Tuesday Open Thread

Time for a new open thread. All topics welcome.

In entertainment news, Netflix' new releases for July have been announced. On July 1, it will add both La Reina del Sur and El Senor de los Cielos, Seasons 1 and 2. Watching on Netflix is much better than the networks' internet sites or You Tube. No commercials, they have good subtitles and they don't stop every 10 minutes to play the show's theme song. I just finished watching all 80 episodes of En La Boca del Lobo. It's the story of the former security chief for the Cali Cartel who turned on them and led to their arrest and the demise of the cartel. (Of course that just led to the rise of the Norte Valle cartel, but that's another story, told in El Cartel de los Sapos.) He's now living with his family in the U.S. under an assumed name. [More...]

It was made by Sony and doesn't have the fast-pace and action of Colombian narcodramas, but it was good and mostly historically accurate (in the sense that it pretty much matches the renditions given in U.S. court cases.) It's more about corruption in Colombian politics, the military and police force than it is about drugs. Wiretapping and bribes ruled the day.

One character who doesn't come off well in the series is William Rodriguez-Abadia, the son and nephew of Cali cartel leaders and brothers Miguel and Gilberto Rodriguez-Orejeula. They are doing 30 years in the U.S.. William cooperated against them (reportedly with their permission) so more than 20 other family members wouldn't be charged and the family would get to keep a large amount of assets and be taken off the OFAC sanctions list. He was initially sentenced to 21 years, later reduced to 5. He too is now living in the U.S. with his family.

He wrote a book last year, "I am the Son of the Cali Cartel", confirming that the Cali Cartel gave millions to the campaign of former Colombian President Ernesto Samper. (The book is only available in Spanish.)

And here's what I found on PACER: William Rodriguez Abadia's 2013 motion for early termination of supervised release, in which his lawyer writes that Joe Biden attended his daughter's high school graduation. (I've whited out all personal identifiers and details as to his wife and daughters, they aren't the story.)

I wish Netflix would pay for subtitles of Los Tres Caines (the story of the paramilitary Castano brothers) and La Ruta Blanca and air them in the U.S. As for MundoFox, the station that carried it in Denver has filed for bankruptcy and it's now the Christian Broadcasting Network. So no more MundoFox here.

Again, this is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< al-Baghdadi's Ex-Wife Gives Birth in Lebanon | Benghazi Suspect Ali Awni al-Harzi Killed in Mosul Drone Strike >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    So much for the death of Fast Track (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Anne on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 08:49:45 AM EST
    and the TPP:

       President Obama's fast-track trade bill is poised to clear a procedural hurdle Tuesday in the Senate, all but ensuring it will win final passage this week and be sent to the White House for his signature.

        Despite deep reservations from many in the president's party, enough Democratic senators appear ready to join most Republicans to finish the legislation, which has sputtered in Congress but is a top White House priority.


       McConnell (R-Ky.) can afford to lose only three of the 14 pro-trade Democrats who last month backed a package granting Obama "fast-track" trade authority and a companion measure to help workers who lose their jobs to free trade. But the Senate on Tuesday is voting only on so-called Trade Promotion Authority, not the workers aid, which is known as Trade Adjustment Assistance. That has some Democrats nervous about whether a separate effort to approve worker assistance will succeed, given that Republicans strongly oppose the program.

        Organized by Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), who is threatening to vote no, a group of pro-trade Democrats huddled for a strategy session in the Capitol on Monday evening. Most emerged tight-lipped, but several Democrats said that the vote is likely to succeed on Tuesday morning.

    Where is Hillary Clinton in all of this?

    Hillary Rodham Clinton said she would "probably not" vote for fast-track authority for the trade deal that President Obama is seeking, but she acknowledged that she once said positive things about "the potential" for the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement.

    Mrs. Clinton made the comments in an interview with Jon Ralston, a Nevada journalist, after spending Thursday in the state, which holds early caucuses.

    Mrs. Clinton, who has not taken a yes-or-no position on the trade deal, which is strongly opposed by labor groups, is in a bind over an agreement she once praised as a potential "gold standard" for trade deals when she was secretary of state.

    "I said positive things about the process and the potential," said Mrs. Clinton, who occasionally called Mr. Ralston "Joe" during the interview.

    "Some people don't like any trade agreement, and some people are willing to take any trade agreement," she said. Asked whether she would vote in favor of fast-track authority if she were still in the Senate, Mrs. Clinton replied, "Probably not, because that's a process vote, and I don't want to say that's the same as T.P.P."

    So...does this mean "no" on process and maybe/possibly/perhaps on TPP, or what?  Oh, wait - maybe she doesn't know what's in the TPP, since it's under lock-and-key and only available to members of Congress and select others.

    Guess she's just waiting to see which way the winds are blowing.  How...presidential of her.

    That's because (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 09:03:47 AM EST
    Fast Track passed the first time in both the Senate and the House. What the Dems in the House voted against was something they were in favor of which is Trade Adjustment Assistance which was set up as a package deal where both needed to pass.

    Anytime you vote against something you like it can come back and bite you in the butt.


    And anytime you let the GOP (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Anne on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 09:19:22 AM EST
    separate out the components and go along with their insistence that you first vote for what they want before they allow a vote on what you want, the risk is classic Lucy-and-the-football.

    That being said, I think there's a reason Congress has refused for so many years to grant fast track authority to presidents, and when you combine that with the lengths the president has gone to to prevent informed discussion among the American people, it just seems like a colossally bad idea.

    It may be time to give Hillary a pair of tap shoes, though, so she can at least entertain us while she tap dances around this issue.  I'm sure she'll have something terribly relevant and definite once the votes are in and it's a done deal.


    Fast Track Trade Bills (none / 0) (#12)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 09:25:58 AM EST
    endorsed by a President still get a vote in Congress. They just can't attach their own personal amendments to the bill. I'd personally think any Presidential candidate would be in favor of it once they are in office.

    If Congress doesn't like the agreement of a trade bill drawn up by a President they can vote it down.


    yep (none / 0) (#36)
    by sj on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:31:39 AM EST
    they voted against the only teeny-tiny sliver of light in that whole mountain of sludge.

    Fabricated sexual assault reports are (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 10:46:16 AM EST
    Very very rare.  My spouse now teaches the military sexual assault course to senior leadership now at one of the military colleges, and this focus on the 3 percent of false reports has been spiritually destroying the 97 percent who are raped and sexually assaulted.  It has been horribly damaging to morale and the overall mental health and well being of everyone as well...so no...not interested in the slightest.

    We're supposed to be circumspect (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 12:06:49 PM EST
    so I won't tell you what I thought after reading the blog posts at his last two links.  

    creepy, right? (none / 0) (#57)
    by sj on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 01:32:31 PM EST
    Granted, I'm making an assumption because no way am I going there again.

    OMG, I can't even... (none / 0) (#67)
    by Anne on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:04:12 PM EST
    I'm still trying to forget about the comment he posted about the child-sized doll.

    If I never had to read another comment from him, it would be too soon.


    how do you explain . . . (none / 0) (#166)
    by zaitztheunconvicted on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 10:12:24 PM EST
    How do you explain the fact that she told police she had no description of the attacker because it was too dark, and that she told news media it was 6 p.m. and fairly light out when the attack occurred . . .?

    One exception comes to mind... (none / 0) (#77)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:37:27 PM EST
    recently brought back to the limelight by the psychotic ravings of the mass murderer du'jour...the sordid history of false rape/sexual assault allegations against black men by white women, particularly in the south.

    Today false allegations are very rare, in the past not so much when a white woman got caught with a black man and cried rape to save face.


    Sad, I'm not sure all accusations (none / 0) (#110)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 04:57:54 PM EST
    Involved actual sexual relations though. Uber sadly it could have been anything, a black man refusing sex, a black man making you feel a little irritated, maybe you just wanted to be the center of some attention that day.  Horrifying time in our history.  But anyone black was in danger.  A white man could say a black woman said something derogatory to him and beat her into intensive care and that was okay too.  And how many black women refused a white man's private sexual advances in the Jim Crow days?  The knife sickeningly cut both ways, and always away from white flesh.

    Quarterfinals here we come... (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 12:21:19 PM EST
    USWNT holds off Colombia 2-Nil to advance, but it wasn't pretty.  Colombia played a lot prettier imo, but could not penetrate our backline for any good chances.  They played their arses off though, and were down a woman for almost the entire second half.  I tip my cap to Las Cafeteras...  

    Win came at a high cost, Megan Rapinoe & Lauren Holiday are out against China...that hurts.  And Abby Wambach is looking a little long in the tooth.  I think the team would be better served with her coming off the bench as a late offensive spark, and Sydney Leroux getting the starting nod opposite Alex Morgan instead.

    But a win is a win is a win...Beat China!

    Losing Pinoe and Holiday for the China (none / 0) (#129)
    by caseyOR on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 06:50:46 PM EST
    game is tough. At least one of those yellow cards was, IMO, ridiculous, but that happens.

    Abby has clearly lost a step. I know the faux grass is a difficult surface on which to play, but a good player adapts to the conditions. Still, Abby has some real skills. I agree that using her as a sub would be best for the team, and probably for Abby.

    The US bench is deep. So, as much as I love to see Pinoe play, we have talent that can replace her.

    So, yeah, Beat China!!!


    No knock at all.. (none / 0) (#201)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 09:53:17 AM EST
    on the greatest American striker of all time's skills...I just can't imagine a better sub scenario than needing a goal and bringing Wambach's golden dome off the bench to head one home against tiring opponents.  

    Let the kids do the running and scoring with their quick feet in the first half. Especially against China, missing Pinoe's pinpoint passing and killer crosses.

    otoh, with Pinoe out Wambach's leadership skills could be needed on the pitch.  Glad I'm not the manager!



    Fox broadcasting today (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by MKS on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 01:39:03 AM EST
    an installment from its staple series, Blacks Behaving Badly.

    Today's fare was Greta and company dumping on the African American District Attorney in Baltimore, and they all agreed it was not murder in Baltimore, but an accident.

