Tuesday Open Thread

Here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Sentencing Commission Holds Hearing on Retroactivity of New Drug Guidelines | 11th Circuit Rules Warrrant Required for Cell Site Locator Data >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • CA teacher tenure case: (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by oculus on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 04:20:46 PM EST
    Superior Court Judge (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by MKS on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 06:11:54 PM EST
    I am not sure that holds up....May end up in California Supreme Court, after the Second DCA gets done with it.

    But I would tell the teachers to give up tenure if they gave them an across the board 30% pay hike.


    Agree. (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 07:00:49 PM EST
    And, tenure is more important than money alone.  Academic freedom is now and will become increasingly critical in the future.  For example, the teaching and pursuit of truth has been challenged by not only the powerful of the past (e.g. the Galileo affair), but also by the fringes of the day (e.g. modern day fanatics).  And, the misconception and misunderstanding is that there are no ineffective teachers in place when tenure is absent.  More often, a way  for the Governor Walkers of the land to weed teachers.  

    Oculus, (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 06:48:44 PM EST
    My lengthly response is in the "Sleeping In" thread.  Essentially, this is a case, I believe, that Attorney General Harris should appeal.  And, in the absence of that, legislative fixes should be made, essentially, to provide more time and opportunity to evaluate teachers prior to determination of tenure; and holding administrators responsible and accountable for executing dismissal statutes. Also, it would not be difficult to streamline the process.   However, overall, I do not believe Judge Treu's findings will hold water.  It leaks like a sieve.

    If the Gov. were to tell the AG not to file an (none / 0) (#28)
    by oculus on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 11:19:36 PM EST
    appeal, the GOP would rejoice but the teachers' union would no longer contribute to Dem. candidates. Interesting to see what happens in light of the fact some states and D.C. abolished tenure.

    An appeal should be an easy call (none / 0) (#80)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:18:22 AM EST
    for the Governor and AG.  The legal case as well as their political landscape are congruent.  The student plaintiffs were bankrolled by a Silicon Valley millionaire and the Judge was appointed by the former Republican governor, Pete Wilson.  Students are often used as pawns by those opposed to tenure or timid or lazy  administrators.  When student complain about a teacher, the administrators duck out with something like, there is nothing we an do, the teacher has tenure.  An early inculcation that often lingers.   Arne Duncan, Secretary of Education is, however, delighted by the judge's ruling.  Wonder what his boss thinks?  

    For all you Cliven Bundy fans (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by MKS on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 06:07:36 PM EST
    How do his supporters look now?  Looks like Harry Reid was right on the money.

    It's just sad (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 07:22:53 PM EST
    The man who took the child from a school bus here and held him in the homemade bunker until the FBI broke in and killed him was said by neighbors to regularly ingest what they termed rightwing talk radio.

    How did two young people become so delusional that they thought murdering police officers and draping them in a specific flag was the start of some sort of revolution?

    People in fragile or vulnerable mental states are doing crazy things listening to the wingnutter propaganda.


    ... and highly prone to suggestion to begin with, and the steady diet of right-wing propaganda is driving them into that increasingly fragile and vulnerable mental state.

    One can only hope that as the cynical right persists with its stoking of white-wing paranoia through the reckless use of apocalyptic imagery and increasingly blatant intimations of violence should the GOP not get its way, that folks like Karl Rove and Frank Luntz will be among the very first to be consumed by the flames which they themselves have ignited and fanned.



    One of the conservative regulars here (5.00 / 2) (#125)
    by jondee on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 02:52:05 PM EST
    the other day compared registering gun owners with rounding up Jews during the Holocaust..

    Talk about having your foot on a dangerously paranoic slippery slope..

    How does slinging that sort of hyperbole contribute to rational thinking and discussion?


    It's a mentality (5.00 / 2) (#79)
    by jondee on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:15:42 AM EST
    that perceives itself as under siege; on a collision course with reality. And it is.

    Unfortunately they're probably going to go down ranting about conspiracies, kicking, screaming, and shooting.


    Apparently... (none / 0) (#57)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 09:34:41 AM EST
    the Bundyites booted them from the "movement" for being too radical...that's pretty f*ckin' radical, in a bad way.

    Ya know you're getting too used to random shootings and senseless violence and heneral societal madness when your first thought after hearing the news is "at least they didn't shoot up a school".  Sad state of affairs man.


    Eric Cantor lost his primary (5.00 / 3) (#7)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 07:22:54 PM EST
    to a tea party challenger. Hahahahahaha.  

    Was reading about the challenge in the paper this morning and the 'experts' said it was a long shot, Cantor had a big lead, lots more money, etc  so I was not expecting this at all.  Very pleased.

    My sentiments also, ruffian (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by christinep on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 07:31:25 PM EST
    I mentioned it below.  Yet, what is really significant:  Think about what would happen with people pushing this bs in office ... funny, but not so funny.  For the cynics who question the difference in parties, take a few minutes to read about where these characters stand and the real life effects ... it is real, and it sure isn't funny.

    I get what you mean (5.00 / 3) (#11)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 07:37:31 PM EST
    The bs is not funny at all, but part of me thinks that only more exposure to sunlight will disinfect it.

    Besides, Eric Cantor is arch-copnservative enough. It is not like the tea party took out another moderate.

    Anyone know who would be next in line for his leadership position?


    I'm hoping... (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by unitron on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 09:00:24 PM EST
    "Anyone know who would be next in line for his leadership position?"

    ...that the Democratic Party will relieve them of the burden of having to figure that one out.


    Oh please please please (none / 0) (#179)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 06:49:55 PM EST
    Rep. Pete Sessions of Texas, the chairman of the powerful House Rules Committee, has begun lining up support for a competing bid. And fellow Texas Rep. Jeb Hensarling, a favorite of the GOP's Tea Party wing, is also considered a possible candidate. Hensarling said in a statement that he is "prayerfully considering" a run at a leadership post.

    Let it be a religious tea partier named Hensarling. The gods would smile on that.


    Teahadist Barry Moore, after being indicted (none / 0) (#12)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 07:45:52 PM EST
    For lying to a grand jury, beat out the slightly less insane Josh Pipkin here as well.

    The South doubles down on going completely nuts, being diagnosed with oppositional defiant disorder, and cutting all noses off to spite all faces.....sigh


    Agreed. (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 07:49:38 PM EST
    Schadenfreude.    The tea party guy will be no better, of course, but not sorry about the results.   Maybe poor Boehner can really enjoy his martini tonight, without watching his back for that "dagger."

    Too funny (none / 0) (#98)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 12:21:25 PM EST
    Don't know how I previously missed that comment

    A diarist at Orange (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 07:38:26 AM EST
    Calls it a cooter d'état

    Just heard (5.00 / 3) (#44)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 08:38:03 AM EST
    Cantors campaign spent more on steak than  Brat spent on his entire campaign.   No big name tea party backing.  Just walked away with it.   Was  34 points behind in the last poll and won by double digits.   I was struck by Cantors comment in his concession about other opportunities.  He seemed like the happiest person in the hall.  Who wants the job anyway and now he can be come a lobbiest or talkshow host and start making some real money.

    Good news bad news IMO


    Not exactly no Tea Party backing. (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by caseyOR on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 01:09:12 PM EST
    Brat was the recipient of a great deal of free, to him, favorable media publicity. Rightwing gasbags Laura Ingraham and Mark Levin are just two of the bought and paid for media people that pushed hard for Brat to win. Every voter in that district who pays the least bit of attention to rightwing media got lots of pro Brat info.

    And I think what killed Cantor's chances for a win were the few times he actually acted like he gave a f@ck what happened to the country. His vote to raise the debt ceiling being a prime example. Brat has vowed to vote against raising the debt ceiling for at least the first five years he is in Congress, assuming he wins in November and hangs on to that seat.

    Too bad the Democrats couldn't be bothered to find and fund a good candidate who could maybe win the district this fall.  Cantor was not that popular in his district. Even he was vulnerable in the general.

    Another missed opportunity by the DCCC.


    Yes, (none / 0) (#55)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 09:32:45 AM EST
    who is wurst?  Cantor or Brat.  Probably Brat wurst.   But, it is always good to get some fresh Republican eyes in Congress--with new ideas, such as tax cuts for the one percent.

    never a pretty sight . . . (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by The Addams Family on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 03:36:28 PM EST
    to see how sausage is made

    Another example (none / 0) (#15)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 08:27:24 PM EST
    of a monster created by the GOP, well really more specifically George W. Bush, that is going to eat the GOP alive.

