Sunday Night TV and Open Thread

Sunday night TV is back. Tonight, the new season of Downton Abbey begins, as does Celebrity Apprentice. The Good Wife is also back tonight.

Tomorrow night, the Bachelor returns.

Showtime is running last season's Shameless all night, which means a new season will begin soon. [More...]

Is anyone else watching any of these?

Next week, Duenos del Paraiso with Kate Castillo (from one of my favorites, La Reina del Sur) begins on Telemundo and Tiro de Gracia with Robinson Diaz (Senor de los Cielos, El Cartel) starts on Unimas.

I wish El Capo was coming back. It may be my all time favorite Narcodrama (although La Reina del Sur is close.) It's silly that U.S. networks are now creating their own versions of these shows in English with American stars. They should just air the originals with subtitles.

I'm up to lesson 5 (of at least 150) in my Fluenz Spanish program. It's the best one I've tried, so far. I think it's much easier for an adult to learn a new language when the program explains the grammar and gender rules, rather than just showing them the correct word and picture. So even though each lesson takes around an hour, it's worth the time.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Dershowitz, Prince Andrew and Jane Doe 3 | Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Trial: Jury Selection Begins >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    URL problems again Thought I had learned (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Palli on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 11:13:54 AM EST

    Surely this is correct

    By golly Palli (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by MO Blue on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 11:40:30 AM EST
    You got it. Your link is definitely correct.

    Keep on using the tinyurls since they work for you.


    Thanks (none / 0) (#13)
    by Palli on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 12:12:07 PM EST
    but it hadn't worked the first time- really I'm a pencil and paper type.  Must be the old fashioned artist in me.

    And if it does (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 04:00:41 PM EST
    "go somewhere" do we get to hear you admit you were wrong?

    It's really a rhetorical question.  I know the answer.

    Jeb Bush still has not (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by KeysDan on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 04:12:10 PM EST
    warmed to the fourteenth amendment of the US Constitution as applied by federal courts that overturned the Florida ban on same sex marriage, or similar and multiple rulings by local Florida judges.  Jeb, yesteryear's Florida governor (1999-2007) stated yesterday, that same sex marriage "..ought to be a local decision, I mean, a state decision..." but, it has been overturned by the courts, I guess."    Same sex marriage became legal in MiamiDade County at  2 pm today, and will become legal state-wide tomorrow at 12:01 am.  

    Apparently, that Bush name is still golden with Republicans, as he seems to be leading that pack.  With his lack of evolution, the Republican primaries should be as easy as not baking a gay wedding cake.  

    The whole thing is becoming (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 04:23:30 PM EST
    quite funny.  Apparently they are refusing to perform any marriages rather than perform gay marriages.  
    Also Idahos governor who has the hardly believable name, Butch Otter is prepared to say you can't get married if you can't or won't have kids.
    You really can't make this stuff up.

    How is he going to (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by MO Blue on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 04:32:48 PM EST
    determine whether or not a person is capable of having children. Is the state going to pay for fertility tests for all prospective couples who want to get married? Is he going to force all older couples who want to get married to live apart or in sin since they can't have children?

    Darn Dubya was right. As far as Republicans are concerned the Constitution is just a d@mn piece of paper.


    Well to be fair (none / 0) (#42)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 04:37:56 PM EST
    Butch Otter (seriously other than Butch Beaver what could be better). Is not actually saying straight couples have to have kids.  I might as well point that out before someone else does.  He is only saying gays shouldn't get married because the only reason for marriage is children.

    Just doing a bit of logical extrapolation.


    Btw (none / 0) (#44)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 04:47:36 PM EST
    "Butch" has already spent about. Half million bucks of taxpayer money to do this.

    Memo to self (none / 0) (#54)
    by MO Blue on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 06:07:28 PM EST
    Don't get in a hurry - read all links before commenting.

    OTOH, the same principles apply. If you are going to accept the premise that the only lawful reason for marriage is to have children, then in order to have equal treatment under the law, marriage would have to be banned for all people who could not or would not have children.


    The nutty conservatives (none / 0) (#104)
    by jondee on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 12:53:42 PM EST
    always seem to have the best, unconsciously revealing names..

    Newt Gingrich always sounded like a Lord of the Rings villain or one of the demons in The Screwtape Letters.


    I can't hear the name (none / 0) (#107)
    by Zorba on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 01:04:32 PM EST
    "Newt Gingrich" without thinking of Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

    yeah (none / 0) (#113)
    by jondee on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 01:24:13 PM EST
    How do you know she's a witch?

    She turned me into a newt!

    I got better..


    Gee, guess those (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by KeysDan on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 05:21:45 PM EST
    preachers were right after all--permitting gay marriage can hurt straight marriages.   But, then, according to the link, the refusal to conduct courthouse wedding services is just due to staffing problems and cramped offices. Cramped minds have nothing to do with it.  

    But, there is a Romney-ish business opportunity here: no Bain no gain.   Entrepreneurial north Floridians can set up wedding services by becoming ordained online by the Universal Life Church, which has but two tenets: to promote freedom of religion and to do that which is right.  Like ministers, priests and rabbis, you become an officer of the state--sign the marriage license that has been issued by the state of Florida and it all becomes official.  


    Are you sure that is true? (none / 0) (#111)
    by Peter G on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 01:10:15 PM EST
    ULC "ordinations" are recognized in some states, but not in others (including New York, I happen to know). Is Florida definitely ULC-ok?

    My understanding is that (none / 0) (#115)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 01:32:58 PM EST
    Florida is OK, based on the ULC website.

    Only refusing to perform marriages in a handful (none / 0) (#43)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 04:44:49 PM EST
    of Florida counties and even they are issuing licenses.

    Miami-Dade didn't wait around today as a local judge lifted the stay and ceremonies proceeded immediately.

    Miami-Dade County became the first place in Florida to allow same-sex couples to marry on Monday, half a day before a gay-marriage ban that has been ruled unconstitutional is lifted in the rest of the state.

    Weddings began around 1:30 p.m., less than three hours after Circuit Judge Sarah Zabel lifted the legal stay she had placed on her sweeping July decision declaring the ban discriminatory.

    "In the big picture, does it really matter whether or not I lift the stay or leave it until tomorrow?" Zabel said from the bench. "I'm lifting the stay."

    True (none / 0) (#45)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 04:49:10 PM EST
    in the Redneck Riviera as I understand it.

    Judge Sarah Zabel, (none / 0) (#117)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 01:41:25 PM EST
    of the Miami/Dade Circuit Court,  married, in the county courthouse,  two of the six couples who had sued the county over the same-sex marriage ban.

    Mike Huckabee (none / 0) (#46)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 04:57:35 PM EST
    Just quit FOX News.

    If he runs he will give Jeb a run for it.  In fact I just might put my money on Huck.


    Crooks&Liars (none / 0) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 05:25:10 PM EST
    Harry Enten argues that Mike Huckabee is the perfect conservative candidate for whoever the leading moderate Republican contender is.  He can win in small conservative states but makes little headway in the larger states.

    Interesting.  Maybe.
    But I have said before I think the rabble has had enough "main stream" and would nominate a hard right candidate.   IMO Huckabee might just be perfect for the republican mood.   He is smart and savvy.  He is easily the best public speaker in the party.  And in spite of his extreme views he has the ability come seem moderate and reasonable.  Said it before n I'll say it again.   Democrats underestimate thus guy at their peril.

    The good news.  Hillary knows him well and will not underestimate him.


    Huckabee on same sex marriage: (none / 0) (#58)
    by KeysDan on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 06:43:38 PM EST
    "until Moses comes down from Brokeback Mountain saying he has changed the rules," he is opposed.    From Matt Taibbi's take on Huckabee.  A little old (Rolling Stone, 2007), and he may have changed his mind, although he does not seem to be into evolution of any kind.   Like Matt's reporting on Huck's televangelist grifting proclivities, although his renewed wedding vows registry at Target does speak well of his family values.

    Looking for what you meant (none / 0) (#63)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 07:18:48 PM EST
    abiut the vows (I thought he had been married to the same woman for a long time, he has so it's just grifting? I guess?) anyway, I found a longer more recent thing 2011 from Rolling Stone.   Interesting.  He has long posed as a champion of the poor something republicans don't usually do.  Thought this was smart-

    What the press doesn't understand is that Huckabee has changed the equation of party-specific orthodoxies. A generation of GOP candidates have used the poor as a whipping-post stage prop, complaining about lazy, frantically copulating homeless fiends living in cars, fvcking up the property values of Decent Folk. Huck turns that rhetoric around by saying, "We shouldn't allow a child to live under a bridge or in the back seat of a car." It's a brilliant innovation for a candidate like Huckabee, who recognizes that the only thing he has to lose by talking about poverty and high CEO salaries is the support of the big-money wing of his party -- something he doesn't have anyway.

    good stuff.  Also MT.


    Cricket Hallelujah Chorus (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 04:34:39 PM EST
    This is making the rounds on FBook

    I usually like to check around before I share anything I find there and this turned up on Snopes.  But in an interesting way.  Whatever it is it's quite wonderful.  The audio link is available at the Snopes link.

    Composer Jim Wilson has recorded the sound of crickets and then slowed down the recording, revealing something so amazing. The crickets sound like they are singing the most angelic chorus in perfect harmony. Though it sounds like human voices, everything you hear in the recording is the crickets themselves.

    "I discovered that when I slowed down this recording to various levels, this simple familiar sound began to morph into something very mystic and complex ... almost human."


    Nonetheless, even if the original recording featured nothing other than the sounds of crickets chirping, exactly what was done to those sounds to create the finished piece remains a subject of contention. Critics contend that Wilson didn't simply slow down a continuous recording of crickets chirping; they interpret his statement that he "slowed down this recording to various levels" and Bonnie Joe Hunt's reference to Wilson's "lowering the pitch" several times to mean that he used multiple recordings of crickets, each slowed down by a different amount to produce a specific pitch, and layered them to create a melodic effect sounding like a "well-trained church choir."

    The Snopes link also explained why it sounded so familiar.  I have the Robbie Robertson mentioned though I had not played it in a long time.

