Friday Night Open Thread

What a long week! Here's a new open thread, all topics welcome.

< DA Brauchler's Post Verdict Statement on the James Holmes Trial | Trump Steps In It Again >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Edge of Stability (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 07, 2015 at 08:39:01 PM EST
    amazing atmospheric time lapse

    This entire timelapse sequence was recording between May and June of 2015. During this time, I managed to arrange about 5 weeks off from my regular job as a Police Officer in California, and set out in my truck with no particular destination in mind. I had only picked up photography as a hobby within the last couple years, and this was my first year ever recording or producing timelapse videos. Having always been very interested in severe weather, nature, and traveling, I picked up storm chasing during spring of 2014. I spent a few weeks in 2014 traveling and photographing storms, but without a solid goal or understanding of the concepts of photography. My interest in timelapse photography of storms stemmed from seeing Nicolaus Wegner's "Stormscapes" videos around this time.

    Beats the heck out of (none / 0) (#5)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Aug 07, 2015 at 11:02:11 PM EST
    a lava lamp.  

    That Guy Missed His Calling... (none / 0) (#80)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 11:27:48 AM EST
    ...and I also time the time lapse for construction, and I recently saw one that followed a glacier from underneath.

    I'm sure that everyone must have seen.. (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by desertswine on Fri Aug 07, 2015 at 10:24:18 PM EST
    the new images of the moon passing across the earth taken from a satellite beyond the moon. But in case you haven't, here are the images of the dark side of the moon, and the earth. You can almost see those alien structures on the moon that Giorgio talks about, but not quite.

    Trump (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by MKS on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 11:17:55 AM EST
    when he said "blood coming out of her wherever," meant her nose.

    Trump may be just fine.  He articulates the underlying misogyny that is the basis for so much conservative angst.....

    Michael Brown (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Aug 09, 2015 at 08:14:45 AM EST
    died one year ago today.  May he rest in peace.

    No peace tonight (none / 0) (#72)
    by McBain on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 01:27:37 AM EST
    Reports of violent protests and gunshots

    American Patriot, Jerry Berrigan, (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by KeysDan on Sun Aug 09, 2015 at 02:17:18 PM EST
    died at age 95. A peace protestor of the Vietnam War and other conflicts, who was arrested frequently, along with his better known brothers Daniel and Phillip, who were Catholic priests.  After Berrigan's service in the Army after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, he studied for the priesthood at St. Joseph's seminary in Yonkers but decided to leave, claiming he was not holy enough.

    Mr. Berrigan protested  against nuclear proliferation and both Iraq wars.  In 1973, he and others were arrested for disrupting a White House tour by knelling in prayer on the last day of US bombing of Cambodia. And, he was arrested for throwing blood on the floor of the Pentagon in 1979,   He said he was arrested so many times he lost count. The most recent arrest was at age 92, at the Hancock AF Base for protesting drone strikes.   In 2008, he said the only thing he would do differently if he could do it over again,  was "I would have resisted more often and been arrested more often."  He is survived by his wife, children and grandchildren.  

    Also, Frank Gifford (none / 0) (#63)
    by desertswine on Sun Aug 09, 2015 at 04:09:27 PM EST
    The GOP nominating process (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by Repack Rider on Sun Aug 09, 2015 at 09:17:35 PM EST
    has been a mixture of a several modern cultural icons: Survivor, The Voice, Family Feud and Lord of the Flies.

    They thought that fewer debates would simplify the process, but tripling the number of contestants had the opposite effect.  The savagery of the contest will leave the winner scarred and damaged.

    Remember those old headlines, "Democrats in Disarray?"  These guys are an insult to "disarray."

    You forgot "Last Comic Standing." (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by Anne on Sun Aug 09, 2015 at 09:26:50 PM EST
    Although none of it's all that funny.

    Slate Magazine... (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by desertswine on Sun Aug 09, 2015 at 11:04:36 PM EST
    has 5 panoramic photos of the ruins of Hiroshima who's anniversary we are not celebrating.

    Not really the kind of thing... (none / 0) (#73)
    by unitron on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 05:35:12 AM EST
    ...one "celebrates", although perhaps we could have observed it.

    Celebrating ? (none / 0) (#81)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 11:32:04 AM EST
    Do you mean mourning ?

    Commemorating (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 11:56:27 AM EST
    is the proper term here, IMHO.

    Yes, I Think That is the Word (none / 0) (#89)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 12:11:02 PM EST
    We would remember.. (none / 0) (#142)
    by desertswine on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 08:42:10 PM EST
    but we would not celebrate.

    Slado has not been around here for a (5.00 / 4) (#90)
    by caseyOR on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 12:25:19 PM EST
    few months now. Has anyone heard from him? Does anyone know if he is okay?

    I know he has been very ill for some time. I do so hope his absence is simply because he is taking a break from the madness.

    I've been wondering that myself. (none / 0) (#132)
    by Mr Natural on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 06:24:47 PM EST
    Slado was polite.  I didn't understand the virtues of politeness in political arguments until someone I knew on the Guardian talkboards died.  I knew her only as a moniker and writer of patient, reasoned comments.  Such an outpouring followed.  She was mourned.  She was praised.  People said she'd changed their minds about something - the rarest of rara avis on a political talkboard.  I realized that no one would miss the shredder I'd become.  And neither would I.

    Was William Shakespeare a stoner? (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 08:24:18 PM EST
    Several pipes from his garden have tested positive for cannabis residue, according to South African anthropologist Francis Thackeray.

    If that's what it takes to effectively wield (5.00 / 2) (#140)
    by Mr Natural on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 08:34:24 PM EST
    hendiadyses, smoke on...

    The things I learn (5.00 / 1) (#201)
    by sj on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:52:49 AM EST
    Welcome to the party Larry (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 10:52:43 AM EST
    He added: "You want to rail against Wall Street, as O'Malley does or Bernie Sanders does? Great" But, he continued, "unless you fix the way we fund campaigns, we're not going to take on the largest funder of congressional campaigns in America."

    Mr. Lessig said if he could raise enough money, he would campaign "24 hours a day" for the Democratic nomination. He also said there were "a hundred successes short of" winning the White House.

    "Eugene McCarthy didn't win, but he certainly made the Vietnam War an issue, brought down a president," Mr. Lessig said, referring to the then senator's 1968 primary campaign against President Lyndon B. Johnson, which helped persuade Mr. Johnson not to seek re-election.

    This is shaping up to be a cycle when dens are talking about really important stuff while republicans are talking about...............help me out here.  What are they talking about again?

    I agree (none / 0) (#180)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:17:46 AM EST
    with that. Unless you fix the campaign system you can rail all you want but it's going nowhere until you make a millionaires money the same as anyone else's.

