Friday Open Thread

Here's a new open thread, all topics welcome.

< Mexico's Latest Extraditions | Saturday College Football Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    I love the way the heat smells (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 07:53:26 AM EST
    When you turn it on for the first time in months and all the dust gets fried that got caught in the system over the summer.

    Smells like fall.

    Yeah, but it feels like winter (5.00 / 2) (#122)
    by BarnBabe on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 08:20:30 PM EST
    Jeez, with that storm off the coast, we are getting rain. More than we had all summer. The rain is needed but it ruins fall a lot. And the smell of fall, but I know what you mean about turning the heat on. It is nice and cozy inside. Woke up this morning with the Golden Retriever at the bottom of my bed, one Tiger cat on the other side, and my uppity kitty cuddled right next to me instead of sleeping alone in a another bedroom. My family. Oh, and they left me my a slice of the bed for myself.

    No comment is really necessary... (5.00 / 3) (#65)
    by lentinel on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 09:55:51 AM EST
    U.S. forces in Afghanistan said they conducted an airstrike on Kunduz at 2:15 a.m. The spokesman, U.S. Army Col. Brian Tribus, said the strike "may have resulted in collateral damage to a nearby medical facility" and that the incident was under investigation. Tribus said it was the 12th U.S. airstrike "in the Kunduz vicinity" since Tuesday.

    Doctors Without Borders said its trauma center "was hit several times during sustained bombing and was very badly damaged." At the time of the bombing, the hospital had 105 patients and their caretakers, and more than 80 international and Afghan staff, it said.

    Interior Ministry spokesman Sediq Sediqqi said 10 to 15 "terrorists" had been hiding in the hospital at the time of the strike. "All of the terrorists were killed but we also lost doctors," he told a press conference. He said 80 staff at the hospital, including 15 foreigners, had been taken to safety.

    That's the current post-Bush way.
    If terrrists are hiding out in a hospital, bomb the hospital.
    It's sort of a new approach.
    It used to be that we would try to negotiate with the criminals in order to spare the hostages. What a waste of time. So "Dog Day Afternoon". So much easier to just wipe out the entire facility.

    Thank you Bush for starting us on this horrific road 15 long years ago. Thank you Obama for keeping the flames alive. And a special thank you to the Clinton administration for providing us with a wonderful euphemism, "collateral damage" which is so much nicer that saying something nasty like we killed a lot of innocent civilians who happened to be in the way.

    Since it is a nearby location (none / 0) (#84)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 02:09:03 PM EST
    I would say it wasn't planned. But believing that makes this outrageous.

    If terrrists are hiding out in a hospital, bomb the hospital.
    It's sort of a new approach.
    It used to be that we would try to negotiate with the criminals in order to spare the hostages. What a waste of time. So "Dog Day Afternoon". So much easier to just wipe out the entire facility.

    Now, exactly how would you negotiate?? Send in a team???


    Simple. (none / 0) (#153)
    by lentinel on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 08:15:02 AM EST
    You send in a team.
    Ground forces.

    You don't bomb near hospitals.

    Use your brains.

    Or - are you of the Bush, "stuff happens" school of shrugging off the slaughter of the innocent?


    And now for something (5.00 / 3) (#144)
    by Zorba on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 03:16:20 PM EST
    completely different.
    While it has been raining most of the week, it is cloudy but not raining today.  So I went out in the garden (with my boots on- it's muddy) and gathered a whole bunch of basil.
    With which I made a lot of pesto, some for dinner tonight, and the rest I froze.  We love pesto!

    While I was living in Baltimore (none / 0) (#180)
    by sj on Tue Oct 06, 2015 at 12:13:28 AM EST
    The yard at my home in Denver went to ruin. Things can go Really Bad in 7 years. My friend and I have spent the last two summers working on it. Last summer was clearing it out, this summer was building it up. And last night I planted the last of the bulbs. My yard looks pretty now, but it will be beautiful next year.

    I have not yet graduated to foodstuffs -- it's kind of intimidating when I rarely cook real meals (I still haven't figured out how to cook for less than a family of seven). Nevertheless, I plan to put in a little vegetable and herb garden next year, and I actually have a good place for it now.  It might be the only way I can get my hands on white eggplant here. And peas. Fresh peas.


    fresh snow peas or sugar peas are big time fun (5.00 / 1) (#182)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Oct 06, 2015 at 07:53:13 AM EST
    and usually don't make it inside the house.  That is, unless there have been birds perching atop the trellis.  Then they do come in for washing.

    Something even differenter... (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by desertswine on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 06:42:48 PM EST
    On Friday, I decided to take a little break in the morning and stroll around the grounds where I work. I heard a loud plane going by overhead, and when I looked up, it was a B-29! A superfort! Lean, clean, and unmistakable, I didn't know any of these things were still flying. It was like seeing a pterodactyl whisking through the air. It was heading east.  

    According to Them... (none / 0) (#158)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 10:57:22 AM EST
    ...there is only one that can take to the air.

    Commemorative Air Force

    Yet, I know in Galveston the Lone Star Flight Museum has one that flies in airshows.  I thought it was available to the public, but according to their website it is not.  

    Looks like Michigan has one for rides.

    That is very cool that you got to see it, I have never seen any of the WWII aircraft in Galveston flying, only on the ground.

    Was it close to the ground, was in super loud line in the movies ?


    Michigan's Yankee Air Museum, which is in (5.00 / 1) (#188)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Oct 06, 2015 at 02:19:59 PM EST
    the process of rebuilding and renaming, has a B-17 Flying Fortress.  It flies over my place regularly.  We seem to be on the flight path from Willow Run to somewhere.  We see them on Memorial Day, July 4th, etc..  It's large but painfully slow.  Watching it float across the sky makes it clear why prop driven aircraft took such heavy hits during wwii.

    Some idiot working on a plane burned the Yankee museum down about ten years ago.  They saved three working planes: a B25, a B-17, and a C-47.  They don't even have a B-24, the aircraft manufactured at Willow Run, at a rate of one per hour during WWII.


    It was loud... (none / 0) (#179)
    by desertswine on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 11:31:51 PM EST
    yet it sounded different than anything else in the air.  That was why I looked up. It was sobering to think that something so iconic and beautiful in a way only existed to rain death on so many hundreds of thousands of innocents. Strangely compelling.

    Or the Glass Being Half Full... (none / 0) (#185)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Oct 06, 2015 at 11:04:34 AM EST
    ...and that is one of the great engineering marvels of western civilization that helped ensure that Hawaii, and the entire pacific rim, isn't worshiping a emperor ?

    I believe the Enola Gay was a Superfortress.  Yes, here it is on display at Washington Dulles International Airport.


    Yes Enola Gay was a Superfort. (none / 0) (#189)
    by desertswine on Tue Oct 06, 2015 at 10:44:51 PM EST
    Learn Something New Every Day (none / 0) (#190)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 10:21:52 AM EST
    The Bocks Car and its crew left Tinian in the Marianas Islands in the middle of the night. Its mission was to bomb the industrial city of Kokura, but the target was blocked by clouds and smog. The contingent plan was for bombing Nagasaki, so the plane flew to that city and dropped its cargo.

    re umpqua . . . (3.50 / 2) (#44)
    by zaitztheunconvicted on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 08:30:13 PM EST
    Let me see if I have this right  . . . the one of a few places that a person can bring a gun illegally without being stopped and searched for it is most high school or college campuses . . . and the laws in most states and/or the policies of most such places prohibit most other people (students, teachers or administrators) from carrying anything  . . .

    a man brings a handgun to the mall and starts shooting and he will be taken out by police, security or an armed bystander . . .

    if a man brings a handgun to community college and starts shooting, then, he shoots till security or police arrive . . .

    CNN military analyst Lt. Col. Rick Francona reportedly suggested Thursday that Harper-Mercer targeted Umpqua because he knew about its no-guns rule. "The gun-free zones are the areas that tell licensed gun owners that you are not allowed to carry your weapon in this facility," Francona said, according to Raw Story. "So, they do serve a purpose to let everyone know that this is a 'gun-free zone.' If you're going to perpetrate some act, you know that most people are not going to be armed [there]."

    Actually... (5.00 / 5) (#53)
    by Repack Rider on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 10:26:47 PM EST
    Let me see if I have this right

    You don't have it right.  Does that help?


    Some Uber drivers think otherwise (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by zaitztheunconvicted on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 11:38:23 PM EST
    re . . . college . . . (2.00 / 2) (#58)
    by zaitztheunconvicted on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 03:10:19 AM EST
    Guns on Campus

    . . .  Community College is a gun free campus. No guns will be allowed on campus, and the College will have signs posted to that effect. Employees and students who violate this policy will be subject to college disciplinary action. Law enforcement officers are exempt from this requirement.


    Though, any person may enter or leave the campus without being searched or wanded or metal detected . . .  with the result that a shooter with evil intent may enter . . . and he will be stopped, if and when he is stopped by law enforcement, and not by armed Uber drivers or other ordinary citizens . . .


    But the Oregon courts knocked down the law (5.00 / 2) (#148)
    by Towanda on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 09:46:15 PM EST
    and so concealed carry is okay on campuses there -- which are not, therefore, "gun-free zones."

    Just another reason I like teaching online. . . .


    Bush now at 4% (none / 0) (#1)
    by ragebot on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 04:56:53 PM EST
    Pew poll link at CNN

    "Stuff happens" (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:12:38 PM EST
    Actually that's not bad advice... (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:17:06 PM EST
    too bad he didn't say that to his brother 14 years ago, hundreds of thousands of lives, billions of dollars, and precious civil liberties could have been saved.

    The Great White Dope... (5.00 / 1) (#160)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 11:01:35 AM EST
    ...too funny.

    So I guess South Carolina, where people are dying, is just stuff happening.  He is so transcendent.

    It is a bit refreshing to hear a political speak the truth even when it's not on purpose.


    Somebody then handed Jeb! a shovel, ... (none / 0) (#26)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:30:36 PM EST
    ... and told him to keep digging:

    "Things happen all the time. Things. Is that better?"

    And then somebody told him to dig faster:

    "Tragedies. A child drowned in a pool and the impulse is to pass a law that puts fencing around pools. Well it may not change it. Or you have a car accident and the impulse is to pass a law that deals with that unique event. And the cumulative effect of this is, in some cases, you don't solve the problem by passing the law, and you're imposing on large numbers of people burdens that make it harder for our economy to grow, make it harder to protect liberty."