    Congratulations to David Brat, ... (none / 0) (#30)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 01:08:08 AM EST
    ... GOP voters in VA-7, and unbridled wingbats everywhere. This is for you, and it fits like a glove.

    Jonathan & Darlene! (none / 0) (#135)
    by The Addams Family on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 03:38:12 PM EST
    marry me, Donald!

    Should you tell my spouse, or should I? (none / 0) (#180)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 07:04:46 PM EST
    Seriously, though, aren't they wonderful? Most people are surprised to learn that Darlene Edwards is actually the incompetent alter ego of accomplished vocalist Jo Stafford.

    And honestly, only performers as talented and gifted as Ms. Stafford and her husband Paul Weston -- a renowned band leader who first met Stafford when he did the orchestral arrangements on her haunting 1944 cover of the iconic WWII-era song "I'll Be Seeing You" -- could have brought Darlene and Jonathan Edwards to life for audiences as a wholly believable bad lounge act.

    Weston just pounded away on the piano keys like a saloon player in a B-movie western, while Stafford would hit 90% of the notes correctly at a high pitch, but knew exactly which ones one to go either off-key or too sharp to render the entire song grating to the ears. Their comic timing was impeccable.

    Ironically, the only Grammy Award that either she or Paul would ever win was for best comedy album in 1961, performing together as Darlene and Jonathan.

    This calls for an encore, "The Last Time I Saw Paris."



    Now he is stepping down (none / 0) (#105)
    by nycstray on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 01:13:04 PM EST
    from his position in the House (ML). Apparently in about 2hrs.

    David Brat ? (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by christinep on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 07:25:08 PM EST
    Who is David Brat?  Why, he is the Repub TeaPot that just defeated Eric Cantor (yes, Eric Cantor) in the Virginia primary.  Once again:  Kudos to you, GA6th, for your perspicacity and determination in warning us that the Tea Party is alive and well (whether incorporated in the Repub Party itself or in these "surprises.)

    Well ... last week we saw that far right case of McDaniel distancing Cochran in the Mississippi Senate primary to set up a run-off in which McDaniel now leads; and, we hear that Kingston is polling ahead of Perdue in the run-off in Georgia.  I wonder if the Washington press corps listened to their buddies-on-the-bar-stools too much before their declaration that the rightwing crazies had been beaten. Maybe they ought to visit us in the hinterlands.

    David Brat ... really?

    The beltway (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 08:34:08 PM EST
    media declaring the tea party as dead shows just how out touch they are with the people who vote in the GOP primaries.

    Jack Kingston being ahead is no suprise. I figured all the tea party people would fall in line with him in a runoff. The thing is though how is Kingston going to move to the center or any of these statewide candidates going to be able to win the center when they've spent months espousing these crackpot tea party stances?


    It will be interesting (none / 0) (#35)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 07:18:21 AM EST
    As the national tea party groups did not support this guy - there was little to no outside support in this redrawn district.

    Also, the voters didn't like the fact that Cantor supported immigration reform, which is basically dead in the water now.

    David Brat's writings are already also ticking off both the left and right:

    Mr. Brat also criticizes both ends of the political spectrum for inconsistencies. He blasts conservatives for the pursuit of individual liberty while pushing laws restricting abortion, gay marriage and gambling. He writes:

    Can Christians force others to follow their ethical teachings on social issues? Note that consistency is lacking on all sides of this issue. The political Right likes to champion individual rights and individual liberty, but it has also worked to enforce morality in relation to abortion, gambling, and homosexuality. The Left likes to think of itself as the bulwark of progressive liberal individualism, and yet it seeks to progressively coerce others to fund every social program under the sun via majority rule. Houston, we have a problem. Coercion is on the rise. What is the root word for liberalism? (Answer: Liberty)

    And then Mr. Brat implied there is no reason to entrust either conservatives or liberals with the government that he said "holds a monopoly on violence." He writes:

    It does not mean that the State alone uses violence, but it does mean that when push comes to shove, the State will win in a battle of wills. If you refuse to pay your taxes, you will lose. You will go to jail, and if you fight, you will lose. The government holds a monopoly on violence. Any law that we vote for is ultimately backed by the full force of our government and military. Do we trust institutions of the government to ensure justice? Is that what history teaches us about the State? Or do we live in particularly lucky and fortunate times where the State can be trusted to do minimal justice? The State's budget is currently about $3 trillion a year. Do you trust that power to the political Right? Do you trust it to the Left? If you answered "no" to either question, you may have a major problem in the future

    The state's budget (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by Dadler on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 08:11:49 AM EST
    Oy. Brat is right. Someone tell Mr. Everyone On All Sides is Wrong But Me that it's 2014 and he has no business being mired in the delusional myth that somehow the federal government can go bankrupt. It cannot. That is a fact, as firm as any scientific one. When we get back on the gold standard or start using a finite natural commodity as currency, then that myth would not be a myth. But we trade in largely non-existent game pieces (I say non-existent because most money never achieves an actual physical form) -- game pieces with no intrinsic value or any other use. And the game is very rigged, I think we all know that. The federal government, as such, simply CHOOSES to screw over the "little people" when it claims to be out of money. It's an ethical and intellectual bankruptcy, it is NEVER financial. As such, when our beloved Bill Clinton left office with a surplus, he was acting on that delusional myth, and acting AGAINST the best interests of the majority of Americans. But he's a Rhodes Scholar, he's "one of us," he knew what he was doing.


    This, my friends, would seem to be our biggest problem. Right wing paradigms still dictate financial debates, which are the most directly impactful on peoples' lives. And that means nothing good will happen for most of us anytime soon. We'll see our share of the nation's wealth decline further, while the top tenth of a percent shoves more of that wealth into its largely undeserving and psychopathic pockets.

    Best of luck to us. I'm sure Hillary will somehow turn out to be magical, just like many thought Obama would be. Forget that on the economy she will be as mainstream as any power player who takes Big Corporate Cash, Hillary's dishonest and disgusting treatment of Edward Snowden, the rank hypocrisy of it, makes me sick and will almost assuredly keep me from voting for her. To me anyway, like Obama, she's turned out to be a large piece of nothing. Beltway blah. Snore.... I am tired of voting for symbolism over principled substance. I'm done with it.

    Now, with that, everyone have a lovely day. All we can do in the meantime. Wife's birthday here, need to run down the street and grab some flowers before she wakes up.

    Peace, y'all.


    I meant Brat is right as in... (none / 0) (#41)
    by Dadler on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 08:12:25 AM EST
    ...he's sure is a brat.

    You are mistaken (none / 0) (#38)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 08:04:23 AM EST
    People like Bozell were pushing this guy.

    He won because (1.00 / 1) (#196)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 09:48:06 PM EST
    people are absolutely disgusted with what is going on and how inept the Repub regulars have been in controlling Obama.

    I suspect Cantor's position on so-called immigration reform was the last straw.


    Controlling Obama? (5.00 / 2) (#200)
    by nycstray on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:26:57 PM EST
    Huh. I thought they were supposed to be working for us, not trying to control their president. Guess when I vote in the fall, I should check everyone's wrangling skills?

    Actually, (none / 0) (#42)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 08:13:34 AM EST
    No, I'm not

    The total outside spending against Cantor included a mere $905 from Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, which is opposed to immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship, and $7,800 from the We Deserve Better PAC.

    That's it.

    This was a grassroots movement from within the district.  Period.


    There is (none / 0) (#43)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 08:28:40 AM EST
    such a thing as FREE publicity which is what people like Bozell were doing.

    Doubtful (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 10:29:50 AM EST
    I LIVE in Virginia  - not too far from this district, and I never HEARD of Brat before last night.

    You (none / 0) (#65)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 10:32:01 AM EST
    don't reside in the GOP bubble. You have to realize that these tea party people only listen to people like Ann Coulter and the other assorted freaks on the right. They were supporting this Brat guy.

    I live in VA, not far from the disctict and am (5.00 / 2) (#130)
    by Wile ECoyote on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 03:04:49 PM EST
    definitely not a "progressive".  Never heard of Brat before last night.  IMO Cantor lost because he was focused on becoming house speaker and did not bother to campaign.  

    I.Live.Here. (none / 0) (#66)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 10:39:57 AM EST
    Don't you think if this was to be expected it would have been highlighted, oh, in the local papers and on the local news?

    I also occasionally read conservative sites - they never mentioned him.

    And it also appears that just about everybody hated Eric Cantor, so it could just be about him personally, and have nothing to do with "Tea Party" loyalties.