    For all you art lovers out there, (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by Zorba on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 05:01:57 PM EST
    See this link from  OpenCulture, from which you can access catalogues full of art from the Metropolitan Museum of Art (as well as more to come), and it also contains a link to many art books from the Guggenheim Museum.
    Also, see this link from the Washington Post, referencing many pieces from the Smithsonian that are now available online.

    I put this on the last open (none / 0) (#48)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 05:06:57 PM EST
    then it didn't work for me for some reason.  Haven't tried again.   Have you downloaded anything?  Maybe just a traffic problem?

    I have spent way too much time today (none / 0) (#50)
    by Zorba on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 05:24:26 PM EST
    Looking at the Metropolitan Museum of Art's online collection.  It does work for me, but it's slow to download.
    I haven't tried the Guggenheim link yet.
    For the Freer and Sackler Galleries collection, referenced in the Washington Post link, try this link.
    It's Asian art, and it's lovely.

    RIP, Bess Myerson (1924-2014). (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 05:36:25 PM EST
    The former Miss America (1945) and longtime power broker in New York City politics, who was implicated in a major bribery scandal in 1987 yet acquitted by jurors at her subsequent criminal trial the following year, died at her home in Santa Monica, CA on December 14, as confirmed today by the Los Angeles County Coroner's office.

    According to her obituary in the Los Angeles Times, former Mayor John Lindsay first tabbed Bess Myerson to be New York's Consumer Affairs Commissioner in early 1969, in a bid to add a little glamour to an administration seen as stodgy and anachronistic. Yet she proved herself to be a very astute and highly effective public servant, who successfully championed and shepherded passage of the city's landmark Consumer Protection Act of 1969, which is still recognized as one of the strongest such laws in the entire country.

    Myerson's political downfall came swiftly in 1987 as a result of her personal involvement with Andy Capasso, a wealthy contractor who was over 20 years her junior, and who was then in the midst of divorce proceedings. Accused of bribing the judge who was overseeing Capasso's divorce in an attempt to get her lover's alimony payments slashed in half, she was indicted and tabloids had a field day with what became known in New York as "The Bess Mess."

    While subsequently acquitted at trial, Myerson was finished politically and she knew it. She subsequently withdrew from public life altogether in 1988 after she pleaded guilty to shoplifting $44 worth of cosmetics from a Pennsylvania department store, an inexplicable act on her part given that she was worth an estimated $16 million at the time of her arrest.

    Nevertheless, Myerson was an accomplished trailblazer and role model during an era when women were first really flexing their political muscles and seeking greater roles for themselves outside the home, even though she herself came to reject any public characterization of her as a feminist icon. And for that, she should be acknowledged and respected


    Interesting news week and it (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by MO Blue on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 06:15:17 PM EST
    and it is only Monday.

    (NEWSER) - A group seeking to declassify data on 9/11 will speak out this week and highlight the possible involvement of Saudi officials in the terror attack, the New York Post reports. Leading the charge is Bob Graham, a former Democratic senator who co-chaired the panel that released the redacted congressional 9/11 report in 2002. Along with him, 9/11 families as well as Reps. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass) and Walter Jones (R-NC) will take part in the Capitol Hill press conference on Wednesday. Graham, who speaks of a "coverup," has long called for the US government to release the report's 28 redacted pages, the Miami Herald reports.link

    Gas prices (none / 0) (#68)
    by christinep on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 07:52:32 PM EST
    And ... my, my ... the Saudis have been so "cooperative(?)" of late with their ongoing direct action to keep oil prices down ....  

    Can't resist the urge to say: Coincidences and politics.  Simply fascinating.


    What's a little funding of terrorism (none / 0) (#88)
    by MO Blue on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 09:43:35 AM EST
    as long as they supply cheap oil?

     Do you support the coverup as long as oil remains cheap? What about if they raise the price?


    Am I remembering (none / 0) (#90)
    by lentinel on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 10:29:44 AM EST
    correctly that the Bushies ushered out Bin Laden's family to safety right after the attacks?

    Richard Clarke, who served as President Bush's chief of counterterrorism, has claimed sole responsibility for approving flights of Saudi Arabian citizens, including members of Osama bin Laden's family, from the United States immediately after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
    In an interview with The Hill yesterday, Clarke said, "I take responsibility for it. I don't think it was a mistake, and I'd do it again."
    Most of the 26 passengers aboard one flight, which departed from the United States on Sept. 20, 2001, were relatives of Osama bin Laden, whom intelligence officials blamed for the attacks almost immediately after they happened.

    How quaint.

    We've been had.
    And it ain't over yet.


    I agree with Clarke (none / 0) (#95)
    by CST on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 11:07:59 AM EST
    The fact that they were related to Bin Laden put their lives at risk and there is zero reason to believe they had anything to do with the attacks.

    I see your point... (5.00 / 2) (#129)
    by lentinel on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 03:22:13 PM EST
    but I see this as a very selective display of compassion by an administration best known for its cruelty.

    Fair enough (none / 0) (#134)
    by CST on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 03:33:12 PM EST
    Different rules for different fools and all that.

    Indeed... (5.00 / 3) (#155)
    by kdog on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 05:11:31 PM EST
    no unconnected poor folks getting airlifted outta police state ghettos for their safety, to be sure.

    Osama Bin Laden's father sired 47 children. (none / 0) (#119)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 02:14:25 PM EST
    Speaking for myself only, I also had serious concerns about the Bush administration's decision to allow hundreds of Saudi citizens to depart our country in the immediate wake of the 9/11 assaults, while the rest of America remained grounded under a no-fly rule.

    The FBI was given no opportunity to question these Saudis regarding any possible relationships which some of them might have had with one or more of the 19 hijackers, when such information might have been quite useful. Because as it stands, we now know that the wife of Saudi ambassador Prince Bandar bin Sultan, Princess Haifa, was a likely conduit for funding -- whether unwittingly or otherwise -- to at least one of the 9/11 participants.

    That said, surely you're not implying that the entire Bin Laden clan should have been arrested and held responsible for the demented and barbarous acts of a rogue and delusional son.

    That's the sort of paranoid rationalization which inspired Kim Jong-un to subsequently have his uncle's entire family put to death in 2013, after that uncle was first accused of plotting to overthrow Dear Leader in a military coup d'état and was himself executed by firing squad.

    I think I see where you were going initially, and while I don't necessarily disagree with you, perhaps you'd like to further clarify your remarks for the record regarding the Bin Laden family.

    Further, I would urge you to read former GOP political strategist Kevin Phillips' 2004 book, "American Dynasty," in which he argues that the Bush family has time and again woven their own business interests and relationships within the fabric of American foreign policy, to the ultimate detriment of the country's best interests as a whole.



    A little grilling..a little (5.00 / 1) (#179)
    by jondee on Wed Jan 07, 2015 at 12:38:45 PM EST
    in-depth questioning isn't the same as being held responsible..

    There still haven't been a lot of clear answers provided as to how Osama ended up set up so well and hiding in plain sight in Pakistan..

    And of course, there's Dubya's flippant "we don't know where he is" -- which is what Bush's TANG commander said..


    You seem to engage in (none / 0) (#142)
    by sj on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 04:30:34 PM EST
    an uncommon amount of mind-reading when reading lentinel's comments. You so often get things so very wrong.

    I don't think so. (none / 0) (#180)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jan 07, 2015 at 04:40:38 PM EST
    I merely took note of what her comment sounded like to me. I further said that I generally agreed with what I thought she was trying to say, and then suggested that she could perhaps rephrase it so it didn't sound so draconian. That's not the same as implying she said something and then impugning her motives on that basis.

    Perhaps you ought to heed your own words, and stop engaging in mindreading yourself. Or better still, you might try reading for comprehension, rather than selective outrage.


    Oh, I know you don't think so (none / 0) (#184)
    by sj on Thu Jan 08, 2015 at 12:18:25 PM EST
    Nevertheless, it's a habit. Or reflexive. Or something similar.

    It's why your scolds are often downrated. But, you're right: I'm doing a bit of mindreading myself and that's not fair. I made assumptions about your comment based on your body of work -- doing the very same thing that you do.


    MO Blue: My own cynicism (none / 0) (#93)
    by christinep on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 10:52:00 AM EST
    about the Saudis left me chuckling in a similar sarcastic way.  Here is my take: When it comes to the Middle East and the untold variety of internecine arrangements, I do not put anything past anybody.  Our definition of "cover-up" in that almost forever strife-torn region of the world probably does not align with not-blinking-an-eye practices of everyone involved in the oil wars.

    Honestly, I'm not sure that any group of more than one or two can agree on what the template for ethical measurement of OPEC and its players should be.  IMO, the new apparent arrangement involving the Saudis and the descending price of oil has a stink about it ... and, even then, it will take a deeper look for the world to see who was doing what to whom and for what ultimate reason.  Right now, every US driver seems to take advantage of the low prices with gusto; but, that infamous piper must be nearby.


    I know what each one of (none / 0) (#143)
    by sj on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 04:31:36 PM EST
    those words means.

    Good for you, sj (none / 0) (#144)
    by christinep on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 04:33:50 PM EST
    Thanks! (none / 0) (#147)
    by sj on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 04:39:03 PM EST
    I don't often get compliments from you.

    Now if I could only figure out why you strung them together the way you did. Maybe if I close one eye... or read every other word, maybe?


    Gasoline prices down, (none / 0) (#114)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 01:25:12 PM EST
    time for gasoline taxes to go up?     Federal gas taxes have been set at 18.4 cents/gallon since 1993 (state gas taxes average an additional 23.5 cents).   The federal gas tax revenue is dedicated to the Highway Fund, to be used only for transportation investment.  Improvements and maintenance of roads requires additional funds.

    And, gas taxes encourage further conservation and more judicious usage.  What may be a temporary gas price reduction, may promote a permanent return to less gasoline efficient vehicles.  If gasoline prices return to previously experienced highs, the gasoline tax could be reduced, especially if raised with a sunset provision.