    Still broadcasting racist dog whistles.

    It gets worse (none / 0) (#176)
    by MKS on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 01:55:05 AM EST
    On Greta's show, support for Tom Brady....Major scolding of P. Diddy.

    Criticism for all Blacks; sympathy for all whites....

    God, it is horrid.  


    Late to the party, I see. (5.00 / 1) (#203)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 10:49:09 AM EST
    Uncle Chip: "In the meantime the Mosby and her ME should gag themselves."

    You go first.

    Confederate Flag Taken Down From AL Capitol (5.00 / 3) (#204)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 11:07:20 AM EST
    Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley ordered the four Confederate flags on the state Capitol grounds in Montgomery to be taken down Wednesday morning, NBC News has learned.

    Bentley told AL.com that his decision came, in part, as a response to the Charleston massacre as well as to avoid drawn-out political fights over the flag.

    This made me laugh:

    "This is the right thing to do. We are facing some major issues in this state regarding the budget and other matters that we need to deal with," Bentley said. "This had the potential to become a major distraction as we go forward. I have taxes to raise, we have work to do. And it was my decision that the flag needed to come down."

    You know it's a problem when a republican governor would rather deal with raising taxes than a flag.


    Another LINK:

    A South Carolina lawmaker says the governor should take the Confederate flag down for "repairs" while a black senator slain in the Charleston church attack lies in state at the Capitol on Wednesday.

    "I hope that the governor would look up at the flag, as I did yesterday, and notice that it looks a little wind-torn," he said.

    Freddy Gray autopsy leaked (2.00 / 1) (#124)
    by Redbrow on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 06:42:09 PM EST
    Of course it is the Baltimore Sun, who Mosby exclusively embedded in her task force.

    The defense has not even received the autopsy yet.

    Where does it state that the (none / 0) (#135)
    by Anne on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:09:49 PM EST
    defense hasn't received a copy?  It says that it hasn't been made public and that the deadline for evidence to be turned over to the defense is Friday.  Since Mosby's office declined any comment, I'm not sure we can infer that the defense does not have the autopsy report.

    Oh, and it wasn't Mosby's task force to which The Sun was given access, it was the police department's task force.  You can read about it here.

    Try to keep up.


    several of the news articles (2.00 / 1) (#195)
    by zaitztheunconvicted on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 09:29:27 AM EST
    Several of the news articles have quoted the defense as saying that they have not yet received the autopsy findings.  You are hoping that I or others would find one and link to it for you?

    I have since seen this, also, and (none / 0) (#200)
    by Anne on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 09:43:54 AM EST
    in fact quoted from one of them.

    I had to point this out to you (none / 0) (#145)
    by Redbrow on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:35:32 PM EST
    the ast time you conveniently overlooked this part of the story you linked to. It clearly states Mosby's prosecutors were part of the task force.

    Later on Friday, Mosby said the charges were the result of prosecutors working 12- and 14-hour days alongside police investigators.

    Did you read all the words? (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by Anne on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 08:27:40 PM EST
    The task force was a police department task force; they were funneling information to the SA's office, they were communicating with them, but it was not a joint task force.

    Did you get to the part where the task force was more or less blindsided by Mosby's announcement of charges being filed?  Don't you think they'd have had some inkling that was coming if it had been a joint task force?

    Never mind; I don't have patience for stupid.


    Perfect final paragraph to your synopsis (none / 0) (#154)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 08:52:23 PM EST
    Police officers investigate (none / 0) (#155)
    by Redbrow on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 08:53:30 PM EST
    All day, everyday. They don't give it a special name,

    Politician's create "task forces".


    Police task force: (none / 0) (#183)
    by Anne on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 07:58:31 AM EST
    Baltimore police convened a task force to study the case after Gray was injured and eventually zeroed in on Goodson as the only officer investigators believed could be criminally charged. Task force members said the charge that most likely fit in Goodson's case was involuntary manslaughter.

    The Baltimore Sun was granted special access to the task force's investigation.

    Police investigators consulted with the medical examiner who performed Gray's autopsy, but the task force did not have access to a full autopsy during its investigation.

    Link - and my emphasis.

    I hope that settles the question of the task force and The Sun's access to it, once and for all.


    Reading comprehension required (none / 0) (#157)
    by Redbrow on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 09:10:56 PM EST
    Mosby's office and the chief medical examiner, David Fowler, declined to comment, as did the defense attorneys for the officers, who said they have not received the autopsy.

    So...you can read after all. (none / 0) (#163)
    by Anne on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 09:35:22 PM EST

    A spokesman for the Maryland medical examiner and for the prosecutor's office declined Tuesday to release the report, but State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby condemned the leak in a statement.

    "I want to make it very clear that the state's attorney's office did not release the Freddie Gray autopsy report. As I have repeatedly stated, I strongly condemn anyone with access to trial evidence who has leaked information prior to the resolution of this case," she said.

    Attorneys for the officers released a joint statement saying they had not yet received the report, although Mosby is expected to turn it over to the defense by Friday. The defense attorneys said they believed only the prosecutor and the medical examiner's office had copies.

    The newspaper reported it obtained a copy of the autopsy, and sources who verified it for the Sun requested anonymity because of the high-profile nature of the case.

    I suppose reports of a lack of (none / 0) (#1)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:35:35 AM EST
    open threads on this blog due to moi were premature.

    not just premature (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:41:00 AM EST
    Sometimes I get busy and forget to put them up. It has nothing to do with any individual commenters.

    Mr Natural on the last open thread (none / 0) (#3)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 08:41:17 AM EST
    posted about Rush Limbaugh losing his prime location on the Boston dial. I was wondering what kind of radio is taking his place...still talk? AM going back to music?

    Still making 50 million a year. If that is not obscene I don't know what is.  

    Well, this is America, and (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by NYShooter on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 09:18:17 AM EST
    you're paid based on what amount of income your performance brings to the company. A first round draft pick in the NFL this year can expect a 20 million dollar contract (four years,) and a $15,000,0000 signing bonus. And, that's before he even knows where the restrooms are. But, I don't begrudge them, just imagine how many "fannies" such a Star puts into the seats.

    At least the players today are getting a more fair share of the income their play produces.

    In my day, the greatest player of all time (IMO) was Mickey Mantle. In 1956 he won the triple crown, a tremendous, rare feat, and was paid the princely sum of around 50 grand. It would be another 5-6 years of record breaking performance before reaching his zenith in pay, $100,000. If he played today, he'd get somewhere around 100 million.

    And, that example is a glimpse of just how fair the millionaire owners of those enterprises are. Mantle played before there was a player's union, what a shame.


    Yeah, but he is apparently not bringing (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:12:40 AM EST
    in much money to the networks any more. Just has a sweetheart deal long term contract. Like your NFL start getting a 20 year contract which will outlive his playing days and income generation abilities.

    I guess it just makes me sick that basically hate speech has made so much money for both him and the networks over the years. Sad testament to the tastes of this country.


    Yeah, I have to apologize to you. (none / 0) (#148)
    by NYShooter on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:45:37 PM EST
    You were talking about Limbaugh, but I got carried away with my Mantle analogy.

    Anyway, the principal is the same. Some make oodles of money because they can play Mozart like the Angels wished they could. Others make equal moneys screeching and cursing at ear-splitting decibels that have you reaching for the Excedrins, and the barf bag.

    It is sad with how we, as a culture, value things. Some drug-addled nin-com-poop finds some gimmick that he can sell to our under-educated youth, and make tens of millions of dollars. But, the kid who studied for decades, and continues studying so that, some day, he/she might improve, and brighten autistic children's lives, and let them have normal dreams and aspirations for their futures, he'll spend the next 10-20 years trying to pay off his student loan.

    It ain't fair, but.......you know how that sentence ends.


    FYI - Inflation Calculator (none / 0) (#11)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 09:25:55 AM EST
    According to THIS website:
    $100,000 of 1956 dollars would be worth: $869,565.22 in 2014

    $100,000 of 2014 dollars would be worth $11,500.00 in 1956

    FWIW, Mantle retired in 1969, (none / 0) (#15)
    by NYShooter on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 09:46:24 AM EST
    his raise to $100,000 in '56 was the last raise he ever got.

    Of course (none / 0) (#39)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:43:51 AM EST
    There also wasn't the additional money streams like there are today. There was no daily televised baseball. There was only one game of the week. No TBS, no ESPN, no NESN, no Fox Sports, and MLB merchandise licensing agreements didn't even start until 1966.

    The TV rights in the early 60's were sold for the grand total of a little over $5 million. Today you can watch every game played and the TV deals alone bring in more than 150 times what they did when Mantle played.

    Using inflation is misleading. With the additional money stream available today, Mantle's $100,000 is more the equivalent of $20,000,000.


    Sure, with so many variables (none / 0) (#150)
    by NYShooter on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 08:08:14 PM EST
    you can juggle the data however you want to, and, based on your agenda's goal, come up with whatever result you're looking for.

    But, one thing popped out here, and it doesn't need to be adjusted for circumstances many decades ago. And, that's the huge pay differential athletes today are getting VS athletes just a few years earlier. And, the good news is that its a win-win all the way around. What I'm talking about is how much good that having a strong Player's Union did for everyone involved. Player's income went up ten-fold in just one generation, and the owners are making more money also, more than they ever could dream they'd make.

    Anyway, not to go off on a tangent, but, being a businessman myself, I can't help but think how stupid today's 1%'ers are.

    But, that's a story for another day.


    Did you see my (none / 0) (#5)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 08:50:02 AM EST


    Thus will be the last season.  Maybe.


    I started to watch it (none / 0) (#16)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 10:35:18 AM EST
    Can't do it...bleh.  But the first episode of season two True Detective has me firmly in its grasp already. And The Brink was terribly amusing, so watching that too.

    I guess I have to try to stomach (none / 0) (#25)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:04:13 AM EST
    Jack Black.