    No (5.00 / 2) (#68)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 10:44:31 AM EST
    because like I said you don't understand how these people operate. They operate outside of local papers  and get their message out through talk radio and other conservative means.

    Well, the tea party is claiming a win on this one and he appears to hold far right tea party views.


    It's funny they are claiming a win (none / 0) (#112)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 01:40:52 PM EST
    Since none of them backed him, even when he asked for their support.

    Despite running a decidedly anti-establishment campaign in which he criticized government bailouts and budget deals and frequently invoked God and the Constitution, Mr. Brat was unable to secure the endorsement of Tea Party groups with national networks, a sign of how under the radar his candidacy was. With FreedomWorks, Tea Party Express and Tea Party Patriots all staying out of the race, Mr. Brat raised just over $200,000.

    The "credit" (none / 0) (#115)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 02:03:07 PM EST
    Well ... whoever gets the "credit" for the upset, the writers/would-be-prognosticators that comprise the media world these days seem to be settling quickly on the pronouncement that the Cantor loss is a stunning upset by Tea Party types as victors.  The story is also turning quickly to House leadership jockeying, and the huge ramifications of the Cantor loss.

    Yes (none / 0) (#117)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 02:10:05 PM EST
    As they also point out that most Tea Party-types have gone down to stunning defeats this year.  Anyone who thought the "Tea Party" would lose all the races was delusional - but they aren't winning all that much either.

    And those voters in Cantor's district may be sorry they replaced him.


    The main idea (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by jondee on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 02:39:56 PM EST
    isn't for the Tea Party to win, it's to keep the GOP tacking to the hard-Right; kissing up to the unregulated  "job creators" and kicking down hard on "the 47%".

    What more evidence do we need of the overarching guiding paradigm of the GOP than moderate Mitt's captured remarks back in 2012?


    There are plenty (none / 0) (#119)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 02:17:15 PM EST
    of tea partiers that are not associated with the national tea party that are local tea party groups. Like Howdy said above this was more of a grass roots tea party type thing. His views seem to be 100% in line with the tea party and like I said before he did have some big names (at least in tea party circles) promoting him.

    Maybe after this exercise they'll quit letting Jenny Beth Martin fleece them out of money like she has been. It seems that they are now shooting at her among others for not supporting this guy.


    Brat had no big name support. (none / 0) (#48)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 08:49:49 AM EST
    Bozel, Mark Levin, Laura Ingram.  That's about it.  And no money.  Sure the nuts are driven by talk radio.  So why didn't it work on Ms Graham.

    That is the (none / 0) (#49)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 09:04:54 AM EST
    question of the ages. Maybe because Lindsay went full tea party and people ignored what he's acutally DONE. And that was a state wide race not in a gerrymandered district. And the Lindsay argument kind of shoots down the argument that Cantor lost because of immigration since Lindsay supported. it. Hard to believe that there's too many people further right than Cantor but a lot of these tea party types seem to be into just knocking off incumbents in general.

    Weeeell (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 09:13:45 AM EST
    Graham was spouting TP bull on the morning shows but according to reports he was campaigning on governing and getting stuff done.  Like immigration.

    I have the teeve on getting ready to go out and I just heard Todd ask him (Brat) if he supported a minimum wage -
    Well he said I would love if people in Africa made 100 bucks an hour but blah blah blah

    IMO this is now a winnable seat.  This guy is nuts. His is a republican but not a lunatic district.  Obama got 46 % there.

    We could pick this guy off depending on how the dem does.


    Maybe it's (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 09:32:07 AM EST
    that the tea party really does not even know what it stands for. They're just flailing around hating Obama but not much else?

    Here in GA they profess to HATE corruption but we have probably the most corrupt governor in the nation who had primary opposition and they voted for him in the primary.


    Him (none / 0) (#58)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 09:36:41 AM EST
    being Deal instead of his opponents.

    I know, they cloak it in (none / 0) (#93)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:49:38 AM EST
    All sorts of wrappings but it is simply Obama hate.  Josh Pipkin acted too sane, he wanted to discuss facts and have factual debate.  Barry Moore, he's so out of his mind who knows what he is capable of?  He might shoot Obama in the face or something

    I know. (none / 0) (#100)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 12:28:02 PM EST
    Cantor probably shook hands with Obama at some time over the past six years and that probably was enough for the other guy to win.

    The crux of it is that they want it to be 1950 again  or even 1890 or something. They see the future as bleak and depressing and scary and all that is good happened in the past.


    A combo of reasons, Ga6th (none / 0) (#111)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 01:37:54 PM EST
    As the day has moved on, we hear that Cantor took the home district for granted as he "campaigned" for Boehner's seat (tho, now that C is out, don't be surprised to see the open long knives come out against B) while Graham carefully cultivated an election-year more rightwing persona for the broader state race, etc.  

    Yet, the beat is building that the TeaPots have pulled out a stunning win ... a win as big, if not bigger in Repub circles, as the 1994 defeat of Democratic Speaker Foley.  Whether one looks at the standby NYTimes or Huffington Post or National Journal or even Politico, the adjectives and adverbs descriptive of the expected party upheaval are multiplying.  As could be expected, the new meme has to be characterized in the usual over-the-top way.  To validate your contention, Ga6th, almost every story on the subject contends there is a major fracture in the Republican Party, that the leadership struggle now is in temporary chaos, and that the TeaPots never really went away.  A story in Politico (by Todd Purdum) opines that the Repubs are back to "eating their own" as they have done from time to time since Eisenhower.

    The landscape out there today is fascinating. Reading snippets about victor Brat calls to mind a rightwing cranky crackpot, if I may be so kind.


    There might (none / 0) (#50)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 09:08:23 AM EST
    also have been a lot of Democrats voting in the GOP primary in SC due to the fear of getting a real whacko worse than Lindsay in the senate.

    According to what I heard that (none / 0) (#53)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 09:14:22 AM EST
    Was a small effect if any.

    That's what I thought too (none / 0) (#61)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 10:28:13 AM EST
    Which then definitely would mean this was not a "Tea Party victory".

    But it really had no effect.


    Not TP victory (5.00 / 3) (#95)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 12:03:31 PM EST
    I think that's exactly wrong.   That's exactly what it was.  It can't even be called AstroTurf.
    It was pure TP grass roots.  There was not a huge turnout but according to Larry Sabato it was about average.  Higher than in 2012 so it can't be written off to low turnout.

    Even if Democratic crossover votes (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by Isabela Hernandez on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 01:33:36 PM EST
    weren't the cause of Cantor's loss, there are still many fiscally conservative Dems and Independents who disagree with the current Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill in Congress. If it passes, there will be even more dissatisfaction among Democrats due to the negative impact on American white collar jobs by high tech immigrants.

    The changes to H1B visa limitations are especially problematic. Our H1B limitations have helped keep middle class jobs paying well, even though H1B employees have lowered workplace standards in high tech companies like IBM, Hewlett Packard, Dell, Sony, etc. For instance, the concept of a 40 hour work week with paid overtime for hours beyond the standard week has been already been subverted. Other employee expectations and benefits will surely be degraded as well when high tech employers have fewer limits on access to foreign employees.

    Like NAFTA et al, the effects of Comprehensive Immigration Reform won't be recognized or acknowledged until another peg has been knocked out from under America's middle class workers.


    Well (none / 0) (#63)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 10:30:34 AM EST
    this in VA is a tea party win along with a couple of Senate candidates like in IA. Looking at a tea party win here in GA too for the GOP nomination according to the polls.

    The story of the establishment Repub (none / 0) (#97)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 12:15:39 PM EST
    triumph in 2014 may have been written so often in the WashPo and other major media that the pundits (and some journalists) may have fallen for their own narrative.  After last night--however one may want to spell it--the narrative will change to tales of the resurgence of the Far Right (or Tea Party, as the case may be.) The new narrative will start with Cantor's downfall and go back to recap the victory of Iowa's Ernst, the lead in Mississippi's run-off by McDaniel against a longtime establishment figure, and the apparent move upward by the further right Kingston in the Senate primary in Georgia.

    While the conventional wisdom may again change, in its fickle way, should one of the far right types mentioned loses in a run-off, I'm guessing that the Washington press types--who do not live that removed from Richmond--are going to have a few days of trying to affix responsibility for Cantor's unpredicted loss on anyone other than their own inability to read what was going on.  The double-digit loss of Cantor should not have been missed by those claiming to be in-the-know. As matters go ... I "predict" lots of finger-pointing for the loss last night.  

    BTW, a potential effect right away has to do with Speaker Boehner's legislative future.  The Cantor loss has been like a siren across the media world (see NYTimes front page headings.)


