Moving Day (Again) and Open Thread

I decided to move back to my new place, even though the fire restoration isn't finished (if it's even begun.) I'm only taking what I need for now, since the floors will be replaced within the next few weeks. The rest is going to storage until the restoration is completed. I did finally find a temporary place to stay, and my insurance company was great and offered to pay for it, but I would have had to move from one unit to another in the same building after 5 days, and I think I've had enough moving for a while.

I hope this move goes better than the last one. But already, Comcast's computers are so confused by my moving back and forth, they've locked my three accounts, even to their employees, so no one could get in last night to do a transfer of service, let alone an activation. They'll work on it today, but if it's days until anyone hears from me, that's why -- no phone, no cable, no internet. Since I'm paying on three accounts, I hope they figure it out soon.

In between all this, I'm tying to get my tax info ready for my accountant, and working, so it's very busy here.

Here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Wednesday Open Thread
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Is this the end of Trump? (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by CoralGables on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 09:44:14 AM EST
    That headline has been written dozens of times starting a few months ago due to a multitude of stances, comments, and a pair of debates.

    Instead of the "fall" of Trump, it looks like we now have the "Fall of Trump".

    Two October polls:
    PPP - Trump +10
    Morning Consult - Trump +18

    Both of those are well above his RCP average coming into October.

    Kevin McCarthy drops out of Speaker's race (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by jbindc on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:36:57 AM EST

    Wow (none / 0) (#32)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:42:07 AM EST
    Clearly he was not going to win the vote.  I thought he might not.  But I didn't expect this.

    I guess it's Chaffetz now.  


    This is a pretty big deal (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:50:31 AM EST
    It's just one more example of the fact that the so called establishment has completely lost all controll of the Republican Party.

    They pulled out all the stops on this.  

    The same thing is coming fir the establishment presidential candidates.


    Just this morning (none / 0) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:58:05 AM EST
    Li'l Luke Russert was dishing the CW and explaining hiw this vote thing was just a formality.

    Thus is pretty stunning

    I guess I have to watch daytime MSNBC


    He is speaking now (none / 0) (#40)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:59:14 AM EST
    If the Republicans (none / 0) (#43)
    by KeysDan on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 12:16:27 PM EST
    are smart, they would go back and try to convince Paul Ryan to take the job. He gave them a no before, claiming he wants to spend more time with his family. But maybe, he will take one for the team. Of course, Republicans are not smart, and Ryan is somewhat smarter when it comes to his own career. So, moving on.....

    They have Daniel Webster and Jason Chaffetz to duke it out. Chaffetz has the edge with this crowd since his initials are J.C.  Or they could just k.o. each other--and, then, look for aspersions on our asparagus (aka. Louie Gohmert).


    If it's Daniel Webster... (5.00 / 2) (#53)
    by Anne on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:14:46 PM EST
    hoo boy:

    Rep. Daniel Webster (R-FL) is running as the alternative to House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) to succeed John Boehner as Speaker of the House. He also has a decades-long affiliation with the Institute in Basic Life Principles, the controversial ministry whose founder, Bill Gothard, resigned last year after more than 30 women accused him of sexual harassment. As TPM reported earlier this month, IBLP subjected young followers to victim-blaming "counseling" for rape, as well as grueling work schedules at its facilities for little or no pay, requiring women to engage in gendered tasks that included scrubbing carpets on their hands and knees.


    But IBLP's teaching on wifely submission is just the tip of the iceberg of the ministry's authoritarian ideology, which includes opposition to, among other things, public education, "humanistic" laws, contraception, and even rock music. Despite downplaying his adherence to a core Gothard teaching, Webster has been, as a 1997 St. Petersburg Times article put it, "an enthusiastic supporter" of IBLP.

    Where have you heard about IBLP before?  The Duggars.  Yeah, them.



    So, not (none / 0) (#58)
    by jbindc on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:28:12 PM EST
    Daniel Webster (none / 0) (#72)
    by KeysDan on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:57:52 PM EST
    seems to have it all.  Just what the House Republicans are looking for: little experience (in US House since 2011), young blood (b. 1949), friend of the inevitable presidential contender, Jeb!, and a winger extremist.

    He does have a lot of Florida legislative experience (28 years), is an advocate of home schooling (his six children were home schooled), and a part of the covenant marriage movement (no divorce except on limited basis), and a central legislative figure in the Terry Schiavo case. What are they waiting for?  


    I think it's possible (none / 0) (#44)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 12:19:27 PM EST
    The red hots might treat Ryan the same way.  

    Not possible (none / 0) (#46)
    by CoralGables on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 12:30:40 PM EST
    He already said "not interested" again today.

    The GOP has postponed the leadership vote. (none / 0) (#48)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 12:55:22 PM EST
    So, no, I don't think it'll be Chaffetz, either. You should probably make some popcorn.

    I say put it to a vote in the full House today (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by CoralGables on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 12:58:01 PM EST
    Top vote-getter wins. That would be Pelosi lol.

    Don't laugh. (none / 0) (#54)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:21:00 PM EST
    I've seen some pretty strange coalitions cobbled together in state legislatures. Our present Speaker out here, Joe Souki, regained his position because in our 51-member State House, you need 26 members to organize, and the 43-member Democratic caucus was split 22-21 between two factions. So Speaker Souki made a deal with the eight House Republicans, and claimed his prize.