    The gas tax is, in many ways, a usage fee. Although, the politics is such that this is not only seen as a tax, but as  an increase in a tax, no mater how necessary and how earmarked.   If more revenue is needed, the old saw is to reduce waste and welfare. Only a rare voice in the wilderness calls for reduced military spending.

    And, while infrastructure construction creates jobs, the lower gas prices, at the moment, are its own economic stimulus.  Another issue to be determined is what, if any, chilling effect would increased taxes have on the economic recovery.  

    Looks like the new Republican Congress will be considering raising gas taxes.


    Well said, I was thinking along the same lines (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by ruffian on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 03:04:57 PM EST
    this morning. The question is not if prices go up again, but when. Drives me nuts to see people returning to inefficient ways after they have done well economizing. One guy on NPR was talking about how he formerly combined trips, etc, and now does not anymore. I'm sure monster truck sales will boom too. They are being sucked into the trap, and will be crying when it springs.

    What may be a temporary gas price reduction, may promote a permanent return to less gasoline efficient vehicles.
    I believe there are US gvt-mandated fuel economy minimums that auto makers must achieve, and that these minimums ratchet upward every couple of years or so, such that the automakers are required to constantly improve the gas mileage of the vehicles they manufacture.

    Also, lower gas prices should result in more gallons of gas being sold, which means more of the Fed 18.4 cents/gal tax should be collected.


    Yes, the CAFE program (none / 0) (#118)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 01:59:50 PM EST
    presents maximum feasible levels for model years. The Obama Administration (in 2012) set rules that would double the average fuel economy of new cars and trucks across time, with 54.5 mpg by the 2025 model year.  This was considered a break-through for the environment.   However, it was politically attacked at the time by Romney and is, as a rule, change is not undifficult.  And, if "lower gas prices should result in more gallons of gas being sold," it would be counter to conservation goals.  

    And not just gasoline/cars... (none / 0) (#120)
    by kdog on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 02:15:34 PM EST
    the water heater industry is in major upheaval right now, new federally mandated NAECA standards take effect April 2015.  

    So if anybody thinks its about time for a new water heater at home, I suggest you get one now...once April hits and existing stock is depleted, they will be costing 25% more than the current models.  

    On the plus...they will use less gas, oil, or electric.  

    But they never work as well as old-school inefficient non-computerized heating equipment...we've got major headaches right now with the fancy new sh*t failing left and right with the first big freeze of the year.  And what was once basic repairs with basic parts now involve computer boards and electronic ignition modules that the heating guy don't have on the truck.  Just like cars...everything got a computer in it now, which makes diagnostics & repairs complicated and expensive.  


    That's what Gov. Jerry Brown argued ... (none / 0) (#121)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 02:42:43 PM EST
    "We are at a crossroads. With big and important new programs now launched and the budget carefully balanced, the challenge is to build for the future, not steal from it."
    -- Gov. Jerry Brown (January 5, 2015)

    ... yesterday in his inaugural address in Sacramento, which also served as his State of the State report to the legislature. He called upon lawmakers to enact his proposed long-term goals to further wean California from an inordinate reliance on fossil fuels, which would:

    • "Increase from one-third to 50 percent our electricity derived from renewable sources;"
    • "Reducing today's petroleum use in cars and trucks by up to 50 percent;" and
    • "Double the efficiency of existing buildings and make heating fuels cleaner."

    It's really too bad that the cable news chatterboxes back east are too busy reprising their mindless and premature speculation about how the 2016 presidential race might shape up, to pay much if any attention to the farsighted policy initiatives presently being pursued in our nation's largest state.



    Exactly, KeysDan (none / 0) (#135)
    by christinep on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 03:33:41 PM EST
    That is the argument in the Denver Post's editorial the other day.  The catch might be--as the DP mentions--how to get a Republican Congress to raise taxes.  I guess that we'll stay tuned.

    What they should have done.... (none / 0) (#183)
    by unitron on Thu Jan 08, 2015 at 07:17:09 AM EST
    ...long ago was set up a system where, as the before-tax price of a gallon of gasoline goes down the tax goes up, and as it goes up the tax goes down.

    That way it always brings in at least a minimum amount of money while

    1. Keeping the final price more stable,

    2. Keeping a little pressure on to move people to alternatives that put a smaller volume of hydrocarbons in the air,

    3. Collecting some extra money for paying the cost to government to provide roads for us, so that they could build up a rainy day fund.

    That way, both the government and consumers benefit from price reductions, and carmakers wouldn't have to yoyo between building sub-compacts and building land yachts chasing a demand that fluctuates wildly from one extreme to another depending on gas prices, because gas prices at the pump, with the sliding scale taxes included, would remain closer, on one side or the other, to a much more slowly changing "middle".

    I'm not sure any of this (none / 0) (#185)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jan 09, 2015 at 12:37:20 PM EST
    will really make a difference, long term.

    imo, the reality is that essentially all the fossil fuels that can be ultimately utilized buy us humans, will be ultimately utilized by us humans.

    So all these methods of reducing released hydrocarbons in the air "today" are really only defering their release until "tomorrow."

    Speaking long term.


    Yes... (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Jan 09, 2015 at 04:21:34 PM EST
    ...so long as we don't kill ourselves first.

    IMO we have already past the tipping point, in that even with zero emissions, the methane being released form the oceans will ensure the earth just keeps on warming up and more methane is released.

    For the US, not a big problem as we are wealthy and have an almost infinite amount of tillable land for food.  For most countries, more poverty and less food.  But humans will survive, it's just going to be a struggle for a lot of people.

    The good news, I will be dead a long time before that happens.


    I agree, The horse has left the barn. (none / 0) (#187)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jan 09, 2015 at 04:29:19 PM EST
    A hydrocarbon release delayed long enough... (none / 0) (#188)
    by unitron on Sat Jan 10, 2015 at 05:51:00 AM EST
    ...may be one that can actually be forgone if we get good enough alternative energy forms in place soon enough.

    And one way to encourage progress in that area is to keep hydrocarbon usage a little on the expensive side with taxes, without making it ruinously so.

    And those taxes can be a way to force us to invest in infrastructure and research.


    As I said (none / 0) (#190)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Jan 10, 2015 at 12:19:25 PM EST
    imo, the reality is that essentially all the fossil fuels that can be ultimately utilized buy us humans, will be ultimately utilized by us humans.

    When not being a pompous a$$ (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 09:41:20 PM EST
    Keith Olbermann still is one of the best in sports.

    Here is his tribute to Stuart Scott

    I Felt Like I Knew the Guy... (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 03:44:41 PM EST
    ...and was very sad when I heard the announcement.

    When you die, that doesn't mean you lose to cancer.  You beat cancer by how you live, why you live, and the manner in which you live.

    So live! Fight like hell!

    And when you get too tired, lay down, rest and let someone else fight for you.

    The best thing I have ever done, the best thing I will ever do, is be a dad to Taelor and Sydni.

    Boo-yah Stuart Scott

    And for what it's worth KO is one of the best, no the best, rant artists of my generation.


    In the alternative, would (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by Anne on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 10:16:30 PM EST
    that you would decide to go somewhere...anywhere, really.

    On a serious note, I get the feeling that the lid is coming off this thing, and a lot of people aren't going to much like what flies out.  It's a little scary, actually, as I don't think it's going to take much to ratchet the unrest up.

    People have really had enough of being stepped on like bugs.

    My comment was not meant to (none / 0) (#132)
    by Anne on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 03:28:42 PM EST
    stand alone; it was a response to a comment that was apparently deleted (if I recall correctly, I believe it was to jim, who said he didn't think the lawsuit filed by the GJ in the Brown shooting was going to "go anywhere").

    As usual, Jim and Mordigan (5.00 / 4) (#168)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 07:29:19 PM EST
    turned the thread into a two way insult fest between them and those comments were deleted.

    What I want to know is (5.00 / 2) (#102)
    by jondee on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 12:36:49 PM EST
    where do they talk about blowing little "human shields" to bits in the Bible?

    Would it be in the same Book that demands the stoning of adulteresses and the putting to death of those who violate the Sabbath?


    Hmmmm let me see (none / 0) (#141)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 04:22:57 PM EST
    I think your last paragraph is in reference to the Old Testament which no longer applies to Christians since it has been fulfilled by the birth, life, death and resurrection of Christ.

    As for killing "human shields" an intelligent person would ask, who put them in harms way????

    That would be Hamas.


    Hmmmm (5.00 / 1) (#172)
    by jondee on Wed Jan 07, 2015 at 11:38:26 AM EST
    I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you're as egocentrically selective about what parts of the Bible are applicable as you are about what historical, current events, and scientific facts are applicable -- and convenient for you -- and for the good folks at the Heritage Foundation.

    Tell me Jim, if the crucifixion and resurrection so integral to the meaning of Christianity, did that make Pontius Pilate a holy vessel for God's Will?

    I've always been struck by the fact that those most fixated on Death and Resurrection are often the same ones most fixated on guns, nationalism, and militarism.


    Matt 5:18 (none / 0) (#174)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Jan 07, 2015 at 11:48:17 AM EST

    For verily I say unto you,
    Till heaven and earth pass,
    one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law,
    till all be fulfilled

    Fly (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 05:10:02 PM EST
    i have been watching the rerun of Breaking Bad and I just watched S3E10 Fly.  Amazing.  Marx brothers by way of Kafka.  The basics are a fly gets into the lab and Walt becomes obsessed with killing it.  Jesse, understandably, thinks he has lost his mind.   Or possibly decided to "try the product".  From wiki-

    Many have remarked that "Fly" is the show's most polarizing episode. It has been widely praised by critics, and several publications have ranked it one of the series' finest episodes, particularly for its cinematography and directing, and for the dynamic between Walt and Jesse. On the other hand, the episode received a very mixed reception from audiences, some ranking it among the worst episodes. Donna Bowman of The A.V. Club gave "Fly" an A grade, praising Rian Johnson's direction and remarking that the episode "would have been stellar even with more conventional direction, but with the unhinged images and bold juxtapositions Johnson provides, it's one of the most distinctive hours of television we're likely to see this year."[3] Alan Sepinwall, writing for HitFix, speculated that "Fly" may be "the best bottle show ever" and remarked in the subtitle of his review that the budget-saving approach ended up leading to "an instant classic".[4] In 2013, Matt Zoller Seitz, writing for Vulture, named "Fly" the greatest episode of the entire series, calling it a "perfect Breaking Bad episode and a perfect hour of television."[5] The same year, the episode was ranked #5 in Entertainment Weekly's list ranking all the show's 62 episodes from best-to-worst, with Darren Franich writing, "Some people despise 'Fly' for its artsy pretensions and its go-nowhere plot arc. Others frankly think it belongs much higher on this list. But we can all agree that "Fly" is one of the great bottle episodes of the new golden age of TV."[6]

    I loved it too (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by ruffian on Wed Jan 07, 2015 at 11:57:43 AM EST
    I can see it angering the plot junkies for its lack of overt plot advancing, but if you are paying attention several things are happening. Walt almost makes a key confession to Jesse. That was really tense.I am all for any episode that is primarily Walt and Jesse interacting.