    He's different in The Brink (none / 0) (#29)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:09:31 AM EST
    Still a little silly, but he's a dirtbag.  A horrible little dirtbag you hope dies a thousand deaths. Tim Robbins was awesome, oversexed, drunk, and the only guy at the table emotionally making sense when the White House contemplates war.

    He does dirtbag well (none / 0) (#30)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:10:59 AM EST
    I was wondering how long it could go (none / 0) (#33)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:15:55 AM EST
    It is rather sick-making!  But I am hooked - at S2 Episode 3 now.

    Almost caught up on Penny Dreadful - just the most recent episode left to watch. Eva Green is so amazing. Wish Josh Hartnett was more her equal in acting chops, but he is nice to look at swinging an ax.


    I believe Hannibal will survive (none / 0) (#35)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:21:37 AM EST
    the numbers may not be great for a broadcast network but FX, AMC, USA not to mention the pay channels are going to think that fan base would not be a bad thing to grab.  The base may be smallish but it's obsessed.
    Also I think one of its problems has always been that's it's natural audience, me, hate and avoid broadcast TV.  It took two years of constant harping to get me to it.

    Penny Dreadful (none / 0) (#73)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:28:46 PM EST
    has been great this season.  So much great.  I love the Frankenstein family.  It looks like they might be setting up to be the bad guys next season.  I hope.

    Only two left.  

    Johnathan Strange and Mr Norrell is very good.  Also a series coming on AMC called Humans, about AE, looks great.

    Leftovers is returning.


    Oops (none / 0) (#75)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:32:01 PM EST
    that would be

    about AI.  artificial intelligence.


    Rush has the 12-3 PM (none / 0) (#7)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 09:00:48 AM EST
    slot on his current station. WRKO, they're a talk radio station with Coast to Coast AM and some other syndicated programs as well.

     They'll probably get someone not being broadcast in the Boston area or develope a local talk show for that time slot.

    Oh, and remember that iHeart radio is a new incarnation of Clear Channel radio, don't get fooled by the name change, it's SS, DN.


    Yes, I took note of the iHeart thing (none / 0) (#28)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:09:02 AM EST
    I had their app for a while when I was listening to one trial or another...did not know it was the new name for CC. Nice rebranding there.

    "iHate" would be more apropos (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 01:59:36 PM EST
    for a network carrying Rush and his pals.

    it's just a shuffle (none / 0) (#14)
    by CST on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 09:42:48 AM EST
    What you have to look at is the range (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 10:56:28 AM EST
    or area that his current station has, vs. the one he's going to.

    The location of the respective transmitters, the power behind the signal, the frequency itself all make a difference in the potential audience he can reach.

    Here's the coverage of his new station.

    Here's the coverage of his current station.  Note the scale is smaller in this example.

    As you can see, the latter has Manchester, for example, at the border of local reception, while in the former, it is beyond the fringe reception area.

    So, it's clearly more than a game of radio chairs.


    True Dectective (none / 0) (#6)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 08:58:22 AM EST
    who saw the premier?   Very very promising.   They say it won't be as "dark" as last season but it started pretty darn dark.

    Yes, pretty dark (none / 0) (#17)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 10:40:34 AM EST
    I'm hooked on all the main characters so far, really hooked.

    I loved last season (none / 0) (#18)
    by McBain on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 10:43:31 AM EST
    but didn't care of the first episode of this one.  I'll keep watching...sometimes it take a few.  

    Agreed. A dark and (none / 0) (#20)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 10:49:11 AM EST
    complicated detective story off to a good start.  Many strands that portend well for storyline intertwining.  The premier was intentionally convoluted it seems so as to pique interest in the characters and their interrelationships surely to come.

    All troubled in different ways and to different degrees. The story is a stand-alone and probably should not be viewed with the same expectations as the earlier series.

     Collin Farrell's character moved from sympathetic to "Oh MY Gosh."  Fast.   Taylor Kitsch's motorcycle cop was hard to decipher (did not recognize him, last seen in "Savages.").  Rachel McAdams character is central, but we need to wait to see how badly she is damaged by the guru father.   Although,it seems the darkness will be there for her, too.


    Great cast I think (none / 0) (#26)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:05:47 AM EST
    the writer says it's more about the cast than the story.   In that the detective story is window dressing to tell the story of the characters.

    As it probably should be (none / 0) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:08:40 AM EST
    Taylor Kitsch's character, (none / 0) (#34)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:17:06 AM EST
    Ex Iraq War veteran so troubled he has to take Viagra to have a relationship and won't sleep over. Does dangerous adrenaline things that place his life in severe danger.  I recognize that :) They don't sleep over because they have bad nightmares and wake up thinking they need to kill something.

    And of course the best part so far (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:35:38 AM EST
    Yes, I recognized that right away (none / 0) (#41)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:56:32 AM EST
    I'll definitely keep watching. I like the SoCal locations too, as a former resident. That plant they show a lot looks like the huge power plant off the 405, I believe, near Long Beach IIRC? That thing used to really spook me. Really sinister image at night driving home late when there is not much traffic.

    ibtimes (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 04:05:59 PM EST
    True Detective season two will be set between Los Angeles and San Francisco, an area that spans 400 miles that writer Nic Pizzolatto describes as "the places that don't get much press and where you wouldn't normally set a television show." The show will be shot on locations that evoke the "psychosphere ambiance of the place."

    California psychosphere? (none / 0) (#113)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 05:14:52 PM EST
    Like the Eagles song :)?

    Film composer James Horner died (none / 0) (#21)
    by McBain on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 10:49:24 AM EST
    in a plane crash yesterday.  He was known for his work on Titanic and Braveheart.  As a sci fi fan, I loved his score for Star Trek 2: The Wrath of Khan.

    Apparently, Horner was the pilot of a single engine plane that crashed in Southern California.

    He musically saved (none / 0) (#38)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:39:13 AM EST
    one of the films I worked on and was uncredited.

    Apollo 13


    Oh no, sorry to hear that (none / 0) (#40)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:52:19 AM EST
    That is a huge loss, he did so much great work.  

    Well there is that one (none / 0) (#170)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 12:23:38 AM EST
    cloying song inTitanic.

    This is a good example of the media (none / 0) (#23)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:00:16 AM EST
    reporting the news while simultaneously pressuring politicians to take a stand.

    The Charleston Post and Courier has asked each member of the State House and Senate in South Carolina how they will vote on the Confederate flag removal.

    The answers are the news. The pressure comes in the form of a live updating page showing where each member stands. So far there is a collection of: Yes, No, Undecided, Hasn't Responded, Refused to Answer in the House. The Senate has no No's as of yet.

    Current tally:
    Yes 39%
    No 7%

    Yes 42%
    No 0%

    It's an interesting say for the politicians of South Carolina.

    errr (none / 0) (#31)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:12:02 AM EST
    interesting day

    A good "bandwagon" (none / 0) (#24)
    by christinep on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 11:00:38 AM EST
    Over the last day or so, the rapidity of expressed changed attitudes about the specifics of the South Carolina statehouse grounds with the CSA flag has been stunning.  The fact that the state's highest Repub officials stood together calling for it's retirement resulted from all sorts of motives--I'm supposing--as do most major moves.  Whether it was the racist-inspired killings of nine Black people praying in a renowned AME church that caused the immediate awareness and change of heart for those officials, those politicians OR whether it was an immediate example of turning tide and politics, it did occur.  The long-awaited eventuality appears to be happening.  

    Then, in a breathtaking display, the leader of the Mississippi state house announced that it was time to rid that state flag of it's incorporated confederate symbol AND, now, Virginia's governor M has announced that the state would no longer produce CSA-insignia license plates.  Oh ... and the very commercial Walmart's new policy is that it will no longer sell certain CSA-logo items.  Again, the incentives probably span the range.  It is happening ... after such long time, but it is happening.  

    With impending SCT decisions this week of potentially great meaning, I find myself thinking about both the societal and accompanying legal arc of LGBT rights.  A friend of mine remarked a few years back on her impression that what seemed to be permanently long and wrong had shifted into high gear toward a just resolution as to rights.  Vaguely, I remember echoes of such statements about struggles--that what was achingly protracted gained traction, almost without notice, and then sped into the future.

    The one small step and the bandwagon ... or better yet, the impetus that the step/initial footfall creates can be good to behold.

    In light of the President of the University (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 12:01:15 PM EST
    of South Carolina along with their Athletic Director and both basketball coached weighing in to remove the flag yesterday, I'm reminded of my beloved Steve Spurrier when asked about this issue years ago, not long after he started coaching at South Carolina:


    "My opinion is we don't need the Confederate flag at our Capitol. I don't really know anybody that wants it there, but I guess there are a lot of South Carolinians that do want it there."

        [...] Spurrier is heard saying the South Carolina-Tennessee game last year, which was featured on ESPN's GameDay, was marred "by some clown ... waving that dang, damn Confederate flag behind the TV set. And it was embarrassing to me and I know embarrassing to our state."

        "I realize I'm not supposed to get in the political arena as a football coach, but if anybody were ever to ask me about that damn Confederate flag, I would say we need to get rid of it. I've been told not to talk about that. But if anyone were ever to ask me about it, I certainly wish we could get rid of it."

    Steve has always had a way of getting his point across even when told not to.


    I like "old coach" 364 days a year. (none / 0) (#82)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:45:01 PM EST
    It is very interesting to me.... (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 12:49:09 PM EST
    like it never occurred to them before that this is a racist symbol? Or they just did not believe the people that said it was? Or what? Has there been a real change of heart, or just what they will call a bow to the forces of political correctness?  I have not read any of the actual statements behind this...is it a non-apology apology, like we are sorry IF anyone was offended...or murdered... because of what this represents?

    the speed of it is astounding to me. These GOP states are so authoritarian, for all their 'rebel' pretense, the word must have really come down from someone that you WILL knock off this bulls**t immediately. Someone named Koch maybe? I believe they use the rubes, but do not necessarily share their views.  