    Seems to me (none / 0) (#181)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:22:01 AM EST
    that Larry, particularly in the age of The Donald, could direct the discussion in way more important even than Saint Bernie of the Great Northeast.

    You are (2.00 / 1) (#184)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:28:50 AM EST
    correct since Bernie is considered a "gadfly" by the "very serious people"

    ugghh.... (none / 0) (#193)
    by sj on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:41:08 AM EST
    I think you're a bigger gadfly than he is.

    Why (none / 0) (#194)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:44:03 AM EST
    the personal attack? I'm talking about the media or did you not notice I used quotes? Sheesh.

    Why the personal attack? (none / 0) (#197)
    by sj on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:47:50 AM EST
    Do you ever read yourself?

    To be clear (none / 0) (#202)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:53:25 AM EST
    not dissing Bernie at all.   I actually see him as St Bernie of the Great Northeast.   His message of growing economic inequality is like a sh!thouse flower in the political discourse.

    Larry Lessig brings another equally important issue on the stage.

    Importantly, I do not believe Bernie OR Larry would consider an independent run.   They are here to shape the debate.  God bless them.   I hope I'm right.


    I Would Love to Know... (none / 0) (#183)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:28:36 AM EST
    ...how that could possibly happen.  The people who benefit the most are the ones who have to make laws that would seriously effect their lifestyles.

    While I applaud the lip service, the President isn't making law anytime soon, and the idea that Congress is going to give up the best super-perk of being in Congress, is funny.

    No one forces any of them to take legal bribes, they do it all on their own.


    Constitutional (none / 0) (#186)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:30:15 AM EST
    amendment to overturn citizens united. If the people in this country are ticked off enough about the money in electoral politics it will pass.

    Link (none / 0) (#185)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:29:59 AM EST
    As Sen. Chuck Schumer ... (none / 0) (#2)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Aug 07, 2015 at 09:41:01 PM EST
    ... and a handful of Democratic congresscritters hasten to join majority Republicans in supporting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's determined bid to hasten his own country toward a possible rendezvous with Armageddon, correspondent Noga Tarnpolosky of Haaretz has posted on Twitter this now-viral photo of the consequences of Netanyahu's insanity.

    How can our humanity not be reaffirmed by the two brave Palestinian men in this photo, coming to the aid of an obviously terrified Israeli policewoman who was apparently being pelted with rocks by right-wing Israeli settlers in the West Bank? They shamed the crowd into stopping, and walked her back to the safety of approaching soldiers and police.


    I called Schumer's DC office (none / 0) (#4)
    by MKS on Fri Aug 07, 2015 at 10:28:23 PM EST
    today to complaint about his position on the Iran nuke deal.

    He should not be voted leader of the Senate Dems next term....  


    As someone who's been in the pol biz ... (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Aug 07, 2015 at 11:15:28 PM EST
    ... for a while, my educated guess is that Sen. Schumer has likely determined that there are more than enough Democrats already in favor of the president's Iran deal, which makes it "safe" for him to "oppose" it without putting the administration's signature diplomatic achievement in any real jeopardy.

    And if that's the case, then his ingratiating but otherwise empty pandering to the AIPAC lobby is even more infuriating, because that lack of personal integrity is both befitting and indicative of someone who either has no core principles, or considers them wholly dispensable whenever he calculates the odds in his favor.

    It's always easy to parrot what's currently popular, and mindlessly bashing President Obama's diplomacy with Iran appears to be the Flavor of the Day in certain Beltway circles. But saying what's currently popular isn't necessarily the same as doing what's ultimately right over the long term. IMHO, voting this deal down would be a disaster, the momentous consequences of which will be borne by our children and grandchildren.

    Surely, Democrats can find someone else other than Schumer to take the reins after Harry Reid stands down, someone with an eye to the future rather than a finger to the wind -- like, say, Brian Schatz. There's nothing in Senate rules which says that choice leadership and committee positions need to go to the old guys by default. And in Chuck Schumer's case, he just rendered himself inherently unsuitable for the post of Democratic leader.



    You guys are fortunate (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by MKS on Fri Aug 07, 2015 at 11:24:01 PM EST
    to have Schatz....Wasn't Scott Case always looming around?

    I think you may be right that Schumer knows Obama has enough votes to sustain his veto, so Schumer thinks he can have it both ways....

    JFK, Schumer is not....And I told the Schumer aide on the phone that Schumer had betrayed JFK's legacy.



    Schumer's certainly not ... (none / 0) (#9)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 05:14:36 AM EST
    ... doing Israel any favors by parroting a hardline extremist like Prime Minister Netanyahu on this issue. His Likud government's absolutist policies are rapidly turning his country into a rogue state and an international pariah.

    And, Chuck Schumer (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by KeysDan on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 12:08:14 PM EST
    is not doing the USA any favors.   Agreed, too, that Schumer is a bad choice to replace Senator Harry Reid, with or without support for  the Iran agreement.

    The senate position is a highly visible one, and one that is the primary face and voice of the Democratic party in the senate.  Reid is going, and Pelosi is likely to follow in the not too distant future.  It is an opportunity to move to a newer and better presence; Brian  Schatz or Chris Murphy are of the stripe needed.

    Chuck Schumer gave a cameo appearance, along with his cousin, Amy, on the Daily Show recently.  It would be a lot better if Amy could take his senate seat and allow Chuck to proceed  in his new chosen endeavor--comic has been.


    Kirsten Gillibrand would make a fine (none / 0) (#15)
    by caseyOR on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 01:48:14 PM EST
    Democratic Senate leader. She is smart, hard-working, tenacious and votes the right way (meaning my way) nearly all the time. Also, she is very good at articulating policy positions.

    She is leading the charge to elect more women to both houses of Congress. Her work in keeping a light shining on the issue of sexual assault in the military is tireless.

    And, even though she, too, represents New York, Gillibrand has stated her support for the treaty with Iran.

    No offense to men in general, or Brian Schatz and Chris Murphy in particular, but enough with guys running the show.


    Agreed. Senator Gillibrand (none / 0) (#19)
    by KeysDan on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 03:03:14 PM EST
    would be great.  She certainly is of the stripe I am thinking of for the Democratic senatorial leadership position, such as Brian Schatz and Chris Murphy (co-authors of the Foreign Affairs article linked by Donald in Hawaii).

    Senator Gillibrand represents a blue state which relieves the potential for major challenges while busy with senate leadership. This is true, also,  in the cases of both Murphy and Schatz, but it is a political factor that needs to be considered.  Harry Reid, in the end, pulled it out, but he did have to fend off serious challenges.      


