST
    It is wickedly cold there! I had to go early January and after a 7 hour delay my flight landed after midnight to minus 22 degrees! But it warmed up over the week enough to dump one inch of rain onto the existing two feet of snow. Love Chicago tho. It was mainly a work trip but I also helped my mom get more heat since her boiler could not keep up with the cold and made a couple months of dinners to freeze for her. Made me appreciate Portland even more. I go back to Illinois in February. I suppose you have lots of frozen dirty slush by now. Hope you are doing well tho!

    AN AXE LENGTH AWAY, vol. 257 (none / 0) (#100)
    by Dadler on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 07:50:06 AM EST
    TGIF, executive style. (link)

    v. 256
    v. 255
    v. 254

    Peace, my friends. Off to the doctor with my wife later this morning. Oh boy, so fun.

    I hope everything's ok (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by jondee on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 10:53:35 AM EST
    with your wife, D. She sounds like one in a million.

    Thanks, J (none / 0) (#132)
    by Dadler on Sat Jan 25, 2014 at 08:59:30 AM EST
    Wish we knew more, but they're being inept. She only has some very worrisome symptoms, that she's had for awhile, that have been misdiagnosed for awhile, and that really indicate something much more serious, so, you know, it's no biggie. Oy.

    I am so sorry to hear (none / 0) (#142)
    by Amiss on Sun Jan 26, 2014 at 08:57:42 PM EST
    that your wife has been misdiagnosed. I come from a series of it. Can't trust a Doctor again after what I have been through. Diabetes missed for a minimum of 10 years, and having my colon punctured during a routine exam. Be very watchful of your wife.
    I am a retired Surgical Technologist and thought I was careful.
    I hope things turn out well for your family.

    Many thanks (none / 0) (#146)
    by Dadler on Mon Jan 27, 2014 at 04:54:32 PM EST
    I appreciate the thoughts. We're finally getting to a specialist tomorrow, but I still feel like I'm going to have to bring that guy up to date, since my wife's file doesn't reflect her actual history with this problem. I'm sure you know the feeling. Oy.

    Jsut got a notification (none / 0) (#104)
    by jbindc on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 12:21:10 PM EST
    CNN reports (no link yet) that the Republicans have moved their nominating convention to June 2016 - the earliest a convention has been held since 1948.

    More of the Republican primary season changes (none / 0) (#111)
    by jbindc on Fri Jan 24, 2014 at 12:51:10 PM EST

    This is interesting:

    The four designated early states will be required to hold their contests in February. States that vote between March 1 and March 14 will be required to award their delegates proportionally, weakening their impact, while states with primaries after that will assign their delegates in a winner-take-all contest, making them much more consequential in the delegate count and adding an incentive to wait.

    The states that break those guidelines will face increased penalties compared to previous years. The committee passed a rule drastically shrinking the number of delegates that state would get at the party's nominating convention. States with 30 delegates or more would be cut down to just nine delegates plus the RNC's committee members, and states with less than 30 delegates would be cut down to 6 delegates plus their committeemen.