    Anybody (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 08:38:56 PM EST
    heard from Jeff in Alabama? Military Tracy? Anyone?

    No (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 09:11:20 AM EST
    I've been thinking about him (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by sj on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:23:46 AM EST
    Thanks for asking the question.

    Have heard nothing from Jeff. (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by caseyOR on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 01:14:43 PM EST
    He no longer sends emails. So, I don't know what to think. I hope his radio silence is because he is too busy with his son and work and not because his health got worse.

    Yes, (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 01:21:25 PM EST
    I hope his health has not gotten worse but that is what I am afraid of. I emailed him months ago and never got an answer back.

    I don't mean to be morbid, (none / 0) (#109)
    by Anne on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 01:28:11 PM EST
    But this is something I've had to do from time to time in my job: when we've exhausted other avenues to determine if someone may have died, try googling his name (if you know his last name) with the additional key word "obituary."

    If nothing comes up, I'd take that as an indication he may still be around, just not in a position to post, or with an interest in posting.

    Just a thought.


    So I checked (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 08:42:49 PM EST
    the bank account online today as I do most days and apparently my formerly Republican husband has now become a DNC donor.

    He is an interesting story. He voted for Reagan, Bush 1 twice, Bob Dole and George W. Bush. In 2004 after George W. Bush lied to use and used the bodies of 9/11 for Iraq, he voted for Kerry. He's never gone back to the GOP but living here in the south the GOP is EXTRA scary. I'm sure Tracy can back me up on that. There is nothing they don't want to blow up or destroy. So apparently he's gone the next step and become a donor. LOL.

    Well, you always knew he had *some* sense... (5.00 / 3) (#24)
    by unitron on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 09:03:30 PM EST
    ...after all, look who he was smart enough to marry!

    So who's the Democrat... (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by unitron on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 09:06:36 PM EST
    ...running this fall for what used to be Cantor's seat, and will the party be smart enough to pull out all the stops in support?

    A side note--Apparently Cantor's polling was telling him right up to the last that he was way ahead.  Must have had Karl Rove counting the numbers for him.  : - )

    Bile. (5.00 / 1) (#185)
    by lentinel on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 07:16:13 PM EST
    Apparently Cantor's polling was telling him right up to the last that he was way ahead.

    I must admit that it makes me smile to think that this mf was encouraged to believe he had the election in the bag.

    It makes the defeat all the more crushing.


    Here (none / 0) (#26)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 09:50:04 PM EST
    Hack Trammell is his name.

    Irony is that he's a professor at Randolph Macon College along with Brat.


    Whoops (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 09:50:28 PM EST
    Typo Jack Trammell is his name.

    Darn! (5.00 / 6) (#29)
    by unitron on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 11:24:06 PM EST
    "Hack" sounded so much cooler.

    More (none / 0) (#37)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 07:40:31 AM EST

    He was only chosen as the party's nominee on Monday by committee because no one signed up to run against Cantor.


    It makes me wonder (none / 0) (#85)
    by sj on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:26:54 AM EST
    if it was a case of "it's the activists who vote in primaries/caucuses."

    Which is true, but still -- that's quite an upset.


    Rumor has it... (none / 0) (#128)
    by unitron on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 02:59:40 PM EST
    ...that lots of Democrats and other non-Republicans voted in that primary for Brat in order to get rid of Cantor.

    It could be... (none / 0) (#140)
    by sj on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 04:18:48 PM EST
    ... Virginia is an open primary state.

    RIP, Bob Welch (1957-2014). (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 02:32:21 AM EST
    The fireball pitcher for the Los Angeles Dodgers and Oakland Athletics first captured the imagination of the baseball world as a 21-year-old Dodger rookie in the 1978 World Series, by striking out Yankees slugger Reggie Jackson in a classic six-minute showdown to end Game 2.

    (True Dodger fans prefer to remember that particular glorious moment, and like to forget that the Yankees went on to win that '78 World Series anyway in six games.)

    Welch then saw his career nearly derailed by his alcoholism, but later rebounded to win the AL Cy Young award as a 27-game winner for the A's in 1990. (No MLB pitcher has won more than 24 games since.)

    Today, the Oakland A's announced that Welch died of a heart attack at his home in Seal Beach, CA at age 57.

    Aloha to a real champion, on and off the field.

    No place to go. (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by lentinel on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:14:57 AM EST
    House Majority Leader Eric Cantor lost. Goodbye Eric! Yay! Hooray!

    He lost to someone who is even farther to the right.

    Uh oh.

    What is going on in this country?

    If what is going on in Europe is any indication, it has to do with continuing unemployment and an unbalanced economy. Too few people with money. Too many people without money. Too many who cannot see a way out. Homes taken. Savings depleted.

    Hopelessness pits people against each other and provides fuel for politicians to exploit the frustration and anger.

    I hope for the best, but am not very optimistic.

    It may be counterintuitive, but I think the way out is for the Democrats to act as Democrats. Offer progressive solutions and fight for them. Fight for them. Not the Obama way of making a few good noises and then disappearing.

    I hope for the best, but am not very optimistic.

    What (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 08:08:22 AM EST
    is going on with this country is the GOP is reaping the disaster they wrought upon themselves with districting. They didn't want competetive districts but instead of protecting people like Cantor it has ended up turning into a freakfest where these radicals are getting the nomination instead of the incumbents keeping their seats.

    I wonder if some of the smarter ones (none / 0) (#45)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 08:40:18 AM EST
    Are starting to wonder if those redrawn districts were such a great idea after all.

    Who (none / 0) (#47)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 08:48:17 AM EST
    knows? I'm sure Boehner is going to need extra sessions at the tanning booth and a few more martinis after this. Pretty soon one of these freaks is going to get a leadership role.

    It was the 1%.... (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by NYShooter on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 10:41:45 AM EST
    the 1% of the most ignorant, uninformed, and angry segment of the bottom of the Republican barrel that showed up at the polls. What else can explain it? Canter spent over 5 million, Brat, less than 200,000.

    I haven't done the research, but, it may have been something as simple as overconfidence on Canter supporter's part, and, a last minute surge of knuckle dragging bottom feeders coming out in a surge to vote for Brat.

    Low voter participation, especially in non-Presidential years, can result in some wacko results. And, I blame the Democrats more than the Republicans for the House situation, and, possibly the upcoming Senate one.

    It doesn't matter how nuts the Republicans are, or how low they go, if the D's stay home we deserve what we get.


    Well (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 10:47:03 AM EST
    the positive in it is that money apparently did not decide the election.

    You are right about people sitting home. If they sit home and the wackos take over they need to start blaming themselves.


    It appears (none / 0) (#99)
    by lentinel on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 12:26:22 PM EST
    to me that you are posting from the point of view of a Democratic partisan.

    If the Democratic party keeps giving us semi-nonentity-republican-lite candidates as the only alternative to the Republican rightwing cretins, you are blaming the victims if you excoriate people for not spending hours in a polling booth to vote for the alleged "alternatives".

    At present we are offered only a choice between wackos and those who cater to them.

    Blame the party, not the people.


    Well (none / 0) (#118)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 02:11:51 PM EST
    I'm not excusing them either but if you really don't want the wackos to take over you have to do what you have to do. We don't even have a Dem running for congress in my congressional district so we would never know whether a wacko would lose or not.

    The electorate (none / 0) (#121)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 02:22:50 PM EST
    I seem to recall from a long ago political science class that the voting turnout during Germany's Weimar Republic in 1933 was exceedingly low ... and the ELECTORATE thereby elected a new German Chancellor.

    There is no way to say this, lentinel, without sounding like a mini-lecture.  That is: Responsibility in a democratic republic cuts lots of different ways ... we are the electorate; we are ultimately responsible ... even when charlatans, crooks, or fast-talkers sometimes pull that wool over our eyes, the electorate is ultimately responsible.  All the wishing in the world won't make that civic obligation any less important whether we decry the politician or not ... because the politician & polity have a shared responsibility in this country of over 300 million people.

    (BTW, I understand from hearing a snippet from Virginia's go-to political scientist that the voter turnout yesterday was about average for off-year primaries.)


    OK (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by lentinel on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 02:42:02 PM EST
    You vote for whomever you choose.

    I'm telling you that there is a reason people didn't turn out for vote for the alternative to Hitler.

    You ought to give some thought to that.

    What were the social circumstances?

    In my opinion, we are in similar circumstances in the despair experienced by the electorate.

    That is my point.

