home

Wednesday Open Thread

The movers will be here at 8:30 to start packing me up and I'm still not sure where I'm going. I think I found a place to rent for the rest of the month, but it's not yet signed and done. Cutting it close is an understatement, since I have to move out on Thursday.

Here's a new open thread, all topics welcome. And please stop the insults to other commenters. I don't have time to babysit the threads. Even long time readers may find themselves in timeout if they keep doing it.

< Moving Week Two and Open Thread | Moving Day (Again) and Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Geez, Jeralyn, what a nightmare. (5.00 / 8) (#1)
    by caseyOR on Tue Oct 06, 2015 at 11:27:13 PM EST
    If  I could, I would bring you a nice hot dinner and a good bottle of wine. Or maybe a gin martini, or two.

    Some cheer we can deliver... (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 05:42:58 AM EST
    I was at that concert in 1968 (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by Peter G on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:17:05 AM EST
    the Tribute to Woody Guthrie, in Carnegie Hall (New York), soon after Woody died. This was Bob Dylan's first public performance (with the Band) after his self-imposed recovery/exile in Woodstock after his motorcycle accident. They were just stunningly good in every way. Blew the roof off the old place.

    Parent
    Since this is an Open Thread, (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by MO Blue on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:27:28 AM EST
    would you please give me your opinion on this argument by Barney Franks from a legal or Constitutional perspective:

    Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) on Tuesday insisted that a state-by-state approach was the only way to legalize same sex marriage.

    "There was a fundamental confusion here,' he said on MSNBC. "There has never been a practical law saying that what marriage is. Marriage has been left to the states."
    ...
    "The point is there is no federal law to be passed," he explained. "Look at the situation with race. When there were states that would not allow interracial marriage, even after the Civil Rights Act has passed in '64 and '65, there was no federal law saying interracial marriage had to be allowed. It was done by the Supreme Court. The constitutional framework has always been states decide who gets married."

    "It has always been up to the states," Frank added. "The only federal rule on the subject was the Defense of Marriage Act, which the Democrats are trying to overthrow."

    Thanks

    Parent

    Without a link, it's impossible to understand (none / 0) (#18)
    by Peter G on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 10:07:58 AM EST
    the context. Was this something Rep. Frank said recently (i.e., "Tuesday" as in yesterday) or two years ago, or what? But certainly he is correct. In our federal system, domestic relations (including regulation of marriage) is generally within the sphere of state not federal control. Subject, of course, to the Fourteenth Amendment (as is all state legislation and government action); that is, whatever laws the states enact must not deny due process or equal protection of the laws to any person (or class of persons) within that state. And similarly where the federal government extends benefits according to marital status (Social Security, federal tax law, etc.) it generally accepts the label put on a relationship by the state but at the same time must abide by 14th Amendment-like equal-liberty limitations under the Fifth Amendment due process clause. Was Franks responding to someone suggesting otherwise?

    Parent
    Franks said it in 2012 (none / 0) (#22)
    by jbindc on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 10:25:01 AM EST
    But yes, it's the same principle as how states can determine the legal age at which one can marry (most states, it's 18 without parental consent, but Nebraska has decided the age is 19 and Mississippi has decided that the age is 21).

    Parent
    Sorry about the link (none / 0) (#85)
    by MO Blue on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 05:48:59 PM EST
    I was in a hurry and I find linking sources more cumbersome on an iPad.

    Your questions required me to dig a little deeper than the Raw Story article which stated that Barney made these statements as part of an MSNBC interview. The interview was on 8/1/2012.

    Background of the quotes:

    Matthews and Rep. Barney Frank clashed over the Democratic party's stance on gay marriage on Wednesday, when the MSNBC host pressed Frank on whether the party's platform would support a federal law legalizing gay marriage.

    The drafting committee has said that it will include same-sex marriage in the party platform. Matthews wondered if it would support leaving the issue up to the states or creating a federal law to allow same-sex marriage.

    He asked Frank, a member of the committee, if the Democratic party's platform would support such a law.
    Link



    Parent
    There were not only two choices, (5.00 / 2) (#99)
    by Peter G on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 08:23:01 PM EST
    as the story implies [Chris?] "Matthews" proposed to B.Frank (leave it to the states, or enact a federal law). There was also the option of challenging in court on constitutional grounds the state marriage laws and state constitutional provisions that did not include (or even banned ever allowing) same-sex unions; as we now all know, this third approach is the one that prevailed (much to the surprise of many involved in the cause). As between the two that were put to him, it is a very honest, well-informed and thoughtful response to concede that a federal law requiring the states to both license and recognize same-sex marriages would have been of doubtful constitutionality at best, as well as political dynamite. To frankly admit that (no pun intended), is not to imply that B. Frank did not fully and strongly support marriage equality.

    Parent
    Thanks for the info and for (none / 0) (#112)
    by MO Blue on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 11:06:15 PM EST
    helping me to more fully understand the issue.

    I never questioned Mr. Franks commitment and strong support of marriage equity but I had never heard the argument for states' rights framed that way. I thought it was an interesting point that might have a lot of merit but I lacked the legal expertise to properly judge it. Thus my getting an expert opinion. Once again, thanks.

    Parent

    Lucky Duck... (none / 0) (#13)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:36:45 AM EST
    I'd kill for a ride in Doc Brown's Delorean to have been there too Pete, I have no doubt they did!  Pretty quality recording in that link.

    But I've got old Bob as a notch in my concert belt, as well as several Midnight Rambles at Levon's farm before he passed.  And even reclusive Garth Hudson a few times.  Sadly I'll never get the chance to see Danko & Manuel.

    Parent

    There were two such concerts, (none / 0) (#104)
    by Peter G on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:11:59 PM EST
    one in NYC and one in LA. Both are available on LP (I have both) and thus on CD. Both excellent. I don't think Dylan played again in LA.

    Parent
    The first time Bob played (none / 0) (#68)
    by jondee on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 03:31:01 PM EST
    publicly after his motorcycle accident, and also the first time he played publicly with The Band, if I'm not mistaken.

    Parent
    So I have since read (none / 0) (#100)
    by Peter G on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 08:23:43 PM EST
    and believe. Sorry if my comment did not make that clear.

    Parent
    Been through something similar (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by scribe on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 08:38:06 AM EST
    a few years back.  I sold my home without a new place lined up, nor a job, nor anything other than having put my stuff in storage.  I left my suits at the cleaners, figuring I would come back in a week or two with money to get them out.
    And I threw the last of my stuff - a couple changes of clothes and some odds and ends - and the dog in the car and pointed it out of town, crashing with friends for the weekend it took for the checks from the closing to clear.  And then picking a town from a short-ish list, and living in a motel for a couple weeks until I found a new place.
    Technically, I was homeless.
    But it all worked out OK.

    And it will work out for you, TL.

    In 1994 (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:01:39 AM EST
    I left Boston to take my first film industry job in LA.  Having done the interviews and sealed the deal in Dec I came back supervised the movers getting my stuff and departed in a step van with the stuff I did not trust to the movers, i collect, the dog and high hopes.
    That was Jan 15 1994.  I was officially on my way to a place I had already rented as were the movers.  On Jan 17 I found myself snowbound in a motel in Tennessee.  If that date sounds vaguely familiar it's because it's the date of the Northridge earth quake.  I was stuck.  There was nothing in tv but wall to wall coverage of the destruction.  They of course made it look like LA was in flames.  Phones were out.  I could not call anyone to find out if I still had a place to live or work and it stayed that way until I arrived.  But I could not go back.  

    It worked out.  I agree with the above,  it will work out.  Breathe.  Maybe day drink.

    Speaking of day drinking, I just finished season 4 of The Wire.
    Is it to early for a vodka?  Damn.

    Parent

    Off Conversation Question... (none / 0) (#8)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:16:40 AM EST
    ...about Hollywood, specifically special effects.

    How are all these shows replicating people floating in the weightlessness of space.  It used to be something you would only see in the movies, but now I see it all time, which leads me to believe it's not very complicated or costly.

    I look closely and it's done so well that it's been seriously bothering me.  The only thing I can come us with is they have built a set in one of those planes that goes up and free falls for a minute or two, but that seems unreasonable.  

    Either way, I am seriously impressed.

    Parent

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:22:33 AM EST
    The "vomit comet" is possible.  But I suspect it's probably just suspension rigs. They have gotten really really good at that.
    I have a friend who specializes in that stuff.  He worked on Gravity.  That was all rigs as far as I know.

    Did you know the vomit comet was first used in Apollo 13, one of my film credits?   Some of the best stuff I was ever able to do.

    Parent

    I Did Not... (none / 0) (#15)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:46:01 AM EST
    ...but I am pleased to know, even if I am 20 years late, that the plane was used for filming.

    If they are using rigs, holly smokes, that is something else.

    Parent

    Thinking of you, Jeralyn. (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by lentinel on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:05:32 AM EST
    I hope things move as smoothly and comfortably as possible for you.

    I also hope that you received some financial compensation from the company whose employee set the fire in your new home.

    Best wishes to you.

    I will raise a glass this evening in your honor.
    And thank you for TalkLeft.

    Kdog Made a Comment... (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 10:04:07 AM EST
    ...last week about the NFL and the Pink program.  He mentioned that no money goes to research, but only to awareness.

    In the end, after everybody has taken their cut, only 8.01% of money spent on pink NFL merchandise is actually going towards cancer research.

    Well at least some is going into research, but how about the awareness.