    If the GOP House caucus becomes so factionalized that no single candidate can garner 218 votes exclusively amongst Republicans in order to organize the House, it's not inconceivable that GOP moderates might turn to Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats. I imagine if that were the case, she'd likely drive a very hard bargain.



    Ha ha ha! (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by jbindc on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:50:22 PM EST
    Could very well be that the most reasonable (none / 0) (#73)
    by ruffian on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 02:00:12 PM EST
    conservative is a Democrat. that is an interesting idea - I hope Pelosi and the Dems are suggesting it. It would be a huge benefit to the country to break up this dysfunctional GOP.

    At the end of the day ... (none / 0) (#89)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 04:20:36 PM EST
    ... when all's said and done, those who seek elected office better be able to govern and further, be able to do so responsibly.

    And over the last three decades, that's increasingly become the GOP's Achilles' heel, because 30 years' worth of angry demagogy and ideological purges has left that party top heavy in socio-political anarchists, clueless know-nothings and lazy blowhards, and woefully short of members who actually possess a genuine talent for the art of governance.

    Thus, since the electorate somehow collectively saw fit to put Republicans in charge on Capitol Hill, it's hardly surprising that we have a completely dysfunctional Congress that has yet to pass even the most basic of measures, such as a federal budget.

    What we got instead was a House Republican leadership whose apparent sole raison d'etre is to take down the presumed Democratic frontrunner for the 2016 presidential race by any means necessary, and a malcontented Tea Party faction of about 50 to 60 members who seem to think that throwing sand in the crankcases of government is somehow a good idea.

    When you listen to stupid and then vote for stupid -- or worse still, stay home under the mistaken impression that both major parties are somehow one and the same, and don't vote at all -- it should really come as no shock to anyone that the result would therefore be stupid. And stupid's what we got here.

    Hopefully, voters will take heed and wise up, and then show up at the polls to perform the necessary course correction at the ballot box, before some very significant and long-lasting damage is done to this country and its 50 component parts. If not, well, then we'll soon have real problems which will not be at all easy to fix.



    It could still be Chaffetz (none / 0) (#80)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 03:50:32 PM EST
    He's still running.   But I agree about the popcorn.

    Alabama, Leading the Charge in Voter... (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:29:31 PM EST

    Last year the state passes a law that requires a drivers license to vote, this year they close 31 offices that issue drivers license, and they just happen to be in areas with lots of black folks.

    Alabama DMV closings draw call for federal voting rights probe

    Citing budget constraints, the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency said last Wednesday that driver's license examiners would no longer work at 31 offices around the state. As John Archibald, an Alabama newspaper columnist, noted that day, eight of the 10 counties with the highest share of non-white registered voters will see their offices closed. That includes all five of the counties that voted most strongly Democratic in the 2012 presidential election.

    Alabama passed a voter ID law in 2011, to go into effect in 2014. The state didn't seek approval for the law from the Justice Department, known as pre-clearance, as was required at the time under the Voting Rights Act (VRA). In 2012, DoJ blocked Texas's voter ID law from taking effect, citing its impact on minority voters. But in 2013, the Supreme Court neutered the VRA's preclearance provision. Hours later, Alabama announced that its law would go into effect in 2014 as scheduled.


    Good thing racism is dead in America or some might feel that Alabama is trying to keep black folks from voting.

    Just another reason (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by CST on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:32:41 PM EST
    Why the party in power matters so much.

    Anyone think a Republican DOJ would give a $hit?  Anyone think the Democratic DOJ won't?


    I Agree, But in All Fairness... (none / 0) (#71)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:54:58 PM EST
    ...this one is on the SCOTUS.

    Sounds like (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by CST on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 02:03:59 PM EST
    This one is still heading to SCOTUS.  Because the DOJ will take it there.  But you are right that they laid the groundwork for the law going into effect and will be the ultimate decider.

    But with this DOJ in place they won't just let it slide, they'll at least press the issue again.


    James Comey (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 04:15:11 PM EST
    The head of the FBI has said it is "ridiculous [and] embarrassing" that the federal government has no better information on police shootings than databases compiled by the Guardian US and the Washington Post.

    "It is unacceptable that the Washington Post and the Guardian newspaper from the UK are becoming the lead source of information about violent encounters between [US] police and civilians. That is not good for anybody," said James Comey, the FBI director, on Wednesday.


    Yeah, it's ridiculous that the FBI doesn't want to know how many people are killed by the police, if only one of us were in a position to change that...


    I so wish (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by sj on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 04:19:42 PM EST
    that I had seen Baryshnikov dance. My sister did. And it looks like the daughter he had with Jessica Lange may have gotten "the gene".

    I never got to see (none / 0) (#91)
    by Zorba on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 04:53:32 PM EST
    Baryshnikov dance live.
    But many, many years ago, I got to see Margot Fonteyn and Rudolf Nureyev when the Royal Ballet was doing an American tour.
    Magical.  They were absolutely  magical together.

    ::sigh:: (none / 0) (#102)
    by sj on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 06:29:21 PM EST
    So envious of you right now.

    Get a copy of White Nights (none / 0) (#92)
    by ragebot on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 05:14:26 PM EST
    Baryshnikov and Gregory Hinds kinda compete in one scene and Baryshnikov shows he is the true master.  I saw the movie in Tallahassee when it came out with a girl who took ballet when she was younger.  Maybe a month or two after the movie we drove down to Miami to see Baryshnikov dance in person.

    Nothing against Hinds and he is a talented dancer, but he really cant hold a candle to Baryshnikov.