    I could go with that, provided that ... (none / 0) (#29)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 06:11:32 PM EST
    ... the woman in question is not our own Sen. Mazie Hirono. She's actually very astute from a policy perspective, but as far as administrative experience and leadership goes, she couldn't organize a one-float rose parade.

    Not Schumer (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by christinep on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 09:42:23 PM EST
    While I also think that Schumer made the initial determination that the overall approval vote was safe and his vote was not needed etc. etc. etc., my response to this latest direct insult to the President's principal policy initiative & accomplishment borders on my own sense of strong insult from this fair-weather would-be leader.

     I was already a bit peeved by Schumer's sleazy hit on the ACA late last year in an interview where he suggested that pursuing that healthcare reform at the start of the term was a mistake. I let it pass with a shake of the head with an understanding that even the most loyal party leadership will disagree in unusual, infrequent situations.  But this ... this latest in-your-face insult against a long sought, cherished goal of the President from one who seeks to be a top leader in the party of the President...yoiks!!  

    What Schumer has shown in recent times is his long-lasting selfishness, his disloyalty, his narrowness.  

    Chuck Schumer is a classic Jerk.  He should never be a majority nor minority leader.  We need to seek someone truly qualified for the position.  At the very least, that person must be someone that we can trust.  


    Never been a fan of Chuck Schumer (none / 0) (#23)
    by Chuck0 on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 04:06:49 PM EST
    Now less so. Seems to me, Schumer is more interested in serving what he perceives to be the  interests of Israel than the United States. Perhaps he's serving in the wrong legislative body. Though, I also don't believe voting down this agreement really serves the interests of Israel. Or the world.

    Opposition to Iran Nuclear Accord (none / 0) (#8)
    by Ladyjustice on Fri Aug 07, 2015 at 11:41:36 PM EST
    What is Senator Chuck Schumer thinking?  Even President Reuven Rivlin of Israel has warned PM Benjamin Netanyhu that his stance is alienating Israel from the United States and further isolating his country.  The coalition has worked long and hard to create an atmosphere of mutual understanding for continued dialogue leading to peaceful and diplomatic solutions.  Failure could guarantee the status quo and rockets could rain on Israel from Iran once again.  How could this be an option?  Should this folly persist and proceed, we should no longer consider Israel an ally and the United States should NOT come to its aid.

    He thinking his big contributors (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 07:19:11 AM EST
    dont like the deal.

    What is Senator Chuck Schumer thinking? (none / 0) (#11)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 10:06:05 AM EST
    He is thinking that this is a terrible deal that will get thousands killed and he doesn't want his name on it.

    ... that's all the more reason to be looking for someone else as the Senate's Democratic leader. Your Republican friends got thousands of Americans killed in the last decade, through their neglect, stupidity and ignorance. I'll gladly take my chances with a peace agreement.

    Ah yes (none / 0) (#35)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 07:55:23 PM EST
    Peace in our time worked so well last time.

    Maybe some day they'll get everything nice and tidy and we'll have that thing we sing about, when "we ain't gonna study war no more." Maybe. Maybe the same day the leopard will take off his spots and get a job as a Jersey cow, too. - Robert Heinlein

    Where do you want American troops (none / 0) (#43)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 08:40:06 PM EST
    To bleed and die today, Jim?

    Do you know any Iranians? (none / 0) (#13)
    by MKS on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 11:43:58 AM EST
    I tend to doubt it.

    What is this??? (none / 0) (#16)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 02:06:16 PM EST
    A rewrite of, "Why some of my best friends are black?"

    But I'll play.

    Why yes. Yes I do. One I know was very upset when Obama didn't help the student movement in 2009.


    It was about not dehumanizing (none / 0) (#18)
    by MKS on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 02:38:02 PM EST
    an entire country...

    I know you say we should kill enough people including women and children until Iran submits.


    No MKS (1.00 / 1) (#20)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 03:37:20 PM EST
    I say we wage war against evil and oppression just as we did against the Nazis and Japan.

    It is a sad fact that women and children will die.

    Whose fault is that?

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

    You know nothing about war, Jim, ... (4.67 / 3) (#31)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 07:12:14 PM EST
    "War is a cowardly escape from the problems of peace."
    -- Thomas Mann, novelist and philanthropist (1875-1955)

    ... except how to volunteer others to fight it on your behalf.


    Real deep sigh,,, (2.00 / 2) (#33)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 07:42:12 PM EST
    I did my 10 years, Donald.

    You did not.

    But I do understand your embarrassment.

    This story shall the good man teach his son;
    And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
    From this day to the ending of the world,
    But we in it shall be remember'd;
    We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
    For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
    Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
    This day shall gentle his condition:
    And gentlemen in England now a-bed
    Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
    And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
    That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

    Shakespheare - Henry V

    I got lucky. I had friends that did not. Enjoy your privileged life.


    I lost my father in the Vietnam War. (5.00 / 4) (#54)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Aug 09, 2015 at 05:01:57 AM EST
    JimakaPPJ: "I did my 10 years, Donald. You did not."

    And since you were nowhere near Vietnam, it goes without saying you've never experienced the horror of war firsthand, whereas my family and I buried my father in Arlington as a direct result of it.

    As I've said to you before -- and it quite obviously bears repeating at this point -- you speak with all the cheap bravado of someone who's never known the heartache and pain of losing a loved one to a time and place of someone else's deliberate choosing, which is what war does.

    Rather, you talk about war vicariously and with a disconcerting sense of glee, much like a 10-year-old boy wielding a toy gun and playing soldier with his friends.

    And then, you wonder aloud why nobody takes you seriously, when you really have no standing here or anywhere else to be suggesting or offering war as a solution to anything -- and most certainly not with the patently false pretenses you've been peddling over and again about Iran, Iraq, Vietnam, &etc.

    Since you've once again chosen to make it personal, I'll conclude by urging you to place the well-being of your own grandson ahead of your mindless ego.

    Because you're in your sunset years and I'm well past the halfway point of my own life, it is our grandchildren and those of their immediate generation who've yet to come of age, who actually stand to lose the most from your ignorant folly.



    Donald, losing your father does not (1.00 / 3) (#58)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 09, 2015 at 08:45:12 AM EST
    qualify you for anything beyond knowing the pain of losing your father.

    That is not unique.

    And you should know that those killed while opposing the Soviets in places besides Vietnam are just as dead as those killed in Vietnam.

    And please show me where I have wondered why no one takes me seriously. All I have said is that I am an adult and I don't care whether you agree with me or not. You, as a full out Leftie, are the one concerned with group identity and acceptance.

    I understand exactly what I am writing about. War is terrible and should be used only when necessary and then should be fought as hard as possible using all the resources available. To not use them because you don't want to kill the enemy is to break faith with the military making them pawns in a chess game.