    And Walt's contrivances for killing the fly were a wonderful character study.


    The bit when the fly (none / 0) (#181)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jan 07, 2015 at 04:47:03 PM EST
    lands on Walts head just after he whacked Jesse with the "swatter" and then hads it to Jesse was so perfectly played and timed.  Not many scenes in that series let Cranston show his comedy chops as well as that.

    Most of the stuff I care about (none / 0) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 04, 2015 at 08:50:25 PM EST
    A reason to live ;-) (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by ruffian on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 01:01:55 PM EST
    Well I am back to work after a week and a half off from work, wherein I tried to keep my TV and computer use to a minimum. That was easy since I was so busy with visiting people, doing stuff with the dogs, and stuff around the house.

    OK, there was that 'The Wire' marathon the first weekend...hey, I'm only human!

    Don't forget 'Better Call Saul' on 2/9!


    Banshee (none / 0) (#130)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 03:25:21 PM EST
    starts this week I think.  You really should give it a try.

    Same Here... (none / 0) (#146)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 04:35:55 PM EST
    ...I basically unplugged for 2 solid weeks, only checking email on my phone and I don't believe replied to anyone but texts.  Went out of my way to avoid any sort of news including local.  Sports were exempted, as they say, 'tis the season.

    It rained and was cold every day but one, which was bothersome considering Santa brought me a new vehicle.

    I got so much done, and after years of stating I was going to eat normal over the holidays, I am happy to say that my work pants, were loser the day I return than the day I left.  It's always a crapshoot, and usually the pants don't fit so good after the holidays.

    Lastly, I don't watch much TV, but hot damn if I didn't run out of stuff to watch and the movie selection is pitiful.  I decided to check out Doctor Who.  ~20 episodes in and it's OK, better than the other garbage, but this year that is a damn low bar.  But at least now I know what all the hype is about, don't get it, but understand it.

    I got back to work yesterday more or less stress free, that lasted until lunch.  Funny how I forgot about all the BS I pushed off to 2015.  I did set my alarm for Sunday as a dry run, and amazingly enough I woke up at 6:29 Monday, one minute before my alarm goes off.  That has to be a good sign as I sleep like a rock, so deep that my GF used to think that maybe I was dead.  I don't sleep much, but when I do it's lights out deep sleep.


    Man (none / 0) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 08:35:57 AM EST
    So cold here.  And it's only going to get worse.  Wednesday is supposed to be the worst day.  19 high 0 low.  This is when I can't stop thinking about the poor little cows and horses.  Many around here have no way to get a break.  Freezing rain snow whatever the poor babies just have to stand there.

    I'm going to watch (none / 0) (#3)
    by lentinel on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 10:08:33 AM EST
    "The Good Wife" asap.

    Last episode featured Cary accepting a plea and looking at two years in the can...

    Hard to believe that they would let it go at that...

    The Mrs. SUO and I love the show, but... (none / 0) (#10)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 11:22:37 AM EST
    ...lately it's becoming, well, stupid.

    And mostly all w/respect to the Cary Agos's legal problems. With almost every step along the way in this storyline someone (previously mostly Cary, but now Kalinda as well) says or does something stupid which leads to jeopardy for the characters.

    iow, they're repeatedly shooting themselves in the foot by making decisions that they and the audience know are stupid, rather than finding themselves in jeopardy due to conflict with other characters who's goals are in opposition to their own.

    There's a reason the old adage on how to write a good story is: "Get your character up a tree. Throw rocks at him. Get him down." and not "Get your character up a tree that he knows is too weak to carry him. Have him choose to overeat lot while up there, even though he and the audience knows that that will end up breaking the tree. Have his weight break the tree."



    I was watching it last night, and realized (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Anne on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 12:42:01 PM EST
    why it is that the writers have Alicia running for SA - it's going to set up a lot of conflict between her office and her good pals at Florrick Agos and Lockhart - only this time it won't be Cary being prosecuted, but Kalinda.  And there's the matter of some unresolved legal matters involving her husband, the governor.  What are the chances those chickens decide to come home to roost when Alicia's in the SA's chair?

    It's way more entertaining if you can stop thinking of it as bearing any relationship to what actually goes on in the average law firm.

    That being said, having just binge-watched all 5 seasons of The Wire, there's no way The Good Wife measures up to The Wire's standard.

    I will say that this season's music does a good job of setting the mood and the tone, which seems to be mostly "DANGER!!!"


    ... started going off the rails when the writers first had Alicia flirting with the idea of running for state's attorney, and then deciding to do so. She's looking less sympathetic by the episode, and is more often than not looking like the creature of the system that she really is.

    Sure, it's TV escapism, but the truth is that very few campaigns for municipal-level offices such as district / state's attorney possess the sort of lavish funding that's necessary to engage in all the activities her campaign is presently pursuing, such as rolling polls, numerous consultants, etc. In that respect, what the writers and directors are deliberately not showing audiences is Alicia behind the scenes, spending numerous hours each day dialing for dollars to feed her political slot machine.

    If I hadn't been watching "The Good Wife" on a regular basis as I have, I'd think that she was running for governor of Illinois against her own husband, rather than Cook County State's Attorney. As it stands, I'd say that if she wins the election, she's probably going to owe one helluva lot of favors to her various political sugar daddies / mommies, even if she doesn't think so right now.

    I've worked on both well-funded "machine" campaigns and cash-strapped populist grassroots campaigns, aka "guerilla politics." I much prefer the latter, because both the candidates and their supporters truly believe in their causes, are really quite resilient in political give-and-take, and have neither the time nor capacity to worry about those matters which they really can't effect.

    Whereas those campaigns which are awash in cash, while often inexorable in their motion, also tend to become numbingly passion-free and entirely predictable. Further, they are often populated with mercenaries, aka "political consultants," for whom success is measured by the size of their paychecks. And should such a campaign run into unexpectedly strong political headwinds, trying to change its course is akin to getting the QEII to do a 180 in Baltimore Harbor.

    Guess which type of campaign Alicia Florrick's is starting to resemble?



    In a strange way (none / 0) (#69)
    by christinep on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 07:56:40 PM EST
    there might be something "real" to the Alicia as being a politician.  Pedestals get boring, after all ... especially in longstanding TV shows.  

    The bit of an edge that is starting to show with Ms. Florick has a certain appeal since it allows for the character to have more dimension.


    ... but I really wish they'd show municipal elections in a more realistic light. They're rarely so full of intrigue as the writers seem to believe. Generally, such campaigns are a lot of grunt work, stuff like mass mailings, canvassing precincts door-to-door, street corner sign waving, and attending numerous neighborhood coffee hours.

    But then, having Alicia standing on a corner with several campaign workers holding signs, waving to passing motorists during rush hour, is not exactly a compelling and dramatic scene, is it?



    I remember (none / 0) (#89)
    by lentinel on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 10:22:21 AM EST
    seeing John Lindsay, running for reelection as mayor of NYC - standing at the top of the stairs leading out from a subway station in Queens.

    It was kind of pathetic.

    He had a funny expression on his face - like - I'm supposed to do this, they're making me do this, but this is like a psychedelic episode... When will it end so that I can get drunk...

    Mostly - since it was rush hour - people just wanted to get the fk home - so we all looked at him with the same bemused expression  as we fled the scene to catch the bus.


    Not much drama in standing on the corner (none / 0) (#133)
    by christinep on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 03:30:53 PM EST
    But-hey-there always has been lots of intrigue, drama in Cook County.  So, the show embellishes a bit :)

    LOL! That there is, christine. (none / 0) (#145)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 04:35:50 PM EST
    But I daresay most of that real-life drama -- much like the notorious graft and corruption which is seemingly ingrained in the local public workforces -- is also likely to be of the petty variety, and hardly the stuff of prime-time TV.

    Ya, Alicia has to win the election (none / 0) (#21)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 02:16:10 PM EST
    there is so much drama to be mined there.

    It seems to me that the officer who was implicated to have done a cover-up will actively push for clearing his name, which will put Kalinda in jeopardy.

    I'm not sure I'll have a lot of empathy for her plight, it was too stupid a thing to do...


    The Kalinda character is leaving the show (none / 0) (#25)
    by Angel on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 03:06:25 PM EST
    at the end of this season.  Archie Panjabi is getting a drama show of her own, don't know the details.

    Well, that is a bummer. (none / 0) (#29)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 03:21:09 PM EST
    Looks like this reviewer (none / 0) (#32)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 03:34:31 PM EST
    sees it the same way I do:
    The palpable relief I felt at Cary's liberation at the end of the episode was more to do with finally being free of the storyline. Especially after the antics Kalinda had to pull to get him off.

    [...]it felt like a bridge too far to have [Kalinda] make such a tremendously stupid move to save him from two years in jail.

    I saw that review and didn't agree at all (none / 0) (#80)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 01:47:02 AM EST
    I was so relieved to see them get back to law and off politics. The courtroom stuff is the only part that interests me. The Carey/Lamont/Kalinda/lying snitch theme was great. I think that reviewer has it backwards.

    It was obvious since the beginning of the season Carey was going to get off due to a legal technicality, and the scenes with Galinda were great. I think she shocked herself  herself when she was willing to commit a crime to save him and told him she'd always be there for him. She had just decided otherwise a few weeks ago. (I really don't like her needy cop girlfriend.)