    After President Obama refused to dignify Bush's remarks with a comment of his own, the former Florida governor's spokesperson Allie Branderburger was quick to defend her boss:

    "It is sad and beyond craven that liberal Democrats, aided and abetted by some in the national media, would dishonestly take Governor Bush's comments out of context in a cheap attempt to advance their political agenda in the wake of a tragedy."

    What a bunch of imbeciles!


    Jeb! wanted (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by KeysDan on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 12:01:31 PM EST
    to use the saltier "sh*+" happens, but since his anchor baby really refers to Asians, and his Romneyesque free stuff bloopers, he had a defeat chip implanted in his skull.

     It is a medical device that is used to treat a common Bush malady, genetic oppressive paranoia, often referred to as GOP. It is effective,but has the side effect of the patient taking to the golf course and shouting:"now watch this swing."


    "Heckuva job, keysdan!" (none / 0) (#83)
    by Mr Natural on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 02:08:20 PM EST
    Ok (none / 0) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 05:01:34 PM EST
    A brand new thread.

    I wanna hear it.  Explain why the pope meeting with Kim Davis is equal to meeting with a random person who happens to be LGBT.

    This is important.  It's been asked twice in response to to different equivalency posts.

    Capt., the LGBT person Francis met with (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by caseyOR on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 05:21:45 PM EST
    is a personal friend of his. No idea how close a friend, but a friend. For me, that makes the two meetings non-comparable (is that even a word?)

    It appears that Kim Davis' presence at this meeting was orchestrated by Archbishop Vigano who is the Papal Nuncio to the U.S. This is like being the ambassador to the U.S. Vigano is a rabid homophobe and active opponent of marriage equality.

    Vigano is also acquianted with Davis' lawyer with whom Vigano has marched in protest of marriage equality. The news of the meeting was first published in a rightwing Catholic publication run by a wingnut who is a longtime protege of Benedict VI, also a vocal opponent of marriage equality and a big old homophobe.

    Keep in mind that the Vatican has long been a political nest of vipers. Dirty politics is an art form in the Vatican. My guess is that this Davis meet was cooked up by Vigano and the lawyer (what is his name? Matt something?) in an attempt to both cash in on this Pope's popularity , letting some of his stardust fall on Davis, and at the same time create a bit of bad publicity for a Pope seen by many of those Vatican vipers, including Vigano, as too liberal.

    It was kind of a two-fer.

    What the Pope should now do , IMO, is recall Vigano, figuratively smack him around, and bury him deep in the dark recesses of the Vatican where he can no longer pull this kind of nonsense.

    I am not excusing Francis here. He is the boss, the buck stops with him. He needs to get better support staff, and surround himself with people who will serve his agenda.


    In addition to being a longtime friend, (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by shoephone on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 05:39:24 PM EST
    Grassi is also a former student of Francis'.

    The day before Pope Francis met anti-gay county clerk Kim Davis in Washington last week, he held a private meeting with a longtime friend from Argentina who has been in a same-sex relationship
    for 19 years.

    "Three weeks before the trip, he called me on the phone and said he would love to give me a hug," Grassi said.


    Pope Francis taught Grassi in literature and psychology classes at Inmaculada Concepcion, a Catholic high school in Sante Fe, Argentina, from 1964-1965. Grassi said that he is now an atheist.

    Grassi said the Pope has long known that he is gay, but has never condemned his sexuality or his same-sex relationship. In the video, Francis says he recalls meeting Grassi's boyfriend in Rome.

    That hardly makes Grassi a "random person."


    This completely misses the point (none / 0) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 05:42:40 PM EST
    No, I get your point (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by shoephone on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 05:53:26 PM EST
    But you asked a specific question, using the words "random person" -- repeatedly, I might add. I merely explained that Grassi is, in no way, some "random person" in Pope Francis' history.

    You also -- mistakenly -- assume that I am equating Grassi with Davis, and seeking to then neutralize the import of each of the meetings. I have done no such thing. I happen to think Davis is a criminal and a wackjob. It also appears that the Pope's meeting with Davis was not, in fact, one-on-one, and that he may not have even spoken more than a few words to her.

    However, you don't seem to be interested in facts. Your red hot anger is leading you to make a lot of insulting comments to people who are not your enemy.

    You might want to read the comment Donald left for you in the last thread.


    I assumed nothing about you (none / 0) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 05:57:51 PM EST
    I wasn't even talking to you.  You read it.  I have an attention span problem.  And I don't require Donalds sermons to survive

    Nor do you require friends, apparently. (none / 0) (#20)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:09:31 PM EST
    That's it... (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:19:18 PM EST
    Mandatory bong summit at my place...you two, Christine, Frank, and Kim Davis.

    I'll sort the lot of ya out!!!


    Cool. (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:34:38 PM EST
    I'll bring the herb, handpicked from Puna. But first, I have to genuflect three times in the general direction of The Vatican and say a bunch of Hail Marys.

    The Puna bud... (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:42:01 PM EST
    is it's own blessing I'm sure.

    I happen to believe the anointing oils used by J.H.C. had the same effect. And Moses ate some peyote like substance before the bush started burning. That's science;)


    Moses was into some hardcore stuff, Dog. (none / 0) (#33)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:48:26 PM EST
    And I heard that the herb his ol' lady was growing was so potent, the entire tribe of Israel ended up wandering around the desert for what seemed like forever, going from point to point only to ask each other, "Now, why did we come over here again?" ;-D

    I'm so far ahead of you (none / 0) (#25)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:23:44 PM EST
    How is the market down there anyway? (none / 0) (#28)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:32:52 PM EST
    I can't believe how abundant quality is, and prices at record lows for premium. Is it the same in rural America?

    And though I'm still not ready to abandon Neanderthal smoke and fire, a buddy has been hitting me off on his pharmaceutical grade vapor...my goodness gracious! But he's always yelling at me cuz I suck that pen trying to fill my lungs to the brim and that's not how your supposed to do it. Says him! ;)


    Very good. Thanks for asking. (none / 0) (#32)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:45:58 PM EST
    Same here.

    Can't do vapor.  Well, I can but I don't get it.

    The whole pageantry of rolling and smoking is integral.


    Btw (none / 0) (#43)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 07:55:49 PM EST
    You know the reason for that is


    Especially here.  Ifyouknowwhatimean.


    I believe I have friends Donald (none / 0) (#23)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:17:50 PM EST
    And the do not require I read paragraph after paragraph after tedious paragraph of condescension fir that privilege.



    Well, of course you don't, ... (none / 0) (#35)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:58:16 PM EST
    ... when you evidently much prefer to write your own. Here's a toast in hope that you won't ever have to backtrack, given all the bridges you've set ablaze here during this relentless and single-minded pursuit of your right-wing Kentucky doppelgänger.

    Dearie me (none / 0) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 07:03:17 PM EST
    Whatever shall I do?!?!?!?

    I know! How about acting like an adult? (none / 0) (#47)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 08:42:49 PM EST
    A good place to start would be to disenthrall yourself of your insane competition with the hopelessly hapless Ms. Davis over who owns the shroud of perpetual victimhood in the now-concluded battle over marriage equality. Then, you could perhaps actually listen respectfully to what others here have to say -- rather than, you know, channeling you know who and trying to shout others down.

    yes, nothing alienates people (none / 0) (#51)
    by jondee on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 10:04:09 PM EST
    like righteous, overly-judgemental people who put themselves above Nazi money launderers and pederasts in high places.

    To the best of my knowledge, (none / 0) (#27)
    by MO Blue on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:31:20 PM EST
    the Vatican has not actually stated that Davis was part of a receiving line of dozens of people meeting the Pope. What was said:

    "Pope Francis met with several dozen persons who had been invited by the Nunciature to greet him as he prepared to leave Washington for New York City. Such brief greetings occur on all papal visits and are due to the Pope's characteristic kindness and availability. The only real audience granted by the Pope at the Nunciature was with one of his former students and his family."

    What Liberty Council continues to state:

    "There was no line of people before, near, or around Kim Davis," Staver said in the press release. "Had Kim Davis been in a line of people or been seen by anyone outside of Vatican personnel, we would not have been able to keep her visit secret. Kim's face is easily recognizable. When we walk through airports as large as LaGuardia, Philadelpia (sic), and Reagan, people recognize her and give her encouragement. This was a private meeting with no other people except for the Pope and select Vatican personnel."

    The Pope could have met with dozens of people and also meet privately with Davis. Also the statement about audiences at the Nunciature IMO contained qualifiers rather than a simple statement that the Pope had only one private meeting.


    "real audience" is obviously (5.00 / 2) (#73)
    by Peter G on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 11:25:13 AM EST
    some sort of weasel-term, although I don't know enough Pope-speak to decode it.

    I agree that "real audience" (5.00 / 2) (#75)
    by MO Blue on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 12:41:49 PM EST
    Is an unnecessary qualifier, otherwise known as a weasel-term. The use of the qualifiers leads me to wonder if the truth lies somewhere between Davis' version and the current version that the Vatican is implying and wants you to believe.

    While I agree that Davis and her lawyers have a track record that makes one doubt the truthfulness of their statements, the Vatican has a track record on this subject that indicates that they have been less than transparent. For example:

    "The Holy See is aware of the reports of Kim Davis meeting with the Holy Father. The Vatican does not confirm the meeting, nor does it deny the meeting. There will be no further information given," the first statement reads.

    I would have thought that if this was a group audience or receiving line, at some time during this 10 day period, another participant would have been saying that they were in line with Davis and her husband.


    Sounds like you're on to something. (none / 0) (#36)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:58:38 PM EST
    Self-promotion would explain a bit of the difference in stories.

    Pride... (none / 0) (#38)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 07:05:15 PM EST
    isn't that one o' dem 7 deadly thingies?

    So private that Mrs. Davis' attorney (none / 0) (#39)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 07:05:53 PM EST
    was sompelled ro release info to the media.  