    Link to White Nights.


    I should have been more clear (none / 0) (#100)
    by sj on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 06:12:27 PM EST
    I never saw Baryshnikov dance live. I have seen White Nights multiple times. And yes, it was pretty brave of Gregory Hines to dance along side MB.

    Woke up this morning (none / 0) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 07:59:56 AM EST
    To Bernie on Mourning Joe.  He was sounding surprisingly hawkish.  At least to me.  About dealing with the ME and ISIS.

    This is not Bernie bashing.  And it may be nothing new since honestly I have not paid that much attention to his foreign policy stuff because frankly he is not my candidate and more to the point, I never thought he would be the nominee.   Again not Bernie bashing, just my opinion.  
    But I was surprised how hawkish he sounded about dealing with ISIS, by working with Russia and other stuff.   I suppose I "assumed" ( that word is dead to me) he would be less aggressive than Hillary.  But he didn't sound that way.

    The talk should be up some place soon if any are interested in hearing it.

    The other thing interesting was Clarie McCaskill handing Joe & Mica their asses about their blind Hillary bashing.   That s great.  Not a Claire fan really but Squint and The Meat Puppet did not deal well with the truth.

    Best line from Mica (none / 0) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 08:05:22 AM EST
    "I think you may misunderstand that we were just asking questions"

    Baa waa waa (none / 0) (#3)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 08:18:24 AM EST
    #drunkMika the concern troll.

    On US + Russia from buzzfeed (none / 0) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 08:19:11 AM EST
    NATO defense ministers convened Thursday to discuss Russia's intervention in the country.

    that's frustrating (none / 0) (#7)
    by CST on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 09:41:22 AM EST
    It would be really nice to have someone up there on that stage at least pushing them on these issues.  Unfortunately none of the other "also rans" seem to be running to the left on foreign policy.

    And to be blunt, whether or not Obama governed that way he certainly ran that way the first time, and it could be argued that he fulfilled some of that promise (Iran, Cuba, etc...) It's one of the reasons that he picked up a lot of support vs. Hillary.

    Bernie seems to be doing a decent job of pushing the conversation on the economy, I just wish there were someone pushing on foreign policy, because it seems like he's not that guy.  Frankly, as senator it's an issue he was never as loud about one way or the other, and when he was he always seemed to frame it more as priorities vs. domestic issues.  IE. we're wasting money on war that needs to be spent at home.  But not a whole lot beyond that.


    Bernie is a one trick pony... (none / 0) (#9)
    by kdog on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:07:33 AM EST
    I just so happen to think it's the trick we need in the White House...the issue of income inequality/wealth disparity is the biggest issue we face.

    I'm willing to sacrifice presidential focus on other very important issues for 4-8 years, some near and dear to my heart (foreign policy, drug policy, criminal justice reform, etc.)...I think it's that critical to get cracking on building a new economic model to replace failed trickle down. Bernie is the only person in the race who truly gets it, imo.

    I mean sh*t our foreign policy has pretty much been a disaster since the Nazis surrendered anyway, focus on it can wait another 4-8.  And it's not like Bernie is gonna make it worse, he won't go starting any new wars....he'll be too busy working overtime with the daunting task of getting congress to get with his economic program.


    pretty much (none / 0) (#10)
    by CST on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:24:31 AM EST
    I agree with you on importance of that one trick these days, I just don't know that he's the guy to actually get it done.  He's great at shouting at it from the outside and speaking truth to power.  We need someone in that office who can wield power.  To be honest, I'm not convinced we've got that candidate at all, but I do think Hillary is probably more effective at it than Bernie, and frankly, her strongest area is also the economy.

    That's what I'm afraid of... (none / 0) (#12)
    by kdog on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:34:58 AM EST
    Hillary's ability to wield power, all those checks she cashed from Lloyd Blankfein, and whose power will be wielded.

    If it ain't Bernie, we don't have that candidate.  We'll likely have a repeat of the Bill & Barack years...couple bones here and there, better than Brand R sure, but another lost 4-8 years at tackling the fundamental flaws and failures.


    FWIW (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:43:38 AM EST
    Hillary Clinton to lay out plans for reining in Wall Street
    Among her proposals: a tax on certain rapid-fire stock traders, who some see as contributing to market instability. She also wants to extend the statute of limitations for prosecuting financial crimes and require that responsible individuals pay a portion of fines levied because of wrongdoing at their companies

    These ideas are part of a wider proposal on financial regulation that aims to address discontent about Wall Street that is running high in the Democratic Party -- and the electorate at large -- in the aftermath of the financial crisis. The full plan is expected to be unveiled Thursday.

    Speaking of drip, drip, drip...


    whose power (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by CST on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:44:02 AM EST
    is always a valid question and concern.

    As far as the "couple bones" here and there go - that's the crux of it.  Bernie may have better priorities but will he be able to even get us a couple bones through congress?  I don't know, I don't see it.  It takes a lot more than a president, and unfortunately we have a hot mess of a situation with the political views rampant in this country.

    And those couple bones can end up having big impacts down the line.


    He will have the power of the veto... (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by kdog on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:53:09 AM EST
    where as a Bill/Barack/Hillary would/will go along to get along and sign off for scraps (again imho)...I think Bernie would hold the line for us against a corrupt congress.  He might not win, but he will not surrender, and I think that's enough for me.  Reasonable people can disagree of course, but I think the situation needs to come to a head, whatever the outcome.  