    We never did that until Korea. It is what we did in Vietnam. It is what we have done in the Middle East.

    Iran means to dominate the world. It is part of the radical islamist's faith. Look at what bin Ladin said to Peter Arnett in this 3/97 intervuew.

    REPORTER: Mr. Bin Ladin, will the end of the United States' presence in Saudi Arabia, their withdrawal, will that end your call for jihad against the United States and against the US ?

    BIN LADIN:.... So, the driving-away jihad against the US does not stop with its withdrawal from the Arabian peninsula, but rather it must desist from aggressive intervention against Muslims in the whole world.


    Obama has made the world a more dangerous place. His surrender to Iran is the most stupid thing I have seen in foreign diplomacy since Chamberlain surrendered to Hitler.

    Will my grandson have to fight? I will be honored if he chooses to serve.

    You and people like you have almost insured he will have to fight.


    The same old tired, discredited talking points. (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun Aug 09, 2015 at 09:05:10 AM EST
    Iran means to dominate the world.. (none / 0) (#204)
    by jondee on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:58:12 AM EST
    Even you're not clueless enough to believe that could ever be remotely possible.

    You are an envious ball of bile (1.00 / 1) (#37)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 07:59:42 PM EST
    and pseudo-patriotism.

    What part do you find objectionable (none / 0) (#55)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun Aug 09, 2015 at 07:27:26 AM EST
    Or untrue, oculus?  

    He was talking about war (none / 0) (#67)
    by Yman on Sun Aug 09, 2015 at 09:42:56 PM EST
    Not peacetime service followed by decades of cheering for others to go to actual war.

    But you knew that ....


    Yman, if you want to say that (1.00 / 2) (#78)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 10:59:47 AM EST
    the Cold War did not happen, and that Korea and Vietnam didn't happen and the Soviets didn't blockage Berlin and the Chec Spring didn't have Soviet tanks rolling through it and the Cuban Missle crisis was a pipe dream....

    Please be my guest.

    But saying that those who died serving in other places....outside of Vietnam have no status, have no right to be mourned, is despicable.


    Where did Yman (none / 0) (#91)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 12:36:59 PM EST
    make these claims?

    Good thing I never said that (none / 0) (#155)
    by Yman on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 10:00:08 PM EST
    But it's funny that your mind went there.

    Cold "war" - heh (how do you make air quotes?)


    So tell us, Yman (1.50 / 2) (#167)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 10:12:48 AM EST
    the people died hunting Soviet subs in the Atlantic or keeping the early warning barrier manned in the Arctic... they weren't involved in a war...

    Well, seeing as how you believe we shouldn't have been opposing the Soviet in such a manner I can understand your position.

    Of course I know some guys, if they could rise from their graves, who would disagree with you.


    Quit using that quote to covertly (none / 0) (#26)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 04:37:23 PM EST
    call commentators here cowards.



    Here you (none / 0) (#32)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 07:39:34 PM EST
    go from probably one of your favorites Goering

    "Voice or no
    voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.
    That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked,
    and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the
    country to danger. It works the same in any country."

    Is that a link???? (none / 0) (#34)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 07:45:06 PM EST
    No, it is just a feeble attempt at a personal insult using the Nazis, which means that you automatically lose the discussion.

    Now, try again. Explain why you hate Carly and why she did so bad at HP.

    Betcha can't.


    The fact (none / 0) (#36)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 07:56:02 PM EST
    that you don't know about Carly's legacy of failure at HP is quite surprising but then again you usually don't keep up on current affairs too well.

    Not that I think you'll read it but here it is: link

    On top of the failures at HP she's also a failed candidate for the senate. Hillary won her senate race.


    A real patriot she was back then. (none / 0) (#38)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 08:01:32 PM EST
    Uh, I know about what happened at HP (none / 0) (#39)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 08:27:42 PM EST
    I also know why. OTOH you know nothing beyond what you read in the Left wing side of the press.

    That is if you want to call your link a "press." But I'll play.

    The company announced earlier this year that it planned to cut 17,900 people by October because of a weak economy and its merger with Compaq." [Omaha-World Herald, 9/29/03]

    When companies get in trouble employees get fired. When two companies in the same field merge... Sorry, that's what they do.

    Sending jobs off shore was/is done by all companies. No one likes it because it hurts morale of those left, it is bad PR and long distance control of engineering, manufacturing and quality is very difficult.

    If you want to stop off shoring then get Congress to pass some laws. Obama has done nothing.

    BTW - Where was your Apple phone manufactured?

    One lesson she's learned while running HP is that she should have moved more quickly in ejecting certain people. Smartened up now, she says, 'I would have done them all faster. Every person that I've asked to leave, whether it's been clear publicly or not, I would have done faster.'"  [Fortune, 2/7/05]

    That's typical in a merger. There are certain people who just wont to accept the new reality and are trouble makers. Id them quickly and fire them quickly. Hopefully she can take this experience into her presidency and the bureaucracy that seems to never change.

    Fiorina: "There Is No Job That Is America's God-Given Right Anymore."

    Sad but true. It is time we recognize that and start to get competitive.

    And then we have:

    Fiorina Admitted To Sheltering HP Profits Overseas

    If that is bad then I would hope you are very angry at Obama's bud at GE and will demand the law be changed.

    So there you go. Facts instead of charges.


    Jim (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 08:36:07 PM EST
    the reason all those people got fired is because Carly made the disastrous decision to buy Compaq essentially tanking the company.

    Though I agree she's the perfect person for the GOP--she shows the complete failure of trickle down economics and is the poster girl for the problems in corporate America today. Just like Sarah Palin was a disaster for evangelicals Carly will do the same for the business wing of the GOP.


    The reason HP purchased (none / 0) (#44)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 08:42:32 PM EST
    Compaq was the failure of HP's pre Carly management to develop and get new products in the pipeline. If that had not been an issue the BOD would not have agreed.

    That you want to talk about economics when 94 million Americas aren't working demonstrates a willful denial of reality.


    Here's what was in the WSJ (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 08:50:55 PM EST
    when the merger was undone:

    August 19, 2011
    One of Silicon Valley's most controversial acquisitions is on the verge of coming full circle.

    In 2001, Hewlett-Packard Co. stunned the technology world when it said it would buy one of its main rivals: Compaq Computer Corp. The deal faced skepticism from Wall Streeters and investors, some of whom saw it as an expensive boondoggle. The son of one of the company's founders called it a "$25 billion mistake."

    Now, the deal that transformed Palo Alto, Calif.-based H-P into the world's largest computer maker looks likely to be undone. On Thursday, H-P said it was exploring strategic alternatives--corporate code for "sale"--of its computer business. H-P said a divestiture could take the form of a spin-off, which would make the business a separate company.