    I assumed the phone call she got and didn't answer in the courtroom was from Lamont's guy. I wonder what he was going to have her do. Last time she was supposed to do something to her   cop girlfriend's phone so Bishop could monitor it. She balked. Now, she's looking at being charged with a crime for doctoring the metadata on the male cop's email, but she also gets to tell Lamont she doesn't need his favors anymore. I wonder how they plan to write her out of the series. I hope Bishop doesn't have her killed.

    On the other hand, I think they made Cary too weak in the episode. His fear and red rimmed eyes and the over the top prison inmate coach bossing him around was not credible or a good story move. I don't see how we're supposed to view Cary as a tough litigator after the last few weeks. On the third hand, props to the writers for not having him become a rat and give up Lamont. There's strength in loyalty.

    I don't like the running for SA theme, or the campaign politics (except for Eli and the campaign manager) or the romantic themes or the office politics themes. I'm also really tired of Alicia's husband. At least her kids, brother and mother aren't around much. None of them are well cast or interesting. For that matter, Finn is also miscast as a potential romantic/emotional connection.

    I also think the show is weak when they try and make Alicia a role model for women. It rings false. Particularly when Diane is on the same show. Diane is the role model, not Alicia.  She has toughness, independence, mental quickness, good lawyering skills and an instinctive ability to sense what would be the wrong legal move, and she refuses to take any crap. She's  not beyond feeling hurt, like when she didn't get the judgeship, but she's not plagued by doubts like Alicia. Alicia hasn't really had any great legal accomplishments of her own that I remember. All her work is a team effort, and she doesn't even play the major role in them. Another stronger female lawyer in recent years was Kathy Bates in Harry's Law.

    If there's one character I'd really like to them not bring back it's Michael J. Fox. His character is sleazier than Saul's from BB and has none of the humor.

    Obviously, I dislike more things about the show than I like, and I don't think the writers are very good, but they use good legal consultants and the parts I like make the whole thing worth watching.


    Kalinda, not (none / 0) (#83)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 01:56:05 AM EST
    Galinda. I mistyped her name in a few places above.

    Michael J Fox's character ... (none / 0) (#85)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 05:42:32 AM EST
    Jeralyn: "If there's one character I'd really like to them not bring back it's Michael J. Fox. His character is sleazier than Saul's from BB and has none of the humor."

    ... reminds me of a former House Judiciary Committee chair in our state legislature, an attorney who was legally blind and not at all above wielding his handicap as a weapon against others. I suppose that one could admire him for having overcome his physical challenges, but I personally found him to be an unlikable and nasty piece of work. And from a standpoint of personal ethics, I thought he was a real scuzball. I wasn't sorry to see him go at all.



    Well said: (none / 0) (#97)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 11:25:59 AM EST
    I'm also really tired of Alicia's husband. At least her kids, brother and mother aren't around much. None of them are well cast or interesting.

    I can't stand her character (none / 0) (#79)
    by McBain on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 01:40:31 AM EST
    but the show might not be the same without her.  

    why? (none / 0) (#82)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 01:52:35 AM EST
    I'm curious. Is it her character's ambiguity? That we don't know her history so we can't predict what she'll do next? That she moves so easily from icy to passionate? Is it that watching her makes you uncomfortable or that you dislike her character?

    Whether one likes or doesn't like Good Wife (none / 0) (#98)
    by christinep on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 11:31:16 AM EST
    there seems to be significant and strong commentary all around the ring of opinions. If controversy and definite, pointed reactions are the stuff of a good show, then Good Wife may just fit.

    I agree with any suggestion that the how of a personal reaction to one of the principals in GW could reflect our own role definition or personality. Funny that you should mention your appraisal of the Diane character; my reaction to Diane is one of a similar identity as well.  (Yet, I do differ as to Alicia in that she--via the writers--has grown into a stronger character suited to role model type over the years.  A number of women in my generation, who started as housewife & mom solely, seem to have experienced an evolution from ambivalence/uncertainty to the maturity of multiple roles ... arguably, as in the case of Alicia.)


    Good questions (none / 0) (#100)
    by McBain on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 11:48:13 AM EST
    Until recently,  Kalinda's been selfish, mean spirited and manipulate..... However, you could say the same about Louis Canning, David Lee and  Eli Gold but I don't seem to have  problems with them.   Maybe I don't like those qualities from a female character? Ever since Will Gardner's death I've had issues with Alicia's behavior but not her husband.  Maybe it's a sexist double standard.    

    Also, I don't get the Kalinda sex appeal thing. Is she really that desirable to both men and women? She's cute but I don't believe she would have a seductive power over so many people.  

    What's your opinion of the courtroom scenes? I assume all Hollywood legal dramas are incredibly unrealistic but I wouldn't know.


    I've always felt that Kalinda's appeal comes (5.00 / 2) (#109)
    by Anne on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 01:08:42 PM EST
    from a combination of the enigmatic quality of her personality, the inability to read how she feels about anything, the exotic quality of her looks and accent, and the aura of unattainability she projects.

    Plus, she seems utterly fearless, which some people clearly find a very attractive quality.


    Anne, that is a terrific (none / 0) (#165)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 07:11:19 PM EST
    description of her character. Really well put.

    they are unrealistic (none / 0) (#164)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 07:06:50 PM EST
    in the sense that they are exaggerated but they don't mangle legal terms and procedures like so many shows do. (I rarely want to throw something at the TV because something they show couldn't happen or they call it the wrong thing.) I also like that they make a lot of objections when they are in court. I suspect (but don't know) that they have a few lawyers on tap who the writers can consult and say "how would this happen" or to review the scripts after they are written.

    I must (none / 0) (#65)
    by lentinel on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 07:24:41 PM EST
    admit that I just like this show.

    The one thing I don't like is diversion into personal relationships.
    To me that is the bane of most programs in which I have even a mild interest. And when this show does that, I have to wait it out until the plot resumes.

    Lately, thankfully, there has been much less of that and more of courtroom drama - fake, fiction, whatever. I confess I like the courtrooms stuff - and I do enjoy Kalinda. She is the Lone Ranger. She solves everything and everybody.

    That having been said, I am intrigued and delighted to learn that you think so highly of "The Wire". It is a show with which I am totally unfamiliar - and it has been a while since I have been able to binge-watch - so it is with pleasant anticipation that I have a binge of "The Wire" to look forward to.



    Mostly agree (none / 0) (#81)
    by McBain on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 01:48:40 AM EST
    The courtroom stuff is the best, the personal relationships are the worst. I don't agree with you about Kalinda.  For some reason I like the Michael J. Fox character and that nutty Elspeth Tascioni.  

    The Wire is one of my all time favorites.  I'm going to watch it again soon.    


    Not comparing (none / 0) (#86)
    by lentinel on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 05:56:18 AM EST
    with Kalinda, - but I also like "Mr. Canning" and absolutely adore "Tascioni."

    I did look at the first episode of "The Wire".
    Wasn't knocked out... but am definitely interested ... hooked enough to continue..;

    It seems as if they are going to swap Kalinda for Agos. He gets off, and she gets fried.  I'm not looking forward to seeing her be persecuted for her moment of emotional weakness... Especially since it was actually due to Lockhart's mining of her computer. She was not going to have to use the phony "Brady" evidence...

    They, those writers, certainly keep you coming and going through the whole episode.


    The Wire is complex enough that it takes (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by McBain on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 11:02:19 AM EST
    a few episodes to get into the flow.  Not everyone loves it but it's so much better than the typical cop show.  It does a good job of keeping the personal relationship stuff in the background.  Every season is a little different.  

    Keep going! (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by ruffian on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 01:10:12 PM EST
    While I was watching it again during the recent marathon weekend, during the first couple of episodes I found myself wondering what I had loved so much. But it builds on itself so well it was not long until I was hooked all over again.

    Well, well, well an ACLU lawsuit (none / 0) (#4)
    by Palli on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 10:45:31 AM EST

    A complaint from a [John Doe] Grand Juror in the Daren Wilson Case in St Louis County MO.

    Read the complaint. It appears that in fact the Jurors wanted to charge DW but could not/had not agreed on the charges.
    Interesting tidbits gleaned so far: 1. the "implication that all grand jurors believed there was no support for any charges; 2. As of 11:40 AM, McCullouh's office has not been served the complaint but local press has it; and,  3. Plaintiff " would like to use own experience to advocate for legislative change to the way grand juries are conducted.

    Uncle Chip, any odds on which questions from the Jurors might represent John Doe?

    tcorrection to post above (none / 0) (#5)
    by Palli on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 10:47:42 AM EST
    1. the "implication that all grand jurors believed there was no support for any charges" is false;

    Here is more and a link (none / 0) (#7)
    by MO Blue on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 10:57:59 AM EST
    Grand Juror Sues McCulloch, Says He Mischaracterized The Wilson Case

    In [the grand juror]'s view, the current information available about the grand jurors' views is not entirely accurate -- especially the implication that all grand jurors believed that there was no support for any charges," the lawsuit says. "Moreover, the public characterization of the grand jurors' view of witnesses and evidence does not accord with [Doe]'s own."

    "From [the grand juror]'s perspective, the investigation of Wilson had a stronger focus on the victim than in other cases presented to the grand jury," the lawsuit states. Doe also believes the legal standards were conveyed in a "muddled" and "untimely" manner to the grand jury.

    In the lawsuit filed Monday in federal court, the American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri argues that this case is unique and that the usual reasons for requiring the jurors to maintain secrecy should not apply.

    In this specific case, "any interests furthered by maintaining grand jury secrecy are outweighed by the interests secured by the First Amendment," the lawsuit says, adding that allowing the juror to speak would contribute to a discussion on race in America.

    Grand Juror sues Bob McCulloch (none / 0) (#6)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 10:57:49 AM EST
    Grand Juror sues Bob McCulloch

    ST. LOUIS (AP) - A member of the grand jury that declined to indict the Ferguson police officer who fatally shot 18-year-old Michael Brown is asking a Missouri court to remove a lifetime order that prevents jurors from discussing the case.