    According to media reports, (5.00 / 2) (#54)
    by MO Blue on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 10:46:56 PM EST
    this anti-gay marriage propaganda was in fact first reported by the conservative Catholic magazine Inside the Vatican. IOW, it was no longer a secret once this Catholic magazine reported that the Pope met with Davis. Here are a couple of paragraphs of the magazine article:

    The Secret Meeting of the Papal Trip

    Washington, D.C.

    One meeting during Pope Francis' whirlwind trip to America has remained secret.

    Until now.

    It was, arguably, the most significant meeting, symbolically, of the entire trip.

    It should, therefore, be brought to the attention of the public, both in the Church, and in the secular world.

    That the meeting occurred may, perhaps, spark controversy. This is evidently why it was kept secret. The Vatican evidently feared the "politicization" of a "pastoral trip" which clearly wished to emphasize the encounter with Jesus Christ, with the poor, with the faithful, with the handicapped, with children, and with all Americans of whatever background.

    But there was also, evidently, a desire to meet with a person who has taken a controversial stand out of conscience.
    This encounter between Pope Francis and Kim Davis takes on new importance since the ACLU (the American Civil Liberties Union) has asked that Kim be held in contempt of court.

    This means that, should the judge agree with the ACLU, Kim could again in coming days be ordered to be held in prison.

    In this sense, the Pope on September 24 clearly "wrapped his protective mantle" around Kim Davis, discreetly, in private, in a way completely hidden from the world, but in a way that was deeply moving for her personally, as a person of conscience. Inside the Vatican

    Great anti-gay propaganda piece wouldn't you say. The last paragraph about the Pope wrapping his mantle around Davis, "discretely,  in private, in a way completely hidden from the world" is the stuff that feeds the souls of those who feed on anti-gay rhetoric.


    Propaganda (none / 0) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 10:43:19 AM EST
    Interesting, I had never seen the second definition -


    information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.
    "he was charged with distributing enemy propaganda"
    synonyms:    information, promotion, advertising, publicity, spin; More
    the dissemination of propaganda as a political strategy.
    "the party's leaders believed that a long period of education and propaganda would be necessary"
    a committee of cardinals of the Roman Catholic Church responsible for foreign missions, founded in 1622 by Pope Gregory XV.

    If you read the OoEd Dan linked to there is more I did not know-

    As recently as 2009, he dealt with the legal and political implications of same-sex marriage so unambiguously as to suggest there was nothing of a swindle or a mistake about his appointment with Ms. Davis. As Argentina's legalization of same-sex marriage approached six years ago, the mayor of Buenos Aires, Mauricio Macri, currently a candidate for the presidency, declined to appeal when a judge's ruling allowed the marriage of two men to proceed. The future Pope Francis, then archbishop of Buenos Aires, publicly objected to the mayor's failure as a "guardian of the law." "The Constitution and national codes cannot be modified by a judge," he said. In such situations, he insisted, officials had a responsibility to act.

    "It was the first time in 18 years as bishop that I criticized a government official," he later said. Within church circles, he spoke more vehemently as the national same-sex marriage bill moved toward a vote. "Let us not be naïve," he wrote in a letter to Carmelite nuns in his diocese. "This is not simply a political struggle, but it is an attempt to destroy God's plan

    I believe Dan nailed it in his typically understated way-

    But, the key part of the article is the reality therapy offered by the author.

    I had not read the letter (none / 0) (#102)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 03:52:25 PM EST
    Interesting.  Particularly the part about when mans law conflicts with gods law it's not a valid law.
    The comments were actually the most interesting.  I assume most are from the faithful.  At least I would think so.  But they are heavily negative. Like 5 or 6 to 1 from my quick survey.  Some very intensely negative.   Although the did run the gamut.

    Jann Coles says
    SEPTEMBER 30, 2015 AT 6:18 PM

    Thank you so much for sharing this story. So many people are very very encouraged. Thank you for bringing joy and hope to our hearts in America.

    Laurence Brown says
    SEPTEMBER 30, 2015 AT 6:48 PM

    That meeting did not happen. Do you really think that the 78 yr old Pope had time, with that insane schedule and relentless media coverage, to meet with this hypocritical bigot??? No way...not one person can confirm this via pictures/video. Just remember a picture is worth a thousand words, and she can lie til the cows come home...she will just ask her god to forgive her for lying...yet again.


    What does that even mean (none / 0) (#40)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 07:09:22 PM EST
    Thanks for the 5 but I changed my mind

    The Pope and the Clerk (5.00 / 3) (#66)
    by KeysDan on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 10:00:54 AM EST
    Two Peas in a Pod?   Op-ed articled NYT, October 3. This account is interesting with regard to the meeting:  did the Papal Nuncio take one for the team?  Was it secret?

     Liberty Counsel's, Mat Staver, verifies some aspects of the meeting, but disagrees with the belated version put out by the Vatican, including who invited the Clerk (the Nuncio), who picked them up at her hotel (a private security van with "Italian speaking men"}, it was a private meeting (not a line), Davis was asked to change her hair style so as to be less recognizable.

     Davis et al. are not believable, given their track record (e.g.,not following Judge Bunning's order not to interfere, and the Peru prayer meeting.) But, Davis was allowed to control the message, with the Vatican behind the p.r. curve.

    But, the key part of the article is the reality therapy offered by the author.


    Thank you Dan (none / 0) (#68)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 10:10:25 AM EST

    Well, it means Mrs. Davis' attorney (none / 0) (#41)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 07:34:21 PM EST
    didn't find it necessary to keep the meet-up w/the Pope secret.  

    But the pope did (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 07:40:04 PM EST
    I believe that's the point.

    The meet-up with the Pope (none / 0) (#55)
    by MO Blue on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 10:49:06 PM EST
    wasn't a secret once the Catholic magazine broke the story of the meeting.

    Who blabbed first? The attorney (none / 0) (#94)
    by oculus on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 03:21:09 PM EST
    or the mag?

    It was the same day (none / 0) (#95)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 03:29:02 PM EST
    The 9th.  Not sure time f day matters.  I would say it was pretty clearly coordinated .

    Oops (none / 0) (#97)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 03:30:43 PM EST

    It doesn't say the dates (that I saw) but you can get them from the links in the first two paragraphs


    Oops again (none / 0) (#98)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 03:33:31 PM EST
    The cache of the page with the letter was the 9th

    The letter (Catholic publication) was first.  On the 3rd frm what I can see.


    Although the letter (none / 0) (#100)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 03:35:43 PM EST
    Is dated the 29th

    Anyway the letter was first.


    I get and actually agree with all that (none / 0) (#6)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 05:36:19 PM EST
    But the comments in the last thread were along the lines of "see, he meets with gay people! What's your problem?"

    Christine posted one of these the other day and vml68 asked the question.  

    Unless, the transgendered person was actively discriminating against other individuals, I honestly don't know how you can conflate the Pope meeting with Kim Davis and with his meeting a transgendered individual.

    IMO, what he did would be akin to meeting with volunteers from the Minuteman Project and telling them to "stay strong", while at the same time preaching compassion for immigrants.

    Good question.   Never answered.

    Then again today.

    Two comments.  He met with a gay couple!!!!

    Kim Davis was sent to jail and likely be again fir actively working to deny rights to others. Very specific others that have made her a figurehead for bigotry in this country.

    I (and vml68) would like to hear the reasoning behind the equivalency.   Because personally I don't get and find it personally offensive.   I just heard it again in cable news.  This matters.  I'm sure you do not believe this but clearly there are people here who see a meeting with any LGBT person as equal to meeting with a convicted figurehead of hate.

    Explain it or stop saying it.
    'Sall I'm sayin.


    Jumping in a little late to this, (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by Anne on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 10:09:47 PM EST
    but after reading all the comments, I think what bothers me is that there's a flavor of "some of my best friends are..." that accompanies the efforts to find some equivalency in the Pope's various meetings, and to make something out of his friendship with a former student who is gay.

    Let's face it: the Pope has a huge platform.  People hang on his every word.  He has an enormous ability to influence and direct and lead.

    I guess I just can't get it out of my head that no matter how gracious he is to the people he meets, he will never see gays or women as people of equal stature or standing.  He will always, in accordance with Catholic doctrine, deem them less worthy of certain rights and privileges.

    For the life of me I do not understand why the Pope who can be such a vocal advocate of environmental stewardship can continue to advocate for policies and doctrine that harm an entire gender.  I do not understand why the Pope who can be such an advocate for the poor can continue to advocate for doctrine that contributes to poverty.  I do not understand how the Pope who can advocate for families can continue to advocate for doctrine that regards an entire community as "less than" because of their sexual orientation, and deny them that blessing.

    I don't frankly care if it was political machinations that punk'd the Pope into meeting with Kim Davis, because the reality is that what Kim Davis believes is what the Pope believes: that same-sex marriage is wrong.  It may have been politically stupid for him to do it, because it's taken some of the shine off his visit here, but maybe it's better for people to be a little less dazzled by this Pope, to come down to earth and face the truth that for all the change in tone, there's been no change in doctrine.

    I get why you're angry and upset about this, and it pains me that in so many ways - and with or without the Davis visit - the Pope is a reminder of how much discrimination continues to be advocated, and in God's name no less.

    That people like Davis, who under other circumstances probably would reveal her antipathy for Catholicism, will use this to keep justifying their bigotry, is just a bridge too far.


    Honestly Anne (none / 0) (#60)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 07:36:20 AM EST
    I'm over the actual meeting with Davis.   It was shocking but as you say probably a good thing in a cold snap of reality way.
    I think the rose colored glasses are officially off for most thinking people.  And that's probably good.
    That comment was more about the shameless toadying and pompous victim hood of people who would grasp so wildly for rationalization they would smear us again by suggesting that a meeting with a trans or "some of his best friends" is the equal and opposite of meeting with a person who's one and only claim to fame is dedication to hateful bigotry and tell her to stay strong.

    I would ask people to think a moment about what that implies about those who hold that opinion.
    vml68 was as usual more articulate that I

    Unless, the transgendered person was actively discriminating against other individuals, I honestly don't know how you can conflate the Pope meeting with Kim Davis and with his meeting a transgendered individual.
    IMO, what he did would be akin to meeting with volunteers from the Minuteman Project and telling them to "stay strong", while at the same time preaching compassion for immigrants.

    This matters.  I have heard this equivalence a dozen times on cable news in the last 48 hours.