    If you're thinking that this is simply a case of signals getting mixed up between the NFL and its financial offices, there's some bad news: VICE Sports also looked into this a year later and found out the exact same thing. It also learned that the NFL is giving money to outdated an technology.

    In Regards to the NFL's A Crucial Catch campaign's "Annual Screening Saves Lives" it is highly misinformative.

    "Screening doesn't save lives and screening mammography ... is different from diagnostic mammography," Jagger says. "The NFL has no business providing medical advice to women that is outdated, unproven, and misguided."

    Jagger quotes well-regarded and independently conducted research that shows screening mammography has no overall impact on survival rates of women with the disease. The most substantive mammography research, a study that followed 100,000 women for 25 years, concluded that annual screening does not result in a reduction in breast cancer specific mortality for women over 40 in any way that goes beyond physical examination. These screenings are the mainstay and only measurable aspect of the NFL's A Crucial Catch campaign, which Jaggar says is spreading an outdated message about early detection.

    LINK

    I would have to say that kdog was correct and that after looking into it, the program may be doing more harm that good.

    But it does sell... (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 10:24:10 AM EST
    pink jerseys to the ladies...that's what counts;)

    Parent
    Score one for the Rebellion,,, (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 11:35:37 AM EST
    Evil Empire goes down in bush league wild card...Houston 3 Yankees Zilch.  How sweet it is!  

    Best of luck to ruffian, casey, and all TL Cubs fans tonight in the NL wild card.  

    Cubs win! Cubs win! (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by caseyOR on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 10:04:17 PM EST
    The Cubs shut-out the Pirates 4-0 in the NL WC game. Pitching phenom Jake Arrieta threw all nine innings for the boys from Wrigleyville.

    Next up for the Cubs Is Saturday's game against the Cardinals in St. Louis.

    One game at a time. boys. One game at a time.

    I am downright giddy with baseball happiness.

    GO, CUBS!!!!


    Parent

    GO, CARDS!!!! (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by Zorba on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 09:12:37 AM EST
    n/t

    Parent
    GO, DODGERS!!!! (none / 0) (#144)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:30:26 PM EST
    And I'm sure if kdog were here he would add something about his beloved New York Mets. But he's not, so I guess I'll have to do it for him:

    "Go, Mets?"

    ;-D

    Parent

    Most interesting stat thus far (none / 0) (#149)
    by CoralGables on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:55:06 PM EST
    Home teams have started the playoffs 0-4.

    Parent
    Here is a slightly better stat (none / 0) (#150)
    by CoralGables on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:57:12 PM EST
    Through 4 MLB playoff games, the home team has never led.

    Parent
    It's on Baby! (none / 0) (#158)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 10:26:44 AM EST
    I don't see a 1988 in this series. Kershaw and Grienke are awesome, but they're no Hershiser circa '88.  And we ain't putting no slouches on the hill ourselves.

    Let the games begin!  

    Parent

    Meet you in St Louie, Louie! (5.00 / 1) (#174)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 10, 2015 at 01:37:31 PM EST
    Meet you at the park!

    Parent
    Simple Stat Comparison (none / 0) (#159)
    by CoralGables on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 11:58:11 AM EST
    1988 Orel Hershiser ERA 2.26
    2015 Clayton Kershaw ERA 2.13
    2015 Zack Greinke ERA 1.66


    Parent
    Orel's Post Season... (5.00 / 1) (#160)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 12:38:16 PM EST
    1.09 in '88 NLCS, 1.0 in '88 World Series...MVP of both.

    Let's see if LA's big two can top that...I sure hope not! ;)

    Parent

    Casey, next game is Friday, not Saturday! (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by ruffian on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 02:04:25 PM EST
    Last night was great. I have not watched any games this year - to scared to hope - but they really looked good!

    Bring on the Cards!

    Parent

    Thanks, ruffian. This next sries of games (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by caseyOR on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 06:13:23 PM EST
    is best of five. So, Arrieta cannot pitch every game. Still, I think the boys can win it.

    Parent
    Congrats... (none / 0) (#123)
    by kdog on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:11:08 AM EST
    Arrieta delivered and then some...I love watching a masterful pitcher work.

    Beat them Cards so the Mets can break your heart in the NLCS, like it's 1969 all over again;)

    Parent

    Ernie Banks told a story (none / 0) (#131)
    by jondee on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 02:13:08 PM EST
    about Ron Santo going off on a teammate in the locker room in front of the media in late August and how the Cubs were an out-of-sync, demoralized unit for the rest of that summer of '69..

    As they say, sometimes it's the little things that make the difference between winning and losing..  

    Parent

    Actually, I'm thinking it's more like '88. (none / 0) (#145)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:31:47 PM EST
    ;-D

    Parent
    The Yankees hardly deserved to be ... (none / 0) (#38)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 12:06:09 PM EST
    ... in the postseason, having blown a huge lead on the Toronto Blue Jays in the AL East. It's altogether fitting and proper that they washed out last night.

    Parent
    And so very satisfying. (none / 0) (#45)
    by oculus on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 01:01:43 PM EST
    [Padres fan; 1998.]

    Parent
    Yeah, but the Padres lost the '98 WS ... (none / 0) (#75)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 04:23:13 PM EST
    ... to what by most all accounts was one of the great teams in MLB history, so there's really no shame there. This year's Yankees team was anything but that.

    The Blue Jays were what, nine to eleven games down at one point to New York? And yet at season's end, Toronto won the division going away, while the Yankees looked old and gassed. I'd bet on them to clean house during the coming offseason, which likely means among other things, saying "buh-bye" to a 40-year-old Alex Rodrigues.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Are the Yankees willing to pay A-Rod (none / 0) (#76)
    by CoralGables on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 04:31:34 PM EST
    $40 Million to play somewhere else?

    Parent
    Could be. (none / 0) (#87)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 06:12:02 PM EST
    The Yankees already have the biggest payroll in major league baseball. Given their heretofore free-spending ways, I'm of the belief that they can afford to buy him out. Regardless, they have to start looking to the future, and that means going with younger players. Otherwise, it's highly likely that they'll crash though to the basement with a rather deafening thud, just as they did in the mid-1960s.

    Parent
    Yankees (none / 0) (#90)
    by TrevorBolder on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 06:27:57 PM EST
    Rodriguez is not going anywhere. He has a big contract, and cannot be moved. Besides that, he was the most productive hitter all year, although he faded a bit down the stretch, especially when Teixeira went down.
    Rodriguez and Teixeira will both be back next year, but both need to play less games. Age is not their friend.

    Parent
    And on a related issue, ... (none / 0) (#102)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 08:37:40 PM EST
    @CoolPontifex via Twitter: "If I wanted to sit around for 3 hours and be annoyed by a woman, I would have taken my wife out to dinner."

    ... all those d!ck-swinging Neanderthals who've been putting the "Twit" in Twitter today by criticizing Jessica Mendoza's presence in ESPN's broadcast booth last night as the first female color analyst in MLB playoff history, can take solace in the idea that she was probably doing so for 79 cents on the dollar.

    Personally, I'm surprised that cable TV service areas include caves.

    Parent

    Well Atlanta Sports Jock... (none / 0) (#120)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:07:51 AM EST
    ...Mike Bell made a fairly offensive tweet that was doubly bad in that he used the infamous sexist words of Ron Burgundy.

    It did not work out well for him.

    By the time Bell's comments were making national news Wednesday, his radio station had suspended him, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. He did, however, appear on the air with a pre-recorded apology saying: "I didn't get it. I get it now. There is no place for that kind of stuff on my show. I will be more mindful. I hope I can be a better talk show host and better person. This has been an eye-opening experience."
     LINK

    To their credit, the Atlanta Falcons Tweeted:

    Embarrassed by Mike Bell's comments, given he's on our flagship station. Inappropriate and disappointing.

    Looks like Bell will be without a job for at least two weeks.

    For the record, Ron Burgundy(Will Ferrell) did lose his job Veronica Corningstone(Christina Applegate) because she was a better anchorperson, so the comment was not only sexist, it was a really bad example if the point was women aren't as good as men.

    I kinda like stuff like this in that is allows a lot of dummies to out themselves, publicly.  I am guessing Bell isn't the only one in hot water over this and I would like to think it closes doors for some and opens doors for others.

    Parent

    Yeah, I saw that. (none / 0) (#142)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:23:46 PM EST
    Mike Bell was an a$$, and deserved to be suspended for that on-air comment. This is the year 2015, not 1955. Title IX has been the law for 43 years now, and there's just no place for that sort of blatant sexism in the workplace.

    Fortunately, most of the kids today don't appear to have the personal hang-ups about so-called "traditional gender roles" that have so often plagued us as their elders. So slowly but surely, it is getting better, though obviously not fast enough for some of us. But then, social attitudes always take time to evolve.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    ... and not an on-air comment. My bad.

    Parent
    A new story (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by FlJoe on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 11:47:36 AM EST
    in the "good Gal with a gun chronicles"  
    47-year-old woman was watching from the store's parking lot on Tuesday as a loss prevention officer appeared to be trying to stop a shoplifter. When the suspects tried to flee in a dark SUV, the woman pulled out her concealed 9mm handgun and began shooting.
     and surprisingly
    the woman had a concealed carry permit and was cooperating with law enforcement. Auburn Hills police had not decided if the woman would be charged.
    In my book not charging her would be an endorsement of vigilantism.

    That is nuts! (5.00 / 3) (#62)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 02:41:52 PM EST
    I could see if she was getting robbed, not agree but understand...but Home F*ckin' Depot? Take it easy Charlene Bronson!