    If we want to avoid the likes of a Hitler, the opposition had better wake up and put forth candidates of quality and integrity.


    Overstatement (none / 0) (#126)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 02:56:33 PM EST
    1. We are not in the same situation as post-WW! Germany.  We are nowhere near the same straits, in any form, preceding the 1933 German election. What we do have, among some, is a detachment by some from civic participation.

    2. The problem with over-statement, hyperbole, and Chicken-Little "sky is falling" commentary is that the approach leads to nothing beyond lament.  In many ways, it introduces a style similar to those on the other side who are claiming daily that this is "outrageous" that is the "worst ever" etc.  (Cicero once exclaimed "O tempore, O mores" ... but, he was an acknowledged pessimist, & I don't recall that he went too much further.)

    You mean like (5.00 / 2) (#132)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 03:08:27 PM EST
    2.The problem with over-statement, hyperbole, and Chicken-Little "sky is falling" commentary is that the approach leads to nothing beyond lament.  In many ways, it introduces a style similar to those on the other side who are claiming daily that this is "outrageous" that is the "worst ever" etc.  (Cicero once exclaimed "O tempore, O mores" ... but, he was an acknowledged pessimist, & I don't recall that he went too much further.)

    Always thinking the Tea Party is about to take over every aspect of our lives?


    Yes, exactly so .... (none / 0) (#143)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 04:29:17 PM EST
    That I would argue that the Republican Party has merged, in large part, with the positioning & reality of the Tea Party is nowhere near the same as claiming or fearing that a strange, overpowering rightwing monster will invade our homes and our person.  

    As for the TeaPot & Repubs merging identity -- which, you will recall, even John Boehner related was essentially the same -- that does mean, imo, that the Repubs would probably become more entrenched in a no-government-is-good-government mentality and would be more obstructive where any legislative progress is at issue.  That would be bad and undoubtedly harmful to many who would benefit from government help ... but, the world would go on.  Of course, in a political sense, the fear technique will be employed by the fundraisers on all sides.

    In many ways, I expect that if the TeaParty dominance in Repub halls strengthens and the positions harden even more--esp. rightwing opposition to immigration reform--the upshot will benefit Democrats politically.  Why? Demographics.  (Hillary Clinton alluded to that in a tweet today.)

    So ... don't include me in forecasting the destruction of society as we know it with the TeaPots ... because they will eventually bring each other down.  Their ideas are simply too out-of-step with America to survive the growing spotlight.  Unfortunately, for Repub Party, tho, the support and recognition which the then-Repubs accorded their rallies, etc. had tentacles of self-embrace.  They are wrapped around each other.

    I wonder how the new GOP House leadership team will look?


    I don't think that (5.00 / 2) (#148)
    by Zorba on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 04:54:10 PM EST
    they will cause the destruction of society, either.  However, it may well get ugly before they self-destruct.
    Remember, a wounded tiger is the most dangerous.

    So true, Zorba, so true (none / 0) (#157)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:13:25 PM EST
    And: Careful when cornering human or beast.

    Yeah... (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by lentinel on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 04:59:47 PM EST
    but the issue is - what is the alternative to these rightwingers gaining power.

    All I'm saying is that the opposition to these fierce cretins is pathetic.

    They pander, they promise change, and deliver nothing.
    If people don't buy it, and don't want to waste their precious time participating in an empty exercise, blame the crappy candidates and the corrupt national party that sponsors them.

    Blaming the people - or saying that if they don't vote for what is presented to them as someone who stinks a little less than the republican - that the people are responsible for the fate that will befall us is blaming the victims - us - instead of the perpetrators. Playing right into the hands of the greedy and powerful.

    But you vote for whomever you please.
    And the very best of luck.


    Saying that the electorate (none / 0) (#155)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:10:58 PM EST
    the citizenry are ultimately responsible for what the government becomes is not a blame-game.  What I learned about the American Constitutional structure and system as I grew up -- and what I firmly believe -- is that citizens have civic responsibilities along with rights.  

    There I am being preachy.  And, to conclude this sermonette: I find that blaming the government as a practice while taking a hike from civic responsibility squarely fits the definition of "playing the blame game."

    On a lighter note: It would be quite an eye-opener if you and I viewed an abstract (or even concrete) painting/work of art and separately described what we saw.


    The question (5.00 / 2) (#181)
    by lentinel on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 07:06:08 PM EST
    I pose is: In your opinion, why do so many people choose not to vote?

    I've given you my thoughts.

    You think it is the civic duty of someone to vote for somebody.

    I think it is the civic responsibility of some to not vote for someone that they have to hold their nose for while pulling the lever.

    This is not a difference in perception.

    This is a difference of opinion.


    Oh phooey. (5.00 / 1) (#147)
    by lentinel on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 04:51:30 PM EST
    You are the one who evoked Hitler...
    I seem to recall from a long ago political science class that the voting turnout during Germany's Weimar Republic in 1933 was exceedingly low ... and the ELECTORATE thereby elected a new German Chancellor.

    If you think you overstated, so be it.

    But I happen to think the analogy is apt.

    You should read what you write.


    Good catch, lentinel (none / 0) (#167)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:36:37 PM EST
    The evoking or not-evoking of Hitler is tricky these days.  Because it has been overdone.  Really.  It is, however, difficult to restrain from pointing out a correlation (long used in political science textbooks) between lack of voting and unintended negative consequences.

    Yes, Ga6th (none / 0) (#122)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 02:26:02 PM EST
    As you say about voting: Sometimes you do what you gotta do.

    I'll go (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by lentinel on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 10:48:52 AM EST
    with that...


    It doesn't matter how nuts the Republicans are, or how low they go, if the D's stay home we deserve what we get.

    If the Dems act like Dims and give us dreck to vote for, they deserve what they get, and we will catch hell from all sides.

    If Dems stand for Democratic principles instead of bending over and kissing the rings of the rightists, they will deserve to win and Dems will go to the polls.

    If they stay on the dismal half-assed course that they're on, we will all reap the whirlwind.


    Brat didn't need to spend money... (none / 0) (#129)
    by unitron on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 03:02:55 PM EST
    ...he was getting lots of free push from Right-Wing Radio shows (after Cantor gerrymandered himself a district full of people who listen to them).

    Maybe (none / 0) (#73)
    by lentinel on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 10:52:36 AM EST
    as you say, this is just a Republican party thing.

    But I fear, and believe, that it is a greater symptom of malaise in the country.

    Too much money in the hands of too few.

    Too little money in the hands of the many.

    Houses taken.
    Too few jobs.
    No interest on savings.
    No savings, period.

    It is a recipe for rightwing victories.


    DOJ and Missoula County Attorney Settle (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Green26 on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 10:01:51 AM EST
    The Montana attorney general has brokered a settlement between DOJ and the Missoula County Attorneys office, over a two-year investigation/dispute over whether the county attorneys office had failed to adequately investigate and pursue sexual assault matters.
    The county attorney said DOJ had no jurisdiction, and had refused to provide 3 years or so of investigation files. The county attorney had sued DOJ in federal court, in a declaratory judgment. DOJ had never provided specific legal authority, just general statements, and it appears the county attorney was probably correct. The MT attorney general agreed.

    The county attorney has been in office for 16 years, is a liberal democrat, has always had a majority of female attorneys (usually 60-70%) on his staff, and a series of women have been the head criminal prosecutor for many years.

    He has called DOJ bullies and heavy-handed. Recently, he said: "(The USDOJ) never once reached out - never once in two years - reached out to work cooperatively with me in this matter," Van Valkenburg said Tuesday. "The letter that (Acting U.S. Attorney General Jocelyn Samuels) issued on Feb. 14 was the single most unprofessional thing I have seen in my practice of law in 41 years. It hurts hugely to see my staff defamed in the way they defamed him."

    ""First and foremost, I think that this is one of the most unfair, unethical things that I have witnessed in 35 years of public life," Van Valkenburg said that Friday. "For the USDOJ to dump this report on the news media at virtually 5 p.m. on a Friday afternoon, three days after we have filed a complaint for judicial relief, is totally irresponsible."

    This letter looked more like a long press release than a report, and in fact was based primarily on talking to women's sexual assault support people and various women who had complained to them. It was not an investigation, because it hadn't involved looking at the files or interviewing the county attorneys office.

    The 3d party monitor is an attorney and former prosecutor with Colorado connections. Jeralyn must know her. Anne Munch.

    There is lots of media coverage on the subject. The best so far is on missoulian.com.

    Mountain Jam Highlights... (5.00 / 3) (#60)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 10:08:44 AM EST
    for anybody who is interested...