    The lawsuit also questions St. Louis County District Attorney Bob McCulloch's characterization "that all grand jurors believed that there was no support for any charges."

    Obvious False Claim in Lawsuit (none / 0) (#70)
    by RickyJim on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 08:01:29 PM EST
    McCulloch never implied "that all grand jurors believed that there was no support for any charges."  The Grand Jury's votes are secret.  For the statement to be correct, McCulloch would have to have said that for each possible charge, the vote was 12-0 not to indict.

    Forgot to post Complaint in my haste to read (none / 0) (#8)
    by Palli on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 11:06:34 AM EST

    Irony (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by jbindc on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 12:48:35 PM EST
    Here's is what the Plaintiff wants in his (and the ACLU's suit) against McCullough:

    34. Plaintiff would like to speak about the experience of being a grand juror, including expressing Plaintiff's opinions about the evidence and the investigation, and believes Plaintiff's experience could contribute to the current public dialogue concerning race relations. In Plaintiff's view, the current information available about the grand jurors' views is not entirely accurate--especially the implication that all grand jurors believed that there was no support for any charges. Moreover, the public characterization of the grand jurors' view of witnesses and evidence does not accord with Plaintiff's own. Plaintiff also wishes to express opinions about: whether the release of records has truly provided transparency; Plaintiff's impression that evidence was presented differently than in other cases, with the insinuation that Brown, not Wilson, was the wrongdoer; and questions about whether the grand jury was clearly counseled on the law.

    1. Plaintiff believes that by sharing Plaintiff's experience, Plaintiff could aid in educating the public about how grand juries function.

    2. Plaintiff would also like to use Plaintiff's own experiences to advocate for legislative
    change to the way grand juries are conducted in Missouri.

    37. Plaintiff's views would add to the public debate--occurring in Missouri and across the country--about the proper role of state grand juries and whether they continue to serve their original purpose of protecting the accused, or are now increasingly used to deprive those accused of crimes of due process to which they are otherwise entitled.

    So the Grand Juror wants to tell the world about what went on, but yet, in the filing, there's this little footnote:

    1 Grand Juror Doe is a pseudonym. A motion for leave to proceed under a pseudonym is
    filed with this Complaint.

    Why is the Grand Juror not arguing that while keeping him/her from discussing the case, that his/her name should be revealed - in the name of transparency, mind you. I want to tell the world of the nefarious actions taken by the prosecutor! (but not if they get to know my name, of course.)

    Transparency for thee, but not for me.


    UnIntelligible Dispatches (none / 0) (#11)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 11:24:55 AM EST
    Here is a Breakdown of Ferguson Police Dispatches that even had the prosecutors scratching their heads before the Grand Jury.

    It becomes suspicious at Track 368 with personal message for Unit 22 from Wilson [Unit 21] taking place at the same place in time as this 21:01:50 disturbance call and shooting event opened report.

    What was that all about???

    Note that Track 375 is a walkie talkie message labelled "UI", and yet the dispatcher responds "10-4 on Canfield" as if she understands. Under GJ questioning she denied understanding it or knowing whose voice it was.

    Witnesses 57 and 16 testified that after the shooting Wilson was on his portable radio/walkie talkie. So was Track 375 Wilson and who was that for???  

    Track 380 indicates UI communication between Unit 24 and supervisor in Unit 23. Was this also on a portable and really UI???

    Track 382 is Unit 23 [the supervisor] announcing his arrival. The dispatcher calls out 12:04 -- the only real time on any of the Tracks.

    This despite months of the media, police and prosecutors telling the public that the first units to arrive after the shooting did so at 12:04 when in fact it was the supervisor in Unit 23 that took that long to arrive.

    The backup units had been there since Unit 24 at 12:02:22, followed by Unit 25 @12:02:41 and Unit 22 @12:02:49.

    This whole thing has smacked at coverup since day one and concealing the times and nature of these dispatches has been part of it.

    thanks (none / 0) (#14)
    by Palli on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 12:13:42 PM EST
    I'm sending this study on...

    and the stack grows (none / 0) (#16)
    by Palli on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 12:43:46 PM EST
    Also today 7 MO residents file Bar complaint against St Louis Co Prosecutors Office. Fourteen specific counts of violations of the MO Rules of Professional Conduct in the handling of the DW case.

    Lordy, I hate news sites (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by sj on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 01:55:51 PM EST
    That "article" has four paragraphs, each consisting of a single sentence. The web page, however is full of junk that ties up my computer and takes forever to load. Jeebus. At least that particular page doesn't have autoplay on any of its numerous videos and ads.

    So anyway, thanks for the info, or rather hint/inkling. I wonder where I go to real data...


    That might be the only (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by MO Blue on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 02:15:10 PM EST
    report available at this time. I did a couple of quick google searches trying to get more info and came up empty.

    Hopefully, more info will be reported later in the day or tomorrow.


    Boy I hear ya loud'n'clear. (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 02:47:20 PM EST
    I have HP desktop and notebook computers that are only two years old, and some of these sites -- and yes, I'm looking at you, SFGate.com (San Francisco Chronicle) -- are running so many long scripts and bells-and-whistles on their pages that they've often come perilously close to crashing my browser. If they offer an article that includes video, why is it really necessary to also include two video ads in separate windows on the side, all three of which start running simultaneously? Eventually, I just started to avoid SFGate.com altogether. Way to go, Chronicle.

    Switch Flash (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 03:31:41 PM EST
    Switch Flash in your browser to 'Ask to Activate' in the Add-On/Plug-In area.

    Then you can decide if you want to leave it active for the page, like Youtube where you need it to see the content, or just once where a video might be posted but for the most part it's not needed, or not activated at all which for me is most websites.

    The problem, I believe, is a lot of those scripts are amateurist and contain errors and for some reason Flash will not just ignore errors.

    I have no problems at work, but at home it made huge difference.  All that garbage is run through Adobe Flash and deactivating on sites where you don't need it will make a huge difference.  It also keeps videos and sound from just starting.

    I changed all my Plugins to that state as there are others that don't do anything but ads or tracking, like Microsoft Silverlight.

    Also, I noticed Windows 7 is constantly checking for updates or gathering info and using massive amounts of memory.  I read several spots it's getting info for Windows 8.  Turn it off and check manually and it will make a huge difference.  Not sure if this is for all Windows products.

    There should be consumer protection laws banning software from using my resources for the purposes of selling more software without asking the person who actually owns the hardware, IMO.


    Thanks for the tip, Scott. (none / 0) (#39)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 04:29:26 PM EST
    I'll definitely check it out.

    P.S.: It worked! It worked! (none / 0) (#53)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 05:45:25 PM EST
    Again, muchos mahalos.

    Scott (none / 0) (#170)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jan 07, 2015 at 10:54:20 AM EST
    Could you please provide instructions on how to switch flash.
    Instructions geared at dummy level would be greatly appreciated.



    What Browser Do You Use ? (none / 0) (#171)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jan 07, 2015 at 11:24:37 AM EST
    Just to complicate things ;o) (none / 0) (#173)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jan 07, 2015 at 11:46:38 AM EST
    On my MacBook, I use Firefox. On my iPad, I use Safari because Its there already and I don't need anything else.

    In Firefox (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jan 07, 2015 at 12:00:21 PM EST
    Tools/Add-Ons, that should open a tab.  On the left choose Plugins.

    Each Plugin should have a drop down menu on the left hand side.  Most likely set to "Always Active", change to "Ask to Activate".  Flash is listed as Shockwave Flash.

    I would set them all to 'Ask to Activate', then when you are on a page it will ask if you want to do it once or permanently for the page, you decide.

    The only page I have set permanently is YouTube.  The rest I do on a case by case basis.  I have yet to find out how to reverse that decision if I choose permanently or always.  I was able to do it after FireFox did an ungraded and reset those choices.

    Also check out AddOns, anything you don't recognize or trust should be disabled.  They all use memory, but for example I have Ad Block, which blocks a lot of the pop-ups, so I let it run.

    Your other browsers should be a similar process, Chrome is almost identical with the added bonus of not using much memory.  But it's Chrome, so it doesn't have all the stuff Firefox does.  It's a Prius to Firefoxe's Cadillac.  Both are good for their own reasons.  

    I have no idea about Apple only that I didn't realize they support Flash.


    Thank you for this. (none / 0) (#178)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jan 07, 2015 at 12:32:13 PM EST
    For years my computer has repeatedly gotten hung up on Flash and I could never find a fix for it, hopefully this will do the trick!

    It doesn't seem to be there (none / 0) (#182)
    by fishcamp on Thu Jan 08, 2015 at 06:59:50 AM EST
    with Safari on my Apple computers.  I do have Flash but there doesn't seem to be a way to adjust the plug ins.  

    Link Embedded (none / 0) (#28)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 03:16:55 PM EST
    ST. LOUIS (KMOV.com) - A group of seven Missouri residents have filed a bar complaint against St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Bob McCulloch and Assistant Prosecuting Attorneys Kathi Alizadeh and Sheila Whirley in the Handling of the Darren Wilson Grand Jury.

    According to the complaint, McCulloch, Alizadeh and Whirly violated 15 Missouri Rules of Professional Conduct, including "presenting witnesses to the Grand Jury including Darren Wilson, who McCulloch, Alizadeh and Whirley knew or should have known would make false statements."

    The complaint also alleges McCulloch, Alizadeh and Whirley mislabeled and misplaced evidence related to Dorian Johnson along with failing to provide specific charges to the jurors.

    The complaint has been mailed to the Office of the Chief Disciplinary Counsel and will be hand delivered to the Jefferson City Office on Wednesday.

    It doesn't take much to file a complaint (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by jbindc on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 12:26:19 PM EST
    Missouri State Bar

    Basically, you need to fill out some forms.  There isn't even a cost, so anyone with some time can file all the complaints they want.

    I would bet that when we find out who filed these complaints, it will turn out to be part of an organized effort from members or, or people aligned with, the protest groups.

    And I don't see any of these complaints going too far.