    We are not the he opposite of hate.  We are not the opposite of anything.  We are just people.


    Well (none / 0) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 05:41:56 PM EST
    I agree with most of that

    I agree, Capt., meeting with any (none / 0) (#11)
    by caseyOR on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 05:46:03 PM EST
    number of LGBT people does not somehow balance out giving any kind of good publicity to a bigot.

    I don't know why some were trying to equate the two. Perhaps it is an attempt to defend a pope who, after the endless reigns of ultra-conservatives John Paul II and his successor Benedict XVI, is a real breathe of fresh air to the more liberal Catholics of the world.


    Thank you (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 05:46:52 PM EST
    I'm out

    A further statement (none / 0) (#31)
    by jbindc on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:42:48 PM EST

    The Pope did not enter into the details of the situation of Mrs. Davis and his meeting with her should not be considered a form of support of her position in all of its particular and complex aspects.


    Pope Francis is the type of public figure who "meets with people every day he disagrees with." To suggest that the mere act of meeting such people is confirmation he agrees with whatever they do is rather ludicrous in Hale's opinion. With this in mind, he emphasized that the narrative by Kim Davis as to the nature of her meeting with Pope Francis is very likely false.

    Sorry to see... (none / 0) (#34)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:52:42 PM EST
    the weather is not lookin' good for your man's victory lap in Flushing Meadows tomorrow.

    This one's for you guys...


    As I understand it, (5.00 / 3) (#14)
    by KeysDan on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 05:52:28 PM EST
    the pre-arranged meeting was with a former high school student in Argentina who is now in his late 60s, along with his long-term partner, and some other family members.

     Apparently, they are not married, as they refer to themselves as "partners," or "boyfriends." This was the only "real audience."  Clerk Davis and husband, were in a larger reception of sorts for their meeting. So the story goes.  

    So the first case, was an acquaintanceship that goes way back. The second case was..um..not easily explained.  To me, it still seems naive to believe that this meeting was happenstance. Whatever the situation, it was determined to require damage control. Which could be considered a favorable development.

      Many stories abound:  William Donovan, the anti-gay Catholic friend of Cardinal Dolan was at the bottom of the pile; the arch-conservative Papal Nuncio, who is about to retire, pulled a fast one on the Pope, an innocence exits by the faithful (akin to the Russian peasants hope of "if only he Czar knew"}, to.. well,a demonstration that.one of my best friends is gay.

    Of course, it is difficult to explain how Clerk Davis and husband got a coveted invitation to meet the Pope inside the Vatican's Washington Embassy in the first place.  That is a big deal. It is not flattering to the Pope to claim that he was duped.

     Or, just had to rely on the Nuncio. Especially, in light of the subsequent response on the rights of conscientious objectors by the Pope on his way home-- to a question whose context was a government official who would not give a license to a same sex couple. Perhaps, just a coincidence. But, come on.

    It seems to me that the Pope did not want to be overt on his trip to the US. He is opposed to same sex marriage, and he rejected the appointment of the French Ambassador to the Vatican because he was an unmarried gay--which he may have felt the Curia would be uncomfortable at this time, more so than for his orientation.  

    So, no, I do not see equivalency.  A religious fanatic who denies rights and imposes her religious views on others in her office is a horse of a different color, so to say. Although, in fairness, the Pope had just addressed Congress, so he had warmed to those who do not do their job at taxpayer's expense.  



    Though in defense of Congress... (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:02:51 PM EST
    They are not so bold as to say "I'm not gonna do my job but I demand a paycheck!", they have the decency to make it look good.

    Unless you're McCarthy and tell the truth by mistake.


    True, (none / 0) (#19)
    by KeysDan on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 06:08:17 PM EST
    Except when they shut down the government.

    You Think... (none / 0) (#161)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 11:12:25 AM EST
    ...they make it look good ?

    Congress has 14.8% job approval rating, that is roughly 1 in 6 people who approve of the job Congress is doing.

    That is just plain sad.


    Friend to friend... (none / 0) (#5)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 05:31:35 PM EST
    let it go my man, let it go.  

    The church is never gonna be right when it comes to equal rights, so take the recent good stuff on climate change and wealth disparity and to hell with all their other bullsh#t.

    I mean it's not like the pope was ever gonna get you or I to sit in a pew right? The Pope could make love to a man while smoking a joint during mass, we still ain't gonna buy in. Who cares what he does, he's just a man, a knucklehead amongst a billion knuckleheads.


    No (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 05:38:30 PM EST
    Sorry.  This right here is not about the Pope.

    My last comment for a while.


    Fair enough... (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 05:51:24 PM EST
    To answer your question, of course there is no equivalency...one is a personal friend assumed cool, the other is frontrunner for Hustler's Assh#le of the Month 2 months running.

    Just hate to think of you steaming is all...TL banter is not worth getting upset over. And the media, sh#t bro they don't know Snowden from Scissorhands. It's like getting mad at Ron Popeil because the spray-on hair didn't work as advertised.


    It bothers me less than it might appear (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 05:54:02 PM EST
    But I appreciate the thought

    This is like needlepoint fir me.

    That doesn't mean I'm letting it slide.


    The problem (none / 0) (#61)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 07:48:32 AM EST
    Kdog is that for many there is equivalency.  I have had the TV on for 15 minutes and I have already heard it.

    This is a talking point put out by media specialists.  The most insidious kind of lie.   The kind that creeps into your basic decision making without you even noticing.

    No.  I will not let it go.  


    The (none / 0) (#3)
    by FlJoe on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 05:06:21 PM EST
    Incredible Shrinking Bush!

    Rubio may (none / 0) (#45)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 08:33:45 PM EST
    be the last one standing.   He is ascending in the polls....

    Of course he is! (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 09:19:12 PM EST
    After all, his parents were so prescient that they became political refugees from Castro's Cuba nearly for years prior to the fact, while Gen. Fulgencio Batista was still in power in Havana.

    Oh, good (none / 0) (#59)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 06:26:33 AM EST
    Lord Rubio. He has a Yom Kippur fundraiser with a Nazi artifact collector. link.

    It sounds like he's living up to his reputation of not being too bright. Perhaps with Jeb collapsing he'll be picking up the stupid slack.


    Harlan Crow, (5.00 / 3) (#76)
    by KeysDan on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 12:57:22 PM EST
    the art collector of curious curios, is a little Trumpish in background. Both Donald and Harlan are sons of real estate developers, and both been contributors to conservative causes and people. But, it seems, Harlan is more inclined to remain in the background.  Although, Harlan Crow did come more to light with his start-up gift of $500,000 to Ginny Thomas, wife of Justice Clarence Thomas, for her Liberty Central--a 501-C (4) nonprofit dedicated to opposing the tyranny of President Obama, including the dreaded Obamacare.  The issue of ethics arose, when the source of the funds was not initially disclosed. And, the ethical worries encompassing the Justice's decisions.  But, nothing came of it. Thomas is, of course, above board, if you do not count his confirmation hearings.  

    Rubio was also mentioned in Paul Krugman's recent article as to whom  he believes will be the nominee.  Reasons were not given, but it is in keeping with those contentions that Trump will not make it, Fiorina and Carson will follow, and Republicans will begin raking through the single digit debris.


    C&L (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 01:50:46 PM EST
    President Rubios Court Picks

    The state of Alabama, which requires a photo ID to vote, announced this week that it would stop issuing driver's licenses in counties where 75 percent of registered voters are black.

    Due to budget cuts, Alabama Law Enforcement Agency said that 31 satellite DMV offices would no longer have access to driver's licenses examiners, meaning that residents will need to travel to other counties to apply for licenses. The move comes just one year after the state's voter photo ID law went into effect....

    "Every single county in which blacks make up more than 75 percent of registered voters will see their driver license office closed. Every one," [Birmingham News columnist John] Archibald explained. "But maybe it's not racial at all, right? ..."

    A civil rights lawsuit isn't a probability. It's a certainty.

    It's only a matter of time before some lawyer takes the state ... back to the courthouse.

    I think that's part of the plan. Republicans would like to do this in as many states of the union as possible, and a court case could help them achieve that goal.

    The next president of the United States will probably have multiple vacancies on the Supreme Court during his or her term -- of the nine justices, four are 77 years old or older. So -- attention Sanders fans who wouldn't dream of voting Clinton in the general election, or vice versa -- if we have a Republican president and a Republican Senate, the High Court is going to shift very, very far to the right.

    Well (none / 0) (#77)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 01:30:00 PM EST
    in a way I can see Rubio end up being the nominee in the sense that he's acceptable to the money bags in the GOP. He comes from a swing state though I'm not sure exactly how well he actually would do in Florida in a general election due to the fact that he's only ran once and it was an off year. I also wonder how his immigration flip flops play out with the GOP base.

    Oregon Shooter Blurb (none / 0) (#46)
    by ragebot on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 08:38:28 PM EST
    I know it is Breitbart but it does seem to be legit about some claims.

    Did not know he was born in the UK and the conservative or Republican link seems to be because he supported the Irish Republican Army, not the Republican party in America.

    "Seems to be," based upon what exactly? (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 09:14:42 PM EST
    Freewheeling speculation about a dead man's thoughts, which further tries to tangentially link this gun-loving crackpot to both the late Sen. Ted Kennedy AND Rep. Peter King? What's their point here?

    Oh, that's right, there is none! It's Breitbart, that magical Never-Neverland on the faraway and misty shores of antideluvian lunacy, a comforting place of welcome respite for besieged wingbats one and all, where it doesn't have to make any sense at all to ordinary folks who live in the real world, to still be very real to those fools who deliberately choose to inhabit their very own parallel universe.

    It's definitely time for margaritas, after reading that waste of bandwidth.


    Donald (none / 0) (#67)
    by ragebot on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 10:01:38 AM EST
    I did say the link was to a kinda funky site which lots of folks would think is a better description than your words:

    "the faraway and misty shores of antideluvian lunacy, a comforting place of welcome respite for besieged wingbats one and all, where it doesn't have to make any sense at all to ordinary folks who live in the real world, to still be very real to those fools who deliberately choose to inhabit their very own parallel universe."

    But the main point of my post was this guy was really strange.  He seemed to have some weird attraction to the Irish Republican Army (a somewhat defunct organization I had relegated to the past) and folks were confused in thinking this meant  he was supporting the Republican party.  It was even more confusing because the IRA had a strong connection to the church and he seemed clearly anti religion and specifically anti Christian.