    A sale of the computer operations would mark yet another climactic moment for H-P, which has morphed over the years into a diversified technology giant from its roots as a hardware firm.

    Now, chief executive, Leo Apotheker, is making the company both smaller and bigger at the same time: H-P said it would acquire software maker Autonomy Corp. as it announced the potential spin-off.

    "He's jettisoning major businesses that are no longer profitable," said technology writer Michael S. Malone, the author of "Bill and Dave: How Hewlett and Packard Built the World's Greatest Company." "This is a very H-P kind of move."

    An H-P spokesman declined to comment.

    H-P's acquisition of Houston-based Compaq was fraught with contention. The two companies had overlapping computer lines, a mishmash of suppliers and contractors, and a sales team that was bloated when combined.(Ed--sounds like she wasn't very good with the follow-through on this.  Just the kind of person you want to be POTUS in these trying times)

    Carly Fiorina, the H-P CEO who led the deal, saw it as an opportunity for H-P to gain scale and cut costs. At the time, H-P was the world's No. 2 computer maker, while Compaq was No. 4.

    Others saw it as an expensive boondoggle. Most notable among the dissenters: Walter Hewlett, the son of founder William Hewlett, led a rebellion of family members who held 18% of the company's shares in a fight against the acquisition, turning the March 2002 vote on the deal into a bitter proxy battle with management.(Ed)

    H-P became the world's largest computer maker through the deal, a position it still holds. Since the deal was completed, however, the PC industry has changed. Margins on hardware face pressure as most manufacturers compete on price. A weak global economy has also prompted both businesses and consumers to hold off on new purchases.

    Jim (none / 0) (#46)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 08:51:58 PM EST
    you are one of those 94 million people according to right wing blogs. The number of people who are actually looking for work is 1/10th of that.

    And the GOP's solution for all this? Their solution is to return to the failed policies of the Bush Administration. The same people who said the 90's were horrible economic times for this country. The GOP wants voodoo trickle down misery for all Americans. How many jobs has Carly created with that golden parachute? Probably zero.


    No, they don't count people on SocSec (none / 0) (#51)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 10:23:35 PM EST
    and I am retired.

    But that aside, when the Demos took over both Houses in 2/77 the market was around 12,000 and going up. the U3 was under 5 and gasoline was around $2.00 and federal revues was setting a new record high.

    17 months later the housing bubble that the Demos had created and Bush tried to stop had burst and the oil markets, driven by the belief that the Demos wanted a shortage, something said by Obama in an MSNBC interview had exploded.

    I could use some more of Bush and less of the Demos.

    And I don't know anyone who claims that the 90's were bad. The end was bad as the Internet bubble burst and the NASDAQ ran off 50% between 3/2000 and 3/2001. Outside of Gore being unable to carry his home sate that is likely the reason why Bush won.

    How many jobs did Carly make?? Probably none. What she was was an efficient manager who helped companies expand and grow. At the end she lost a battle caused by her attempt to correct a problem caused by previous management. This is neither an unusual or unexpected event.

    Flash back to the mid '70's, the dawn of the digital age. ITT engaged in a bitter intra division fight over R&D dollars. Should it be computer control analog switching or digital? Analog won. NTI, Stromberg and North Electric went digital. Digital won. A new CEO came in. Fifteen months later ITT purchased North. Two years later the CEO was fired. Three years before that firing ITT had failed to produce the product the market wanted.

    Try and understand that.


    Correlation doesn't imply causation (none / 0) (#53)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 11:13:54 PM EST
    Understanbd wingnut talking points (none / 0) (#68)
    by Yman on Sun Aug 09, 2015 at 09:47:03 PM EST
    ... coupled with a complete lack of logic and evidence?

    No thanks.


    New Rules (none / 0) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 02:31:57 PM EST
    Let Bill Cosby keep his Medal of Freedom

    But maybe put a bell on it.

    Bill Maher was in good form, (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by KeysDan on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 03:50:29 PM EST
    his vacation seemed to re-invigorate him.  Looked forward to his comedic takes, or take downs,  on the Republican debate, which I figured would be like shooting ducks in a barrel--and it was.   I needlessly worried that the panel of Steve Schmidt, Republican hired gun, and Mary Matalin, an aids to W. and Cheney, and the other half of Carville political odd couple, would not let Gavin Newsome and Bill get a word in edgewise.

     My other worry was for Mary Matalin--something seemed wrong with her ability to move her lips when talking.  Don't agree with her, but hope her health is OK.

    Steve Schmidt, usually offers some good Republican perspectives, if you overlook the fact that he was the campaign manager for McCain/Palin.   But, last night he seemed to be apologetic for, and defensive of,  the candidates, hoping to staunch criticism by stating the obvious--that Trump speaks complete nonsense.  

    Only to be caught by Bill countering "what does it say about your party that the guy who;s leading you keeps saying nonsense?" Bill did disappoint by letting Christie's Rudy G. 9/ll, 9/ll schtick go unnoticed--Christie's debate lie that he was appointed US Attorney Sept. 10, 2001, the day before the attack,  and swung into action.

    When the fact is that Christie was appointed by President Bush in Dec. 2001 and confirmed in Jan. 2002.   That could have been a "leg-up" to  the Christie umbrella stand joke.

    Bill had great quips about each of the non-Trumpers, including my favorite on Scott Walker--his odd face and looking like he carries a dead bird in his pocket.   Oh, and the Professor on climate change was measured and informative.  He was good.


    dead (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 05:04:51 PM EST
    bird in Walker's pocket? maybe in his pocket with  a dead woman in the trunk of his car. That guy is creepy.

    And (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 05:43:06 PM EST
    cat heads in the freezer

    An old Billy Mumy tune (none / 0) (#40)
    by Mr Natural on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 08:34:34 PM EST
    Boy (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 08:37:33 PM EST
    cant unsee that

    He is From Wisconsin... (none / 0) (#85)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 11:55:00 AM EST
    ...and did go to Marquette , which was Dahmer's territory.  So how about a couple heads in the fridge and some necrophilia ?

    Knickers in a knot? (none / 0) (#48)
    by Repack Rider on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 09:02:25 PM EST
    i guess that makes daily kos Mysoginist since they have been call Megyn Kelly worse things for years.

    With 1.3 million members, DK has a very wide variety of opinions, and people get kicked off all the time for hateful statements.  My UID is #207, BTW, I have been a member since the first day DK opened for business.  I am not misogynist, so there goes your entire premise.

    Nothing you supplied from DK about Ms. Kelly, who shares my last name, approaches the bile and hatred you find for the "libtards" or for Hilary Clinton on conservative sites.  If you can't find a racist, hateful statement about the president on a conservative site, you haven't read a word of it.