    IMO (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 01:06:34 PM EST
    judging by Nikki Haley and Lindsey Graham the word came down that you are getting rid of that flag. And I guess the word must have been sent out to other states as well. I'm not sure the Kochs would care about those kind of things.

    A bigger problem for the GOP is they have been coddling these segregationists for decades. Just because they get rid of these racist symbols doesn't mean that their voting base is all of sudden going to get loving and inclusive. As a matter of fact they seem to be hopping mad over all this.


    I'll take... (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 01:12:19 PM EST
    bow to the forces of political correctness for
    $200 Alex.

    I think the pro-confederate/southern pride/bigoted have just decided this isn't a battle worth fighting anymore when it comes to official government displays of that rag.  I'd like to think it's a sincere change of heart, and maybe it is in some cases, but I'm not naïve.  Old habits are hard to break.

    As notoriously anti-pc as I am, I agree that rag has no place in any official capacity in any state of the union outside of a museum...if private citizens wanna fly it that's their business, and let it define them.  I would not go so far as Germany did with their embarrassing symbol and make it illegal.

    If I were Governor Haley, I wouldn't wait for the f8ckin' legislature, I woulda cut it down yesterday and said "impeach me or arrest me if ya want, I'm gonna do what's right and come what may."


    Political Correctness (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 01:34:24 PM EST
    Come on, there is political correctness and there is common decency.  This is not a PC issue just because it's been allowed to happen for many years.

    But all we are doing is eliminating a symbol of a problem without actually addressing the problem.

    God forbid we actually discuss the how a kid with black friends came to hate black people to the core a short time later, or how easily that person was able to kill 9 people.  

    Nope, let's focus on a flag that people outside of handful of states could give 2 squirts about.  Once again we are putting a band-aid on major wound because no one has the fortitude to deal with reality about race and guns.


    Yes, Scott, but as symbols go, ... (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:54:14 PM EST
    ... I'd offer that the Confederate battle flag has been one of the most adversely potent ones in American history. For too long now, that damned flag has represented America's dark side, and has further been empowering some people to do their absolute worst to their fellow countrymen and -women.

    Just look to the reasons why it was first officially resurrected by the respective state governments of Georgia, Mississippi and South Carolina in the 1950s and '60s, and you'll understand why this is not a trivial issue for many people, and why the flag really needs to go.

    Therefore, that flag's actual removal from official public life in the American South, while equally symbolic, is actually a pretty big deal.



    Agreed (none / 0) (#89)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 03:01:43 PM EST
    just put in another thread something I only just learned.  That flag is not the flag SC or MS fought under during the Civil War.

    It's being voted off the island is a pretty big deal.  OTOH I think it will make it all the more cherished by the lunatic fringe.

    Hopefully it will at least make them easier to identify.


    Actually (none / 0) (#91)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 03:08:44 PM EST
    here in GA they are easy to identify. They have confederate flags on their cars, hanging in their businesses and all kinds of places but that's a good thing in my mind. I see those and I don't do business with them.

    Yeah, there's going to be a cottage industry for somebody making those flags and ripping off people. Whatever. Have at it.

    I have to wonder if GA is going to quit selling those confederate license plates though. Part of the agreement with getting rid of the stars and bars was that people could buy license plates with them it on them.


    Well said, Donald (none / 0) (#97)
    by christinep on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 03:46:13 PM EST
    Potential changing points ... Most major changes or the inkling of the full change don't come about because, first, we had "A" and, next, we have "X,Y,Z."  A step here, then another step or two; followed by a series of measures & acts; often, in controversial big change areas, a traumatic occurrence or focusing event leads to the so-called tipping point ... that, imo, is when the process of change and change itself is revealed.

    Thank you for your descriptions, from time to time, that set out the chronology of significant change.  You have the patience to depict change via the steps, events that eventually bring it about.


    What it Represents... (none / 0) (#107)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 04:46:47 PM EST
    ...isn't going anywhere.  Great we don't have a day-to-day reminder that black people are hated by a lot of people in the south.

    The issue isn't being addressed, it all been placed on a symbol.  And that is why the republicans IMO are so quick to pull it down, they don't want to talk about what the flag represents in 2015.

    Granted, I am sure the folks who know what it really means, are damn glad to see it go, but I am pretty sure they would prefer the underlying issue be resolved rather than it's symbol.  A flag ain't shooting up any churches in the near future.

    It's as meaningless as when it was resurrected, just a symbol, that apparently both sides think is/was some glorious moment in time when it was put up/taken down.

    Which I might add has not happened and if the legislature poling its to be believed, won't happen.  Then what ?  All we did is spend a lot of time arguing about a piece of fabric.


    More often than not (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by christinep on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 05:02:34 PM EST
    it takes the first step(s)--often symbolic--to set the pattern for the next.  Look ... many of us would like the racial question in the US to be resolved much faster than the length of time it even took to get to the CSA flag in South Carolina.  Yet, the movement has started ... and, as President Obama said the other day, the ills of 200 or 300 years don't disappear over night.

    If we think we can "magic away" the hateful patterns that too often divide us as Black and White, I think that we will find bitter disappointment.  If Black leaders can counsel steady progress and not giving up the fight, who are we White people to counter their hard-earned wisdom.  Keep moving ahead and fighting the good fight.


    Some definite points there (none / 0) (#109)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 04:53:17 PM EST
    i think the more correctly don't want to talk about in 2016.

    I think Haley took one for the team to take the issue off the table for every stupid republican stumbling to find a way to talk about it.   Watching the "evolution" of their positions has been precious.


    But if it Doesn't Come Down... (none / 0) (#187)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 08:44:59 AM EST
    ...she just set them up like bowling pins.  They voted to discuss it this summer when they could have just voted to remove it.

    I hear ya... (none / 0) (#63)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 01:58:36 PM EST
    the Confederate Battle Rag is a red herring in regards to racism in America, and has nothing to do with our gun violence problem, nor our mental health problems.  I concur.

    Yes - I was careful to say (none / 0) (#66)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:03:12 PM EST
    what they will call political correctness. I call it human decency too.

    Hey, we have no confederate flags, AND a black president! Racism is over!


    Ebay has announced that they're banning (none / 0) (#68)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:12:20 PM EST
    Good For Them But... (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:50:12 PM EST
    ... the idea that none of these people understood the symbolism of the flag that has been the center of controversies for decades, until Thursday, is quite absurd.
    "We have decided to prohibit Confederate flags, and many items containing this image, because we believe it has become a contemporary symbol of divisiveness and racism,"

    "You mean the swastika has a different association than ancient Indian religions, who knew."


    LOL, yes another one for the 'Well, duh' file (none / 0) (#88)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 03:00:19 PM EST
    Only a contemporary symbol of divisiveness? Wasn't the whole point of it divisive?

    Now I Believe This... (none / 0) (#190)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 09:07:13 AM EST
    ...more than 'we just figured it out'.
    Walmart CEO Doug McMillon said he was surprised to learn his company was selling products featuring the Confederate flag,

    But then...

    "Our focus as it relates to firearms should be hunters and people who shoot at sporting clubs," he told CNN. "We believe in serving those customers. We have for a long time."

    And went on to say, which I did not know:

    Walmart says it doesn't sell handguns in the continental U.S., nor does it sell magazines that hold a large number of bullets. It also says it sells firearms primarily in areas where there are large concentrations of hunters and sportsmen, and that it doesn't sell firearms online.

    "Not every retailer has made these choices," the retailer said.


    Can you buy a gun online ?


    Of course you can buy them online (none / 0) (#192)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 09:15:03 AM EST
    From thousands of sources, both handguns and rifles... But not from Walmart.

    Just occurred to me that it reminds me of (none / 0) (#49)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 12:51:13 PM EST
    the way the militias went nearly silent after the OKC bombing. One week they were in the news making noise almost weekly, next ...nothing. They are still there obviously but it was like a switch was flipped off.

    And just (none / 0) (#45)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 12:28:17 PM EST
    found out one of the best ones and that is the statue of Nathan Bedford Forrest is probably coming down in TN.

    Wonder what (none / 0) (#46)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 12:34:26 PM EST
    The University of Mississippi football fans are going to do come the fall, since many of them wave the Stars and Bars  for the Rebels during games?

    I suppose the say their team name 'Rebels' (none / 0) (#47)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 12:43:49 PM EST
    is just named after generic rebel spirit, not any particular group of rebels?

    It would be hard to (none / 0) (#50)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 12:53:59 PM EST

    They also play "Dixie" as an unofficial fight song.

    Ironic, so nice most of the guys on the football team are not white.


    When in High School (none / 0) (#70)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:22:37 PM EST
    our sports teams were Rebels.   They changed it many years ago.  Not long after I left I think.   Timberwolves now.   For a long long time.

    I had not thought (none / 0) (#51)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 12:57:51 PM EST
    of that but maybe they can wave the new flag MS is going to have when and if they get rid of the stars and bars.

    ... at its sporting events quite some time ago, and further banished its former Rebel mascot, which looked like some creepy plantation overseer. Not surprisingly, there was an initially practical side to the ban, because the rebel flag and image had proved to be a pretty serious impediment in the recruitment of African-American athletes to play in Oxford. But as university officials have since discovered, the ban actually changed overall school culture, and for the better.

    Amen (none / 0) (#158)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 09:13:02 PM EST
    If you're talking about the one on private land (none / 0) (#78)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:37:28 PM EST
    off I65 that has been tried long ago and failed.

    Free speech and all that stuff.

    Some are trying to get TDOT to put walls up so the statue can't be seen from the highway but that would be government money and the First pops up.

    Several people are trying to get private money but then again, how much is 100' of government owned land worth??

    Most of my Nashville friends are saying that this latest was started by Megan Barry, a mayoral candidate with a faltering campaign, for political gain.

    I am sure we all agree that couldn't possibly be the case.

    Too bad the owner ever put it up but then the First isn't about people saying what is popular.

    But in 2/13 Memphis renamed three parks named after
    CSA generals.