    As for the Ted Kennedy connection it was because Kennedy to some extent supported the IRA, although probably not as strongly as the Oregon shooter did.  One of the things liberals attribute to conservatives is strong religious beliefs and clearly this guy was anti religion yet seemed to like the IRA.

    Bottom line for me is that when someone reaches their position through extra logical means using logic to understand that position is a fool's errand.


    And the Tennessee Lt. Governor's response: (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Mr Natural on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 10:49:32 AM EST
    Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey warns of "aggressive secularism" & urges his fellow Christians to get a "handgun carry permit"

    Conservatives have scrambled to connect nearly every recent event to a larger trend of Christian persecution. Now obviously, terror groups like ISIS have singled out Christians for persecution in places like Iraq and Libya but somehow America's religious right has inserted themselves into the mix to paint themselves as victims of a broader attack against the faith. Call it the Kim Davis complex.

    I am moved to wonder (1.50 / 4) (#81)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 02:03:08 PM EST
    if the victims had been black, or muslims, or all female....Would the media have been screaming??

    Yet when the killer asks if the victims are Christian and kills those who say they are you nothing from the media, or Obama.

    I guess they didn't look like his son.


    Fwiw (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 02:22:44 PM EST
    Perhaps you should expand your "media".

    I've heard it in every report I've seen about this.


    If you hear nothing from the media (none / 0) (#87)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 02:16:21 PM EST
    How did you know?

    Armed vet on UCC campus (none / 0) (#78)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 01:39:53 PM EST
    Explains Why He Didn't Engage Shooter
    And in the process completely destroys "Gun Free Zone" and "Good Guy With Gun" argument

    "Luckily we made the choice not to get involved," he explained. "We were quite a distance away from the building where this was happening. And we could have opened ourselves up to be potential targets ourselves, and not knowing where SWAT was, their response time, they wouldn't know who we were. And if we had our guns ready to shoot, they could think that we were bad guys."

    Good point.  Arm away I say.


    First of all if he is telling the truth (2.00 / 2) (#80)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 01:59:51 PM EST
    and we have no way of knowing that, then he wasn't a "Good Guy With a Gun."  He was a guy with a gun who decided he didn't want to risk his own life because SWAT was on its way.

    This reminds me of the deputy at Columbine who wanted to go in but was told to wait.

    In both cases people died who probably could have been saved.

    Secondly, the school has publicly declared it to be gun free. The killer had no way of knowing that someone would be there with a gun. That is especially true since the lone security officer was known to carry only mace as a weapon.


    You seem (5.00 / 2) (#91)
    by FlJoe on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 02:47:58 PM EST
    to be inferring this guy is a coward. Running into a situation like this with guns a blazing with little or no training and probably zero situational awareness is probably the worst thing he could have done.

    All the "good guy with a gun" saving the day scenarios always assume that the good guy has a proper level of training, alertness and situational awareness to take out the bad guy, all while identifying himself to law enforcement and other  armed "good guys" who throw themselves into the fray.

    Real life does not work that way.


    According to this writer, (none / 0) (#92)
    by Mr Natural on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 03:00:40 PM EST
    the proverbial "Good guy with [an arsenal]" hasn't stopped a mass shooter in thirty years.

    2. "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."

    If you prefer pithy sayings to hard evidence, I can see why this would be convincing. But if you look at the real world, you'll find that far from being our only hope, good guys with guns are barely any help at all. No mass shootings in the past 30 years have been stopped by an armed civilian; in 1982, an armed civilian successfully killed a shooter, but it was only after he committed his crime.

    No only were good guys with guns useless, (none / 0) (#93)
    by Mr Natural on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 03:06:06 PM EST
    So, it seems, were the cops.  According to this story, the shooter shot himself.

    Nope, I didn't say that. (none / 0) (#96)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 03:29:48 PM EST
    And don't read what you want into what I said.

    But if he didn't want to get involved, why was he carrying? Now I don't know the answer to that and neither do you. But it is a valid question.

    And if he was carrying and had a license he had received training.

    And law enforcement wasn't there. He was assuming they would be. And if he was carrying then one of the reasons is that the police won't be there.

    Facts are that "good guy with a gun" situations happen regularly with good results. You are anti-gun  so you grasp at any straw to prop up your biased position.

    In this case an individual didn't respond. Only he knows why.


    Are you saying that a valid reason for (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by Anne on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 03:44:24 PM EST
    carrying a concealed weapon is to be able to act as some sort of quasi-police officer?

    And here I thought it was a self-defense kind of thing.

    I mean, it's bad enough we never know anymore who's going to go off the deep end and just start shooting at people, but now you want us to have to wonder who with concealed weapons will feel compelled to pretend they are the vigilante version of law enforcement and respond in kind.

    The person in question is no coward, jim, he's just smarter than you are.  Only you would be disappointed and feel the need to demean someone whose brain isn't bypassed by his trigger finger.

    Maybe you're just jealous that someone actually has a brain and knows how to use it.


    Love this (5.00 / 2) (#103)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 03:56:06 PM EST
    Only he knows why.

    Actually no.  Anyone who can read knows why.  He quite articulately explained why.
    And he was a vet.  So he knew how to use it.


    Knowing how to use it has nothing to do (none / 0) (#111)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 06:19:30 PM EST
    with deciding to using it.

    Nope, anne I didn't say that. In fact if you ever (none / 0) (#116)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 06:50:35 PM EST
    attend a class to get your CC license one of the things that should be, and probably will be, emphasized is that the license is for your defense and that if you ever shoot someone your life will be  changed forever.

    And I didn't say he was a coward. He says he was there, he had a weapon and knew where things were happening. He chose to wait because the police were on the way and things might be confused.

    The question that will always be unanswered, as it was at Columbine, how many would have been saved if he had just engaged the shooter?

    You know anne, I don't expect you to understand this:

    Then the LORD said to Cain, "Where is your brother Abel?" "I don't know," he replied. "Am I my brother's keeper?"

    But we know what the Lord thought.


    But we know what the Lord thought.. (5.00 / 1) (#167)
    by jondee on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 12:22:34 PM EST
    Not only do you guys always seem to know "what the Lord thought", you talk as though you had his unlisted phone number..

    I just hope the Lord never tells you to load up all your guns and go out and smite the infidels.



    Please list all "good guy with a gun" (4.00 / 3) (#104)
    by MO Blue on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 04:44:12 PM EST
    situations, complete with links, that stopped a mass shooting over the last 30 years. It shouldn't be real difficult for you to back up your claim with real data if these situations happen on a regular basis.

    You grasp at straws trying to muddy the water (none / 0) (#110)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 06:16:52 PM EST
    Facts are that "good guy with a gun" situations happen regularly with good results. You are anti-gun  so you grasp at any straw to prop up your biased position.

    In this case an individual didn't respond. Only he knows why.

    I didn't limit myself to any particular situation but let's look at a few:

    Is 3 + 3 enough?

    It was January 16, 2002 when Peter Odighizuwa came to campus. He had been suspended due to failing grades. Odighizuwa was angry and waving a gun calling on students to "come get me". The students, seeing the gun, ran. A shooting spree started almost immediately. In seconds Odighizuwa had killed the school dean, a professor and one student. Three other students were shot as well, one in the chest, one in the stomach and one in the throat.


    Many students heard the shots. Two who did were Mikael Gross and Tracy Bridges. Mikael was outside the school having just returned to campus from lunch when he heard the shots. Tracy was inside attending class. Both immediately ran to their cars. Each had a handgun locked in the vehicle.

    Bridges pulled a .357 Magnum pistol and he later said he was prepared to shoot to kill if necessary. He and Gross both approached Odighizuwa at the same time from different directions. Both were pointing their weapons at him. Bridges yelled for Odighizuwa to drop his weapon. When the shooter realized they had the drop on him he threw his weapon down

    How many would have been shot except for this grumpy old man?

    The 71-year-old Florida man who fired his gun at two men trying to rob a crowded Internet café will not face criminal charges, an assistant state attorney general told FoxNews.com

    And at least this man is honest.

    I don t believe in guns, said Dorsey. I don t own a gun. I m totally at the mercy of my saviors. They obviously sent two angels to help me. These people protected me when I couldn t protect myself.

    Sometimes bad things happen to bad people.

    A gun-toting bystander saw the chaos unfolding and drew his weapon, shooting the thief in the shoulder.

    "The guy that got shot, he was falling out of the car and he was holding his chest. And he started shivering and shaking, and then he kind of flopped on the ground," witness Chris Roberts said.

    Then we had the mall where a CC good guy stopped the killing and down in Alamaba, or maybe GA, school teacher stopped a killing...I could go on.

    But you get the idea. Or at least most people would.


    Shooting at the Appalachian School of Law (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by MO Blue on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 08:14:31 PM EST
    GRUNDY, Va., Jan. 16-- A distressed student facing suspension stormed through the campus of the Appalachian School of Law today with a handgun, killing the dean, a professor and a student and wounding three others before he was tackled by fellow students, the state police reported.
    Obdighizuwa was subdued by three law students who were experienced police officers, the authorities said.

    ''We're trained to run into the situation instead away from it,'' said one of the three, Mikael Gross, 34, of Charlotte, N.C., who ran to his car for his bulletproof vest and service pistol before tackling the suspect.

    The experienced police officers were well trained and did an excellent job subduing the shooter who was armed with a handgun.


    That story is quite different from the way Jim (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by Mr Natural on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 10:02:43 PM EST
    represented it.  It wasn't a "good guy" with a gun.  It was a trained, experienced police officer.

    And he wasn't carrying.


    Surprising, I know (5.00 / 2) (#125)
    by MO Blue on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 10:10:49 PM EST
    That Jim would leave out those facts. :-)

    The subject under discussion was (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by MO Blue on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 08:53:00 PM EST
    mass shootings before you attempted to muddy the waters by throwing in sitituations that had nothing to do with mass shootings.  The only shots fired in the attempted FL robbery were by 71 year old man and not by the only robber who was armed. The teenager involved in the car jacking was unarmed. It is really hard to have any kind of shooting, let alone a mass shooting, when the person does not have a gun.