    1. Derek Trucks might be the best guitar player alive...jaws dropped up and down the mountain in awe 3x...Tedeschi Trucks Band set, a cameo during Government Mule's set, and of course an epic Allman Bros. Band set to close it out.  His axe could chop down a mountain.

    2. Best New (to me) Artist...The Weeks outta Jackson Miss.  Blistering set, mucho impressivo.

    3. Bob Weir & Ratdog encore w/ "Uncle" Warren Haynes of "Johnny B. Goode".

    4. Government Mule's always unique choice of covers...this year Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers "Breakdown" and Radiohead's "Creep".  Their sets are always like Gump's box of chocolates, and they always taste good.

    5. Finding a previously unknown swimming hole on a hike up the mountain trail...ice cold baths to start the days, and sober up in the late afternoon, were absolute godsends.  

    6. The baby black bear of Mountain Jam who was spotted up the mountain all weekend long...that bear cub musta been digging the tunes too!  And momma must have let him/her roam cuz I never saw her.

    7. All the shiny happy people...I heard not a word spoken in anger all weekend long...just smiles, good wishes, and sharing.  I was approx. 10 for 10 in my pass the dutchie to randoms experiment.  Jammers are the salt of the earth!

    8. Aside from 3 State Troopers supervising the entrance security search, not a cop to be seen all weekend.  Who needs 'em?  Not Mountain Jam!

    Good times. (none / 0) (#77)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:09:17 AM EST
    The best! (none / 0) (#78)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:11:28 AM EST
    Can't wait to go home again next year;)

    on youtube. I really like them.

    Got one more for ya... (none / 0) (#87)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:32:46 AM EST
    check out some Connor Kennedy...that dude has "it" in spades too.  

    Right in my groove, thanks! (none / 0) (#103)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 01:05:13 PM EST
    Darn it. I missed RatDog! (none / 0) (#89)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:36:58 AM EST
    Fear not... (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:41:44 AM EST
    my hippie padawan...Sunday July 6th the show rolls in to San Diego.  LA and Santa Barbara on the 2nd and 3rd respectively.  Be Grateful for our independence!

    Is Derek Tucks better than God? (none / 0) (#90)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:38:27 AM EST
    Clapton? (none / 0) (#92)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:43:38 AM EST
    Right now, hell yes.  Clapton in his prime? Tougher call than you'd think.

    One thing for sure...they both make it look so god damn easy.


    Thanks for the recap! Really sounds (none / 0) (#172)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 06:01:44 PM EST
    like a great assortment or music...I will check out some of those bands.

    Plus the environs, people. and even a bear. Perfect!


    Class Warfare! (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 10:48:48 AM EST
    But fear not, the DEA and NYPD are on the case, protecting the wealthy from their own stupidity and horniness getting them roofied and over-charged at the t*tty bar.

    And that's best case if the allegations are true, for all we know the banker and real-estate lawyer chose to get high and couldn't handle it.  And this is their cockamamie story to welch on their bills.  We know how the 1% love to welch, while ranting about responsibility and bootstraps for the rest of us.

    lol; Robin and her seven hoods: (none / 0) (#81)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:19:34 AM EST
    Stealing from the rich...

    Alleged? (none / 0) (#82)
    by squeaky on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:20:18 AM EST
    A crew of New York City strippers scammed wealthy men by spiking their drinks with illegal synthetic drugs, then driving them to strip clubs that ran up tens of thousands of dollars on their credit cards while they were too wasted to stop it, authorities said Wednesday.

    So much for alleged...  I guess when it comes to down Bankers side of the story is gospel.


    I guess the AP... (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:24:12 AM EST
    might need a "preferred customer" interest rate on a loan or something...lol.

    You missed this part (none / 0) (#94)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 12:03:27 PM EST
    ...authorities said Wednesday

    What's wrong with that? That's what they arrested them with and charged them with

    According to court papers, the strippers would prowl bars in Manhattan and Long Island for their victims over a four month period beginning in September 2013

    It's not a trial and, like defense attorneys, the arresting officers and prosecutors are allowed to say "what happened" - it's called argument.  The presumtpion of innocence applies only to the trial itself and only to the jury or trier of fact.  It does not apply


    Forgot to finish my thought (none / 0) (#96)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 12:05:02 PM EST
    The preusmption of innocence does not apply to law enforcement or at a bail hearing or whatever.

    So your comment about it the bankers' story as gospel is pure bunk.


    Here I thought... (none / 0) (#113)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 01:46:11 PM EST
    the presumption of innocence always applied under a jury of one's peers said otherwise after a fair speedy trial.

    But I know it's gotten pretty twisted from that ideal. I expect no better from law enforcement but the AP could have worded the article better to stress these ladies and gent are presumed innocent.


    Right (none / 0) (#114)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 01:55:23 PM EST
    They will have a presumption of innocence - at trial.  But law enforcement does not have that requirement when arresting people, nor does the prosecutor when charging someone. And since they were quoting law enforcement (the whole "authorities said" part), who were speaking from their position, no, the media is under no obligation to say "allegedly" or presume innocence of anyone.

    I'm not saying there... (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 02:04:24 PM EST
    should be a law against how the story was reported, but the sentence structure is flawed imo, and it's ok to expect better from a once dignified journalism institution like the Associated Press.  The sentence should start "The authorities claim".  Again, imo.

    The beauty that is the presumption of innocence is a tough enough sell as it is without the press throwing it under the bus.



    The way they do it nowadays... (none / 0) (#127)
    by unitron on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 02:57:11 PM EST
    ...is to say the scandalous, outrageous, titillating thing first, and then bury something at the end referring to the source for the claim.

    I think it's sort of a relative of Betteridge's Law of Headlines.


    Well, (none / 0) (#131)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 03:07:29 PM EST
    Since it's the first sentence of the article, I'm not sure how that's "burying" something.

    It's buried at the end of the sentence (none / 0) (#182)
    by unitron on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 07:11:47 PM EST
    They get the sensationalistic stuff in first, and then tag the disclaimer on at the end instead of making it clear at the beginning of the sentence that they're only passing along what someone said, not something their reporter(s) witnessed first hand.

    The idea is to get you stirred up emotionally at the start.

    They won't say "Some guy nobody ever heard of says that the world will be ending tomorrow", they phrase it ' "World ends tomorrow!" according to local man. '

    In your mind's ear, they want the first part loud and the last part sotto voce, kinda like the drug ads where they do their best to bury the list of side effects at the end.


    That's news to me! (none / 0) (#197)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 10:15:45 PM EST
    On a completely different, (5.00 / 2) (#133)
    by Zorba on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 03:16:29 PM EST
    non-political note:  we now have new potatoes from our garden!
    Love, love, love new potatoes.  And the stuff you get at the grocery stores (or even the farm stands) that are labelled "new potatoes" are not.  They're just not.

    Pot news Colorado tax illegal? supremacy surrender (5.00 / 4) (#144)
    by Lfrieling on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 04:30:34 PM EST
    Rob Corry, highly visible marijuana lawyer in Colorado, filed a case against the Gov, and various State agencies,  arguing that all taxes collected by the State were illegally collected UNDER FEDERAL LAW, and therefore had to be returned.  He argues that the supremacy clause (state vs. federal powers)  is won by the the Feds and not by  the states.  Victory would mean the feds control all pot law, basically.  

    This position is at best bizarre, IMO.  When Holder/Cole, in August 2013, talked about when the feds would not interfere with state mj laws, what they literally said was "we , Feds, will not assert supremacy and push that issue unless the state does not have strict and strictly enforced laws."   This anti-tax suit, if impossibly was won, all legit MJ business would be eliminated.  It would return MJ to the Anslinger Hurst and  Devil's Lettuce days.

    Arguing in court that the Feds have supremacy is so counter-MJ legalization that it is beyond bizarre.   If the Feds were found to have supremacy, which is what Corry is suggesting should happen, Feds could shut down every legal pot program in every state overnight.  Stay pending appeals?  Do you want to hope for that?.  Lenny  

    What has advocate Corry been ingesting? (none / 0) (#198)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 10:17:56 PM EST
    I used a credit card at the count fair today. (5.00 / 1) (#199)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 10:22:03 PM EST
    The device the merchant used then displayed my phone no. I said, what's up w/that?  Merchant replied, you must have used that credit card on squareup before. Outrageous.

    Hey, CaptHowdy... (5.00 / 1) (#201)
    by unitron on Thu Jun 12, 2014 at 12:03:06 AM EST
    ...anyone who ever ran/mixed live sound knew that the way they presented the "Dean Scream" was the equivalent of lying by omission, and I can't believe anybody got to be a producer without knowing enough to know that as well.