    Given that Memphis has been under black politicl control for at least 20 years it is amazing it took so long.


    No this (none / 0) (#83)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:46:39 PM EST
    is the one at the TN state house. Your illustrious leader says it's heritage not hate about the founder of the KKK.

    And no, they're not talking about putting up walls. They are talking about planting trees around the monument seen from I-65. But darn when people put up monuments on I-65 to leader of the KKK and they're probably going to be the first to complain about the south being seen as racist.


    He was not only the very first Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, he was an outstanding Confederate cavalry commander and by most all contemporary accounts, a military genius of the first rank.

    Gen. Forrest was also an unrepentant war criminal who rightly should have been arrested by federal officials and charged with multiple counts of murder after the Civil War was over, for his part in ordering the wanton massacre of over 300 unarmed African-American Union infantrymen at Fort Pillow, TN on April 12, 1864.

    These soldiers had been slaughtered like sheep after they had already surrendered, because diehard racist that he was, Gen. Forrest refused to recognize the legitimacy of Negro soldiers and instead told his men to treat the prisoners as illegally armed contraband -- that is, escaped slaves -- for which the penalty in most southern states was death upon capture.

    Just so there's no misunderstanding here, that's the man we're talking about, whose 4-ft. bronze bust presently adorns a hallway in the Tennessee State Capitol, and whose 25-ft. tall statue glares ominously at passing motorists on I-65 outside Nashville.



    Yeah, some said plant trees some said (2.00 / 1) (#100)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 03:59:37 PM EST
    walls. Read the TN article/comments.

    And I don't believe that the people wanting the statue up give a flying flip what others think.

    And I have no idea who my "illustrious leader" is. The governor I voted for said:

    Gov. Bill Haslam supports discontinuing Tennessee license plates that feature the Confederate battle flag and removing the bust of Nathan Bedford Forrest from the Tennessee statehouse.

    "I feel like that that Confederate battle flag is something that I think people are ready to see move to museums" Haslam said Tuesday after an event south of downtown Nashville.

    "I think it's appropriate to move the flag to museums and off of Tennessee symbols.



    Yeah, some said plant trees some said (none / 0) (#101)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 03:59:37 PM EST
    walls. Read the TN article/comments.

    And I don't believe that the people wanting the statue up give a flying flip what others think.

    And I have no idea who my "illustrious leader" is. The governor I voted for said:

    Gov. Bill Haslam supports discontinuing Tennessee license plates that feature the Confederate battle flag and removing the bust of Nathan Bedford Forrest from the Tennessee statehouse.

    "I feel like that that Confederate battle flag is something that I think people are ready to see move to museums" Haslam said Tuesday after an event south of downtown Nashville.

    "I think it's appropriate to move the flag to museums and off of Tennessee symbols.



    For some reason on some (none / 0) (#104)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 04:06:53 PM EST
    comments they double. They post at exactly the same time.

    Is anyone else having that problem?

    I'm running MS Vista on a Toshiba Satellite and it happens on AOL, Chrome and Firefox and seems to have gotten worse over the past month.



    It happens (none / 0) (#106)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 04:16:39 PM EST
    its happened to me and others

    Back in the day day (none / 0) (#65)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:00:21 PM EST
    I went to Romania just a few days after their revolution when they separated from the USSR.

    A striking symbol of the revolution was their national flag, with the Soviet hammer and sickle chopped out of the center with scissors.

    Would love to see the MS flag waving in the breeze with a gaping hole in the corner...


    Hmm... (none / 0) (#52)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 01:06:17 PM EST
    Study;  Scant Evidence that Medical Pot Helps Many Illnesses

    CHICAGO (AP) -- Medical marijuana has not been proven to work for many illnesses that state laws have approved it for, according to the first comprehensive analysis of research on its potential benefits.

    The strongest evidence is for chronic pain and for muscle stiffness in multiple sclerosis, according to the review, which evaluated 79 studies involving more than 6,000 patients. Evidence was weak for many other conditions, including anxiety, sleep disorders, and Tourette's syndrome and the authors recommend more research.

    I thought (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 01:08:30 PM EST
    the main reason was for people going through chemo treatment because it kept their appetite up and kept them from being sick so much.

    Probably what happened with these states that has happened with a lot of bills is the legislature just put everything they could possibly think of in there so they wouldn't have to go back and change the bill later on.


    Even if it did absolutely nothing, (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 01:56:15 PM EST
    it's better than the completely legal, to any idiot over the age of 21, alcohol.

    If it did absolutely nothing... (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:17:09 PM EST
    I could save 60 bucks a week and pull bong rips of air every night! ;)

    But it does something...something relaxing and euphoric and stress-reducing, recreationally speaking.

    Medically speaking, let patient & doctor decide what works for them without political interference nor criminal justice hassles.  


    As Scott says in a nearby post, (none / 0) (#76)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:36:36 PM EST
    if the test subjects can't tell the difference between placebos and pot, the pot they're using is lousy and the study is a waste of paper and electrons.  

    Sure (none / 0) (#74)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:29:15 PM EST
    But no one is trying to sell the idea that alcohol isn't bad for you, nor are they trying to sell the idea that drinking alcohol will help with a myriad of symptoms from diseases.

    I think the final paragraphs make the point well:

    The editorial by two Yale University psychiatrists suggests enthusiasm for medical marijuana has outpaced rigorous research and says widespread use should wait for better evidence. Federal and state governments should support and encourage such research, the editorial says.

    "Perhaps it is time to place the horse back in front of the cart," Drs. Deepak Cyril D'Souza and Mohini Ranganathan wrote in the editorial.

    They note that repeated recreational marijuana use can be addictive and say unanswered questions include what are the long-term health effects of medical marijuana use and whether its use is justified in children whose developing brains may be more vulnerable to its effects.

    An alternative perspective: (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:42:42 PM EST
    a couple of "Yale University Psychiatrists" are pimping their next DEA grant application.  As has been revealed before on TalkLeft, anti drug research is easy to fund.  Research not directed toward that end is difficult to fund and has been effectively impossible to get research material, i.e., marijuana, to do it with.

    Lordy (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by sj on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 04:52:42 PM EST
    You do love to conflate things. And when attributes of each of those things to be conflated are so twisted as to be unrecognizable it leads to all sorts of shrillness.
    nor are they trying to sell the idea that drinking alcohol will help with a myriad of symptoms from diseases.

    As I said above, it was the DEA who effectively hamstrung research. But your criticism could apply to garlic as well.

    Personally, I think your concerns have traveled over to pearl clutching levels. Especially since scientists have wanted to do research.

    It doesn't matter much. The momentum is going the right way IMO, so clutch away. You post and I'll ignore the next few comments you post of this nature.



    Jb would be better served (none / 0) (#178)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 06:32:38 AM EST
    doing her own research instead of listening to DEA propaganda as though it was the gospel truth.  

    Funny... (5.00 / 3) (#62)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 01:56:28 PM EST
    ...if you don't know you are in the control group when using marijuana then the study clearly has some flaws, like:
    The researchers pooled results from studies that tested marijuana against placebos, usual care or no treatment.

    And then there is this:

    It's possible medical marijuana could have widespread benefits, but strong evidence from high-quality studies is lacking, authors of both articles say.

    Does this include the authors pooled results from other studies ?


    Tramadol doesn't heal you either (5.00 / 2) (#119)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 05:53:41 PM EST
    It really doesn't make anything better, just allows people who are hurting to get through another day with the pain being masked.  No difference in my mind except long term marijuana use is safer than long term Tramadol use.

    I bet it wouldn't work for hair loss, either (none / 0) (#60)
    by sj on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 01:53:59 PM EST
    even if all those doctors in the State Leges put it in the bill.

    But more than that, of course evidence is "weak for many other conditions". Have you heard how difficult/impossible the DEA made research? No research, no data. No brainer.

    Although, according to this article, just yesterday "White House remove[d] obstacle to medical marijuana research."

    I don't have time to read the PDF right now, but it looks promising...


    Gun Purchase Was Legal (none / 0) (#56)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 01:13:08 PM EST
    Roof had been arrested in late February at a Columbia shopping mall and charged with possessing Suboxone, a controlled substance commonly used to treat heroin addiction. He was indicted by a Lexington County grand jury on a state drug charge, a case that is currently pending.

    Federal law prohibits the sale of a gun to anyone who is "under indictment for" a felony, but the drug charge Roof faces is a misdemeanor under South Carolina law. For that reason, according to several current and former law enforcement officials, the pending charge did not disqualify Roof from buying a gun.

    A separate provision of federal law prohibits the sale of a gun to anyone who is "an unlawful user" of any controlled substance. A provision of the Code of Federal Regulations, which defines that term in the gun law, says habitual use can be inferred from evidence of recent use, examples of which, it says, include "a conviction for use or possession of a controlled substance within the past year," or "multiple arrests for such offenses within the past 5 years."

    Current and former ATF officials say a single misdemeanor arrest for possession of a controlled substance would not be disqualifying. The federal courts, these officials say, have tended to be strict in interpreting "unlawful user," and as a consequence, this provision is not often enforced.

    I Conclude... (none / 0) (#59)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 01:42:19 PM EST
    ...you posts serve no purpose other than drumming up business for your blog.  Much like your 'walks', your posts scream:

    'Everyone, please look at me, pay attention to me, damn it !!'

    But the truly odd thing is you seem to crave negative attention the most.

    What MT said. (none / 0) (#71)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:23:44 PM EST
    I worked on a documentary film project a number of years ago, the subject of which was perhaps the most infamous false accusation of sexual assault in modern American jurisprudence.

    It was one of those stories that first unfolded and then played out like an overwrought and over-the-top Lifetime Movie Network production. Only it was all too real, and ultimately had profound and adverse consequences for not only the accuser and those she had accused, but also the immediate families of those who were involved -- one of which was one of the most prominent in American high society -- as well as the greater community and even the U.S. Navy.