    In the only situation you mentioned that met the criteria for a mass shooting, the shooter killed 3 people, wounded 3 others before he was  tackled by 3 experienced and well trained police officers.


    No the situation you folks's claim is (none / 0) (#127)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 10:30:00 PM EST
    that there has been no "good guy with a gun" actions.

    I have you four. One with 3 dead and 3 wounded, one where an old dude kept a robber from possibly killing employees and customers and one where a man was saved by some men with guns and one where a car jacking was stopped.

    All by good guys with guns.

    You can whine that the 3 + 3 was stopped police going to school but that changes nothing.

    Instead of looking at the vast amount of evidence that conceal carry deters crime you want to continue to act like the police can.

    They can't. They aren't there. But they are, as I noted in another thread, more than willing to write reports and make learned observations.

    And I love it when you write:

    The only shots fired in the attempted FL robbery were by 71 year old man and not by the only robber who was armed.

    I guess the old dude should have waited for the police... That worked so well in Columbine and in Oregon.


    Do you have even the remotest idea (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by Anne on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 11:05:20 PM EST
    how many mass shootings there have been, just this year?

    Another project, Mass Shooting Tracker, has a broad definition of mass shootings. While the FBI measures a "mass shooting" as an incident when people are killed, the tracker classifies a mass shooting as an event when four or more people are shot. Using that criteria, the tracker reports that 294 known mass shootings have occurred this year.


    The school shooting is the 142nd since 20 children and six educators died in the December 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, according to Everytown.


    Here are the tracking numbers for 2015.

    We are a nation awash in guns.  Shootings and the deaths and injuries that result are a public health crisis that is not going to be solved by arming more people in more places.

    Now, I want you to put your best reading comprehension skills to work here, read the following words one word at a time, and read it as many times as you have to to understand what I am about to say.

    I am not - repeat, NOT - advocating for confiscating guns.  What I am advocating for is the same kind of sensibility that puts people to work finding cures for cancer and heart disease, the same sensibility that puts people to work making cars safer.  The same sensibility that puts people to work finding ways to build better, build stronger, build safer.  That's what we do when we encounter things that kill and injure people.

    Your examples of a couple of times when someone with a gun actually managed not to make a bad situation worse is akin to saying that if we all had an eyedropper we could drain the world's oceans.

    Please stop inflicting your apparently pathological idiocy on us; enough is enough.


    anne writes (none / 0) (#134)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 08:41:20 AM EST
    I am not - repeat, NOT - advocating for confiscating guns

    Yes you are.

    If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck....it's a duck.

    And Newsweek appears to be counting 2 as "mass." That's misleading but I don't mind you exposing the dishonesty of your source.

    And I barely brushed the surface. There are many many more.

    Fact: Gun homicides were 10% higher in states with restrictive CCW laws, according to a study spanning 1980-2009 1

    Fact: Crime rates involving gun owners with carry licenses have consistently been about 0.02% of all carry permit holders since Florida's right-to-carry law started in 1988. 2

    Fact: After passing their concealed carry law, Florida's homicide rate fell from 36% above the national average to 4% below, 3.

    Fact: In Texas, murder rates fell 50% faster than the national average in the year after their concealed carry law passed.  Rape rates fell 93% faster in the first year after enactment, and 500% faster in the second. 4 Assaults fell 250% faster in the second year. 5

    Fact:  More to the point, crime is significantly higher in states without right-to-carry laws.

    Fact: States that disallow concealed carry have violent crime rates 11% higher than national averages.


    Here's one from Chicago.

    I mention Chicago because the Prez didn't. Tell you what. If you want to get gun deaths under control then get Chicago, Detroit, Memphis and the other major crime centers aka large cities under control.


    Then there is always (none / 0) (#131)
    by FlJoe on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 07:33:54 AM EST
    police say that an armed man's attempt to stop a carjacking went terribly wrong on Saturday night when he shot the vehicle's owner in the head, then fled the scene.

    The gun fetish crowd is doing nothing less then advocating anarchy, where random untrained gun carriers are seeded throughout the schools, churches, malls and highways, all ready at moments notice to switch into GGWG mode and thwart the evil doer, just like in the comic books and movies.



    The link you provide doesn't say a thing (none / 0) (#132)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 07:58:48 AM EST
    about the shooter having a concealed carry license.

    You are assuming.

    I trust you know how to spell assume.


    Oh (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by FlJoe on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 08:12:21 AM EST
    I see, plunking down 50 bucks and sitting through several hours of classroom training and filling out a few forms turns your average gun nut into Robo-Cop.

    I see that you have never taken a class (none / 0) (#135)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 08:43:28 AM EST
    If you had you know what was taught.

    That you don't proves what you are.


    Where (none / 0) (#136)
    by FlJoe on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 09:12:48 AM EST
    in this
    Texas Concealed Handgun License Course - $69
    The Concealed Handgun Licensing Course is a minimum 4 hour course that includes training in basic firearms, basic marksmanship, safe storage of firearms, handgun proficiency (qualification), legal issues, law enforcement contacts, non-violent dispute resolution, use of force and written test
    is there any tactical training?

    There are reasons that LEO spend hours and hours in tactical training, specifically for active shooter situations. Your suggestion that four hours of classroom training could somehow turn an an average citizen into an effective crime fighter is both ignorant and rather insulting to the professionalism of law enforcement.


    Joe, don't waste your time... (5.00 / 2) (#137)
    by Anne on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 09:26:55 AM EST
    no matter what you post, what facts you present, what links you provide, jim will reject all of it.  He will always accuse you of making things up, which, not so strangely enough, is usually just a projection on to you of what he, himself, is doing.

    You see, he just knows stuff.  He knows that no matter what you say, you're really saying whatever it is he wants to argue about.  He knows no one here - almost no one here - shares his point of view, and he revels in stirring things up.

    I once again made the mistake of engaging him, an exercise in futility: a$$holes are incapable of rational discussion, but they do love pushing people's buttons and relentlessly trolling.

    Pretty sure he lives under a bridge somewhere, though now that the weather is turning, he may now be living under someone's stairs.


    I (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by FlJoe on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 09:46:27 AM EST
    am fully aware of the futility of engaging in Jim, just like to take a few shots for "training' purposes. Taking some shots at an easy target like Jim helps to keep my rhetorical aim sharp.

    It is I possble to not respond sometimes (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 09:56:08 AM EST
    But it's the second response that gets you.

    It's at that point you have crossed the event horizon and all hope is to be abandoned


    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by FlJoe on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 09:59:32 AM EST
    one must always be careful when dealing with black holes of ignorance.

    heh again (none / 0) (#143)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 11:49:11 AM EST
    You're just mad because I asked a simple question.

    Are we our brother's keeper?

    And you won't answer that because the answer is yes.

    And since it is yes then we should have the means to protect ourselves and others.

    And you cannot debate without insulting. FlJoe, when his errors are pointed out, declares victory.

    Both of you claim I have written things I have not and when I point that out you claim that I have without any proof. That is dishonest.

    anne, I provide links.


    heh (none / 0) (#142)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 11:39:37 AM EST
    The purpose of concealed carry is self defense. Tactical training is for offense.

    The only time a non police person should be involved if his/her person is threatened or if they are in a situation in which they know that others, including themselves, are threatened or will be. As this may be a matter of judgement caution is advised.

    BTW - I did not suggest what you claim. FYI NC is 8 hours. I could look up others but it would merely be a waste of time.

    You continue to prove this:

    "Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accept the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay-and claims a halo for his dishonesty." - Robert Heinlein

    I Got Licensed to Carry Concealed in 32 states (none / 0) (#155)
    by Mr Natural on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 09:04:30 AM EST
    by Barely Trying".

    According to the state of Utah, I earned the right to carry a concealed handgun on a Saturday morning in a suburban shopping center outside Baltimore. Toward the back, next to a pawnshop and White Trash Matt's tattoo parlor, is the global headquarters of Dukes Defense World, a mom-and-pop firearms instruction shop certified by the Utah Bureau of Criminal Identification to teach nonresidents firearm safety as a prerequisite for obtaining a concealed-carry permit.

    My achievement doesn't make sense for a number of reasons. One, I don't live in Utah. I'm a resident of Washington, DC, a city that holds concealed handguns in roughly the same esteem as working escalators. I've never shot a gun. And in distinctly un-Utahn fashion, I'm nursing a hangover. Fortunately, none of that matters here. After four hours at Dukes Defense, I have a completed application and a snazzy graduation certificate for my wall. Sixty days after my application is processed, I'll be able to carry a concealed weapon in no fewer than 32 states. It's great for road trips.

    Very true Mr. Natural, but (none / 0) (#157)
    by fishcamp on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 10:55:44 AM EST
    you may have to cross a state where the reciprocal agreement doesn't work.  Those states love to find and prosecute people that have not put their weapons safely away to meet their rules.  My cc permit only works in eleven states, but that may have changed.  Somehow they, whomever they are, need to align both the concealed gun permits and the marijuana laws to fit the needs of the people.  Doesn't seem like too much to ask, since both have been problems for so long.

    Should be concealed weapons. (none / 0) (#159)
    by fishcamp on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 10:58:35 AM EST
    Yes, fishcamp, they do indeed (none / 0) (#173)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 01:45:00 PM EST
    Shifty doctrine.. (none / 0) (#168)
    by jondee on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 12:28:41 PM EST
    I still find it fascinating how many far-right armchair warriors live by a shifty doctrine of avoiding the front lines at all costs..

    Almost as if they were closet pacifists; the same way so many conservatives turn out to be in the closet about other things.


    Do they now, jondee?? (none / 0) (#174)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 01:48:52 PM EST
    Are you saying that some people are hypocrites??


    Your power of observation is overwhelming.

    What's next? Some Baptist drink alcohol? Politicians lie?


    Yeah, Jus tlike That... (5.00 / 3) (#176)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 02:30:22 PM EST
    ...sending people to their deaths is exactly like having a sip of booze on the hypocrisy scale.

    I think the point is if maybe some of hawks actually fought in a war they might be not be so quick to pull the trigger for other people to fight in a war.


    They-you do indeed, Jim (5.00 / 2) (#187)
    by jondee on Tue Oct 06, 2015 at 01:25:31 PM EST
    More specifically, what I'm saying is that there's an undeniable plethora of non-combatant right-wing chickenhawaks who are experts on other people's bravery.