    It's bad enough when the opposite party pulls dirty tricks, but when what is supposed to be objective sources for the millions of voters who weren't in that room that night do the same thing, how can you trust anything they say about anyone?

    "Murder (none / 0) (#10)
    by lentinel on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 07:33:34 PM EST
    in the First" is a new tv show.

    I watched it after reading a favorable review in the Times.

    It is definitely watchable.

    But my gripe is that although there is a good story line relating to the solving of a crime, and another about potential blackmail and murder, the threads of the mysteries are constantly being interrupted by the insertion of subplots involving the personal lives of the protagonists.

    This seems to be staple of these cop shows.
    They just can't give us a mystery and spend the show in detection and unraveling of clues. They must give us a nude body, the saga of the tragic personal life of one of the detectives, and an extra gratuitous bit of t and a thrown in.

    The same is true of the Good Wife. Interesting legal issues... and then off to melodrama for awhile... then maybe the plot. Maybe.

    Same with that dreadful "Scandal". Political intrigue and then... boom... into personal sordid meandering.

    Something for everybody - maybe.

    But I think what's really happening is that the writers aren't capable of remaining focused. No Agatha Christie they.

    Thankfully, if one is watching a recorded version as I was, one can fast forward.

    We'll see. (none / 0) (#20)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 08:39:52 PM EST
    "Murder in the First" certainly has a great ensemble cast and an intriguing premise, but it also has so many potential characters with divergent plotlines going here and there that the screenwriters, directors and producers could soon lose the audience in the high weeds, if they're too ambitious and not careful.

    Yes. (none / 0) (#33)
    by lentinel on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 04:43:12 AM EST
    The divergent plot lines are the potential pitfall for me.

    For the writers, or producers, I suspect that they think that some soap-opera type of cliffhangers will keep the audience hooked.

    For me, I just have to grit my teeth until they return to the mystery at hand.

    I do like the cast, so I'm hoping for the best.


    I decided to try (none / 0) (#14)
    by scribe on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 08:04:48 PM EST
    the "deep dish" pizza at my local Little Caesars'.  And, I have to say, I'm very favorably impressed.  Especially at $8 for 8 slices.

    Their pizzas are so dripping with grease and oil, one could probably drop a lit match on one and quickly set it ablaze. Yuck!

    Oh Donald...snob (none / 0) (#22)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 10, 2014 at 08:46:31 PM EST
    The local outlets use cheap ingredients, and it shows. I really have no idea how good it is by you. Oahu's best pizza chain is Boston's North End Pizza Co. Pizza Hut is also good, but where my mother lives in suburban L.A., it's similarly synonymous with mediocrity. So I think the quality of product put out by pizza chains just depends upon where you live.

    In NY (none / 0) (#193)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 08:38:36 PM EST
    It is a social test.  A real man does not blot the grease from his pizza slice before eating it.

    Needless to say I always did


    Fargo was excellent (none / 0) (#46)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 08:44:51 AM EST
    Really looking forward to the 90 minute finale next week.

    Prediction, Lorn Malvo will survive to return next season.   He is just to great a character to kill off.   Lester, not so much.

    Did anyone who saw the previews happen to notice how similar some of the scenes of the finale were to the closing scenes of the Coens first (IMO best) movie, Blood Simple.

    If you have never seen that one you should.  Maybe before next Tuesday.

    This is (none / 0) (#101)
    by lentinel on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 12:47:10 PM EST
    one series I will be sorry to see ending...

    It was a wonderful episode (none / 0) (#173)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 06:04:55 PM EST
    aka Billy Bob Thornton's Emmy reel. Wow, he was so good as that dentist. I was cracking up.

    But my bet is on him dying and Lester living on in prison.

    that scene with him and Keith Carradine in the diner was so suspenseful - I rarely pray for TV characters, but I sure was hoping Keith didn't take a bullet.

    Lester setting up his wife....wow.


    Diner scene was amazing (none / 0) (#175)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 06:12:56 PM EST
    Like holding your breath amazing.  IMO Lester signed his death warrant with the wife setup.  

    I also loved the scene where Malvo tells the kids in Lester's old house about the events and the "noises".  What gleeful evil.   As the father helplessly looks on like WTF?


    Although he could also go to jail. (none / 0) (#176)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 06:13:58 PM EST
    I hope Malvo goes on.

    Sorry one more (none / 0) (#177)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 06:22:06 PM EST
    Yeah, the guys a dentist now?  WTF? I'm pretty sure that takes years of training.  The guy is like some supernatural demon.

    Did you notice the line in the diner "haven't had a piece of pie like that since the garden of Eden"



    Yes - that was good. Maybe he really is the devil (none / 0) (#178)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 06:39:51 PM EST
    and will live on into next season and forever.

    Loved the writing, how you didn't know what he was up to with the dentistry until that other dentist mentioned his brother in witness protection. Aha!!!


    My one more (none / 0) (#183)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 07:14:24 PM EST
    As I was watching the funny scenes with the FBI agents ...I thought to myself, hey they are kind of like Key and Peele, the comedians with their own show on Comedy Central. Then as the credits rolled by at the end...sure enough, Key & Peele.  Very good!

    If you are not familiar with them, this sketch cracks me up every time


    Yep (5.00 / 1) (#187)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 07:29:17 PM EST
    I caught K&P.

    If you haven't seen Blood Simple you should before Tuesday if you can.  It probably streams.  Don't be put off by the name.

    BLOOD SIMPLE is a term from detective fiction that describes the state of mind of an inexperienced killer after a kill.  They do dumb things.  It's a great movie and I'm pretty sure you are going to see the ending echoed in the ending of the season.

    it's the best

    It was actually remade by a famous Chinese director Yimou Zhangs into A Woman A Gun And A Noodle Shop


    Btw this quote from the first listed (none / 0) (#188)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 07:32:51 PM EST
    Review explains the bad reviews

    Heaven knows what inspired Zhang to undertake this nutty project, but the results are, at the least, amusing.
    October 22, 2010Full Review  

    It flew right over their heads.  It's spectacular.


    I did see Blood Simple ages ago (none / 0) (#194)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 09:21:20 PM EST
    I will watch it again over the weekend since I don't remember the details at all. Will be fun to spot the call backs in the Fargo finale.

    Light through bullett holes (5.00 / 1) (#195)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 09:27:03 PM EST
    Who knows if it will be more than that but it slapped me when I saw it.  It such a key part of the end of BS.
    Some how it makes sense that they would nod to the movie that started it all.

    Trailers (none / 0) (#189)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 07:48:30 PM EST
    Blood Simple

    If you watch the trailer and the previews for the finale you will see what I mean



    Canada grants asylum to American (none / 0) (#56)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 09:34:24 AM EST
    - a Florida mother sentenced to 30 years in prison for sexual liasons with a sixteen year old boy.

    Anybody else remember the stories we were told in primary school, about those nasty olde English who would hang or transport people for stealing a loaf of bread?  Well, we're there.

    Three cheers for Canada... (none / 0) (#120)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 02:20:38 PM EST
    But they may soon be over run with American criminal "justice" refugees fleeing punishments that not only do not fit the crime, they aren't even in the same f*ckin' ballpark as the crime.

    Bowe Bergdahl (none / 0) (#64)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 10:31:44 AM EST
    Was discharged from the Coast Guard after only 26 days of service in 2006 because of psychological concerns.

    I guess (none / 0) (#70)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 10:48:32 AM EST
    that shows how desperate the army was for people back then.

    The definitive article on this that I've seen is the one in Rolling Stone that was written two years ago. It stated that 20% of the people that joined back then had to be given a waver because they could not pass the drug test.


    I don't think they were given waivers (none / 0) (#74)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:00:41 AM EST
    For drug test flunking :). But many who entered the service at that time were granted waivers for not completing high school, poor ASVAB scores, and criminal records.  His past difficulty with the Coast Guard would have been easily waivered.

    And now we are back to the old way of it, only about 7% of applicants are being accepted now.


    Okay (none / 0) (#75)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:04:40 AM EST
    I take your word for it :)

    We have had recruiters pre testing (none / 0) (#76)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:07:58 AM EST
    Them though before they sent them in for the real one.  We also had recruiters reported for suggesting certain cleansing methods. That's at least waivering on something :)

    Sensitive young men should not (none / 0) (#88)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 11:33:25 AM EST
    Read Atlas Shrugged

    The WaPo Article (5.00 / 2) (#102)
    by squeaky on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 01:00:13 PM EST
    Appears to be biased, imo...