    Veto power (none / 0) (#21)
    by jbindc on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:04:13 AM EST
    Doesn't do much good when you can't get a supermajority of Congress to agree with you.

    I mean, he hasn't been able to convince his colleagues in the Senate about many of his ideas now- how will he do it as president?


    Might be able too... (none / 0) (#24)
    by kdog on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:09:37 AM EST
    by publicly shaming Congress...if pigs fly and he does manage to shock the world and become our next president, he'll have one hell of a mandate to make Congresspersons fear for their jobs.

    There's a better chance of pigs flying (5.00 / 3) (#41)
    by CoralGables on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 12:05:19 PM EST
    LOL! You're funny, kdog. (none / 0) (#45)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 12:22:59 PM EST
    How exactly does one shame a Congress whose members have long shown both an individual and collective propensity to not embarrass easily?

    I mean, House Oversight Committee Chair Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) was caught in a demonstrable lie by Planned Parenthood's Cecile Richards during a public hearing only last week, and it was like water off a duck's backside to him. Three days later, he declares his candidacy for House Speaker in a direct challenge Kevin McCarthy, a guy who had his own serious issues only days earlier.

    Best of luck in your quest to shame those two, and the clowns who'll be voting for one of them as their leader today.



    Oops. Never mind. (none / 0) (#51)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:05:29 PM EST
    McCarthy's removed himself from consideration, and the leadership vote has been postponed. I guess we now know what that open letter from Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) to his GOP colleagues was really all about. From Susie Madrak at Crook & Liars:

    "Last night, a certain wingnut blogger reported that McCarthy, despite warnings from the leadership, was still carrying on an affair with Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-NC). There were enough details that I figured it was leaked in an attempt to sandbag McCarthy, because this blogger is notorious for getting everything wrong."

    This will be fun to watch.


    There's... (none / 0) (#55)
    by kdog on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:22:23 PM EST
    your congressperson lied about Planned Parenthood shame, and there's President Sanders addressing the nation saying "you haven't gotten a real raise in 30 years in part because of who you've elected, and you elected me to change that, but your current congressperson is trying to stop us" shame.  

    Of course it's a long shot, still better than no shot.  

    Does Hillary keep moving left when Bernie concedes?  


    No one moves far left or far right (none / 0) (#63)
    by CoralGables on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:37:01 PM EST
    once you get the nomination. It's then a race to the middle.

    Which is why it's important to move her (5.00 / 4) (#66)
    by Anne on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:47:41 PM EST
    as far to the left as we can now, because there are two things I think it's safe to say: no Republican nominee is going to be moving to the left, and so when/if she gets the nomination, she is going to be moving to the right.  When she does, it would be good if it isn't past "the center," and well over into what we'd consider to be the right-hand side of the spectrum.

    This is why many of us wanted Sanders in the race, because without him, I don't know if Clinton would be taking nearly the progressive, populist stands she is with him in the race.


    Cynic in me... (none / 0) (#69)
    by kdog on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:51:19 PM EST
    says her change of course on TPP has more to do with Sanders and the polls than the new info she has obtained about what's in TPP.

    realist in me (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by CST on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:52:46 PM EST
    agrees with you and doesn't care why.

    Whatever works... (none / 0) (#75)
    by kdog on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 02:15:47 PM EST
    works for me too...just hope it sticks.

    That should be enough evidence to rest your case.

    Rest what case? (none / 0) (#67)
    by kdog on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:49:06 PM EST
    That we can't win?  I guess we don't need an attorney to tell us that, do we;)

    I was actually responding to CG's comment ... (none / 0) (#96)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 05:42:28 PM EST
    kdog: "Rest what case? That we can't win?  I guess we don't need an attorney to tell us that, do we;)"

    ... and not to you, kdog. That said, I pointed to Goldwater and McGovern because both of them campaigned for the presidency from positi9ons that were well right and left of center, respectively, and yet they still managed to gain their parties' nominations in 1964 and '72.

    But because both candidates then failed, refused or were unable to tack back to the center after their party's respective conventions, neither man was ever able to rise above 36% at the polls, and both were easily and literally blown out of the water by their opponents in the general election.

    While my own personal politics fall close to Bernie Sanders, and God bless him for his willingness to speak truth to power on economic issues, I'm also a hardcore pragmatist and not a dreamer. It's vitally important that we win this upcoming election, and not place or show.

    And the hard truth here is that short of the U.S. economy suddenly tanking and bringing about a major depression, nothing has changed significantly in the American electorate over the last 50 years which will somehow magically throw open the doors to the White House for an avowed and unrepentant Socialist like Sanders.

    If you want to see what happens to Socialists in this country who seek real power, I recommend that you study the quixotic 1934 gubernatorial campaign of Upton Sinclair in California, which occurred during the Great Depression.

    Now, one would think that at a time of significant socio-economic dislocation in this country, such a campaign would resonate with a majority of the embattled electorate. Well, one would be wrong because it most certainly didn't.

    Instead, because Sinclair was initially thought to be the frontrunner in the race, he soon found himself demonized and ridiculed relentlessly by a California media that was dominated by William Randolph Hearst of the San Francisco Chronicle and Harry Chandler of the Los Angeles Times. Sinclair had no real means to respond to the onslaught, because his campaign was underfunded and the media further refused to cover his quest honestly and truthfully.