    Police your own hatred and misogyny before you complain about it somewhere else.  Nothing on DK matches the hatred you find in a typical Free Republic or RedState thread.

    Joan Walsh at Salon has a good (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by Anne on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 02:06:09 PM EST
    piece up that highlights the hypocrisy of the right's defense of Megyn Kelly.

    Here's an excerpt:

    So many in the media are shocked at the rise of Trump and the piggishness he represents. I can't understand why. From the dawn of the Obama administration some of us have experienced the surge of racism and misogyny personally.

    Within days of Obama's inauguration, I had former House Majority Leader Dick Armey tell me on "Hardball," after I'd criticized Rush Limbaugh, "I'm so damn glad you can never be my wife, because I surely wouldn't have to listen to that prattle from you every day." A lot of folks on the left were outraged; on the right, they laughed and cheered Armey.

    One of those who laughed was Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace, a debate moderator along with Kelly Thursday night. On conservative Mike Gallagher's radio show, Wallace said he found feminist anger over Armey's insult "pretty funny."


    Just a few months later, Watergate felon and torture apologist G. Gordon Liddy decided that it had been my "time of the month" when I beat him in a CNN debate on torture. "It upset her greatly," Liddy told his radio sidekick. "Probably that time of the month." Later the two men discussed searching my bio page. "There's no mention of a husband there at all is there?" Liddy asks.

    "No sir," his buddy quips. "But the next time you're tempted to feel sorry for yourself, just remember-"

    "You could be married to her," Liddy says, laughing.


    The pinnacle of hypocrisy, of course, was Erick Erickson's opportunistic decision to rescind Trump's invitation to his Red State Rising event this weekend (where candidates were invited to one-up one another on shutting down the government over defunding Planned Parenthood.) Erickson is a sexist oaf who's made a career out of Trump-like attacks on women. He famously called Texas State Sen. Wendy Davis "Abortion Barbie" - but he extended that insult to GOP Rep. Renee Ellmers merely because she fought to insure the House GOP's 20-week abortion ban included exceptions for rape and incest.

    Erickson's called Michelle Obama a "Marxist Harpy Wife," branded the 2012 Democratic National Convention "the Vagina Monologues" and regularly attacks "ugly feminists." But for his brave disinvite to Trump, Jeb Bush praised him as "on the side of women."

    Poor dumb Jeb. Bush also tried to portray himself as on the side of women, denouncing Trump for his attack on Kelly - but he did it in the most ham-handed and opportunistic way, attacking not the decency of Trump's insults but the way they were hurting GOP electability.

    I'm not suggesting the right is wrong to defend Kelly: it's not.  What's wrong is the selective outrage about sexism that has been regularly and cheerfully launched at women of all political persuasions, by people of all political persuasions.  This isn't a case of something only being wrong if it's done to someone I like, or right if it's done to someone I don't.  Trump didn't have to step into the trap she laid for him, but that's not The Donald, is it?  She knew what we all know: Trump doesn't admit when he's wrong, he just gets in your face and shouts until the stink of his breath and the shock of his boorishness sends you into retreat.  And that apparently works on the media, too.

    For what it's worth, I think the defense of Kelly has more to do with defense of the Fox brand than anything else: we must protect this house, right?


    Exactly... (none / 0) (#103)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 02:26:29 PM EST
    For what it's worth, I think the defense of Kelly has more to do with defense of the Fox brand than anything else: we must protect this house, right?

    No one is talking about the cheers for Trump when he said "Rosie O'Donnell"(loudest of the night), which presumably is a woman just like Megyn Kelly.  It has nothing to do with women IMO, and it has everything to do with the outrage of insulting a Fox News employee.

    Had Donald not mentioned bleeding, there would be absolutely no flap over the other comments.

    They set him up and he knocked it down, but I don't think Fox counted on his minions being more loyal to the man than the network.  They are the ones who created this monster and now they don't know WTF to do with it now that it's pulling the mask off the beast and exposing it for what it is.


    And the authors (none / 0) (#49)
    by MKS on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 09:31:20 PM EST
    of those comments are not running for President, and are not the frontrunner for the nomination, as is the would-be Misogynist in Chief.

    Hannibal! (none / 0) (#52)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 08, 2015 at 10:41:22 PM EST
    Hey, Bedelia.  Can you give me a hand?

    PreviouslyTV (none / 0) (#56)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Aug 09, 2015 at 08:00:38 AM EST

    The Hand That Feeds You
    The 'healing' power of touch in Hannibal.

    Btw, not a spoiler (none / 0) (#60)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Aug 09, 2015 at 12:05:40 PM EST
    promise its not what you think.

    Like, in a million years not what you think.

    Love that Zachary Quinto made a cameo.


    Meanwhile, (none / 0) (#61)
    by desertswine on Sun Aug 09, 2015 at 01:14:48 PM EST
    Bernie has a problem in Seattle.

    Racial profiling is wrong... (5.00 / 2) (#95)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 01:26:53 PM EST
    even for old white people...Bernie's economic platform would do wonders for Black America, what a shame the protestors are too blinded by anger to see that.  Justified anger, misplaced rage.

    Bernie seems to be a target (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by Repack Rider on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 01:49:42 PM EST
    ...because anything that happens at his events takes place in front of more people than ALL THE OTHER CANDIDATES COMBINED could draw.

    Bernie has used this "crisis" to show off his skill at resolving problems.  Not one of the other candidates could have handled this with such aplomb.

    If anything the protests allowed Bernie to look MORE presidential!  He should send a thank you note.


    He did respond... (none / 0) (#98)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 01:58:39 PM EST
    quite well...when he could not continue on the podium, he took to the crowd and conversed there.  A man of the people, I can dig it.

    Maybe I'm too cynical, but I wonder if the protestors were paid plant-jobs...I mean, who could be so obtuse?

    Or maybe you're right and the protestors are just following the crowds and had nothing to do with Bernie, cuz nobody packs them in on the trail like Bernie right now.


    Charlie Pierce had some thoughts on (5.00 / 3) (#154)
    by Anne on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 09:34:47 PM EST
    this event:

    What happened in Seattle was an embarrassment to the tradition of public protest.  It was a hysterical piece of performance art that accomplished absolutely nothing toward whatever goals its performers sought to achieve. Rage is not an excuse. Frustration is not an excuse. This was a simple act of public vandalism, aimed (again) at the wrong target. I have been to a bunch of rallies already in this godforsaken campaign. If the two principals here had tried this at any Republican rally; if they had tried it at any rally for any candidate of the party that largely has supported the militarized state of American policing, that more than any other political institution has worked to create the climate of The Other by which Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin are thugs while the people who killed them are blameless victims; if they had tried this at a Republican rally, they'd have been hauled off in handcuffs within five minutes, if they were allowed into the hall at all. This is taking advantage of the openness of a campaign that is overwhelmingly sympathetic to your goals, instead of bringing your fight to the politicians who actively oppose you, because it's easier to do. Consider me unimpressed by the courage involved. I feel absolutely no compunction about saying that this "action" was stupid and counterproductive. It was loud and spectacular and it accomplished nothing good.