    The point here is that such dark and seedy tales are very definitely the exceptions and not the general rule. While they may capture our attention and hold our inner drama queens as willing hostages, the media coverage and resultant public overemphasis of them are grossly out of proportion when compared to the actual number of overall occurrences of sexual assault.

    And that's really to our overall public detriment as a society, because the breathless manner in which some people tend to discuss these false accusations -- as though they're somehow representative of an epidemic -- serves only to diminish and insult those real victims whose claims otherwise deserve our fullest attention.

    Yet these victims are all too often dismissed as cranks or worse for sometimes the most appallingly trivial and grotesque of reasons, and it's no small wonder why the majority of sexual assaults end up going unreported to the authorities. Because quite honestly, for every Duke Lacrosse saga or "Massie Affair," there are true stories of very real crimes which are many times the number of false accusations. And that's the real tragedy here.


    I just saw Gone Girl (none / 0) (#72)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:23:48 PM EST
    i want my two and a half hours back.  What a waste of time.

    It was a much better book, though (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by Anne on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:53:02 PM EST
    it had the same crappy ending - I don't know anyone who read the book who liked the way it ended.

    What annoyed me was that I thought, based on the number of pages left, that I was going to get some resolution - and all I got was book club questions for discussion.  

    If you read the book, you know that it was like 2 books - his and hers - and I think it was hard to bring to the screen.  So much of it was internal that it didn't translate well, at all.

    Going to maintain that books are the way to go...you can have the little movie playing in your head and imagine it however you want, instead of being force-fed someone else's interpretation.


    I can see that (none / 0) (#87)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:56:42 PM EST
    there was parts I liked.  The dual story you mention.  I liked the setting up of the frame.  But if I had read the book I would really be pi$$ed..

    Also, maybe a movie thing,but so much of it seemed completely implausible.


    I was really taken in by "Gone Girl"... (none / 0) (#96)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 03:37:49 PM EST
    ... during its first 45-50 minutes or so, and it seemed to hold so much promise up to that point. But then came that much-vaunted and over-ballyhooed "plot twist," which was simply so absurd and unbelievable on its face that I very quickly lost interest.

    Still, I resolutely stuck with it, in part because I had paid $35 for three of us to see it in the theatre, not counting the two $6 bags of popcorn. But also, I was genuinely curious to see exactly how the filmmaker was going to climb out of the hole he had dug for himself, and where he was going with it -- which eventually, after much meandering and bad melodrama and gnashing of teeth, proved to be absolutely nowhere.

    "Gone Girl" was the first movie in a long time that I actually wanted to boo aloud during its closing credits.



    Same here (none / 0) (#98)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 03:53:07 PM EST
    i like David Fincher very much.  Not a big Affleck fan but he can be competent.  Rosamund Pike can be very good.  So I stuck with it glancing at the clock with increasing frequency.  Thank Crom I didn't pay to see it.
    And then....credits.  And I'm like. WAIT, WHAT?  WTF just happened.

    I feel like it was some kind of cinematic exercise in pointlessness.  Thanks guys.  

    This is why I like spoilers.  If I had bothered I would not have bothered.


    And that's the thing about this turkey. (none / 0) (#114)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 05:33:02 PM EST
    I considered David Fincher to be a very good director, and still do. But "Gone Girl" proves to me at least that even the best of directors are not immune from the occasional pratfall. And as directorial pratfalls go, this one was quite the face-plant.

    How and why "Gone Girl" received all its praise and accolades, including an Oscar nod for Rosamund Pike as best actress, I'll never know. There's no accounting for personal taste, I guess. This guy's rather silly denunciation of Academy voters for ignoring the film is funny, if somewhat embarrassing. I'm wondering if he's not really the same clown who cried on YouTube about everyone hating on Britney Spears.



    Agreed. First half good.... (none / 0) (#102)
    by McBain on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 04:04:42 PM EST
    second half Joe Eszterhas bad

    ... with one notable exception, "Music Box," a 1989 film which was directed by Costa-Gavras and starred Jessica Lange and Armin Mueller-Stahl. (Lange received an Oscar nomination as best actress for her performance.) A powerful and disturbing tale about family secrets and personal revelations, Eszterhas ostensibly based the story on the true case of since-convicted Nazi war criminal John Demjanjuk, which was then still working its way through U.S. courts.

    But the screenplay in many respects is acutely personal as well, and it shows to tremendous critical effect. Because at the time he wrote "Music Box," Eszterhas had only recently disowned his own father, Count István Esterházy, upon learning that the man had deliberately concealed from his family his own sordid past as a rather prominent anti-Semitic propagandist and provocateur in Hungary, then an ally of Nazi Germany. They never reconciled.



    I have to defend Joe. (none / 0) (#116)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 05:38:25 PM EST
    As someone who's worked in the screenwriting profession for a number of years, I have to say Joe is one of the most highly respected writers in the business.  He combines great technical skill with strong natural storytelling instincts.

    He also committed the greatest sin for writers in this country. He made some money. And it got headlines. It was a fraction of what producers you've never heard of make every year.  But it was a lot for a writer.  And so he became a target for every armchair critic and wannabe whatevers.

    I've never worked with him. But friends have. And they speak of his laser-like ability to pinpoint story weaknesses and find efficient solutions.

    Joe's the real deal.


    I have heard this too (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 05:46:10 PM EST
    We'll have to agree to disagree. (none / 0) (#121)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 06:23:48 PM EST
    I won't dispute that Joe Eszterhas is someone who shown considerable talent as a writer and storyteller, on occasion. And yes, he made a good amount of money for what he did.

    But for all that, films like "Jade," "Showgirls" and "An Alan Smithee Film: Burn Hollywood Burn" are indicative of someone who at best somehow failed to actualize his potential, and at worst was seriously overrated.

    (Eszterhas reportedly got paid $4 million in 1994 to write a screenplay about the Russian mafia tentatively titled "Evil Empire," which never even got produced. Given the resultant product, perhaps they should've moved the decimal point on that paycheck two places to the left.)

    Even his biggest hit, "Basic Instinct," was in my estimation the cinematic equivalent of stadium nachos from an artistic standpoint. I think that film's box office appeal was driven in large part by its sexual notoriety and salaciousness, which tapped into our inner adolescent. Critically, it was at best a variation on other works of his, such as "Jagged Edge" and "Betrayed," and differed only in the respect that its antagonist was a woman and not a man.



    I offered expert testimony ... (none / 0) (#125)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 06:43:11 PM EST
    and as such it can only be refuted by another expert in the field.



    Okay, "another expert in the field." (5.00 / 1) (#172)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 12:52:44 AM EST
    Unfortunately, Blake Snyder is dead and presently uavailable. Perhaps we can entice Jerry Bruckheimer to weigh in.

    He's the Michael Bay of screen writers (none / 0) (#146)
    by McBain on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:36:22 PM EST
    Yes, so much of the enjoyment of it (none / 0) (#90)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 03:03:38 PM EST
    was int he writing. And Ben Afleck was not at all how I pictured that character. Too old, for one thing.

    Not a memorable book. (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by oculus on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 03:55:23 PM EST
    then add Ben Affleck. Blah

    same here, it was awful (none / 0) (#79)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:41:12 PM EST
    and boring. The principal character had no redeeming qualities and it was impossible to care what happened to her. Even her face was unpleasant to look at. Ben Affleck was beyond bland, it was like he filmed it on sedatives. The only character with substance was the defense lawyer.

    Movies don't generally make me angry (none / 0) (#81)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 02:43:08 PM EST
    that one did.  Aside from everything you said, I felt cheated.  If I want to watch people do horrible things and get away with it I will watch the news.

    Ummm....don't you watch Game of Thrones? (none / 0) (#93)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 03:25:01 PM EST
    maybe you are hoping people won't get away with things....

    Ha (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 03:27:46 PM EST
    i think no one will get away with anything in GoTs.   The night is dark and full of terrors.

    True...all men must die (none / 0) (#95)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 03:35:38 PM EST
    gotta take the long view.

    Amazing Amy will get hers eventually!


    To quote Clark Gable's Rhett Butler: (none / 0) (#117)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 05:38:27 PM EST
    ruffian: "Amazing Amy will get hers eventually!"

    "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn."


    Oh, c'mon, Jeralyn, admit it! (none / 0) (#92)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 03:20:04 PM EST
    You're just saying that because you loves yourself some Tyler Perry.

    I believe I wrote here about my displeasure with "Gone Girl" back when it was first released, because I found it to be an appallingly silly story and quite possibly the most gratuitously overrated film I'd seen in many years. (Since "Titanic," maybe.) Aside from being way too long, in so many ways it provoked in me the same negative reactions I had experienced when I first saw "Fatal Attraction."

    "Gone Girl" is representative of the type of film in which its initial reputation will likely diminish over the course of time. Years later, people will rethink their opinion upon a second viewing, and will wonder what its appeal ever was in the first place.



    Without sending me to your blog.... (none / 0) (#105)
    by McBain on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 04:07:37 PM EST
    Why do you conclude it's a false allegation?  

    the following items of evidence . . . (none / 0) (#156)
    by zaitztheunconvicted on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 09:08:04 PM EST
    1) she told police that she had no description of the
    person who attacked her because it was too dark to see him and she told the news media that it was still light out when the attack occurred;  this is the most serious discrepancy;
    1. It is very rare that at 6 p.m. and daylight at Greenlake in weather without rain that there are no passerby as witnesses--on a similar day and time, I photographed more than 15 adults while facing forward there were probably as many to my rear;
    2. she claimed she was attacked with both her hands in her pockets . . . in the photograph I took of people walking, there is not a single person with both hands in pockets and only one with a single hand in a pocket;
    3. she told police she had pepper spray with her, which she dropped and did not pick up--a bit doubtful if she had just been sexually attacked and there was any light by which to see;
    4. she claimed that this fellow who attacked her placed one of his arms across the front of her bod--and yet to both police and news media, she says that she has no description of him.  The reason she gave to police for having no description of him contradicts the time and light of day she says there was when she was speaking with news media.