    Parent
    Ed Kilgore @ Washington Monthly: (5.00 / 4) (#65)
    by Anne on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 03:03:27 PM EST
    Now let's say you're another Home Depot customer with a concealed carry license and you didn't notice the shoplifter but you did notice the other vigilante's bullets whizzing by your head. Would you pull down on your fellow armed citizen? And if a widespread gun fight broke out in that parking lot, how would the police--you know, sort of auxiliaries to the real crime-fighters in their Fords and their Subarus--sort it all out?

    Clearly, Ben Carson's right: when violence breaks out, you should have the courage to shoot first and think later.

    Link

    Some days it feels like we really have gone down the rabbit hole, doesn't it?

    Parent

    But (none / 0) (#69)
    by FlJoe on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 03:34:39 PM EST
    an armed society is a polite society, I am certain the proper apologies would be sent to the widows and the orphans.

    Parent
    Polite society.. (none / 0) (#70)
    by jondee on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 03:42:16 PM EST
    If these terminally paranoid mfers had their way, we'd all be living in an armed-and-dangerous post-apocalyptic Mad Max movie.

    Parent
    Whereas our "polite society" ... (none / 0) (#88)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 06:18:12 PM EST
    ... is presently the equivalent of a Fellini film.

    Parent
    Are we or are we not (none / 0) (#175)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 10, 2015 at 01:44:10 PM EST
    our brother's keeper??

    If not, turn your head and walk away.

    And wait for your time to come.

    Parent

    BTW (5.00 / 1) (#178)
    by FlJoe on Sat Oct 10, 2015 at 05:01:40 PM EST
    Jim, try to explain this part of the hoax, What Exxon knew about
    the Earth's melting Arctic
    "Certainly any major development with a life span of say 30-40 years will need to assess the impacts of potential global warming," Croasdale told an engineering conference in 1991. "This is particularly true of Arctic and offshore projects in Canada, where warming will clearly affect sea ice, icebergs, permafrost and sea levels."

    "We considered climate change in a number of operational and planning issues," said Brian Flannery, who was Exxon's in-house climate science advisor from 1980 to 2011. In a recent interview, he described the company's internal effort to study the effects of global warming as a competitive necessity: "If you don't do it, and your competitors do, you're at a loss."

    I count 3 plus decades of fake denial all while  taking AGW very seriously.

    They were worried about their fkng profits, the rest of us are worried about their fkng planet.

    You on the other hand are "What, me worry".

    Parent

    heh (none / 0) (#179)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 10, 2015 at 08:07:53 PM EST
    Heh. You folks just snarked me that my point re consensus and Ga Washington  being killed by his doctors was old....and here you are going back 24 years.... Would you please make up your minds?????

    And that you don't understand that we are our brother's keeper is not surprising. Your brother's whiner is more your speed. But I digress.

    No one has denied climate change. The issue is cause. There has been no proof that meets the requirements of a Scientific Theory.  Just lots of speculation. Lots of claims. Lots of threats against anyone who disagrees.

    But nothing else beside claims of consensus.

    And even the claim of 97% is fake.

    As for Exon, so what?  They can speculate all they want. The earth hasn't caught on fire, FL remains above water and satellite measurements say that the "change" has been flat.

    Parent

    The (none / 0) (#180)
    by FlJoe on Sat Oct 10, 2015 at 08:23:10 PM EST
    density of your derp is astounding.

    Parent
    Yes, ny facts are astounding (none / 0) (#181)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Oct 12, 2015 at 09:54:50 AM EST
    They devastate all the nonsense floating around.

    You need to study this:

    Link

    Parent

    Bizarre (5.00 / 1) (#183)
    by FlJoe on Tue Oct 13, 2015 at 06:42:29 AM EST
    statement here
    "If you cannot explain your finding to an [attentive] eight-year old, you don't understand it yourself."
    I agree entirely.

    Well then I guess we should just turn the Cern Super Collider into a thrill ride.

    Consensus is not science unless you get third graders aboard.

    Peer reviewed by Meadowview Elementary school is obviously good enough for this crowd.

    Parent

    One of the few times (none / 0) (#182)
    by jondee on Mon Oct 12, 2015 at 10:05:17 AM EST
    you'll ever hear anyone on the far right utter the words "you need to study"..

    ANYONE who says the entire governmental environmental protection apparatus should be dismantled has already disqualified themselve for this "debate".

    Parent

    Am (none / 0) (#177)
    by FlJoe on Sat Oct 10, 2015 at 04:17:57 PM EST
    I my brothers keeper? Cain snarks to God while washing the blood off his hands.

    Is there anything that you don't misconstrue?

    Trusting a Glock is not trusting  in God.

    Parent

    Like brown rice? (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 01:32:22 PM EST
    I do.  I ran across this and I just tried it.  It works.  Really well.  

    Cooking brown rice, or at least cooking it well, is tricky. The goal is to soften the texture of each grain's fibrous bran coating--a process that takes longer than that called for in the cooking of white rice--without causing the rice to become mushy. Unfortunately, the labels on most packaged brown rice recommend an ineffective method that suggests boiling water and rice in a two-to-one ratio, then allowing the mixture to simmer for 40 minutes or more, until all the liquid is absorbed. We followed those directions and ended up throwing away more than a few pots of unsatisfying rice. What we ultimately found is that brown rice looks and tastes the best when it has been boiled and drained like pasta and then steamed in the small amount of moisture that remains in the pot. The boiling cooks the rice, while the subsequent steaming allows the grains to retain their integrity and come out light and fluffy.

    Ingredients
    1 cup short, medium, or long-grain brown rice
    Kosher salt, to taste
    Instructions
    Rinse rice in a strainer under cold running water for 30 seconds. Bring 12 cups water to a boil in a large pot with a tight-fitting lid over high heat. Add the rice, stir it once, and boil, uncovered, for 30 minutes. Pour the rice into a strainer over the sink.
    Let the rice drain for 10 seconds, then return it to the pot, off the heat. Cover the pot and set it aside to allow the rice to steam for 10 minutes. Uncover the rice, fluff with a fork, and season with salt.



    This is how most Indians cook rice, (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by vml68 on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 01:35:47 PM EST
    specially Basmati rice. Comes out perfect every time.

    Parent
    Ever since I dated a girl from (none / 0) (#61)
    by ragebot on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 02:38:30 PM EST
    Japan I have used a rice cooker.  I know Alton Brown does not like one trick ponies in the kitchen but in this case I am willing to make an exception.  The directions for the rice cooker say for both white and brown rice it is a good idea to rinse the rice (unless you want sticky rice for sushi) and then let the rice sit in clear water in the cooker.  My cooker has a delay so I can put rice and water in in the AM, leave for the day, and return for supper with hot rice ready.  In by cook book rice cookers are a big OK.

    Parent
    I had been told cookers (none / 0) (#63)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 02:47:48 PM EST
    Don't work that well with brown rice.  And I don't cook white rice at home.

    But the above thing amazed me.  For most of my adult life I have tried, with very mixed success, to cook brown rice.
    And that was so easy.  I don't understand why it doesn't say that on the dang package.

    Parent

    I don't have (none / 0) (#71)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 03:58:58 PM EST
    a rice cooker but I have the most awesome appliance that cooks rice. I agree with Alton. Most of these small appliances are a waste because you can do whatever usually with what you already have. I have an Instapot pressure cooker/rice cooker/slow cooker combo and it's awesome. It does rice, pressure cooks and then you can use it as a slow cooker should you want to. I can see single use rice cookers if you cook a lot of rice but I find this is more useful for me. It does a lot of other things.

    Parent
    We have both a rice cooker and a slow cooker (none / 0) (#101)
    by Peter G on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 08:32:58 PM EST
    both of which work incredibly well. But it is true that they take up too much space in the kitchen, considering how often each is used. I have never heard of the Instapot, but if it does all three of those very useful functions that well, it sounds like a great wedding gift for someone!

    Parent
    I love my rice cooker (none / 0) (#130)
    by ruffian on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 02:08:27 PM EST
    I'm not a cook, so I use it a lot more than any other gadget. Not a waste for me at all to have an appliance that only does one thing really well.

    Putting something in a pot, pressing a button, and forgetting about it is right up my alley.

    Brown rice takes longer because it does soak it for an hour or so before cooking it.

    Parent

    Interesting... (none / 0) (#122)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:10:49 AM EST
    ...because just last week I walked into Whole Foods and noticed they had a huge cooker of cooked brown rice so I go some.

    I tried it and was like, that solves that.

    Parent

    It's not that hard to cook brown rice (none / 0) (#169)
    by shoephone on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 07:23:05 PM EST
    You just have to time it. I switched to brown rice exclusively three years ago, and I find that simple is best and works for me every time.

    I use long-grain rice and use the (apparently) disparaged 2-1 method. Boil one cup water with about 1/2 teaspoon of butter, add two cups brown rice, stir to prevent sticking, immediately turn down to "low" and cover. Cook 35 minutes. Check it. If it's not done, I cover and cook for exactly two more minutes. Voila. It's perfect.

    Parent

    LOL. I accidentally switched the amounts on you! (none / 0) (#170)
    by shoephone on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 07:24:50 PM EST
    It's two cups water to one cup rice.

    Parent
    A nice article about Hillary Rodham (5.00 / 1) (#171)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 10:36:48 PM EST
    on her High School debate team.