    Well, you made me google (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 01:21:18 PM EST
    this particular complaint:
    Attorney and former judge James R. Dowd and attorney Robert Ramsey reviewed the grand jury transcript - including evidence, witness interviews and testimony - before a group of seven citizens and attorneys - led by Christi Griffin, founder of the Ethics Project - filed an 11-page complaint with the Office of the Chief Disciplinary Counsel in Jefferson City, Missouri.

    Griffin says the complaint focuses on more than 15 Rules of Professional Conduct the group believes were violated

    Griffin is an interesting cat.

    Her license to practice law was suspended by the state of MO in 2007 for a bunch of things including Conflict of Interest and Misconduct.

    iow, Ethics and Professional Conduct.:

    The Court finds Respondent has violated Rules 4-1.7(b), 4-1.8(a), 4-1.8(b), 4-8.4(c), 4-8.4(d), 4-1.2(a), 4-1.4, and 4-1.16(a) of the Rules of Professional Conduct and should be disciplined;

    Now, Therefore, it is ordered that Respondent, Christi S. Fingal-Griffin, be, and she is hereby, suspended from the practice of law in this state, and no petition for reinstatement will be entertained for a period of three years from the date of this order.

    However, the bio she wrote on her Linkedin account says she "retired."

    Retired attorney & Founder/President of The Ethics Project,

    And, yes, in case there some confusion, Christi M. Griffin is aka Christi S. Fingal-Griffin. From her Linkedin account:

    Christi M. Griffin

    Author of Incarcerations in Black: The Subjugation of Black America

        Greater St. Louis Area
        Professional Training & Coaching


        The Ethics Project


        C Griffin Publishing,
        Christi Fingal Griffin,
    Attorney at Law

    In all fairness, she does claim that her suspension was without merit:
    Licensed by the State of Missouri in May, 1984, Griffin built one of the largest consumer and small business bankruptcy practices in the State of Missouri, vigorously, successfully and ethically representing thousands of clients, and providing pro-bono services both in and outside the courtroom.

    Twenty three years later, following a flawed process, 30 minute hearing and faulty order, that license was suspended - contrary to a plethora of evidence.

    I Just Posted the Content... (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 05:14:06 PM EST
    ...from the link because I though someone was having issue viewing it.  I think I misread the comment.

    agreed, almost all the news sites are (none / 0) (#167)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 07:21:47 PM EST
    awful to navigate. Between popup boxes for social media, or asking you to read their next article to the overhuge graphics so you have to keep scrolling down for the content, the auto-play videos, and the glitches they cause on our computers, I've stopped reading a lot of them.

    I won't click on a CNN or ABC news article, they all have video. NBC and MSNBC have the worst layouts ever. CBS is a crap shoot, but they are doing more and more video so I'm less apt to click on them. Reuters is my first choice. Yahoo News has gotten good too. The NY Times and WSJ are pretty good but you have to access them from Google news or you get one those "you've used up your free articles" or "limited to subscribers" messages. The Daily Mail (UK) is really good. The LA Times are usually okay too, and some AP sites.


    frantically searching, can anyone help? (none / 0) (#17)
    by Palli on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 12:55:00 PM EST
    Trying to locate the section of the GJ transcript that explained to Grand Jurors lawful self-defense under MO standards for a police officer.

    Sorry, i found it pretty fast after all (none / 0) (#19)
    by Palli on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 02:14:47 PM EST
    Though there is a bigquestion about whether this section Vol 14 pag 135 is the final time the law is defined for the GJ since there has been no final Vol 25 released.

    Given that New Jersey is home ... (none / 0) (#36)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 04:21:33 PM EST
    ... to the NFL's New York Giants, and further that its state capital of Trenton sits right across the Delaware River from the Philadelphia Eagles' home city, it's entirely understandable if all those shots on Fox Sports yesterday of Gov. Chris Christie in Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones' private suite at AT&T Stadium, obviously cheering for the Giants' and Eagles' archrivals in their playoff game against the Detroit Lions, don't go over too well with many of his own constituents back home.

    Now, too be fair, Christie is by his own admission a lifelong Cowboys fan. And honestly, anyone who'd vote either for or against a particular candidate on the sole basis of that candidate's favorite sports teams is by definition a fool. So as far as political criticism is concerned, the "Gov. Christie as Cowboys fan" meme is entirely beside the point.

    And one thing that's always entirely predictable is Christie's reaction to his critics, whom he naturally dismissed while chatting this morning with WFAN-AM's Boomer Esiason on his morning sports show. Further, let's never mind the fact that as New Jersey's governor, he seems to be appearing everywhere in public but in New Jersey lately.

    Rather, it's the reports that Jones flew Christie to Dallas at his own expense via his own private jet, since confirmed with the addendum that this wasn't the first time he's done so this season, which are likely to raise some public eyebrows, and may come back to haunt the governor once the presidential silly season kicks into full gear.

    Certainly, the populist image the governor's been trying hard to convey to voters nationally is at least partially undermined by those TV images of him celebrating the Cowboys' victory with Jones and other elitists in that posh stadium suite yesterday, a sight which even Boomer Esiason -- himself an admitted Republican and unabashed Christie admirer -- called "creepy."

    One would think that as a presidential hopeful who's long been casting himself as a "man of the people," Chris Christie would understand that in the age of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and live digital TV -- well, as Andre Agassi once quipped in those Canon camera commercials from a more than a few years back, "image is everything." That realization wasn't lost to people affiliated with American Bridge, a Hillary Clinton-touting SuperPAC, who wasted little time in taking Christie's most excellent Cowboys adventure out for a little spin.

    One thing's for sure -- it's going to be a long campaign season.

    Update: The mouth that won't shut up. (none / 0) (#123)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 02:58:23 PM EST
    "These Philadelphia fans, they are the worst in America."
    Gov. Chris Christie (December 2014)

    Apparently not content to alienate only Giants fans residing in the northern part of New Jersey, Gov. Christie has decided to become an equal opportunity offender by dissing those constituents in the southern half of his state who also tend to be Philadelphia Eagles fans.

    CHRISTIE 2016: "Who cares what you think about me?"


    Except, in this situation (none / 0) (#124)
    by jbindc on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 03:02:33 PM EST
    He's right. (Along with Yankee fans).

    Oh, please! So what if he's right? (none / 0) (#149)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 04:50:50 PM EST
    A politician verbalizes such personal dislikes about current or future constituents at his or her own peril.

    I held lots of personal opinions about certain people when I worked at the State Capitol, and admittedly some of them weren't very nice or flattering. And had I articulated those thoughts publicly, I also wouldn't have been working up there for very long.

    Being correct in one's own personal opinion, and being stupid about expressing it to others, are hardly mutually exclusive propositions -- especially in politics. And if you can't tell the difference between the two and don't know when to keep your mouth shut, your career will likely be toast in pretty short order the moment you open it.



    Oh Pleaze... (5.00 / 2) (#153)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 05:09:24 PM EST
    ...first see JB's comment, then think about the folks voting for Christie who also love Philly, I hardly think another shoe in the Christie mouth is going to push them over to the left.  

    And if he is going national, dissing Philly and cheering for Dallas certainly works in his favor if we are to believe people will vote because of the NFL.


    Christie really is displaying (none / 0) (#131)
    by christinep on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 03:28:19 PM EST
    his jerky-ness.  Or, maybe, he is trying to beat the Texas boaster, Governor Perry, in his home state.  One thing for sure: Pennsylvanians probably can be crossed off his future votes list.

    Doesn't say much... (none / 0) (#137)
    by kdog on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 03:36:17 PM EST
    for Penn. voters does it?

    One thing I don't check out when choosing "representation" is favorite sports teams...that would be f8ckin' stupid.


    No, But Any Fan of the Cowboys... (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 05:04:15 PM EST
    ...not from Dallas has deeper issues.

    I will let this GUY say what can't be said here.  And I am in the same state.

    I cannot wait for the Pack to stop the madness.  Out of nowhere a million cowboys fans in the span of a week, all bragging about how great they are, yet a year ago you would think there wasn't one cowboy fan in town.

    So while voting for anyone because of sports is ludicrous, I can point out a cowboys fan a mile away, if Texas had guidos, they would all be fans of the Cowboys, but you would only know if they were winning.  Chris Christie is the quintessential Cowboys fan, see link above.

    And I will never understand how Mexicans can love them so much considering Texas was stolen from Mexico by the real life cowboys who did by killing them.  So not only are cheering for the team that represents the people that stole their very resource rich lands, they are doing it in those same stolen lands.  There has to be a clinical name for that sort of mental defect.  


    Can't argue with that Bro! (none / 0) (#157)
    by kdog on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 05:25:20 PM EST
    Of all the non-home teams in all the land, the f#ckin' Cowboys? The only choice to rival that is the Dolphins.

    Best NFL Day of My Life... (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jan 07, 2015 at 09:23:04 AM EST
    ...sans the Pack winning two Super Bowls, was the Texans first regular season game eva, and they beat the Cowboys 19-10.  It was a night game and pandemonium broke out as the city had been in an NFL vacuum since the departure of the Oilers 5 years earlier.  

    The rest of the season was an expected flop, but no one cared because we beat the Cowboys out of the gate and that fully converted any fans who had run astray with the Titans, aka the old Oilers.

    I didn't live here during the Oiler years, but I did live here free of a home team for 4 years and that sucked.  Before the NFL Ticket, my only option for catching a Packers game was the bar.  Luckily enough there were 2 Packers bars here when I arrived.


    Hear ya ... so, let me put it this way (none / 0) (#140)
    by christinep on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 04:21:14 PM EST
    Not so much the football team ... but, the puffy and blustery and arrogant (jerky) attitude that a candidate displays can be relevant :)

    Hear you too... (none / 0) (#152)
    by kdog on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 05:08:25 PM EST
    I guess I only have so much patience for the superficial sh#t...leave it to the media and PETA to have me sympathetic towards Christie & Palin this week;)

    Hmmm, kdog (none / 0) (#158)
    by christinep on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 05:35:33 PM EST
    Chill, maybe.  If you were in Denver, we'd have a good smoke.

    Good advice... (none / 0) (#161)
    by kdog on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 06:36:55 PM EST
    got the flu, may not have full faculties...to the Bush Doctor I go!