    Meanwhile, the corporate world poured money into the campaign of his Republican opponent, Frank Merriam. The major Hollywood studios even went so far as to unilaterally deduct funds from their employees' paychecks without permission to give to Merriam. And further, they got away with it because after all, who's going to complain about it during a major economic depression, when nearly one in three Californians were unemployed -- right?

    Not surprisingly, Upton Sinclair lost that election to Merriam in rather decisive fashion, getting only 37% of the vote.

    Now, there's certainly an argument to be made that Sinclair's campaign actually sparked a long-term renaissance within the California Democratic Party, which ultimately came to fruition nearly a quarter-century later with the 1958 election of liberal Edmund G. "Pat" Brown, Sr. as governor, and corresponding Democratic majorities in the state legislature. But for purposes of our discussion, that's neither here nor there, because I don't think we're all that interested in the 2040 election right now.

    Look, I'm a Democrat, and if Bernie Sanders somehow gets my party's nomination, I will of course support him to the very best of my abilities during the general election campaign.

    But I'll do so with my eyes wide open to the likelihood that were that to happen in this age of Citizens United, we Democrats would be staring at an election debacle across the board, from which it would probably take us the better part of a generation to recover.



    Comparing Sanders to McGovern (none / 0) (#103)
    by Dadler on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 06:36:58 PM EST
    I don't buy it. Especially in the context of these quite incomparable times. Almost half a century of progressive social history alone (though we've had plenty of regressive also) renders the comparison not accurate to me. IMO, almost anyone the Dems nominate, Sanders, Clinton, whomever, would beat whatever right-wing halfwit the Repubs cough up. And right now Sanders is the only Democrat who can claim to be genuinely and consistently politically progressive and untainted by big money. That matters, to me anyway. And I think it does to others. And he comes from a "gun" state. Though he has a D- rating from the NRA, I think that's a plus for him in getting the kind of rational (even if only partially rational) opposition votes necessary to win. Maybe I'm wrong, but I still believe real and handcrafted political imagination of the stirring and hilarious and reason-appealing sort is just sitting there waiting to be grasped and used by supposedly free American candidates in this insane season. Yap, yap, yap, I'm not right in the head, I realize. Very left. Too far. So far the junk is coming out of my left ear. Ick. Again, maybe I'm wrong, maybe the Big Bank Boys will crash the economy, or something else will. You never know these days. The digital gilded age. I was in a guild once. Sigh. Goodnight now. Peace.

    Saw Morning Joe (none / 0) (#13)
    by ragebot on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:37:14 AM EST
    I was not that impressed with Clarie.  She interrupted Joe multiple times and Mika had to step in and put an end to it.  But what ever Mika and Joe did there was another female talking head that was the token conservative that was not shy about interrupting Clarie when Clarie refused to answer direct questions.  Instead Clarie would go off on some tangent defending Hillary.

    This is the biggest problem I see with Hillary and her minions.  Every candidate has warts somewhere and when they get pointed out most folks think the thing to do is grab the bull by the horns and deal with it.  This does not mean pointing fingers and saying but others are doing that. It does not mean trying to change the subject.  Especially if a candidate is claiming they are trying to be transparent.

    Not saying Hillary is the only pol who seems to be asking the question 'who are you going to believe me or your lying eyes?'.  Just that she seems to get more publicity for doing it.


    I'm sorry (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:40:54 AM EST
    I still laughing about the " she interrupted Joe" part.

    We will agree to disagree.


    Talking over someone (none / 0) (#29)
    by ragebot on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:28:18 AM EST
    seldom results in changing someone else's mind.  The thing is Joe was in the process of asking a question Clarie thought would be embarrassing to Hillary and she tried to cut him off.

    Some of the most impressive public performances I have seen involves Trump's hair.  Everyone seems to agree his 'do is not something you see everyday.  The word comb over does not come close to describing what it is.  But Trump has made it clear he styles his own hair and has invited audience members (always seems to be a hot babe) on stage to pull his hair and prove it is his.

    This is the kind of taking the bull by the horns I am talking about, as opposed to sending out minions to shout down questions and try and impose a heckler's veto.

    Perhaps more to the point anyone who has been at TL for any length of time knows Morning Joe is not the most popular talking heads show here.  What kinda questions did Clarie think she was going to get on that show.  In fact when introduced she started a monolog about how unfair Morning Joe was to Hillary.

    My take is the better plan is to expect questions that will try and make your guy look bad and have stock answers to refute them.


    I Hope You are Joking About Trump... (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:55:49 AM EST
    ...who has been caught numerous times planting actors in the audience, or is that taking the bull by the horns in order to deceive the gullible ?

    Google Search

    But thank god Donald is proving himself a viable candidate vis-à-vis his hair isn't fake.  But it says a whole lot more about, that you think 'Some of the most impressive public performances I have seen'.  Good GD gravy.

    Bar, meet no low.


    Please (none / 0) (#33)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:44:59 AM EST
    The guy is a non stop diarrhea mouth who has never let a guest finish a thought in the history of the show.

    I thought his imperious offense at being cut off was great.


    I should say (none / 0) (#35)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:52:46 AM EST

    who has never let a guest he disagreed with finish a thought in the history of the show.

    "Hillary and her minions," ... (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:19:26 AM EST
    ... says the guy who reads Breitbart.com.

    Minions (none / 0) (#42)
    by CoralGables on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 12:09:01 PM EST
    another overused word here I'd put on the banned words at TL list.

    Agreed. But that said, ... (none / 0) (#52)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:09:00 PM EST
    ... "Minions" is a pretty amusing popcorn movie.