    Ms. Rodham, one of the school's standout debaters, was a proud Barry Goldwater supporter (she wore a hat with an "AuH2O" logo) and an active member of the Young Republicans. But the teacher, Jerry Baker, was intent on challenging her to argue the other side.

    Always a dutiful student, she agreed, settling into the library to pore for hours over Johnson's positions on civil rights, foreign policy and health care. She prepared with such ardor and delivered such a compelling case that she even convinced herself. By the time Ms. Rodham graduated from college, she was a Democrat.



    Trump referred to himself (none / 0) (#4)
    by lentinel on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:00:29 AM EST
    as being "militaristic".

    In fact, he said something to the effect that he is more militaristic than anybody.

    He said he would strengthen the military so that no one would dare mess with us - or words to that effect.

    Even though he phrases this sentiment somewhat more inelegantly than others on the campaign trail, I don't think that his vision is at odds with theirs.

    What I don't think that these people have taken in is the experience - the trauma - of September 11, and the bombing in Boston at the marathon.

    The lesson I think that might have come across to these politicians is that a few schmucks with a box cutter - or a pressure cooker - can immobilize a country. Nukes - Armies...planes, nuclear subs and the rest are no defense - and as we have seen are of no retaliatory use either.

    These guys running the show don't seem to have taken this in.

    There is no such thing as a war on terror.
    It cannot exist. Terror is a term we apply to the work of an individual - or a small group of individuals.

    Our version of destruction - massive bombing campaigns - are not considered to be acts of terror - although I'm fairly confident that the people in and near the vicinity of the target are terrorized from head to toe.

    Unless what is meant by a "war on terror" is a serious attempt to sit down with people with grievances - no matter how unsavory they may be - and try to defuse them.

    But that is not what I get from our leaders or would-be leaders when they talk of a war on terror.

    In my jaded opinion, building up the military is more and more money down the drain - and lives - young lives - wasted and squandered by politicians stuck in the military-industrial-legislative complex mentality of the 1950s.


    I Thought Somehting Similiar... (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:31:53 AM EST
    ...when I read the comment, "Is not spending more than every other country, combined, on the military not enough Donald ?"

    This notion that they are doing all this stuff because they aren't scared of us is absurd, we can destroy the entire planet how many times over, and Trump thinks multiply that number will stop terrorism.

    To me terrorism is the obvious choice when your 'army' is outnumbered, outgunned, and out-everything, not because you want to to strap bombs on your brothers and sisters, but because it is very last option you have.  But now it's transformed into this thing where people have lost all sense of humanity, and they are doing it for the shear pleasure of it, there is no longer an end goal with terrorism, they could care less if lighting people on fire or lopping off heads with have any effect on anything.

    We have been seriously fighting terrorism for more than a decade, it's time to realize that our intervention is having the exact opposite effect, which is to eliminate it.  And there is Trump admitting Iraq was a mistake, but hot damn if he doesn't want to double down, that is insane, at least according to Einstein.

    Parent

    Interesting that the same people (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by jondee on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 03:02:02 PM EST
    who say terrorists wouldn't attack us if they were more afraid of us are usually the same people who say deranged shooters, like the one in Oregon, wouldn't launch an attack if they thought the intended targets had guns..

    It's an analysis that betrays a very simplistic, almost simpleminded understanding of human motivation.

    Parent

    All of them (none / 0) (#57)
    by lentinel on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 02:06:50 PM EST
    want to double down.

    All of them.

    Not just Trump.
    He gets the noise.
    But the others slither along unnoticed, and sometimes even applauded.

    Sanders may be the exception - but I haven't read his position of this subject as yet.

    Parent

    They've taken everything in (none / 0) (#14)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:45:14 AM EST
    They are saying what their lizard brained base wants to hear. It isn't any more complicated than that.

    Parent
    Maybe... (none / 0) (#59)
    by lentinel on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 02:14:30 PM EST
    but I think that they are lizard-brains.

    I truly think that we are better than they are.
    They talk down to us because that is their conception of who we are.

    And they put us in danger because they are confident that we will do as they say and protect them. They have nothing to lose. They are insulated from the consequences of their aggressive self-serving behavior.

    They are the lizards. The snakes in the grass;

    We are good people who are not being given much of a chance by these elitist freaks.

    In my overwrought opinion...

    Parent

    Trump Calls GWB a Disaster (none / 0) (#7)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:08:50 AM EST
    When Baier asked Trump if he stood by a statement he made 2007 and 2008 saying he would impeach Bush for getting into the Iraq War, Trump replied, "I think he was a disaster and I think it was one of the worst decisions ever made. (He) has totally destabilized the Middle East. If you had Saddam Hussein, you wouldn't have the problems you have right now."

    Fox News Link

    I don't really care what Trumps thinks about anything, but this interview was on Fox News, and it's pretty damn funny that he is basically told his 'base' they are completely wrong about GWB & Iraq.

    And don't skip the comments, it will remind you of just how good we have it around here.

    Imagine how the press would react (none / 0) (#16)
    by jbindc on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:52:35 AM EST
    if HRC did what Joe Biden did.

    They would lose their minds.

    you know what though? (none / 0) (#21)
    by CST on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 10:24:47 AM EST
    She's gonna win anyway most likely, and he almost certainly won't.

    There's some fantastic karmic justice in all that.

    Parent

    Did you see? (5.00 / 6) (#24)
    by jbindc on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 10:30:55 AM EST
    HRC sent a note and copies of her book "Hard Choices" to all the Republican candidates who participated in the debates who continually pose, "If you want to stump a Democrat, ask them to name Hillary Clinton's accomplishments.". She also joked that there are so many of them, they could start a book club.

    Parent
    Responses: (5.00 / 6) (#46)
    by KeysDan on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 01:18:30 PM EST
    Trump: Thanks, but no thanks, my library is already filled with books, both of them--the Bible and Trump on Trump; Fiorina, I saw the video; Jeb! What about me, like saving the life of Terry Schiavo? Just more free stuff from a Democrat; Carson: I will read it next time,if I can find my glasses; Rubio, Can you send another copy, I spilled Poland Spring all over it; Cruz Thanks, I will add it to the US Constitution for my next book-burning party; Santorum: the title sounds gay; Kasich: can't tell a cover by its book; Huckabee: Thanks, I'll read it while doing Clerk Davis' jail time and use it to slam Cruz if he gets in my way; Christie: not as good as mine, "A Bridge to Nowhere near the WH."; and Jindal: I'll give my review if I can get a TV crew out here. Lindsey: I do declare--war.  Gilmore: Hey, Hillary, you forgot me. Don't I count?

    Parent
    Thank-you for the laugh. (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by vml68 on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 01:33:12 PM EST
    n/t

    Parent
    I concur... (5.00 / 3) (#53)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 01:48:28 PM EST
    KeysDan has been killin' it with clown car commentary for weeks...you are the key to us maintaining our sanity throughout the extended silly season KD, eat your Wheaties homey!

    Parent
    Thanks, (none / 0) (#58)
    by KeysDan on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 02:09:29 PM EST
    Like shooting fish in a barrel. Self-preservation should be a reason for Republicans to consider gun control.  

    Parent
    Even more... (none / 0) (#60)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 02:34:39 PM EST
    bounty of material for you to work on the way, once the Clarabell's hear about this.  

    Parent
    What is Even Fuinnier About... (none / 0) (#80)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 05:00:50 PM EST
    ...the monument, it was replaced last year because a car drove into, but he company that did the work hasn't been paid.

    A company that built a granite Ten Commandments monument that was removed from the Oklahoma Capitol grounds under a court order said Tuesday it still hasn't been paid for its work.

    Wilbert Memorials sales manager Gary Mosier said the company fronted the costs of constructing the monument after someone drove a car into the original last year.

    Mosier said the second monument was built with the understanding the company would be reimbursed but that no payments have been made.

    Republican state Rep. Mike Ritze of Broken Arrow and his family paid about $10,000 for the original granite sculpture. Ritze vowed to spearhead a fundraising effort for the second monument.
     LINK

    This story is in a nutshell, the modern day christian conservative movement.  They got the funds to take it to court, but they haven't even thought about paying for it.  

    GD, think how much money this has cost the state, for what, so christians can look at a list of things they don't do ?

    Parent

    Hysterical... (none / 0) (#81)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 05:14:02 PM EST
    Deadbeats. Wilbert Memorials best sell this account to collections. Ritze is panhandling for God's sake.

    Parent
    She is really good (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by sj on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 04:50:03 PM EST
    at that kind of thing. Remember the Tucker Carlson/Eat-my-shoe thing?

    She really does have a really great, wicked sense of humor.

    Parent

    Not That it Matters, But... (none / 0) (#26)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 10:37:11 AM EST
    ...Biden Team Calls Report on 2016 Leak 'Categorically False'

    "The bottom line on the POLITICO story is that it is categorically false and the characterization is offensive," said a spokesperson for Biden.

    But...

    The vice president's office is neither confirming nor denying that a conversation took place between New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd and the vice president, but sources say the paper is flatly wrong to suggest that Biden intended the leak to be a trial balloon for his candidacy.

    Biden to me, is the classic press building someone up only to tear them down.  They never liked him, except for the jokes, until they thought he would be a thorn in HRC's side.

    Parent

    So, a conversation did take place (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by jbindc on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 11:15:05 AM EST
    With Maureen Dowd, a known Hillary hater. And the Biden people are suggesting they didn't know what the outcome would be?