    Freddie Gray's (none / 0) (#115)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 05:37:37 PM EST
    autopsy leaked, reveals "high energy injury".

    Also says he tested positive for opiates and (none / 0) (#122)
    by McBain on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 06:26:56 PM EST


    The report said "single high-energy injury -- like those seen in shallow-water diving incidents -- most likely caused when the police van in which he was riding suddenly decelerated"

    "The state medical examiner's office concluded that Gray's death could not be ruled an accident, and was instead a homicide, because officers failed to follow safety procedures "through acts of omission."


    Raise your hand (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 06:43:37 PM EST
    if any of that is a surprise

    Was pot and oxycontin ... (5.00 / 2) (#174)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 01:24:20 AM EST
    ... the reason Freddie Gray's spine was nearly severed at the neck?

    If not, then it's an immaterial and irrelevant factoid, much like how my own family learned 20 years ago from a similar corner's report after a beloved uncle of mine had suffered a massive and immediately fatal coronary, that he also had early-stage colon cancer.



    It is not reasonable to assume the officers (none / 0) (#173)
    by Redbrow on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 01:06:27 AM EST
    were aware of the change in policy. It was only emailed 2 days before Gray's arrest.

    While previous reports say this new policy was published April 3, 2015, ABC2 has learned it wasn't approved and emailed out to officers until almost a week later.

    In Focus has obtained the department wide e-mail confirming as much with the time stamp of 6:01 p.m. on April 9, just two full days before Freddie Gray would be arrested in the western district.

    Say what? (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 02:00:39 AM EST
    Redbrow: "It is not reasonable to assume that the officers were aware of the change in policy. It was only emailed 2 days before Gray's arrest."

    Excuse me, but we're not talking about some memo from mid-level corporate management to the secretarial and clerical pools, notifying them of new hours at the company cafeteria upstairs.

    As police officers, it's an integral part of their professional responsibilities to be fully up to date on any such policy changes, particularly when those changes are effective immediately.

    Hell, I don't wait two days before reading a work-related e-mail / memo that's sitting in my in-box -- and I'm a business consultant, not an officer of the law! Sorry, but ignorance in this case is no excuse, especially if such ignorance is otherwise entirely plausible due to professional neglect.

    Therefore, you're defending the indefensible by further positing as a possible defense a hypothetical which itself is indefensible on its face.



    They actually used the word "accident" (none / 0) (#127)
    by Redbrow on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 06:47:26 PM EST
    "High energy" injury, like shallow-water diving accident, killed Freddie Gray, autopsy found.

    So (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 06:51:16 PM EST
    is your point he had a shallow water diving accident in the back of a police van?

    Why did he stand up (none / 0) (#131)
    by Redbrow on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 06:56:06 PM EST
    before taking his dive?

    I don't think he intended to kill himself, maybe just give himself some injuries so he could cash in on a police brutality claim.


    If you ever wondered (5.00 / 3) (#133)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:05:03 PM EST
    why no one takes your comments seriously, the answer can be found in your above comment.

    So why do you think (1.00 / 1) (#137)
    by Redbrow on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:13:11 PM EST
    He stood up?

    It is a very simple question.

    I stated a possible theory.

    Now it's your turn.

    But of course, as usual, fools with nothing substantial to add to the debate /conversation resort to personal attacks.


    Most people (5.00 / 2) (#141)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:23:52 PM EST
    would rather stand or sit up rather then lie face down on the floor, very simple answer.

    Your turn if you are not done digging.


    But he was (none / 0) (#147)
    by Redbrow on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:37:41 PM EST
    "Unable to use his legs" when he was initially loaded into the van.

    Did't you see that horrifying video evidence?


    Wow. Now I know why Rodney King laid (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 09:36:40 PM EST
    there on the ground while the LAPD beat the crap out of him.  It was so he could cash in.  Everybody knows it's a cakewalk to win lawsuits against organized, professional liars who have every advantage in court.  

    Thanks for clearing that up.


    Just saw a video of Roofs arrest (5.00 / 1) (#165)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 09:46:38 PM EST
    by cops who knew who he was and had been following him for a while.  Calm, respectful, almost deferential.  Such a contrast to "other" videos we have seen lately.
    Chris Rock tweeted pics of that and Eric Garner saying this is how you get arrested after murdering 9 people in a church and this is how you get arrested for selling cigarettes.

    Don't have a link but I'm sure the video is up.   I need a vodka.


    Here is the (5.00 / 1) (#199)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 09:43:20 AM EST
    Dash-cam video of the arrest.   Very professional.  Later the police got Roof a burger from Burger King--said he was hungry.   That is OK, too. (except, Burger King burgers may be considered cruel and unusual punishment).  Probably no food service at their little jail.   Now, was that so hard. Try it is a color-blind manner. And, let's send all police down to Shelby, N.C to "arrest school."  

    I'd like to know more about (1.00 / 1) (#144)
    by McBain on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:28:11 PM EST
    the toxicology report.  Was he significantly impaired? If so, that might explain strange behavior. It might also explain the arrest.

    I'd also like to know more about why the police did not completely restrain Gray in the van.  Did they think he was a threat to hurt them as has been suggested?


    Unbelievable (none / 0) (#136)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:12:28 PM EST
    well, not really.

    He was supposedly "placed" in the van on his face, correct?   Shackled and handcuffed.  What indicates he stood up?   It would certainly not be necessary for the "rapid deceleration" injury to happen.

    I once witnessed a "shallow water diving accident".   It was one of the most awful things that ever happened to me.  I was at an outdoor rock festival.  I was on acid.  It was a gorgeous summer day.  We were all hanging out around and in this absolutely beautiful crystal clear little creek.   Some kid climbed up into a very tall tree.  At least 30 or 40 feet stood and screamed WATCH THIS!!!  My friend who was sitting next to me in the water that was about neck deep sitting said vaguely,  oh no. no.
    And he dived.  Head first.  And for what seemed like much longer than it really was I'm sure he just stuck there,  visible from the waist down as the water around him turned red.

    A shallow water diving accident is something I can understand.


    What indicates he stood up? (none / 0) (#138)
    by Redbrow on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:19:21 PM EST
    The medical examiner as reported.

    While it's possible Gray was hurt while lying on the floor and moving back and forth, Allan determined his body likely couldn't have moved in that position with enough force to cause his injuries.

    Allan surmised that Gray could have gotten to his feet using the bench and opposite wall. With his hands and ankles restrained, and unable to see out of the van and anticipate turns, she said he was at a high risk for an unsupported fall.

    First (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:24:18 PM EST
    i would say that's speculation and IMO would depend entirely on the rapidity of the deceleration.  And of course if it was being done with the intention of injuring him.  Which is the case IMO and what has been alleged from day one.
    Look up the term nickel ride.

    I only responded to that because I thought it needed a response but I'm done.  With you.  Speculate away.


    What You Keep Neglecting to Mention... (5.00 / 1) (#193)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 09:27:08 AM EST
    ...is that these rides, I believe called nickel rides, where the suspect is shackled and then the driver purposely brakes hard to cause pain, was common practice for the Baltimore Police.

    This isn't merely a coincidence, as you keep suggesting, it's the worse possible outcome to a common practice.


    No, the word was "incident" (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by Anne on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:22:39 PM EST
    not "accident."

    You and Rick Perry seem to have some confusion over these words.

    From The Sun article:

    Freddie Gray suffered a single "high-energy injury" -- like those seen in shallow-water diving incidents -- most likely caused when the police van in which he was riding suddenly decelerated, according to a copy of the autopsy report obtained by The Baltimore Sun.

    You know and I know and anyone reading knows that the simplest and most likely explanation for how Freddie Gray ended up with an 80% severed spinal cord is two words: rough ride.  The medical examiner isn't going to say those words, but when I read "suddenly decelerated" and "...at risk for an unsupported fall during acceleration or deceleration of the van," those are the two words that come to mind.  Rough ride.

    And while the word "accident" was used, it was used as follows:

    The state medical examiner's office concluded that Gray's death could not be ruled an accident, and was instead a homicide, because officers failed to follow safety procedures "through acts of omission."

    Read that again: "could not be ruled an accident."


    I would wager that (5.00 / 1) (#149)
    by Redbrow on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:56:02 PM EST

    The medical examiner made no specific mention of "80% severing" or "crushed voice box" as claimed by Mosby's long-time friend, mentor and personal lawyer.

    This Baltimore Sun article on the leaked autopsy certainly makes no mention of it.


    Yeah, I guess it isn't possible that (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by Anne on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 08:33:05 PM EST
    Murphy could have gotten his information from the doctors/surgeons who treated Freddie, is it?  What, you think the surgeons just went in there blind and had no idea what it was they were going to try to repair?

    You don't think the docs talked to the family, that Murphy, as the family's attorney, didn't also get as much information as he could?

    Maybe your level of analysis goes over well with some of your playground pals, but you're going to have to step up your game here if you don't want to be laughed out of the room.


    Reading comprehension required (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by Redbrow on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 08:45:26 PM EST
    "The medical examiner concluded that Gray's MOST significant injury was to the lower left part of his head."

    Donald Trump is surging (none / 0) (#120)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 05:55:16 PM EST
    I just don't get it. What the flying monkeys does this mean?

    Same it meant the last time (none / 0) (#123)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 06:34:26 PM EST
    we don't like the front runner.   As long as it's Jeb we will have clown musical chairs.

    Jeb (none / 0) (#132)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:00:17 PM EST
    has got to be stewing though, Trump is sucking up a lot of the oxygen right now. Between Charleston and Trump  his launch week was much less them the ! he was looking for. Romney even butted in with his decisive statement on the flag issue contrasting with with Jeb's waffling.

    Yep (none / 0) (#140)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:22:58 PM EST
    it's going to be a repeat of someone surging to the top and then imploding upon inspection it looks like.

    Though for the life of me I can't figure out why someone has not told Rick Perry the truth and that is there is no point in him running.