    For one, his writings, given the context of death, fear and questionable ethics surrounding him, seem appropriate. And it would have been another article to compare his writings to someone else who is not being used as the current political pawn.

    and to end with this seems unfair, imo:

    Three days later, Bergdahl walked off his post.

    Apart from characterizing the writings as written by a loon, (fragile young man) they fail to mention the other times he allegedly walked off his post.


    It's biased IMO too (5.00 / 4) (#107)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 01:19:23 PM EST
    Serving in the military during a time of war is full of that exact inner conflict unless you are a psychopath.  You must detach at times but you feel yourself detaching.  It happens to a lesser degree to the families too.  You realize as the soldier leaves where they are going, what is involved,they may not come back, and your survival mechanism kicks in and you feel yourself detach.

    Our family can even talk about that whole process too, the constant back and forths.  We are Out though.  We won't be experiencing that ever again.  And there is a relief and a healing in knowing that as well.

    The first time my husband experienced combat though, some of his letters were tortured, fragmented, he suffered.  He was not in a senior position either.  He suffered poor leadership at times too, and that makes surviving the stress even more difficult.

    He came home, processed it, changed in many ways as a person, went back into combat but more senior, constantly strives to be the support system that is needed for those who are junior.


    Yes, the WaPo article (5.00 / 2) (#136)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 03:40:14 PM EST
    is biased.  But, also, it is reckless and irresponsible--to Sgt. Bergdahl and almost anyone who is introspective, and, certainly, anyone in the military who is dealing, first hand, with the realities of a war environment.  Bergdahl's s "close friend", Kim Harrison, misplaced her trust in the Washington Post.

    This is what (none / 0) (#137)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 03:55:08 PM EST
    one of the tea partiers put on facebook:

    Congratulations to Professor David Brat on his win in the 5th district of VA. This is huge to win on only 250k....and to actually have a message and a plan...I hope people realize the Tea Party Organizations would not help him. JennyBeth M artin would not return hi calls . The Tea Party is larger than the organized groups....and will not go away as these are the every day people who are just angry about Washington politics...and want both parties to change...we want our country back....based on moral principals and God.

    Can someone explain to me what the heck they want?

    I Wouk translate this as (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 04:09:15 PM EST
    we want our country back....based on moral principals and God.

    We want a white republican president


    You missed 2 words in translation (5.00 / 3) (#141)
    by nycstray on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 04:23:01 PM EST
     We want a white batsh!t crazy republican president

    My bad (5.00 / 2) (#142)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 04:24:49 PM EST
    It is a tricky dialect

    We want a white *male* batsh!t crazy (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by Angel on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:27:54 PM EST
    republican president.

    We want a white *male* batsh!t crazy (5.00 / 1) (#165)
    by Angel on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:29:52 PM EST
    republican president.

    And rich...or does that come along (5.00 / 1) (#174)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 06:08:31 PM EST
    with white republican?

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 04:34:56 PM EST
    that's part of it but I think there's more than that. They want another George W. Bush who talks about how Jesus was his favorite philospher. I mean they are knocking off white Republicans left and right.

    What the heck are they talking about w/r/t morals? 1950's morals or something? Well, that doesn't jibe with their desire for "less government"

    You know, Frank Luntz says "Obama ruined the electorate" The truth of the matter is Obama didn't ruin the electorate. George W. Bush ruined the GOP fusing religion and politics into an apocalyptic cult.


    More serious response (5.00 / 2) (#150)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 04:56:52 PM EST
    Nystray nailed it.  They want Ted Curz.  The want public school turned into bible school. They want minorities put back in their place where god meant them to be.  They want environmental laws rolled back so the last tree can fall so Jesse will return.  They want women to stfu and stay in the kitchen pregnant.  They want a gun in every room and every car.  They want mullets to come back strong.

    Greasers Palace 1972 (none / 0) (#152)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:04:51 PM EST
    Jesses Song

    Zoot suit Jesus in the best life of Christ film ever made.

    Thank you Robert Downey Sr.

    Now you know why junior had problems.


    Yeah (none / 0) (#154)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:10:53 PM EST
    Ted Cruz is who I have been saying for quite a while now. And I believe this particular person is a Ted Cruz supporter.

    And they'll nominate him because they reside in a bubble where they think he's great. And Hillary will rip him apart and Bill will turn him into a national laughing stock poking fun at his views and his statements. And then they'll all scream and rant and rave about how morally bankrupt the country is.

    One term under someone like Ted Cruz would finish off the GOP for good. It would be like turning the US into Iran overnight.


    History (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by lentinel on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 07:21:44 PM EST
    One term under someone like Ted Cruz would finish off the GOP for good. It would be like turning the US into Iran overnight.

    Don't be too sure.

    W. turned the US into an Iranian nightmare - and got reelected.

    Personally, I think that Howard Dean would have eviscerated Bush.
    But the party went with Mr. Ketchup and Mr. Haircut.


    And you (5.00 / 3) (#191)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 08:30:55 PM EST
    are right. George W. got reelected so it's not impossible to get two terms out of a Ted Crazy crackpots.

    This is why no matter how flawed D candidates might be I'm not sitting home. I cannot bear a repeat of Katrina, 9/11, Iraq War and Afghanistan war all in 8 years plus an economic collapse to boot.


    I agree (5.00 / 2) (#192)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 08:35:01 PM EST
    I gave more money to Dean than any pol ever.  I think what happened to his candidacy was one ofthe great travesties of American politics.  
    I have never wanted to kill the media as much.  Ever.

    Howard Dean (none / 0) (#190)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 08:28:45 PM EST
    did not have the self discipline necessary to run for president. And his campaign manager Joe Trippi really didn't know how to fight Republicans only how to fight other democrats.

    I can't believe they would nominate him (none / 0) (#158)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:14:33 PM EST
    But you asked what they want.   We couldn't be that lucky.  If he ran we would the white house the house and a veto proof majority in the senate

    I'd (none / 0) (#160)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:19:39 PM EST
    frankly be surprised if he ran and did not get the nomination at this point. He and Rand Paul are the front runners.

    I can see Paul (none / 0) (#162)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:20:51 PM EST
    Not him

    Why? (none / 0) (#169)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:45:39 PM EST
    These rabid tea party crackpots are the ones most likely to show up and vote in the primaries. Look at some of the crackpots they've thrown out there already that have won primaries. I mean these crackpots are even winning senate primaries for pete's sake.

    I know you probably don't discuss politics with your brother but who would he vote for? You have to think of it that way.


    Cruz just renounced his Canadian citizenship. (none / 0) (#166)
    by Angel on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:32:09 PM EST
    First step toward running for the nomination.

    I saw that (none / 0) (#170)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:57:52 PM EST
    I hope he gets the nomination.

    Actually Reagan did that (4.00 / 1) (#146)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 04:50:13 PM EST
    GWB just exploited it

    That's (5.00 / 1) (#149)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 04:55:06 PM EST
    true but in reality so did Jimmy Carter. That's where they started and then moved over to Reagan in 1980.

    Carter was honest about his faith... (5.00 / 1) (#184)
    by unitron on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 07:15:22 PM EST
    ...if anyone asked him about it, maybe even brought it up first sometimes, but never tried to subliminally (or not so subliminally anymore) imply "I'm the one Jesus wants you to vote for".

    Unlike a certain Republican party I might mention.


    Couldn't tell you what they want (none / 0) (#138)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 04:07:33 PM EST
    But what they need is information.  For example it's the 7th district.  Not the 5th

    Just read that Brat (none / 0) (#153)
    by Angel on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:04:59 PM EST
    scrubbed his facebook page after the election.

    Why do they ever (none / 0) (#156)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:12:16 PM EST
    Think this will work?  

    He man (none / 0) (#159)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:17:07 PM EST
    women hater's club for sure. Women shouldn't be teaching boys. In essence only men should be teachers. Okay. This is back to 1890 or before.

    I'm tellin ya (none / 0) (#161)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:19:53 PM EST
    Crazy radiates from this guy like stink lines in a comic strip.  We can win this seat.

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#168)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:42:31 PM EST
    is the DCCC going to write off yet another seat? That is the question.

    That will probably depend entirely (5.00 / 1) (#171)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 06:00:09 PM EST
    On the viability of the dem candidate which was only picked a few days ago.   No idea what that is yet.

    I was complaining about the rain (none / 0) (#163)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 11, 2014 at 05:24:52 PM EST
    I just heard it has rained 22 out if the last 25 days