    I think the VP's office is lying here, but I don't care if they are - it's how the game is played.  No biggie. They do something, it leaks and does not get quite the reception they intended, they go on offense and deny.  Simple.

    I think the press loves Biden - but they don't want him to be president.  But I agree that it's a way to stick it to the Clinton's while maintaining neutrality - 'Hey, we're just reporting the news here!" Kinda thing.

    But I think the thesis of the article is true - had Hillary done this, whether true or not, the long knives would be out.

    Parent

    I don't know, jb. (none / 0) (#67)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 03:30:29 PM EST
    Yeah, MoDo is a known Hillary hater, but I think most of us here also know that she's perfectly capable of manufacturing schitt like this all on her own. There was something about her account that rang so totally false to me the first time I read it, and Charles Pierce summed it up neatly yesterday:

    "First of all, who gives a damn? Second, I don't believe that quote as far as I can throw the National Press Building. Beau Biden is dying of brain cancer and, on his deathbed, he talks to his father like they're both on Hardball?"

    That said, Joe Biden can't win, and all he can do is hurt Democrats with this game of footsie he's playing with the east coast media. He should rest on his laurels and stand down.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Biden (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 04:05:10 PM EST
    already had pretty much started to jump the shark before this latest story with me. The latest just made me be "done" with Biden.

    The whole "footsie" thing has gone on way too long and it's like Biden was hoping against hope things were going to change and there was going to be this big uprising of support for him amongst the voters. Does Biden want to run and lose again? That is the ultimate question. Maybe he doesn't care about losing another nomination fight.

    Parent

    Biden (none / 0) (#93)
    by TrevorBolder on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 06:35:42 PM EST
    Is only a insurance policy. Which is why he keeps postponing any decision.
    FBI is moving along in their probe,

    From The Hill

    By A.B. Stoddard - 10/07/15 06:49 PM EDT
    Wow, those stupid remarks House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy made about the Benghazi Committee succeeding in denting Hillary Clinton's favorability in her presidential bid really put the wind in her sails for a week.

    But now we have learned that two technology companies are worried Clinton may have ensnared them in a cover-up, and the FBI has seized four more servers from the State Department in order to determine how top-secret information flowed from Clinton aides at the agency to her private server during her tenure as secretary there.

    Classified top secret information is treated seriously by the FBI ,

    Biden is insurance

    Parent

    Nothing but a bunch of nonsense. (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 07:43:16 PM EST
    Biden is (none / 0) (#95)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 07:07:34 PM EST
    not an insurance policy. That whole theory has been blown up too. There is no cover up. It's already been established that there was nothing illegal going on, she's not the target of an investigation despite conservatives shopping conspiracy theories hoping they come true.

    C'mon even you aren't dumb enough to believe the "top secret" stuff are you? We've already been over that one. The Benghazi committee shopping all this fake information has been exposed for just what it is: abuse of public funds. Of course, you also have shown that Republicans have an unlimited capacity to be fleeced out of their money with conspiracy theories. All the GOP has succeeded in doing over the last week is convincing Americans that there really is a VRWC.

    Parent

    Winter is Coming (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 06:25:24 AM EST
    You are far too emotionally invested to see the pitfalls ahead.
    Beware.....Winter is Coming
    The FBI has taken 4 State Department servers to trace the trail of classified information ,
    Exactly how did classified information end up on the Clinton server, against all government protocols.
    The FBI is just beginning, and 60 % of the e mails yet to emerge.
    In Hillary's own words, the drip..drip...drip...continues

    Huma Abedin, working for the State Department, Teneo, at the same time. Scheduling Bill Clinton speeches.

    Cheryl Mills, sent 2 e mails with classified information to the Clinton Global Initiative. Who was Mills working for? The State Department, or the CGI? She was a former Director of CGI, followed Hillary to State, still e mailed CGI, then went back to work for CGI when Hillary left. Who exactly was Mills working for, after we get to the bottom of classified e mails she sent.

    So Hillary's aides never stopped working for CGI? It doesn't look good, it makes it appear that Hillary is always working for Hillary, despite her title as Secretary of State.

    Go back to March, and Hillary's statement at the UN, and it is another version of what the definition of is....  is.

    There are just so many areas where there can be a monumental PR disaster, or criminal liability,   that is why people are worried,

    Yes, Winter is Coming,

    Ignore at your own Peril

    Parent

    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 06:34:29 AM EST
    I know all these are the "touch points" of the wingnut welfare crowd. Nothing is going to disabuse the wingnut welfare crowd of their conspiracy theories shopped by the likes of a guy who sued his mother and was screaming put down the Koran in front of the white house. How much of the lies about Benghazi did you fall for? I'm willing to bet a lot of them.

    Parent
    Winter (5.00 / 4) (#115)
    by FlJoe on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 06:35:41 AM EST
    is coming and tin foil stocks are dwindling! Trouble ahead!

    Parent
    Baa waa waa (5.00 / 2) (#116)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 06:58:52 AM EST
    It's amazing. They have been repeatedly lied to yet they continue to come back for more and lap it up. One of their "touchstones" is you are too "emotionally" attached to see. But then they also say Hillary doesn't emotionally attach to voters. That's some industrial strength tin foil they are wrapping their heads in.

    Parent
    Pretty sure that whatever (5.00 / 2) (#117)
    by Anne on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 08:27:58 AM EST
    relationship existed between any of Clinton's aides and the CGI was fully disclosed to the State Department and vetted by government lawyers, so this seems like just one more attempt to see evil and conspiracy where none exists.

    And, golly gee - who's behind this latest effort to stir things up?  Why it's Citizens United and David Bossie...can't imagine there's anything behind this other than a principled search for truth, right?

    Winter is coming...whatever doom that's supposed to portend.  At this rate, I suspect so, too, are the men in the white coats, so if you have eyes in the back of your head, I'd keep them open.


    Parent

    Actually (none / 0) (#135)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 05:14:09 PM EST
    The questions that have risen are due to the actions of Mills and Abedin while working at State Department.
    What does anything they "promised" to State Department lawyers prior to signing on at State mean...Nothing. It is their actions after becoming State Department employees that is now being questioned.
    It is the never ending cloud that follows Hillary,  if her employees wanted to follow her to State , they should have cut all ties with their former employer, CGI, which was not done. Isn't that true with any private sector  recruits to any Administration? Just too much blurring of the lines with anything Clinton.

    Parent
    ROTFLMAO (none / 0) (#136)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 05:32:05 PM EST
    The only people that think there's a cloud is the wingnut welfare circuit. Nobody with half a brain takes anything that comes out of the wingnut welfare circuit seriously except gullible conservatives. How long was the GOP able to fleece you guys over Benghazi? Let's see I think they were able to take you for a ride for about three years was it? I'm sure they'll be taking you for a ride over these emails for quite a while longer.

    Democrats have asked for all of Mills and Abedin's testimony to be released to the public. Guess who's refusing to do it? Your guy Howdy Doody Gowdy. Do you want to know why? So he can try and keep floating this kind of stuff. But hey, Trevor, no one can fleece you without your permission and as long as you allow Gowdy and Citizen's United and the crazed Larry Klayman to fleece you they are going to continue to do it.

    Parent

    okay then (none / 0) (#139)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 07:15:07 PM EST
    But the drip..drip..drip

    Continues.....

    New found Blumenthal  e mails,

    http://tinyurl.com/npzovks

    Link is to Gowdys letter to Elijah Cummings, quite thorough and comprehensive.

    You seriously do not believe that more of these revelations will occur, monthly, or weekly?
    Democrat donors and insiders are growing worried...

    Winter is Coming

    Parent

    Nobody (none / 0) (#140)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 07:20:19 PM EST
    listens to Gowdy anymore except people like you.

    Yes, I guess winter is going to drive up the price of tin foil. You should be stocking up Trevor.

    Parent

    Yeah, winter's coming. (none / 0) (#146)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:41:03 PM EST
    And judging by your comments, you're apparently already snowed in.

    Parent
    I think you have watched (none / 0) (#167)
    by MO Blue on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 05:07:52 PM EST
    too many episodes of The Game of Thrones and remain in a realm of fantasy.

    Parent
    Agree very much with this analysis, jbindc (none / 0) (#94)
    by christinep on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 07:07:19 PM EST
    A certain troubling aspect of the Biden son-father story that has developed here, tho, involves the purported (per M. Dowd, anyway)desire that Beau Biden did not want to see another Clinton in that office but would much rather see Biden "values."

    Why is that slant so troubling to me?  Unless Joe Biden outright confirms not only that that was his late son's wish, but also that the slant specifically about the Clintons was part of that deathbed situation, it seems beyond the pale to me.  In any situation...but, most especially, I cannot conceive that one so spiritual as the Bidens are and as one would presumably be facing death imminently .... I cannot believe that the politics of the Clintons, the Carters, the Bushes, the whatever would be of any any moment.  It makes no sense.  Because I honor peoples' religious beliefs, the mere suggestion that someone on their deathbed would be naming names about what a political anger would be is not believable.  (Even Atwater recanted.)

    Parent

    I've said all along that the (5.00 / 4) (#31)
    by Anne on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 11:28:55 AM EST
    Joe-mance was all about sticking it to Hillary, so as far as I'm concerned, Biden has done this to himself; I mean, Jesus, what did he think Maureen Dowd was going to turn it into?

    I'm just completely over whatever little game is afoot here - whether it's Joe and his ego needing some cuddle time with the media, or trying to be relevant to anything that is happening in the world right now, I think it's going to end up putting a less-than-graceful coda to the Biden opus.