    And it takes something less than overwhelming powers of observation to have noticed that.

    But then, the folks you consort with are so fear-ridden to they can't even go into Jesus's own sanctuary without arming themselves first -- that's how bold they are..



    Uh, no, ragebot, it isn't. (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 03:20:01 AM EST
    ragebot: "I did say the link was to a kinda funky site which lots of folks would think is a better description than your words."

    "Kinda funky" is a term that one can use when discussing the '70s music of The Ohio Players. It doesn't even come anywhere near as close to describing the crackpotted netherworlds of Breitart.com, as does "lunacy," "wingbats," "fools," "parallel universe," and "doesn't have to make any sense at all."

    But hey, thanks for playing.


    Maybe you'd like the LA Times link (none / 0) (#145)
    by ragebot on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 06:24:42 PM EST
    Sad to say you would not like the comments.

    The first group of comments point out that the MSM has been hiding the fact that the guy they claimed was a white-supremacist was mixed race and his mother was black.  Not to mention another kinda funky link describes how CNN seems to have digitally altered the shooters photograph to make him seem white.

    The next group of comments point out how the LA Times and other MSM sources seem to have morphed the shooters strange admiration of the Irish Republican Army into a claim that he was conservative who admired the Republican party in America.

    What disturbs me most about your post is you seem to have a bad habit of using derogatory terms to describe folks you disagree with.

    This shooter was clearly disturbed (one would probably have to be do attack and kill people at the scale he did).  But he just as clearly did not fit the MSM meme of an angry white guy.  In fact he was a mixed race guy born in the UK who's mother was from UK and married a US citizen and separated after 11 months according to the LA Times.

    I will be interested in finding out what is in his manifesto.  Bet the liberals won't like it.


    And with that one revalatory statement, ... (5.00 / 1) (#147)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 07:18:43 PM EST
    ragebot: "I will be interested in finding out what is in his manifesto.  Bet the liberals won't like it."

    ... you've neatly summed up your entire rationale for having posted the Breitbart article in the first place. It's not at all about what happened in Roseburg, OR. Rather, you're far more interested in finding some way to exploit that senseless tragedy politically, as though blaming liberals for it will somehow give meaning to your otherwise dreary and superficial existence.

    Have a nice evening, wingbat.


    Wish I had a nickle (none / 0) (#171)
    by ragebot on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 01:08:51 PM EST
    for every time Donald called me a wingbat.

    Is wingbat even a word, it comes up as a spelling error in my auto correct.

    Not to mention back in the day I was taught when someone has no real argument they resort to name calling.


    When (5.00 / 1) (#172)
    by FlJoe on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 01:15:50 PM EST
    arguments based on logic and facts fail to make a dent in ignorance, sometimes name calling becomes an attractive tactic.

    One man's logic and facts (none / 0) (#175)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 01:51:15 PM EST
    is often seen as ignorance by others.

    Individuals (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by FlJoe on Tue Oct 06, 2015 at 07:40:32 AM EST
    having their "own" set of facts and logic is practically the definition of ignorance.

    So your excuse for name calling is (none / 0) (#183)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Oct 06, 2015 at 10:08:55 AM EST
    that other person rejects your very own facts and logic.

    Okoe dokie. Works for me.


    Jim has own system of mathematics (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by jondee on Tue Oct 06, 2015 at 12:38:31 PM EST
    biology, astronomy and grammar as well.

    Because he refuses to rely on the consensus opinion of all 'a them so-called experts.


    You said it... "So called experts..." (none / 0) (#191)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:01:18 AM EST
    Like those doctors who bled Ga. Washington to death while treating his pneumonia??????

    Or those who told Galileo that consensus said he was wrong????

    Like those that told Pasteur he was wrong?

    Or this doctors who would wash their hands and worse filthy aprons while delivering children as the mother died of fever?


    I understand that your mind (none / 0) (#192)
    by jondee on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 12:44:23 PM EST
    is imprisoned somewhere between the antebellum South and the late Reconstruction period, but I'm going to stick with the cutting edge of scientific research and technology in the early 21st century.

    If that's alright with you.


    You Can Always Tell... (5.00 / 1) (#194)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:51:12 PM EST
    ...how weak Jim knows his argument is by how far back in time he goes.  For the Middle East, it's around 60 years, for GW, it's always 1580 and that is only because he can't go back any further without running into Jesus.

    Well, at his blog (5.00 / 1) (#195)
    by jondee on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 02:03:03 PM EST
    where he feels free to be himself, he basically comes right out and says scientists in general can't be trusted because they "believe things", whatever the hell that means -- coming from the party of the Rapture and the folks who said Saddam attacked us on 9/11.  

    et al (none / 0) (#198)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:13:20 PM EST
    The next thing you guys will be doing is telling me that 2 + 2 = 4 is too old fashioned to be true.



    If I was you (none / 0) (#199)
    by jondee on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 07:55:52 AM EST
    I wouldn't trust them mathematical hoaxers with their secularist political agenda..

    Yeah (none / 0) (#200)
    by FlJoe on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 08:16:43 AM EST
    2+2=4 is only a consensus opinion, and we all know consensus does not equal science. besides I think those darn Arabs had a lot to do with this whole mathematics sham, probably a terrorist plot.

    'sides, all 'a that hifalutin (none / 0) (#193)
    by jondee on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 01:30:20 PM EST
    spectrographic analysis and satellites that George Washington's doctor didn't have just leads to more secularist knowledge and to children disrespecting authority.

    I heard Newt Gingrich talk about that.


    I will (none / 0) (#184)
    by FlJoe on Tue Oct 06, 2015 at 10:17:12 AM EST
    let Paul Simon answer
    All lies and jests
    Still a man hears what he wants to hear
    And disregards the rest

    In one of his on-line profiles, (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by MO Blue on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 10:45:50 PM EST
    He self-identifies as a conservative Republican. Screen shots are of the profile are available on-line if you want to take the time to find it.

    I figured that out a while ago. (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 12:17:38 AM EST
    While I really don't have a problem with conservative, I draw the line at bat-guano crazy. And the folks at Breitbart.com are not only bat-guano crazy, but also morally and ethically obtuse as well.

    And frankly, the idea that someone would peruse that gunman's manifesto with the notion that its contents might contain stuff with which to attack liberals is patently offensive.

    This is what's wrong with our country's politics in general, and GOP politics of late in particular. There are too many people who prefer to pander only to their own side's worst fears and instincts as a means to gain short-term partisan advantage, rather than make any sincere efforts to seek out common ground for the collective good of the whole.



    I always discount dating profile crapola (none / 0) (#170)
    by ragebot on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 01:05:57 PM EST
    especially if it is on the internet.  Donald is all to happy to bash links to sites he considers biased, wonder how he feels about accepting stuff on dating sites as gospel.

    You discount information people (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by MO Blue on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 03:05:35 PM EST
    self disclose about themselves and rely on blog COMMENTS, from anonymous sources, for your so called facts? Hmmm....

    Uh-oh, George McGovern (none / 0) (#48)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 08:47:10 PM EST
    is against gun safety legislation.

    Hillary is in favor.

    The late Senator? (none / 0) (#149)
    by Towanda on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 09:52:08 PM EST
    Now, that would be news.

    News of the assured Trump victory! . . . (none / 0) (#56)
    by zaitztheunconvicted on Fri Oct 02, 2015 at 11:35:05 PM EST
    If you have not seen it (none / 0) (#63)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 08:01:37 AM EST
    You really should watch this video.  It's hilarious.  A bunch of hicks and yahoos, all TV evangelists, most of the Prosperity Gospel (Jesus wants you to be rich) laying hands on Trump.
    Yes, laying hands on him.
    Keep in mind Trump is a big time germaphobe.  He does not like to be touched.  He must have loved having this nuts hands on his face.

    Hicks and yahoos vote (none / 0) (#82)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 02:04:06 PM EST

    We Know You Vote (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 11:15:12 AM EST
    Welcome to the New World Order (none / 0) (#64)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 09:18:47 AM EST
    This is a 4Chan thread from before the Oregon shooting when the perp declares his intention as is egged on.  It reall doesn't get much creepier than this-

    Anonymous Wed 30 Sep 2015 18:28:47 No.22785351 Report
    >>22785073 (OP)
    Thanks fam
    Anonymous Wed 30 Sep 2015 18:33:10 No.22785448 Report
    Quoted By: >>22785535 >>22787588,229 >>22787588,237
    I suggest you enter a classroom and tell people that you will take them as hostages. Make everyone get in one corner and then open fire.

    Make sure that there is no way that someone can disarm you as it it possible. I suggest you carry a knife on your belt as last resort if someone is holding your gun.
    Anonymous Wed 30 Sep 2015 18:36:33 No.22785535 Report
    Quoted By: >>22785606 >>22785618
    Thanks. Keep me in your prayers
    Anonymous Wed 30 Sep 2015 18:39:20 No.22785597 Report
    You might want to target a girls school which is safer because there are no beta males throwing themselves for their rescue.

    Do not use a shotgun. I would suggest a powerful assault rifle and a pistol or 2x pistols. Possibly the type of pistols who have 15+ ammo

    Compared to that creepiness, (none / 0) (#70)
    by Mr Natural on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 10:44:57 AM EST
    movies like Saw, which is the sickest five minutes of film I've ever watched - look like Disney.

    There are worse films, but they merit the 4, 3, 2, and 1 minutes of what I can stand rating.

    My current limit is 0 minutes.  If I want to watch a sicko horrorfest, I've got local politics.


    Honestly (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 10:48:22 AM EST
    Everyone should read that.  Before and after the BBC guy pops up and starts asking for people to go on the record.

    As a creepy aficionado it just about the creepiest thing I've ever seen.


    More about that thread: (none / 0) (#126)
    by Mr Natural on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 10:24:02 PM EST
    Especially on FB (none / 0) (#130)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 07:23:56 AM EST
    My bad.  That's the last time

    I'm seriously getting to old for this.

    Still, honestly, IMO that makes it only marginally less creepy.

    And I was apparently far from the only one punked.  At least


    No, Jake - (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by Mr Natural on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 09:21:12 AM EST
    It's the Internet!