    Politely remind Comcast that (none / 0) (#5)
    by scribe on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 09:24:29 AM EST
    you're paying for "service" and not getting it, so they'd better fix it or credit you or both, or else.

    Discussing this sort of thing the other day with a neighbor, he remarked how another neighbor got the cable company's fastest internet for 24 months for half price after telling them he was sick of their non-service and craptacular service interruptions and turtle speed.  All it took was his contacting the competition (the phone company) and telling the cable company he was saying goodbye.  A day or so later the cable company called begging him to stay.  A little bargaining later, and they rolled over.

    I would not live in the apartment until the repairs are done.  Your insurance company will decide that means everything is copacetic and find a way to decline to pay for the repairs.  Besides, who wants to live in a construction site?
    I would just have the insurance company pay for you to stay in one of those extended stay motel suites.  They're actually pretty nice.

    Spoken Like Someone Who... (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:38:14 AM EST
    ...has never called Comcast.

    I have DSL at my house, but in Galveston there is only one company, Comcast.  One of my best friends is a higher up at Comcast, and even with his help, it is a nightmare, not past tense.  They actually strung the cable that is suppose to be buried, along side my neighbors clothes lines, in the air, it fricken bright orange.  I know, not their fault contractors, but I didn't pay contractors nor did I call contractors for internet, which is $80 for the same speed I get at my home for $40.

    It's funny because whenever we are down there it seems like some merchant is always having issues with Comcast, and I always say, "He works for Comcast".  It's fun to watch my friend get visibly mad as the someone lays into him.  And that is not a rare occurrence.

    Years ago Comcast bought out Time Warner, so I had their service for about 6 months.  Right before I moved I called and asked about my email explaining that I was moving in with someone who had Comcast, they said you will have 6 months of email.  The night after the move, gone, I called and they told me the servers had been wiped.  I doubted it, but I wasn't getting anything back and I had a lot of contact info.  I was beyond upset.

    I switched to DirecTV within a couple weeks.

    That company is one of the worse I have ever dealt with, they straight up lie, then lie some more, and are straight up thieves IMO.  I would easily rate them as the worse company I have ever had to deal with.


    Yes, you could stay at an (none / 0) (#6)
    by fishcamp on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 09:34:32 AM EST
    Embassy Suites where all the Cops stay, along with the rest of the alphabetical henchmen.  (-:

    That's always been the secret with cable (none / 0) (#11)
    by Dadler on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:33:21 AM EST
    You simply call them, tell them how disgusted you are and say you demand an immediate 30% reduction or you are leaving. They will, almost always, give you a serious discount. Negotiation is the forgotten art in this pre-packaged society. Work those effers, people. Work them.

    I loathe haggling though... (none / 0) (#18)
    by kdog on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:47:17 AM EST
    (sh*t I loathe business for that matter;)...I just can't do it, I must be missing the gene.  

    Even more so now since I'm the schmuck being threatened with "I want 20% off or I'm never buying anything from you people ever again for as long as I live!!!".  To which I think but can't say "Works for me guy, take a f8ckin' hike!".  


    They know what a monopoly they have (none / 0) (#22)
    by Dadler on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:05:16 AM EST
    i hate haggling too but, seriously, you can imagine the profit margins they enjoy if they so easily will cut your rate 20% cuz you call up in a pissy mood. It has always worked for us well every few years or so when the bill gets out of hand.

    Oh I can imagine... (none / 0) (#26)
    by kdog on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:13:32 AM EST
    I know my proclivities cost me money...but their is a cost to time and aggravation too.  I'd rather cancel the service than battle the corporate bureaucracy, not to mention the conscience pangs of giving some underpaid slob who doesn't have anything to do with setting rates grief on the phone...I am that underpaid slob! ;)

    Bro... (none / 0) (#20)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:03:46 AM EST
    ...I would agree with the exception of Comcast.  

    I just negotiated myself into a sweet deal with Sirius this morning, I used always get good deals with Time Warner, and swear to god on his one, I got NFL Sunday Ticket for free this year.

    But Comcast, if there was a competitor, I would have saved myself 1001 headaches and never called Comcast to begin with.

    Now I don't know how accurate these stories are, but there are literally millions of links just like this:

    7 reasons Comcast is the most hated company in America

    If you've ever wondered why even the federal government has more fans than Comcast, here are some good reasons. The notorious cable provider is infamous for trying to destroy Internet freedom, having some of the worst customer service on the planet, and making you wait for hours, sometimes even days, for the cable guy.

    Congratulations To Comcast, Your 2014 Worst Company In America!

    But the nation's largest cable and Internet provider (which is trying to become even larger), almost got stopped in its track by first-time contender SeaWorld, riding high on waves of negative publicity tied to the documentary Blackfish. Comcast pulled off a buzzer-beater to hold off SeaWorld and earn its place in the Final Death Match.

    Comcast pledges $300M to fix its terrible, horrible, no good, very bad customer service

    "There are times you just need to transform things and rethink things from the base level," said Neil Smit, president and CEO of Comcast Cable, at a recent industry trade show in Chicago. "That's what we've done."

    Should you be skeptical? Of course. Comcast has abused so many customers for so long, that it should take more than promises, some of which we've heard before, to convince people an outfit that has twice been named the "Worst Company in America" by an arm of Consumer Reports finally had its come-to-Jesus moment.