    If there's a bright side, it seems to be bringing the fight out in Hillary, and I think she operates better and more effectively when she does that.

    Parent

    Since I can't rate this comment 10 (none / 0) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 10:40:04 AM EST
    I will just say I rate I a 10.

    This is exactly right.  Biden has been a press joke forever until he could be used as a club to beat Hillary.

    Parent

    Yes (none / 0) (#29)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 10:45:05 AM EST
    that's the press. Bernie is the same. Both he and Biden are more or less treated like "useful idiots" in the press game "I Hate Hillary". But should either of them beat her they would get the same treatment. For Biden it would be all about plagiarism and his record in the senate. And then Bernie would be the wild eyed socialist from the people's republic of Vermont. Anybody with half a brain can see all this coming.

    Parent
    Yes (none / 0) (#27)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 10:39:26 AM EST
    they would lose their minds for sure.

    Parent
    Once upon a time... (none / 0) (#19)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 10:21:51 AM EST
    Lindsey Graham (Clown Car, Trunk) opposed federal aid for victims of Hurricane Sandy.  

    Today, his state is suffering catastrophic floods...why that's a horse of a different color!

    What a Weasel (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 10:28:23 AM EST
    "I'm all for helping the people in New Jersey. I don't really remember me voting that way," Graham said.

    Pressed further, he said: "Anyway, I don't really recall that, but I'd be glad to look and tell you why I did vote no, if I did."


    Now he needs time to remember(spin) why some hurricane victims should get aid and others should not.

    Parent
    Hypocrisy and karma. (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by jbindc on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 10:32:43 AM EST
    And if a Democrat there can't kick his ass.... (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Dadler on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 01:52:32 PM EST
    ...on that series of quotes and votes alone, then opposition politics are truly, absolutely dead in this nation. Bury him now.

    Parent
    ... in the federal budget -- that is, if they were going to allocate funds for relief of Sandy's victims, then there should be corresponding reductions in federal spending elsewhere, just not in defense and homeland security.

    So Graham and congressional Republicans were effectively holding New Jersey residents hostage in the furtherance of their own political agenda, when Gov. Chris Christie cried foul because putting the screws to his constituents over cheap politics was his job.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Gallup gallops out of the race (none / 0) (#34)
    by ragebot on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 11:57:14 AM EST
    link

    As the link points out polls have not mirrored reality in some of the last races and now Gallup says it will not be polling before the debates and possibly/probably not for the presidential race.  Given how networks are using polls to determine participation in debates this is an interesting development.

    I've read a few things lately (none / 0) (#35)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 12:01:23 PM EST
    About how frustrated pollsters are with what they are doing, how it's being used and that they think for several reasons it's becoming increasingly unreliable.

    It is interesting

    Parent

    Or perhaps (none / 0) (#37)
    by CoralGables on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 12:03:29 PM EST
    Gallup looked at their polling numbers from the 2012 presidential election and came to the realization that they are really bad at what they do.

    Parent
    Nit just Gallup (none / 0) (#39)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 12:22:56 PM EST
    Ironically (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by FlJoe on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 12:35:29 PM EST
    I am in the polling industry, I have 25 people on the phones as I type this, I will agree we have problems, especially with the cell phone issues, demographics has always been a bear.

    Parent
    At htis point, I would say it's more (none / 0) (#41)
    by Anne on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 12:31:54 PM EST
    than polls that are failing us...the influence of a manipulative and dishonest media may have something to do with it.

    I do love the sense of panic and hair-about-to-spontaneously-combust breathlessness that's accompanying this news.

    Oh, no - whatever shall we do?  Surely we aren't going to have to think for ourselves again, are we?

    The horror!

    Parent

    Especially from Nate Silver (none / 0) (#43)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 12:35:46 PM EST
    I must say.

    But this is a thing.  I just did a quick search for an example or two but I've been reading about this for a while.   I actually didn't find the one I was looking for and I can't remember where I saw it.

    Parent

    To be fair (none / 0) (#55)
    by CoralGables on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 01:59:30 PM EST
    Nate Silver went out of his wheelhouse and attempted to predict UK elections. He failed miserably.

    But some polls and most aggregators (including Silver) nailed the 2012 Presidential election, although nearly all still had a Republican bias.

    For US News & World report to say Romney was blindsided and the polls were wrong is a little like living up to the quote from Matthew Henry:

    None So Blind As Those Who Will Not See.

    Parent

    reading the comments (none / 0) (#40)
    by CST on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 12:25:13 PM EST
    In these thing is such a disconnect from reality.  Everyone saying "it's because they don't want to show Democrats losing" when the article clearly states that they overpredicted votes for Republicans in 2012 to such an extent that they wanted to re-examine their methodology.

    The intentional ignorance hurts sometimes.  It's right there.  Right above the place you left a comment...

    And I know, these things are cancer, just needed to vent.

    Parent

    Those comments (none / 0) (#137)
    by sj on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 05:54:40 PM EST
    are unbelievable! Too sad, really, to be funny.

    I have to be honest, I am bored silly by polls. Especially when I'm not aggravated at the poor quality and obvious bias of the questions. Overall, it's better for me to ignore polls altogether.

    I know others are more adept than I at interpreting polls, and who take the results quite seriously. If I were in their number I would be seriously annoyed to hear this.

    Parent

    Had to end sometime (none / 0) (#36)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 12:02:31 PM EST
    I Bet This Time... (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 12:51:35 PM EST
    ...they didn't give all their S away.

    But if it's gonna happen, I hope it comes before 3, as I got a meeting that I would love to miss and I'd rather not have my boss' face be the last one I see.

    Parent

    Happy to Report... (none / 0) (#124)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:15:07 AM EST
    ...at 11, right before I went to bed, this occurred to me that I bet there is a bunch of people praying really hard for the world to end in the next hour, then I thought, what if they aren't in the Central Time zone, then I thought about more interesting things.

    Happy to Report the world did not end yesterday !!!

    Parent

    Please let this not be true. (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by vml68 on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 01:29:20 PM EST
    I bought a few fruit trees this summer and I would really like to be around for a couple more years by which time they should start fruiting.

    Plus, there is so much of the world I haven't seen yet. I need more time, dammit!

    Parent

    I watched last nights (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 01:34:10 PM EST
    Bastard Executioner earlier than I normally would have.

    Just in case.

    Parent

    Finally... (none / 0) (#56)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 02:05:32 PM EST
    there is an outfit brave enough to defend the health & safety of the poor, downtrodden, oppressed white male. Thank you Bobbies...lol.

    Hillary Clinton (none / 0) (#66)
    by CST on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 03:25:00 PM EST
    Officially opposes TPP

    "The Democratic presidential candidate says in an interview with PBS there are too many ``unanswered questions'' about the Trans-Pacific Partnership. She says, ``What I know about it as of today, I am not in favor.''"

    You know, I want to support TPP. (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 04:00:01 PM EST
    The concept of a free trade agreement between the nations of the Pacific Rim sounds very promising, and if implemented it would likely resound to our benefit here in Hawaii, and also to residents of California and Washington, among others.

    But while I'd really like to back the president on this, I just can't. His administration's refusal to clue us all in on the agreement's particulars, and preference instead to patronize us with plaintive pleas to thrust them, was the red flag for me.

    This is not how democracy is supposed to work. I have no problem with the private conduct of international negotiations and diplomacy outside the public spotlight, but once an agreement between the parties is reached, as citizens we have the right to know what's been accomplished in our name.

    I mean, we've been provided the details of the multi-power nuclear accord with Iran, even if some people are refusing for obvious political reasons to actually read it. But that same policy of public disclosure is now somehow inapplicable to an international trade agreement? I don't think so.

    I was burned once before when the powers that be convinced me against my better judgment as a citizen to support NAFTA, and I certainly won't be making that same mistake twice. This time if I'm errant, it will be on the side of caution.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Wonder if the flip flop will hurt (none / 0) (#74)
    by ragebot on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 04:21:23 PM EST
    Hillary was called out on this in August and the NPR interview confirms the flipflop

    Parent
    Flip Flop... (5.00 / 4) (#82)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 05:17:27 PM EST
    ...was coined and and seems to be an issue with the people who won't vote for her, progress is something most people on the left like.

    She has said it about others things, that she is constantly learning and re-evaluating her positions, and yes, some of her positions have changed over time.  Personally I think, not always, that it shows a person with integrity, to admit that maybe their previous position was not the right one.

    That being said, you can never tell with a politician, they will jump ship in a heartbeat if it means more votes.  Which is what they should do, they should generally be on the side of consensus of their voters.

    But thanks for your concern anyways.

    And for the record, liberals aren't going to get too worked up over a politician 'flip-flopping' when they end up taking a liberal position on anything.  Just like I don't see too many conservatives freaking out over Trump's new found dislike of abortion, I mean come on.


    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#77)
    by FlJoe on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 04:42:05 PM EST
    she could plausibly pin this one on her boss.

     I'm glad that she did the right thing even if she is accused of flip flopping.

    Parent

    She actually left lots of wiggle room (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by CoralGables on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 04:46:03 PM EST
    "Knowing what I know now" while acknowledging she doesn't know yet what's in it.

    Parent
    A politician (none / 0) (#79)
    by FlJoe on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 04:53:01 PM EST
    leaving themselves wiggle room? How odd.

    Still hopeful news for those of us hoping that Hillary would be pulled to the left while helping to drag this ugly deal into the spotlight.