    The difference this time may be that Jeb may not be the one that ends up being the nominee like Romney was. Romney looks like a beacon of decisiveness and strength compared to Jeb. Maybe someone should have a word with Jeb like they need to have with Perry.


    Except (none / 0) (#143)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 07:27:15 PM EST
    Donald was not in last time and I agree with RR he changes everything.  I would be surprised if hit men are not being interviewed by the puppet masters.

    Wow (none / 0) (#169)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 10:38:15 PM EST
    Not judging what you said, just contemplating it :)

    Judge away (none / 0) (#179)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 07:14:29 AM EST
    i certainly would not hire a hit man.  Even for Donald.  But I don't run republican politics.  And Donald is a very very serious problem for republican politics.
    I can not imagine they would not be in full panic mode.

    Right (none / 0) (#180)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 07:23:11 AM EST
    now I would think Donald is on the back burner of their problems. Their decades long embrace of confederate ideals and confederate emblems seems to be causing them a lot more problems.

    Every time I go to Facebook there's another trending item about the GOP and racism. Today it's still about the CCC guy that gave the GOP a ton of money. I am kind of surprised about this guy giving Santorum money but not Cruz and Paul. Paul has a long history of dancing with the neo-confederates.

    And Mitch wants to take down the statue of Jefferson Davis in KY. Nathan Deal wants to take the stars and bars out of license plates along with a couple of other states. Nathan Deal has been embracing the stars and bars his entire term. LOL. I guess he's hoping nobody remembers.


    Disagree (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 07:27:44 AM EST
    this whole flag thing is going to go away.  Donald is not.   Donald is a much bigger problem than racism which is not actually news and is sort of baked into the cake.

    If it was July of next year I might agree with you.


    The flag (5.00 / 1) (#184)
    by FlJoe on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 08:11:09 AM EST
    thing might go away but the bigger problem for the Republicans is their traditional coalition is starting to fall apart. The "southern strategy" that has been a very important tool for them for half a century has now become toxic.

    It's been toxic for decades (5.00 / 2) (#186)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 08:24:17 AM EST
    but it's been effective.  Their problem is its becoming less effective.  And will continue to.   But this cycle it's still status quo.  More or less.  They are certainly smart enough to know this is a problem which explains their come to Jesus moment concerning the flag.
    Racism is certainly a problem for them long term.  I believe Donald is a problem for them short term.   He is going to define the debate.  He just is.   Every actual candidate is going to be put in the position of either agreeing with him or offending large portions of their base.   Their racism problem right now is not that half or so of the country thinks they are racists.  That is old news.   It's that their base IS racist and they either appeal to it or die.

    Donald presents a different problem.  He is insane.  

    Just my opinion.


    I think Donald is a problem in the primary (none / 0) (#194)
    by CST on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 09:28:47 AM EST
    But come general election time he will be a non-entity.  There's no way they "let" him win.

    The thing about the race issue - that's also become a police issue - these things are intertwined deeply in the media right now and for the first time in a long time getting a lot of coverage.  And unfortunately, there is no doubt in my mind that there will be another incident of some kind, or a trial, before the election to keep it in the public eye.  It's a long term issue, but this election season it's starting to feel like a short term one too.


    I think (none / 0) (#196)
    by FlJoe on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 09:29:35 AM EST
    the toxicity of the race issue is a serious long term problem for the party. Trump is a short term problem for the presidential candidates, especially Jeb who seems to bear the brunt of his bluster.

    Unlike most of the clowns from last time, the media can not seem to stop talking about him. From my observations over the past several news cycles on CNN it seems that Trump is getting the lion's share of coverage. A lot of it verges on mockery but being mocked by the press is a badge of honor for a sizable segment of the Republican base.


    I don't (none / 0) (#182)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 07:55:30 AM EST
    think either of them are going to go away. You and I know the racism that is baked into the GOP cake but with all this that is happening it's becoming obvious to casual observers that the GOP has a race problem.

    It's really hard to watch (none / 0) (#168)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 10:36:16 PM EST
    We are debating this group of people in this upcoming election and I barely have the patience to tolerate  acknowledging them. In competition though, that is your first and sometimes last mistake, so I acknowledge them...and it's psychically painful.

    We argue around here (none / 0) (#159)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 09:16:06 PM EST
    But nobody wants to turn things over to someone out of their freaking mind because they don't like the slightly sane candidate :)

    It means (none / 0) (#128)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 06:49:31 PM EST
    ...that he is sucking all the air out of the GOP primaries through sheer celebrity.

    He has as much chance of the nomination as Sarah Palin, but the entertainment value of this moron will be immense.


    Thank the Gods leftwing celebrity (none / 0) (#160)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 09:18:41 PM EST
    Constitutes something much different from rightwing celebrity.

    In meaningless June news (none / 0) (#161)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 09:20:17 PM EST
    The Tom Brady appeal was heard today.

    word on the street is (none / 0) (#197)
    by CST on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 09:34:40 AM EST
    He'll be playing in the first game.

    re the Freddie Gray autopsy (none / 0) (#162)
    by zaitztheunconvicted on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 09:34:27 PM EST
    I think my local news is reporting a summary of the autopsy results from the Baltimore Sun, which I can't read.  anyway, supposedly, Gray probably died from his spine being injured when the van suddenly slowed and then turned . . .

    Supposedly Gray was loaded into the van on his stomach and then got to his feet and was thrown or fell when the van was suddenly slowing or turning.

    the problem is, for the prosecution, if the driver is known to be of good character and to have asked the others to strap him in, he did not have a depraved heart, and there might have been other reasons for slowing down and turning.

    I am not saying that the police conduct in this case was commendable; it appears it was quite careless.  

    Obama (none / 0) (#167)
    by lentinel on Tue Jun 23, 2015 at 10:17:03 PM EST
    looks to be getting the fast track trade bill he and his friends in the Republican party so desire.

    He is defining his legacy in style.

    George W the Prognosticator (none / 0) (#185)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 08:16:02 AM EST
    "I think -- tide turning -- see, as I remember -- I was raised in the desert, but tides kind of -- it's easy to see a tide turn -- did I say those words?"

    Why yes, yes you did. And yesterday this quote on the need to remove the Confederate flag from the capitol in SC from South Carolina state Sen. Paul Thurmond (R) (Son of Strom):

    "It is time to acknowledge our past, atone for our sins, and work for a better future. That future cannot be built on symbols of war, hate, and divisiveness... I am aware of my heritage. I am not proud of this heritage. These practices were inhumane and wrong, wrong, wrong."

    George W was finally right about something. You can see a tide turn.

    George (none / 0) (#188)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 08:51:46 AM EST
    W supported keeping the confederate flag on the state house.

    Amazing the son of Strom gets what the problem is while the majority of the residents of SC don't understand what the problem is.

    You want to know what really makes me mad about all this? It could have long ago been done with if the GOP had not given aide and refuge to racists.


    True (none / 0) (#191)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 09:08:57 AM EST
    But just as you don't like them living in the past, you too can't live in the past.

    Take the victories as they come.

    They need a super majority in the Senate and House in SC.

    According to the Charleston Post & Courier that number has been reached in their poll of the Senate and is now at 71%. They are currently 18 votes shy in the House with 51 House members not yet taking a stand.


    No (none / 0) (#198)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 09:42:50 AM EST
    I'm glad the symbols of the confederacy are going to be relegated to a museum where they belong. I just find it sad that it took the lives of 9 innocent people to make it happen

    How many autopsies (none / 0) (#189)
    by Uncle Chip on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 09:00:28 AM EST
    did the ME/prosecutor leak?

    Here is the Daily Mail article saying that the ME claimed that the fatal injury occurred when FG's head hit the bolt on the back door. That would have been sudden acceleration -- not sudden deceleration -- and facing the back not the front:

    Medical examiner 'found Freddie Gray's catastrophic head injury was consistent with bolt in the back door of the police van'

    Now according to the BSun leaked autopsy, we are told that the ME believes the fatal injury occurred at the front of the van by sudden deceleration as he was facing forward.

    So which was it -- facing forward or backward?

    What happened to the bolt on the backdoor as the cause of death?

    Which leaked autopsy is the ME standing by?

    I guess we'll have to wait til Friday to find out.

    In the meantime the Mosby and her ME should gag themselves.

    5 blocks? (none / 0) (#202)
    by zaitztheunconvicted on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 10:45:13 AM EST
    I am looking over the timeline . . . It appears that the van could have taken Gray to the police station five blocks to the south and done so quickly . . .  Instead, the van took a much longer and circuitous route and arrived at the police station 40 minutes later . . .

    It appears that Gray was arrested 5 to 8 blocks north of the police station to which he was eventually taken . . .

    I just (none / 0) (#205)
    by lentinel on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 07:34:36 PM EST
    watched the pilot episode of a show called, "Mr. Robot".

    I felt I was watching something original.

    It also felt very contemporary - expressing a kind of feeling that is very 2015 - after all we have been through since 2001 with Bush - and then the Obama years.

    We are at some place that I can't define.
    And this show, in the pilot episode at least, seems to express it.

    Mr Robot (none / 0) (#206)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 07:41:23 PM EST
    i agree very fresh

    I imagined people get tired (none / 0) (#207)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 24, 2015 at 07:43:31 PM EST
    of me telling them to watch tv shows but I liked that very much.

    I Don't... (none / 0) (#208)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Jun 26, 2015 at 01:03:08 PM EST
    ...and with all the drivel on the TV, it's nice to check out programs I normally would pass right over.

    Anyone else see Whiplash? (none / 0) (#209)
    by jondee on Fri Jun 26, 2015 at 02:48:28 PM EST
    I'm thinking a teacher like Terrence Fletcher wouldn't last five minutes in a prestigious music school, but I still loved the film..

    I wonder how many times JK Simmons listened to those tapes of Buddy Rich yelling at his band in preparation for his role?

    To me, ultimately that film is about the transcendent power of art, specifically music.

    The last two minutes of the film, where Fletcher and the young drummer connect on the higher level of musical time was a perfect denouement.