    Illegal immigrants will elect Hillary (none / 0) (#85)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 02:09:19 PM EST
    from Politico of course

    Illegal immigrants--along with other noncitizens without the right to vote--may pick the 2016 presidential winner. Thanks to the unique math undergirding the Electoral College, the mere presence of 11-12 million illegal immigrants and other noncitizens here legally may enable them to swing the election from Republicans to Democrats.

    The distribution of these 435 seats is not static: they are reapportioned every ten years to reflect the population changes found in the census. That reallocation math is based on the relative "whole number of persons in each state," as the formulation in the 14th Amendment has it. When this language was inserted into the U.S. Constitution, the concept of an "illegal immigrant," as the term is defined today, had no meaning. Thus the census counts illegal immigrants and other noncitizens equally with citizens. Since the census is used to determine the number of House seats apportioned to each state, those states with large populations of illegal immigrants and other noncitizens gain extra seats in the House at the expense of states with fewer such "whole number of persons."
    This math gives strongly Democratic states an unfair edge in the Electoral College

    This is the beginning (none / 0) (#86)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 02:11:06 PM EST
    Of the "delegitimization" of Hillary's presidency

    Oh, yes (none / 0) (#89)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 02:35:37 PM EST
    but I am surprised that they are already moving onto this issue. Kinda early I would think.

    Act 1 (none / 0) (#90)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 02:47:51 PM EST
    Scene 1

    Yeah, But The Electorial College Votes... (none / 0) (#164)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 11:40:36 AM EST
    ...are based on actual votes.

    That doesn't make sense unless the areas where the undocumented are located were blue.  

    They are not, so for example, say Texas has 4 million undocumented folks, then they get the electoral college representation to reflect that 4 million more people.  

    So Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona get more electoral power because of undocumented people, but California & New York get the same benefit, depending on the numbers, but I would imagine it's a close to a wash.

    HERE is a map that show the distribution, it's pretty even as far as blue/red state, but I think the D's edge it out.  That argument only make sense if the election is close, within a highly immigrated to state.  It will be a blow out.

    Lastly, since its calculated in the 14th Amendment, even the notion that it could effect the vote is funny because.... it is Constitutional, meaning that it can't be illegitimate.


    I like this part (none / 0) (#166)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 12:20:05 PM EST
    hen this language was inserted into the U.S. Constitution, the concept of an "illegal immigrant," as the term is defined today, had no meaning.

    That's an interesting statement.  Or admission.  Or whatever you want to call it.


    but but but but (none / 0) (#99)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 03:34:51 PM EST
    They can't vote!

    At least that's what we're told.

    If an election can turn on a sentence, this could be the one: "You don't need papers for voting."

    On Thursday night, Francine Busby, the Democratic candidate for the 50th Congressional District, was speaking before a largely Latino crowd in Escondido when she uttered those words. She said yesterday she simply misspoke.



    But (5.00 / 4) (#106)
    by Repack Rider on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 05:44:31 PM EST
    ...you would let anyone with the $ purchase a death-dealing weapon without as much scrutiny as a Black man trying to vote in Alabama.

    Do you think it would be wise to run a background check on a potential gun owner, just to make sure he isn't an undocumented foreign terrorist?

    Should it be easier to kill someone than it is to vote?


    Where have I even hinted that I am against (none / 0) (#119)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 08:04:24 PM EST
    enforcing our gun laws??

    That is a very old comment (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 07:02:06 PM EST
    There is no such things as actual voter fraud.

    There are maybe less than a dozen proven instances over many, many years.

    As a statistical matter, so few instances as to practically zero.

    And the concept makes no sense.  Liberals have a hard enough time getting the people to stand in line once to vote, let alone stand in line multiple times.....

    Just more right wing fact free craziness.  


    She said what she said. (none / 0) (#120)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 08:05:05 PM EST
    That has been (none / 0) (#178)
    by sj on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 04:40:55 PM EST
    debunked so many times. It is, in fact, debunked in the very link you provided. She misspoke and then immediately corrected herself -- in 2006. Isn't it time for your grumpy old man nap?

    Hey, if the GOP wants to use this as a reason (none / 0) (#113)
    by ruffian on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 06:30:14 PM EST
    to get rid of the electoral college, I am all for it. They'll never win another election without all the low population red states that get extra influence in the electoral college. Let's go with a popular vote of all citizens!

    Imo that's not the goal (none / 0) (#115)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 06:41:50 PM EST
    It's just laying the ground work for "Obamaing" Hillary.

    Can't say she is Kenyan.  Can't say she's a Muslim.
    But they can say she was illegitimately elected by illegals and is not a legitimate leader.

    ppj is off to a running start.


    Something to (none / 0) (#105)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 05:31:52 PM EST
    add to the discussion on Religion link

    This particular lady lives in Russellville Arkansas and is a Methodist pastor.

    I guess Howdy can tell us about Russellville.

    There is nothing particularly (none / 0) (#107)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 05:45:24 PM EST
    Special about Russelville.  Except I have friends there.  Or frankly this person.   There are many liberal Christians in this state.  Many.  You could say some of my best friends are.  But actually almost all of my best friends are.  And several family members.

    Interesting story but not news for any resident.   I have many many friends in this state.  I know three other atheists.

    Shrug.   Numbers have not been that different anywhere else as far as I can tell.

    If someone has the idea I am anti Christian they are mistaken and they do not know me.


    Story (none / 0) (#108)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 06:01:06 PM EST
    In the last election there was a rash of defacing Obama yard signs.  Ugly racist stuff.  
    Two surprising things about this.  The number of Obama signs and that the police set up a task force and a neighborhood watch and caught the person doing it.

    A local meth dealer.


    Meth dealer (none / 0) (#112)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 06:27:05 PM EST
    ha! I'm surprised the meth dealer could get it together enough to do that kind of thing. The ones around here at least don't seem to care about anything least of all politics.

    Here it is just easier to say nothing because frankly I don't want a sanctimonious lecture from yet another conservative. I guess her point was that she feels she "can't" state her "opinion" due to where she lives I guess. I wouldn't care though. I would say it anyway. I might get radical and put a Hillary sign in my yard next year just to piss off the neighbors.

    In lowest common denominator politics there is no agree to disagree which is one of the reasons the country is polarized right now.


    She didn't say (none / 0) (#114)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 06:34:51 PM EST
    It was because if where she lives

    I preach in two churches, and I teach history in a respected four year college.  I am not stupid. But I am not allowed to put political signs in my yard or stickers on my car because it will offend my students and my congregants if they know how I truly believe

    That's a bit if a special circumstance.   It's not fair in my opinion but it's not all that surprising for a pastor and a teacher.   I have heard similar rules from the teachers in my family.  There are 3.


    Just seeing this break about the shooter (none / 0) (#109)
    by ragebot on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 06:15:46 PM EST
    A student is claiming the Oregon shooter gave a "package" to one of the students to deliver to authorities.  Also claimed that student was spared.

    From the link:

    "Authorities have not disclosed whether they have such a package, but a law enforcement official said a manifesto of several pages had been recovered"

    Sound like a "manifesto" (none / 0) (#117)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 03, 2015 at 07:00:12 PM EST
    If I hope to god they burn it

    Researchers at Arizona State University and Northeastern Illinois University published findings in the journal PLOS ONE on Thursday that they say is the first study to quantify how mass killings and school shootings inspire similar acts. They applied a mathematical contagion model, typically used to predict earthquake aftershocks or the spread of disease, to data on shootings and killings.

    Towers and her team found that 30 percent of mass killings appeared to have been inspired by a past mass killing. And 22 percent of school shootings appeared to have been inspired by other school shootings. The period of contagion was on average 13 days. That is, on average, the later events took place within 13 days of the earlier events. That unlucky 13 was the figure for both the separate mass killings and school shootings formulas was just a coincidence, Towers says.

    That's from NEWSWEEK


    Not to talk about the weather (none / 0) (#140)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Oct 04, 2015 at 09:58:19 AM EST
    Or anything, but holee krap.

    Turn on the weather channel for a minute

    Chaffetz for Speaker? (none / 0) (#152)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 08:07:49 AM EST
    I've decided I'm rooting for this guy.   Not because I think he would be better (or worse) but because I think he would be less embarrassing.    I'm thinkin I'm not the only one who feels this way.   Some republicans are tired of having stupid for a brand

    WASHINGTON (AP) -- An up-and-coming House committee chairman announced his long-shot candidacy Sunday for speaker of the House, adding a new dose of turmoil for reeling House Republicans.

    GOP Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah presented himself as a new face who can unite the House in the wake of Speaker John Boehner's sudden resignation last month. Boehner's deputy, Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California, remains the favorite, but Chaffetz's candidacy ensures there will be no coronation.

    The House GOP will vote by secret ballot on Thursday, following by a floor vote in the full House later in the month.

    If you had seen him interrogate (5.00 / 2) (#163)
    by Anne on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 11:36:11 AM EST
    Cecile Richards from Planned Parenthood, you might not think he was the better choice.

    And when you watch that disgusting performance, you can pretty much understand why the Secret Service tried to fk him over (which is not meant to be an endorsement of what the Secret Service did - the agents who participated in that dirty little op should all be fired).

    Not sure how smart he is, but I don't think being stupid is high on the list of things Republicans consider disqualifying.


    I saw it (none / 0) (#165)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 12:17:19 PM EST
    You think McCarthy would have done any better.

    I'm just tired if the country's "leaders" being to GD stupid to form a sentence.

    At least he can speak.  I believe I said he would be no better or worse.   Just less embarrassing.


    Btw the secret service thing (none / 0) (#169)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 12:46:19 PM EST
    Anyone think McCarthy was not behind that?  Probably why Chaffetz is running because he had said he supported hm after the McCarthy on FOX thing but before that.  

    To be more clear, Chafftez is a tool.  And a fool.  But he would not just be a "republican" leader.  The speaker is third in line for the presidency and a leader of our country in the eyes if the world.  McCarthy is a idiot who can't carry on a basic conversation.  We don't need any more of that.  And I see not one shrewd of evidence he would be worse, or better.  Just less embarrassing.


    I'm not (none / 0) (#154)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 05, 2015 at 08:59:18 AM EST
    sure Chaffetz is any better. they all look pretty bad to me.