    Comcast allegedly changes name on another customer's bill to a profanity

    A few weeks ago Comcast apologized for sending a bill to Washington state customer Ricardo Brown that was addressed, "A--hole Brown." The offending bill showed up in his mailbox after his wife had called to cancel their cable service.

    Now Mary Bauer is telling the Chicago Tribune that her most recent Comcast bill--which she just got the other day--was addressed to "Super B----h Bauer."

    we did it with comcast once (none / 0) (#23)
    by Dadler on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:06:05 AM EST
    maybe we were lucky, i dunno.

    there's a company (none / 0) (#25)
    by CST on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:10:33 AM EST
    that you can pay $5 to to cancel your Comcast service.  Link

    I agree with you they are the worst company, the problem is in so many areas they are a defacto monopoly.  If I had any other option for semi-reasonable internet speeds I'd drop them in a heartbeat.  I almost never watch cable and if they didn't essentially force me to have it with bundling, I would cut that cord and never go back, especially now that HBO offers online-only packages, since that's pretty much the only thing I do watch.  I have the most basic TV package possible (not even things like FX, ESPN, or AMC) plus HBO because it was "free".  But the cost of internet only was raised to cover the cost of cable.  Which I find incredibly infuriating.  And no, I don't want a frikken landline.

    Grrr. I hate comcast so much.


    I Saw That Yesterday... (none / 0) (#28)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:27:04 AM EST
    ...I guarantee that price will go up, but if I know Comcast, they will simply stop letting other people cancel.

    I was also reading that Comcast is single-handedly pushing people into cutting the cord.  That is crazy, they are ruining an entire industry.


    Dadler maybe a little OT (none / 0) (#30)
    by ragebot on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:30:57 AM EST
    but given the choice who would you rather have negotiating your deal with Comcast; Trump or Hillary?

    Depends (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by CST on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:59:01 AM EST
    (I realize I'm not Dadler)

    Are we talking about negotiating "my deal", "the country's deal", or "Donald Trump's deal".  Because for the first two I'd much rather have Hillary.


    Neither of them (none / 0) (#50)
    by Dadler on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 12:58:33 PM EST
    I'll take myself.

    Smart move... (none / 0) (#59)
    by kdog on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:28:26 PM EST
    Trump would pull his ADD sidetrack move towards negotiations to getting The Trump Network included in the Comcast basic package, Clinton would be giving a paid speech at the Comcast National Sales Meeting in Boca Raton next year for 25 grand.

    Both just coincidences though, honest! ;)


    With McCarthy out ... (none / 0) (#38)
    by christinep on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 11:58:57 AM EST
    what next?  With the story-of-the-day, does that Repub caucus turn to the further right? Where else are they going to go?

    With the Repubs reeling, it would be a good time now--a very good time--for Democrats to amp up the push against the Benghaziii fiasco as well as the right-wing witch hunt against women that is telecast via Cecile Richards.  We should ramp up the push for meaningful gun legislation as well. We should openly push back against the Repubs latest attempts to tamp down the vote & disenfranchise minority voters.  A gigantic initiative on our part in the days ahead could have an impact as the Repubs find themselves in the deep political sea.

    Also: Hoo-ha ...let's give a shout-out to the hapless John Boehner who tipped the balance and helped bring about The Unraveling.

    Benghazi claims a scalp (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by CoralGables on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 12:42:16 PM EST
    Not the one the Republicans planned on (5.00 / 2) (#56)
    by jbindc on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:27:07 PM EST
    It is some nice Clintonian speaker jujitsu (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by ruffian on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:27:37 PM EST
    I am remembering the spate of speakers and speaker candidates that were burned through during Bill's impeachment fiasco.

    Their Kung Fu (none / 0) (#82)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 03:59:28 PM EST
    Is strong

    While his comments on Fox News ... (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:40:09 PM EST
    ... about the House Select Committee on Benghazi probably didn't help his case, Kevin McCarthy was likely done in by a few skeletons rattling around in his closet.

    Specifically, there have been rumors that McCarthy's been having an affair with Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-NC). That may have prompted the open letter from Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) yesterday to his House GOP colleagues, in which Jones referenced the fiasco in Dec. 1998, when then Speaker-elect Bob Livingston (R-LA) resigned his seat due to marital infidelity, at a time when Republicans were pursuing impeachment proceedings against President Clinton for the same thing.



    If this rumor is (none / 0) (#76)
    by KeysDan on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 02:33:38 PM EST
    true, it is likely the coup de gras. McCarthy was already flat-lining of self-inflicted wounds, from his ham-handed boasting on the effectiveness of the Benghazi strategy to his inability to demonstrate  facility with the English language. He was already fodder for the late-night comics.

    But, worst of all, in my opinion, was that he was tagged as being another "liberal" like Boehner. If just a dalliance, it could be overlooked--or covered up. Your basic wing-nuttery, not to mention moderation, cannot be tolerated. And, the fanatical chaos is better shrouded with righteousness.


    What Happens if They Can't Get it Together ? (none / 0) (#79)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 02:56:29 PM EST
    As far as I can tell Boehner will stay.


    "After Leader McCarthy's announcement, members of the House Republican Conference will not vote today for a new speaker. As I have said previously, I will serve as speaker until the House votes to elect a new speaker. We will announce the date for this election at a later date, and I'm confident we will elect a new speaker in the coming weeks."

    According Issa, they need 218 votes.