    Chicken soup (none / 0) (#166)
    by christinep on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 07:13:26 PM EST
    Fluids. Even jello.  Take them all. Get rest; get well.  Lots of junk on TV ... watch it, and it will help you sleep.  Blankets too.  Yes, keep warm.  Chris

    Interesting news week and it (none / 0) (#56)
    by MO Blue on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 06:15:17 PM EST
    and it is only Monday.

    (NEWSER) - A group seeking to declassify data on 9/11 will speak out this week and highlight the possible involvement of Saudi officials in the terror attack, the New York Post reports. Leading the charge is Bob Graham, a former Democratic senator who co-chaired the panel that released the redacted congressional 9/11 report in 2002. Along with him, 9/11 families as well as Reps. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass) and Walter Jones (R-NC) will take part in the Capitol Hill press conference on Wednesday. Graham, who speaks of a "coverup," has long called for the US government to release the report's 28 redacted pages, the Miami Herald reports.link

    If something good comes of this... (none / 0) (#189)
    by unitron on Sat Jan 10, 2015 at 05:54:05 AM EST
    ...then maybe my having to have had old "freedom fries" as my congresscritter all these years (thanks a lot, redistricting) won't have been entirely in vain.

    Ethics Complaint against McCulloch : (none / 0) (#57)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 06:36:42 PM EST
    McCulloch, Two Assistants Face Ethics Complaint Over Darren Wilson Grand Jury

    "gross failure to vigorously represent their client - the citizens of St. Louis, Missouri, in their capacity as prosecutors."

    "It's made possible by the prosecutors, because as long as the police can expect not to be prosecuted for their misconduct, they will continue to over-police, they will continue to abuse citizens, they will continue to use excessive force," she said.

    "We would like to send the message that prosecuting attorneys can no longer abuse their power and expect it to be swept under the rug," said Christi Griffin, a former attorney who is the founder and president of the Ethics Project, and one of seven citizens to sign the complaint.

    They Misled Us (none / 0) (#59)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 06:57:49 PM EST
    Daily Mail

    'The Supreme Court has said that grand jury secrecy must be weighed against the juror's First Amendment rights on a case-by-case basis,' Rothert said. 'The rules of secrecy must yield because this is a highly unusual circumstance.

    The First Amendment prevents the state from imposing a lifetime gag order in cases where the prosecuting attorney has purported to be transparent.'

    Jim Cohen, associate professor at Fordham University Law School and a grand jury expert, said the lawsuit will add to concerns about how the case was handled.

    "Believe me, there's already more than a fair amount of skepticism about whether this process was fair, notwithstanding Mr. McCulloch's cynical attempt to pretend that it was fair," Cohen said.

    Cohen believes the juror has a strong argument in the lawsuit.

    "This matter has been discussed by virtually everybody in the universe with the exception of any person actually subjected to the presentation of evidence," he said.

    Frequencies (none / 0) (#71)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 08:23:11 PM EST
    Just watched this strange and wonderful little movie .
    I recorded it a while ago but just got around to it.  I loved it.  Whatever you expect it won't be that.  A bit from the NYTimes review from the spring-

    Before summer tent poles are fully erected, and science fiction is dominated by spaceships, superheroes and special effects, "Frequencies" arrives to remind us that all sci-fi truly requires is a slightly surreal twist on life.  

    In this ambitious little British film, written and directed by Darren Paul Fisher, every individual emits a frequency that determines his or her luck, particularly in love. The higher the frequency, the better the luck -- but also the lower the empathy.

    When they meet again years later, Zak (Daniel Fraser) claims to have found a way to ease their disparities. Marie (Eleanor Wyld) is first intrigued to learn how he has accomplished this. Then, when they are able to touch and even kiss, she is won over, at last able to feel.

     That's only the first of the movie's many mysteries, which unfold as it pursues issues greater than one romance. Teeming with ideas, "Frequencies" is just as interested in debating free will versus determinism, or investigating the science that might lie behind old superstitions. Flashbacks replay key scenes to reveal secrets hidden in plain view. While the detached, deadpan tone and occasionally stilted acting might leave some viewers flat, there's no doubting the fierce intelligence behind this admirable puzzle box of a movie.

    It's 100% on RT but it only has 6 reviews.  The Times and 5 others.    Definitely worth the time IMO.

    Like Autotune for life. (none / 0) (#77)
    by Mr Natural on Mon Jan 05, 2015 at 10:23:18 PM EST
    Nothing Lasts Forever, a very strange Bill Murray film, played on Turner Movie Classics the other night.  Along with Bill Murray were Dan Acroyd, Mort Sahl, Imogene Coca, Sam Jaffe, and whoever was the actual star.

    It was

    'the tale of a young man who aspires to become "an artist" but whose lofty ambitions are foiled by the Port Authority of New York who run Manhattan like a totalitarian state. He fails the test for a "creativity license" and they assign him to direct traffic at the Holland Tunnel.'

    I watched your Orson Welles piece the other day. It had that fifties pace.  Touch of Evil is still my favorite Welles.


    I actually saw (none / 0) (#128)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 03:21:24 PM EST
    this a while ago.  It is great. Recently I saw Zombieland for the first time.  Not sure why I never saw it but it's great.   And my favorite part was Murrays short hilarious appearance.

    Saw three fantastic movies over my holiday break (none / 0) (#106)
    by ruffian on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 01:04:07 PM EST
    All very different, but I could not pick a favorite: 'Wild", 'The Imitation Game', 'Into The Woods'.

    There will be Oscars!

    Capt Howdy, do you know anyone (none / 0) (#108)
    by ruffian on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 01:07:10 PM EST
    that worked on the effects for 'Into The Woods'? I thought they were really top-notch!

    Not that I know of (none / 0) (#126)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 03:15:43 PM EST
    but with big effects movies they send small parts to many effects houses so it's possible.  I generally hate musicals but I will have to see this.   For Meryl and the effects if nothing else.

    I'm not a fan of musicals, either, ... (none / 0) (#159)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 06:00:03 PM EST
    ... especially on the big screen, because I'm generally not big on cheese and schmaltz.

    Of course, there are definitely exceptions to that rule. The late Bob Fosse's work in "Cabaret," "All That Jazz" and "Chicago" -- the latter adapted superbly for film by director Garry Marshall -- come immediately to mind.

    I also enjoyed "West Side Story," and "Oliver!" because both films had a gritty undertone to them. I like the "The Sound of Music" because the manner in which its plot pivots effortlessly from sunshiny cuteness to a rather menacing darkness with the looming Nazi takeover of Austria.

    "The Wizard of Oz" takes me back to young childhood days, when Almira Gulch, the Wicked Witch of the West and the flying monkeys all took turns terrifying me. (And my eternal gratitude to the gifted character actress Margaret Hamilton, for creating one of the truly great villains in movie history.) "Singing in the Rain," "The Rocky Horror Picture Show" and "Grease" appeal to my innate sense of camp, which is hard for me to resist.

    But please hide the razor blades, barbiturates and rope, before making me watch "My Fair Lady," "Oklahoma!" or "Gigi," which I consider the cinematic equivalent of consuming a 5-lb. block of Velveeta in one sitting.

    Aloha. ;-D


    Everything you said (5.00 / 1) (#163)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 07:02:07 PM EST
    Victor/Victoria is one of my favorite movies.  But it like some of the ones you name does not exist as a vehicle for the musical numbers.  
    True story-back in 1995 when I went to Disney, against my better judgement-I am NOT a Disney fan generally I would rather pull all my teeth with my fingers than sit through Frozen or Mulan, to work on the movie Dinosaur I spent a full day in interviews with many different people.  Which I typical.  What was not typical for Disney is that most of these people were effects people not Disney people since the point was combining CG dinosaurs with real photography.  Many I knew from other previous work experiences or just "around".   They were scooping up all the best effects people around to work on it.  In every interview I said the same thing.  YOU HAVE TO SWEAR TO ME THAT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO TALK.  SWEAR IT.  They all did.  That was not the plan.  There was to be no dialog.   I should explain that this was a golden moment for people like me.  CG was cranking big time and there were not enough people to fill the job openings.  We were being "bid on".  Needless to say it did not last long.  We knew it would not which makes the rest of the story even more dramatic.
    We spent six months doing the test, which is or was included on the DVD.  And when we screened it for Eisner he did not praise or criticize the work he said one sentence and walked out of the screening.  "Fine, but they have to talk".
    You have no idea what a total sh!tstorm this sentence caused.  Many people including me threatened to quit.  MANY.  So many that there was a company meeting with bigwigs who explained that we had all signed 3 year contracts and anyone who chose not to work on the film were free to do so but they would not work anywhere else for three years.   After a long silence I stood up cleared my throat and said "fine, but as God is my witness, if they start singing I will burn this fvcking building".
    I got a standing ovation and was elected Union rep.

    What a great story! (none / 0) (#175)
    by ruffian on Wed Jan 07, 2015 at 11:52:57 AM EST
    To me, there are musicals, Disney animated musicals, and then there are Stephen Sondheim musicals, of which 'Into The Woods' is one of the latter...I like all three forms in their own way, but Sondheim is obviously in a league of his own.  And they did not screw up 'Into the Woods' at all, IMO. Great cast, and they only removed one song that I noticed. Unfortunately it is one I really like- the 2nd version of 'Agony' the princes sing after they get their wishes.  Oh well, maybe it will be a DVD extra.

    Former Governor Bob McDonnell (none / 0) (#122)
    by jbindc on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 02:46:21 PM EST
    Gets 2 years in prison, with 2 years supervised release after that.

    The photographers' lens (none / 0) (#127)
    by christinep on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 03:19:19 PM EST
    Reading the story along with a few new photos of the former governor and the surprise appearance of the wife, I was struck by how both McDonnells have aged.  The drawn looks worn by Mr. & Mrs. are harbingers of what is still to come.

    Angels in hoodies (none / 0) (#136)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 06, 2015 at 03:34:58 PM EST
    watching The Bible (off and on) on Encore and can't help noticing that all the angels seem to be wearing hoodies.