    Shouting down Bernie Sanders does nothing to solve any problem worth fighting against. It just doesn't.

    You are usually not a conspiracy theorist. (none / 0) (#152)
    by vml68 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 09:28:08 PM EST
    I wonder if the protestors were paid plant-jobs

    I have heard a few hard core Bernie supporters state that they believe Hillary is behind it!

    I wish the BLM activists would spread the love and crash some of the Republican candidates gatherings instead. The Bernie interruptions are starting to get annoying. Not to mention, #bowdownbernie is very offensive.


    I saw a person (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 06:26:54 AM EST
    whining about all the people who booed.  How disappointing and discouraging it was.  Hello, what did you think would happen.

    Someone asked why they are not hitting republican events.  I think because they know they would be arrested.  And probably pummeled.


    Agreed. (none / 0) (#161)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 01:50:44 AM EST
    Speaking as a strong supporter of Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders doesn't deserve this. He doesn't have a racist bone in his body. He's on our side.

    #Black Lives Matter activists need to focus their efforts where the problem actually is, and stop anger-bombing their own friends for supposedly not caring enough.



    This is (2.00 / 1) (#165)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 08:21:32 AM EST
    unfortunate for sure but the rallies that he has invites this kind of thing. I remember Howard Dean having rallies back in 2004 and they got totally out of control. All it takes is one or two people to completely turn over the apple cart.

    So, it's Bernie's fault for (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by Anne on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 10:18:43 AM EST
    allowing these two activists some time at the microphone?

    Can you even imagine what would be said or how it would be characterized, if his campaign had exercised more control and not allowed them to speak?

    By all means, though, let's make it his fault for wanting to be inclusive.

    As I understand it, when they wouldn't cede the stage back to him, he just went into the crowd and talked to people one-on-one.

    And even after that, what did he do in Los Angeles last night?


    Sanders, who has been interrupted several times at previous rallies by Black Lives Matter demonstrators calling on him to address police shootings, invited the group to open his rally in Los Angeles. "There is no president that will fight harder to end institutional racism," he told the crowd.

    He also gave time to an immigrant rights activist, and pledged to bring the millions of immigrants living in the U.S. illegally "out of the shadows."

    Jesus...28,000 in Portland, 27,500 in LA last night.  Yeah...out of control, for sure.

    And I know we can count on you to turn that into a negative.


    That (none / 0) (#172)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 10:31:24 AM EST
    is not what I am saying. What I am saying is when you have those kind of rallies it's easy for someone to jump up on stage and take the microphone. Yes, once they were up there he pretty much had to let them talk but what if he actually just didn't let anybody get on stage? Then this whole thing could have been avoided.

    Oh, so you didn't mean (none / 0) (#190)
    by sj on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:35:24 AM EST
    enthusiastic. You meant populist. You meant inclusive. You meant that you prefer the super-controlled big money way of doing things.

    You mean big? (none / 0) (#188)
    by sj on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:33:22 AM EST
    but the rallies that he has invites this kind of thing
    Or do you mean well attended? Or is that they are enthusiastic?

    Tell me, if Hillary had attracted 28,000 people yesterday like Senator Sanders did, would you be sniffing and looking down your nose at how her rallies "invites this kind of thing"?

    There are some things you should just stop talking about because your position starts hanging out there at the very tip of the high dive board. Senator Sanders' campaign appears to be one of those things.


    This is (none / 0) (#192)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:36:27 AM EST
    not about Hillary and no it's not about the number he attracted. The same thing could have happened with 1,000 people showing up. It's about campaign management.

    What would you be saying if Bernie (5.00 / 1) (#205)
    by Anne on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 12:00:08 PM EST
    had had his security detail refuse to give two young black women the stage so they could speak to the crowd?

    That, it seems, would have been an example of poor campaign management, especially in light of the (in my opinion, unfair) heckling he got at Netroots Nation for daring to say that "all lives matter."

    So, he let them speak.  They were exceedingly rude not to cede the stage back to the man who had given them the opportunity to get out their message, but that's not on Bernie.  That's not on "campaign management," it's on the speakers.

    I hate to tell you this, but people are hungry not just to speak, but to be heard.  They are not looking for a leader who is good at shutting people up, but one who is good at letting people be heard.  That's not a campaign thing, that's a values/character/beliefs thing.

    And I also hate to tell you that this is all very much about Hillary.  Or at least it will be when the BLM folks want to speak at one of her rallies.  We'll see how the campaign "manages" that - my guess is she will do exactly what Bernie did in LA.  

    No one ever accused Clinton of not knowing which way the wind was blowing, but I think the crowds Bernie is drawing are tired of being managed and manipulated.


    as if (none / 0) (#196)
    by sj on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:46:59 AM EST
    This is (none / 0) (#192)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 10:36:27 AM MDT

    not about Hillary and no it's not about the number he attracted. The same thing could have happened with 1,000 people showing up. It's about campaign management.

    This isn't about campaign management. This is about you looking for any d@mn excuse to belittle and demean his campaign.

    Does it make you feel better? Do you feel superior? I don't know what your goal is. I really don't. Do you think you will start to influence others with the your insidious insinuations?

    It might be working, though. I just contributed to Senator Sanders' campaign due to your influence. You hit the exactly right nerve ending.


    New poll (none / 0) (#64)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Aug 09, 2015 at 06:54:49 PM EST
    on the GOP primary

    Post-Debate Poll (NBC)
    Trump 23%
    Cruz 13%
    Carson 11%
    Fiorina 8%
    Rubio 8%
    Bush 7%
    Walker 7%

    Trump keeps the lead and Cruz and Carson move up. Fiorina moves out of the kiddie table and Bush and Walker collapse. I don't know where Rubio was previously so I can't comment on that.

    In other words, ... (none / 0) (#71)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 12:38:59 AM EST
    ... 44% of Republican voters are apparently out of their cotton-pickin' minds, while the rest are merely clueless. That's hardly reassuring.

    I think that would be (none / 0) (#74)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 06:19:04 AM EST
    47% from the top three however I'm sure it's over 50% when you start adding in the crackpots not shown there like Huckabee.

    How Did Carson Go Up ? (none / 0) (#87)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 11:57:46 AM EST
    I would like someone to explain how Carson would appeal to a republican more than Bush or Walker ?