    Parent

    Did she of did she not (none / 0) (#83)
    by oculus on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 05:21:12 PM EST
    lay the groundwork for this agreement while she was Secretary of State?  Whatever that means.

    Parent
    Exactly. Whatever that means. (none / 0) (#86)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 05:57:52 PM EST
    As Shakespeare once allegedly wrote after doing mushrooms, "To be of not to be, what is the question." ;-D

    But seriously, though, the current TPP accord is rooted in the already existing Trans-Pacific Economic Partnership Agreement that was signed back in 2006 by the nations of Brunei, Singapore, New Zealand and Chile. Negotiations to expand that agreement to include the United States and other Pacific Rim countries were commenced by the late Bush administration in 2008. The Obama administration maintained that initiative when it assumed office the following year.

    So, given that: (a) Hillary Clinton stepped down as Secretary of State about 31 months ago, and (b) the TPP accord was only just finalized two days ago by all twelve parties to its negotiations, perhaps you could further expound on what exactly you believe her "groundwork" to have been.

    For my part, while I'm hardly a former Secretary of State, I also once thought TPP to be in our country's best interests. But right now, given what I've heard about the agreement that was just reached, my doubts about it are such that I cannot support its ratification by our Congress.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    While this may not qualify as (none / 0) (#91)
    by Anne on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 06:31:34 PM EST
    "laying groundword," it does speak to her familiarity with the Agreement, and she does appear to have had some opinions about it:

    During her time as secretary of state, from 2009 to 2013, Clinton was a strong supporter of the TPP. CNN has a fun article documenting 45 times Secretary Clinton spoke out in favor of the deal, which was then in the early stages of negotiation. She even said in 2012 that "this TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements."


    Link

    You may want to read the entire article, both at Vox and at CNN, but the excerpt seems to address your more specific question.

    Parent

    I've now read both articles.* (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by oculus on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 07:14:10 PM EST
    As President Obama's Secretary of State, apparently her role was to encourage other countries to participate in negotiating the trade agreement. I have not seen any indication she was empowered to negotiate the terms of the agreement, which was in flux.  It seems to me it would have been inappropriate for her, while Secretary of State, to undermine the U.S. President while working for him and while the agreement was being negotiated.

    *. The author of the Vox article is an adjunct to the Cato Institute.  

    Parent

    "groundworK" (none / 0) (#92)
    by Anne on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 06:33:40 PM EST
    Sheesh.  Eyes must be more tired than usual.

    Parent
    An astute response (none / 0) (#97)
    by christinep on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 07:17:34 PM EST
    It is sensible to be concerned about currency manipulation and what specific steps are taken to help American workers.  Clinton, more than once, uses the sensible phrase "what I know now."  

    There will be lots more to come, certainly.  IMO, this position is responsive to all our interests and concerns.  Sensible.

    Parent

    So what? (none / 0) (#84)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 05:31:14 PM EST
    People can and do change their minds on various matters all the time, for whatever their reasons. And politicians being people, they're no different than the rest of us. Has Marco Rubio's flip-flops on the subject of immigration reform hurt him? Not really, as far as I can tell.

    I think it's rather foolish to expect public officials to remain firmly and consistently wedded to a particular policy stance or decision, especially as circumstances tend to evolve over time -- even if those changed circumstances are sometimes political.

    That's one of the things which used to really irritate me about the late Tim Russert on NBC's Meet the Press, because his game of "Gotcha!" was really not very enlightening, especially when his wholly arbitrary method of play was not at all evenhanded.

    Look, it's a perfectly legitimate question when journalists ask candidates or public officials to explain why they've apparently changed their mind regarding their public stance on a particular issue. And it's entirely up to those candidates or public officials to then be able to fully articulate their reasons for having done so.

    But that's not what those who play "Gotcha!" do. Rather, their intent is to confront their targets with apparent inconsistencies in their public statements, which are often taken out of context, and then demand that they immediately reconcile what otherwise looks to be obvious contradictions.

    And more often than not, those journalists who engage in these rather disreputable tactics are doing so in furtherance of an agenda which, particularly in the case of Fox News, is otherwise obvious, rather than seeking to actually enlighten the general public.

    It wasn't too long ago when "three strikes" laws were all the rage among politicians of both major parties, who couldn't enact such policies quickly enough. Today, as we clearly struggle to deal with the serious fiscal consequences of those hasty decisions, those who continue to advocate for such laws sound increasingly dogmatic and out of touch.

    I, for one, respect public officials who will adapt their views accordingly in light of further information, even if it runs completely counter to what they formerly advocated in public, rather than simply double down on stupid in stubborn refusal to acknowledge the obvious reality of a given situation. TPP is a legitimate campaign issue, given the public's obvious hesitancy to support such an agreement. If Mrs. Clinton has changed her mind, she's reflecting that public opinion.

    I'm of the opinion that we should instead be far more concerned with those politicians who are clearly making public promises that are either undeliverable, e.g., their perpetual vows to repeal Obamacare and same-sex marriage, or profoundly reckless, foolish and shortsighted, e.g., stating categorically that they would renege on the six-power nuclear accord with Iran.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Only (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 06:26:34 PM EST
    conservatives see changing your mind as a bad thing. Most people will change their minds as new facts come to light. It's also called mental growth but I don't have the patience to explain that type of thing to people who are still maturity-wise stuck in middle school.

    Parent
    Don't look now (none / 0) (#103)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:00:37 PM EST
    but the FBI has just seized two State Department computers.

    What in the world is that all about??

    lol

    You can always (5.00 / 2) (#108)
    by jondee on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:51:45 PM EST
    wish upon a tea bag it has something to do with Hillary.

    lol

    Parent

    Hacking. (none / 0) (#105)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:19:12 PM EST
    They were hacked.

    Parent
    I was wrong. It was four (none / 0) (#121)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:09:00 AM EST
    The FBI has seized four State Department computer servers as part of its probe into how classified information was compromised on former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private email system, according to people familiar with the investigation.

    The four servers, which were located at the State Department's headquarters building, were seized by the FBI several weeks ago. They are being checked by technical forensic analysts charged with determining how Top Secret material was sent to Clinton's private email by State Department aides during her tenure as secretary from 2009 to 2013, said two people familiar with the probe. The people spoke on condition of anonymity because it is an ongoing investigation

    Link

    Parent

    Hope and wish and pray (none / 0) (#128)
    by jondee on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 12:48:11 PM EST
    that they nail all those liberals to the wall in one hand, and sh*t in the other, and see which one fills up first.

    Parent
    Scared , aren't you! (none / 0) (#141)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:14:38 PM EST
    Scared of what, exactly? (none / 0) (#147)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:47:49 PM EST
    I'm sure President Romney will forgive her. Oh, that's right, he isn't president, is he, even though you predicted that he'd win. My bad. Please give us a call when you finally disembark from HMS Bounty upon its return to Portsmouth from Tahiti.

    Parent
    You are scared to know the truth, Captain (none / 0) (#156)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 07:47:00 AM EST
    Bligh.

    Parent
    Just wait till President Romney-Walker (none / 0) (#157)
    by jondee on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 08:03:48 AM EST
    gets to the bottom of that Benghazi investigation..

    The truth shall set you free, Donald.

    Parent

    Murder Close to Home (none / 0) (#106)
    by Repack Rider on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:27:23 PM EST
    Two days ago a murder victim was found on a trail where I ride my mountain bike all the time.  The victim was found where the trail is close to a major road, and connected by a short spur to a pull out spot.  Apparently the victim parked there to walk the dog.  The killers fled in his vehicle.

    The most recent murder in Marin County before that was in June.  I can't remember when there was a murder in sleepy Fairfax.

    Three suspects were arrested today in Portland 600 miles to the north.  Modern technology had much to do with the arrest, as all three suspects had been captured on surveillance videos in commercial establishments on the day of the murder, and the stolen vehicle was tracked by its internal GPS device.

    Very sad. (none / 0) (#107)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 09:40:40 PM EST
    The articles I read didn't state a motive for the killers. Did they even have one?

    Parent
    American Horror Story (none / 0) (#109)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 10:01:13 PM EST
    Oh my stars and garters.

    If there was a Emmy for Most Twisted Dramatic Series it would have noooooo competition.   And Lady Gaga has not even shown up yet.

    So good (none / 0) (#111)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Oct 07, 2015 at 10:57:32 PM EST
    So so good.  No Jessica Lange this year but Lady Gaga and Chloe Sevigny should make up for that.

    Lady Gaga has an amazing face.  It's like one of those old screen star faces.  Not pretty.  Beautiful.  Individually the features are not all perfect (nose+) but somehow they all work together.  Even more she has "presence".  Mae West & Garbo presence.

    This will be fun.

    Parent

    On premiers most disturbing scene (none / 0) (#118)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 08:45:59 AM EST
    So, back to our questions: What? Why???

    According to Ryan Murphy, the demon is a metaphor.

    "He is a representation of that and what people go through fighting addiction," Murphy told EW, describing the scene as the series' "most disturbing" so far. "It's not done lightly or blithely. I think it's very powerful and strong."

    Lady Gaga echoed that explanation as she discussed this season's central themes with The Hollywood Reporter earlier this week. Season 5, she said, is all about addiction.

    "What's interesting about this season is that you see the dichotomy of the two worlds: You have the hotel world, which feels decidedly like the Ryan Murphy world, and then you have the outside world," Gaga said. "It's addiction as the public sees it versus how it really is and how that all plays into each other." The gripping reality of full-blown addiction is, surely, very painful.