    Darrell Issa, an influential California Republican congressman and chair of the House oversight committee, said "I think it's obvious that all members of the conference were shocked" by McCarthy's sudden withdrawal. "Kevin McCarthy had the vast majority of the conference's confidence and votes," Issa said, "but he made the decision that he couldn't get to [the requisite] 218 [votes on the House floor], and as a result he's taken himself out of the race."

    Seems almost assured they won't get 218 votes, there are only 247 republicans.


    Agent Orange staying (none / 0) (#81)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 03:58:45 PM EST
    Could be a good thing.  He might be the only one who is "statesman" enough to avoid a shutdown over budgets and debt limits.

    Pretty ironic.


    Yeah... (none / 0) (#84)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 04:11:42 PM EST
    ...what could go wrong with a guy who doesn't want to be there and who a lot of people really hate.  He could go off the grid and become a liberal just to show them.

    Boehner is like my neighbor, hate the guy right until he told me he was putting his place up for sale and it occurred to me it could easily get worse.  He decided to stay and now we actually talk from time to time.

    The humane psyche is weird thing.


    Agree with Donald (none / 0) (#93)
    by ragebot on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 05:18:35 PM EST
    McCarthy seems to have skeletons in his closet that probably had more to do with his getting out than anything he said.

    This one is gonna take a lot of popcorn for me.


    FWIW... (none / 0) (#61)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:30:09 PM EST
    Another depressing article (none / 0) (#77)
    by CST on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 02:47:05 PM EST
    One of the biggest problems (none / 0) (#78)
    by CST on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 02:54:18 PM EST
    that rarely gets talked about is the fact that these loans are not discharge-able in bankruptcy.

    Just about every other loan gives you some way out, some way to negotiate.  But not student loans.


    The rational for non discharge (none / 0) (#95)
    by ragebot on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 05:27:44 PM EST
    is that most students could run up a debt and file for bankruptcy as soon as they graduate, or even if they don't.  Given the economic status of most students the courts would allow that.

    Gotta say I had a debate scholar ship, worked as a bouncer at a local watering hole on weekends, did construction in the summer, and drove a cab in Miami over the Christmas holiday.  Not really high paying jobs but when I graduated I had money in the bank.

    The real problem is the cost of attending a university has increased faster than almost anything else.  Maybe the real solution is to figure out how to lower the cost of going to school.  Administration in universities has grown like a monster, more admins that profs.  The rec centers at major universities often resemble the Taj Mahal.  Very few major universities have a football/basketball team that is in the black and all the minor sports never make money.  Many courses taught provide no skills employers are willing to pay for.

    Even with the high cost tax payers foot the bill for about 2/3 to 1/2 of the cost of a student attending a public university; sometimes even more.

    Massive student debt is the symptom, not the disease.


    And for that you can thank Joe Biden. (none / 0) (#99)
    by caseyOR on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 06:07:00 PM EST
    Everyone who finds themselves mired in student debt, wondering why they cannot declare bankruptcy, should demand that Biden explain to the American people why student loan debt is the only consumer debt that can drag them down the rest of their lives.

    That bankruptcy bill was Biden's baby. Does he think this will not be an isssue if he gets in the race?


    This is the (none / 0) (#101)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 06:19:42 PM EST
    kind of thing that makes me think it's going to be a repeat for him of the last two times should he get in. I mean there were actual reasons he didn't win twice before and it wasn't because of that bogus" authentic" narrative.

    I heard mentioned this afternoon (none / 0) (#83)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 04:11:06 PM EST
    Something I knew but had forgotten.

    The Speaker does not have to be in congress.   It's possible if they can't agree on someone in the house who will take it they could bring someone in from the outside who they can all agree on and is dumb enough to do it.

    Speaker Kim Davis?

    Is It a Paid Gig ? (none / 0) (#86)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 04:17:45 PM EST
    There are a lot of republican presidential candidates who will need a job in the very near future.

    Oh dear god (none / 0) (#87)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 04:19:15 PM EST
    ChuckieCheeses Todd just said the names of Dick Cheney and Ben Carson were being floated.

    Hugh Hewitt (none / 0) (#90)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 04:46:50 PM EST
    Just said it would be Pete Roskam.  He knows these guys pretty well.

    Interesting.  Relatively speaking not the most dangerous inmate in the asylum.

    Supports stem cell research.   Denies climate change.

    Just had (none / 0) (#94)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 05:25:16 PM EST
    a conversation with a wingnut that thinks Boehner is the problem. Talk about clueless. The problem is that the GOP has so many gerrymandered far right districts that elect nuts to the house. This new guy is probably not going to be any better than Boehner because frankly nobody is going to be able to run the monkey house full of tea party monkeys.

    Uh huh (none / 0) (#97)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 05:43:47 PM EST
    Boehner may be the solution.  I sort of expect he will stick around.   But not everyone will be happy with that.   I just saw gap toothed Texas piggy birther Blake Farenthold saying "his people", who are the craziest of the crazy, absolutely do not want more Boehner.

    Boo hoo.   It would be ironic if they end up forcing Boehner to stay and he sells them out by refusing to shut down  the government.

    And why should he not.  He's leaving.  What does he care how pi$$ed off the TP morons are.

    If I was him I would want to stick it to them.


    I had no (none / 0) (#98)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 05:57:02 PM EST
    idea who that person was. So i went to his Facebook page. Facebook pages are a great place to read the crazy. His people? LOL. Yeah, the best thing for the GOP in general would be for Boehner to stay as much as the nuts hate him because things would get much much worse for the GOP with one of the nuts being speaker. At least Boehner won't let them blow up the country.