    And while drug abuse provides a convenient example to kick off the season, "Hotel" will explore other variants, too.

    "The way that we can all be addicts in different ways that are detrimental to our health is a big part of this season," five-time "AHS" star Sarah Paulson told The Hollywood Reporter. "Whether it be love addictions, sex addictions, drugs addictions, alcohol addictions."

    As for Greenfield, it's pretty clear this was the "emotionally terrifying" scene he alluded to in a red carpet interview with PopSugar about the premiere. "I can say that I'm a different person for having shot the show," he explained. But he knew what a challenge it would be.

    "There was a moment of pause, and then I was like, `OK. Let's do it,'" the actor told Vulture on doing the scene.

    "[Murphy] wanted it to be graphic, and I think he wanted it to be intense and to shock people."

    Mission accomplished, guys.



    Parent
    Shady Sh*t (none / 0) (#125)
    by Uncle Chip on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:31:23 AM EST
    Hillary email scandal just took a turn for the worst

    What is Clinton trying to hide?

    The morning after the Datto news broke, the Washington Free Beacon reported that the FBI has seized four State Department servers in its probe of Clinton's personal email system.

    Investigators want to know "how top secret material was sent to Clinton's private email by State Department aides."

    Remember, Clinton has said multiple times that there was never classified material in her personal email. Yet there it is, and the FBI wants to know why.

    Clinton has also said constantly that she has turned over all the emails that investigators and officials have asked for. She even signed a statement in which she swore "under penalty of perjury" that she had produced all emails that were, or potentially were, federal records.

    Yet, as we have noted, officials keep asking for more emails because they don't think Clinton has handed over everything. So we naturally wonder if she perjured herself when she signed the statement.



    Oh.... (none / 0) (#126)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:45:11 AM EST
    I so enjoy Chip's attempts at a drive by (5.00 / 2) (#127)
    by CoralGables on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 12:35:26 PM EST
    while brandishing a squirt gun.

    Parent
    If that's a squirt gun, ... (none / 0) (#148)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:49:35 PM EST
    ... then why is his fly open?

    Parent
    Baa waa waa (none / 0) (#132)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 04:12:52 PM EST
    Keep wishing and hoping and dreaming.

    Parent
    I Think It's Pretty Funny... (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 04:22:28 PM EST
    ...that even after the entire 'scandal' is outed by a republican as a political witch hunt, they can't turn off the idiot brigade who still thinks it's about emails.

    Also notice, no republicans clocking in after the House fiasco earlier today.  They disappear like fricken magic.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#152)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 06:06:40 AM EST
    I don't believe the FBI and Federal judges seizing 4 State Department servers, requesting more and more e mails share in your lighthearted view of what is progressing

    Parent
    Do you realize (none / 0) (#153)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 07:05:58 AM EST
    that Hillary has been out of the state department for years and those servers have been sitting there the entire time? You guys claim her server was "seized" too and that was a lie.

    Look all of this is nothing more than the wingnut welfare brigade trying to keep people like you in line and Trey Gowdy shopping garbage because he's mad he's been exposed as a fraud. His career is now ruined. Who wants a crazy conspiracy theorist as a prosecutor or a defense attorney? Maybe the wingnut welfare brigade will hire him is I guess what he is hoping.

    Parent

    "wingnut welfare" (none / 0) (#154)
    by Anne on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 07:34:29 AM EST
    Your use of this term puzzles me.  

    RationalWiki defines the term, as follows:

    Wingnut welfare refers to jobs or deals offered to conservatives on the basis of ideological purity rather than talent or experience. The term was coined in 2005 by blogger Jane Hamsher, who used it in reference to Pajamas Media.[2] It has since become a popular term among liberal bloggers.

    Wingnut welfare typically describes positions at conservative publishing houses, opinion journals, and websites. However, not all such positions are considered wingnut welfare. The term is generally applied to those positions or deals which are divorced from free-market business principles. Put simply, wingnut welfare recipients are not expected to generate profit or even make any money at all, but rather, to act as "loss leaders" in the promotion of right-wing ideas to the masses. Such operations are heavily subsidized by wealthy benefactors such as William Regnery Jr. and Richard Mellon Scaife, and organizations such as the John M. Olin Foundation.

    I think the people you're talking about are just plain wingnuts - no welfare of any kind involved.

    Stupid thing to be bugged about, I know, but what can I say - it just does!

    Parent

    Yes (none / 0) (#155)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 07:39:33 AM EST
    that's it. It's pretty much the whole fleece the rubes contention and it doesn't matter how much they fail or how much they lie people like Trevor swallow their stories whole simply because they WANT to believe.

    In all honesty it's very, very sad.

    Parent

    You gotta love investors.com! (none / 0) (#151)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 10:58:44 PM EST
    While I'm not quite sure if combining sober business reporting with a "madman in the attic" editorial perspective makes for a very compelling marketing strategy, I have to give them props for mixing it up like that and keeping people guessing.

    Parent
    I heard on the tube (none / 0) (#161)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 03:42:40 PM EST
    That the "freedom caucus" is pushing back and undermining Paul Ryan.

    A quick look did not find a link.  But I heard it a couple of times on MSNBC.

    The must really want more Agent Orange

    This might be related (none / 0) (#162)
    by MO Blue on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 03:48:47 PM EST
    Get ready for (none / 0) (#163)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 04:06:27 PM EST
    I Guess the Whole Reagan Rule... (none / 0) (#164)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 04:06:59 PM EST
    ...about criticizing fellow republicans is no longer in effect:
    Rep. Pete King (R-N.Y.) said that if hardliners reject Ryan, "they would lose all credibility."

    "Listen, these guys don't know what they're doing anyway. They would prove to the American people they have no idea what they're talking about," King said.

    Credibility, that's a good one.

    When is this going come to a head, at the convention, something had got to give.  Between the speaker, the nominee, and the election, that party is going to have melt-down, they can't function like this for much longer.


    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#166)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 04:14:52 PM EST
    Pete King is no white knight but he has been saying stuff like this about the full mooners for years.
    He once described Joe Scarborough as someone who might have just walked barefoot out of a tent revival.

    I think it will be more Boehner.   I think Ryan is too smart to do this.  But who knows.  The pressure is fierce.   Some, like Jie Scarborough,  are saying things like "if he cares about the country, he will do it"

    Parent

    front page (none / 0) (#168)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 05:31:27 PM EST
    of our newspaper said Lynne Westmoreland had stepped up to run for speaker. I guess that did not even make a blip in the DC press. He's another Kevin McCarthy in the brain department.

    Parent
    Sure they can. (none / 0) (#172)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Oct 10, 2015 at 02:57:50 AM EST
    ScottW714: "Between the speaker, the nominee, and the election, that party is going to have melt-down, they can't function like this for much longer."

    Just watch them. We've got wingbats posting here who are convinced that Mrs. Clinton is going to be arrested and indicted -- which will apparently happen once the FBI finds the cached copy of the old White House surveillance tape on her server that shows her shooting Vince Foster.

    ;-P

    Parent

    This (none / 0) (#165)
    by FlJoe on Fri Oct 09, 2015 at 04:14:05 PM EST
    Freedom Caucus is distilled crazy, 190 proof wingnut. Led by good old Taliban Dan. Grayson for Senate!

    Parent
    Allure of the `Anti-Politician' (none / 0) (#173)
    by Mr Natural on Sat Oct 10, 2015 at 11:06:56 AM EST
    NYT: Flat Wages Add to Allure of the `Anti-Politician' in Reliably Red States
    "Ken Ard, South Carolina's former lieutenant governor, has an accent that is the audio equivalent of a chummy slap on the back. Everything he says sounds folksy and congenial. This is true even when he is berating Washington's political establishment, which he does often these days as the host of a morning show on Live 95.3, a talk-radio station in Florence, S.C.

    There is a large part of me that wants to blow it up," he said on air recently. "That's the Donald Trump side. A large part of me says, `Hey, man, we've got a plutocracy that's bought and sold to special interests. It's crony capitalism.' And here comes this crazy fool that doesn't stand anywhere on any policy other than all over the place. But I believe he'd blow up the building."

    By "the building," Mr. Ard means the federal political system, broadly speaking. Though he joked that if Mr. Trump blew up the White House, he'd construct a hotel on the premises and then crow about it: "He'd say, `That's one of the great addresses of all time, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, and I've got a property there.' "



    "Friedman, read your Chomsky:" (none / 0) (#176)
    by Mr Natural on Sat Oct 10, 2015 at 03:01:13 PM EST
    Thomas Friedman, read your Chomsky: The New York Times gets Putin/Obama all wrong, again

    My three favorite questions of late, it also happens, have to do with Syria. And let there be no doubt: It is all over for the Obama administration, the Pentagon, the spooks and all others still pretending there is a "moderate opposition" that will carry the day in the many-sided Syrian conflict. Washington has slipped its grip. Others are in charge now, and as they pursue a solution to this crisis the only choice open to the U.S. is whether or not to join in the effort. It will be interesting to see which alternative the White House and the State Department choose.

    "I cannot help asking those who have caused the situation, Do you realize now what you've done?" This is the first good question.

    Vladimir Putin posed it in his speech to the U.N. General Assembly 10 days ago. Sensibly, the Russian president added, "But I am afraid no one is going to answer that." To offer modest assistance, Mr. Putin, the U.S. leadership knows exactly what it has done, and this is why you are correct: Your query will go without reply.