    How did Carson go up?? (none / 0) (#102)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 02:09:52 PM EST
    That proves you do not understand the American people.

    11% of Republicans (5.00 / 2) (#156)
    by Yman on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 10:04:45 PM EST
    ... are not "the American people".

    That's like how Palin referred to her (none / 0) (#158)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 10:13:01 PM EST
    audience at one campaign event as "real Americans".

    Just a way of telling us what Leftie traitors we all are.


    True... (none / 0) (#105)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 02:44:22 PM EST
    ...you point ?

    I will never understand people like you Jim, who vote against their own self interests, who believe a lie with no proof, then deny the actual truth supported by mountains of evidence.

    Maybe if I had a Fox News lobotomy I would get it.

    Your theory on why Carson jumped in the polls ?  His only notable debate comment was pro-torture.,, which probably explains it, but more likely they don't know he is black and like the name.

    I bet none of them know he recently became a republican.


    Is he a Repub??? (2.00 / 1) (#149)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 09:23:01 PM EST
    Well Scott by admitting that you don't understand the American people  I believe there may be some hope for you.

    Carson and Carly jumped in the polls because they are seen as outsiders.  Just as Trump is. You should remember that the Tea Party wasn't created as opposition to Obama, although you like to claim that and play the race card, it was created in opposition to WASHINGTON. Look at the 2010 elections and the promises... none were kept. Look at the 2012 election. Another  insider who pussyfooted around and lost. Look at the 2014 elections.... The people have spoken loud and clear yet they get another Bush as the anointed one.

    I don't know who Trump is. They don't know who Trump is. But they know exactly who and what Bush is and they don't want him. You say you want Trump to run because you can beat him? Wrong and wrong. You want Bush to run because you can beat him.

    Trump is a problem for you.  Bush is not.

    And Carson didn't endorse torture. He just wants the country protected. And that's what the "Fly Over " people want.


    Oh, please, enlighten us, jim; (none / 0) (#108)
    by Anne on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 02:53:02 PM EST
    I could use a belly laugh this afternoon, and your attempts to explain it would surely provide one.

    So, please - give us your take on why Carson's star is rising.


    anne, I try and I try (none / 0) (#171)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 10:22:41 AM EST
    but enlightening your closed mind is beyond me.

    ... even if you made a pilgrimage to Rome and lit a tray full of votive candles on his behalf at St. Peter's.

    Because (none / 0) (#110)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 03:02:14 PM EST
    only "real Americans" are republicans right? No one outside the GOP is a real American apparently.

    No, we completely understand how wacko Republicans are Ben did a good job pandering to the them at the debate despite only having a few questions. Sound like George W. Bush and jump up a few points. You know kinda like the moonies.


    Yes, as Dr. Ben Carson (none / 0) (#117)
    by KeysDan on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 03:56:19 PM EST
    was standing on that stage in the orbit of Trump, I wondered, at first, why he was there.   And, certainly we need not claim that he was forgettable.  That distinction was made not only by the FOX News moderators, but also, Dr. Carson himself--who said when finally given a second nod, "I wasn't sure I was going to get to talk again."

    But, then it clicked--the virtual world will love him. Perhaps, they appreciate the sleepiness of his demeanor, and the attraction some may have to a candidate who avoids stimulants, such as coffee.  Eyes wide shut.  A non-Trump with all the Trumpness. A winner.  

    And, for the non-Deliverance wing of the party, small, true, but able to answer a phone,  the clincher may have been when he informed the crowd that he was the only one on the stage who separated Siamese twins. It is a good guess that they were swooned by the intellect ascribed to a to a brain surgeon.  Which may have just added to their joy for  his proposing a return to torture.

    After all, it "doesn't take a brain surgeon" as in, ....to know that wheels are round, is part of the lexicon.  And, looking at  the rest of the non-Trumpers, the poll responders made a distinction that, while they are all wacky, at least Carson is, or was at one time, smart.  


    2 more post debate polls (none / 0) (#111)
    by CoralGables on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 03:15:11 PM EST
    Iowa (PPP):

    Trump 19
    Walker 12
    Carson 12
    Bush 11
    Fiorina 10
    Cruz 9

    Drop by Bush. Gains by Carson and Fiorina

    Nationwide (Reuters):

    Trump 24
    Bush 12

    and on down the line.

    I can see all 17 staying in through South Carolina at this point. No reason to get out if you are convinced Trump will drop. And the money on the sideline will likely remain on the sideline with no one but Trump getting the spotlight.


    If Walker (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 03:59:17 PM EST
    loses IA he's done because I don't think there's another Midwestern state for quite a while. MN caucuses on super Tuesday and then his own state of WI isn't until April.

    I may have to backpedal (none / 0) (#135)
    by CoralGables on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 07:36:16 PM EST
    on my 17 thru South Carolina thought. Looks like Perry has stopped paying his SC staff already.

    People (none / 0) (#136)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 07:49:02 PM EST
    talk about Trump's ego but darn what about Perry? Did he think people wouldn't recognize him if he wore glasses or something?

    You can't add (none / 0) (#150)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 09:25:13 PM EST
    that's 65% seen as outsiders.

    There may be a story there.


    and I can't either... 55% (none / 0) (#151)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 09:27:26 PM EST
    True Detective finale (none / 0) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Aug 09, 2015 at 09:50:23 PM EST

    Help me out here (none / 0) (#75)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 08:04:37 AM EST
    surley someone else watched.  Love it?  Hate it?  I understand either reaction.

    I like the whole season more than most I guess but I really thought the finale nailed it.  


    I thought it was good as well (SPOILER ALRT) (none / 0) (#77)
    by vicndabx on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 10:52:37 AM EST
    Although, that Slate article link someone posted last week was a bit of a spoiler (although I didn't think it at the time).

    I liked that Bezziredes hooked up w/Vince Vaughn's gf and muscle.  Was not expecting that...and a son for Ray to boot.

    Was looking for the happy ending....seems like today's shows eschew that to leave folks thinking/guessing.


    Ha (none / 0) (#79)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 11:01:53 AM EST
    i wondered last night how many were looking for a happish ending.
    Perhaps it's my core cynicism but I never did.  Honestly I expected every one to die.  Especially after the early dialog about the white dress and the white suit.  
    I knew (thought) Bezziredes would survive after putting the girl on the bus.   But the rest.......

    Loved(hated) the awards ceremony at the end.  I also love when the guitar girl left the stage and the building.  It was like, ok funs over.

    I think the music was the best thing about the season starting and ending with Lara Lynn and her guitar.


    Yeah (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by vicndabx on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 12:44:16 PM EST
    Music was awesome set the tome throughout. Not understanding all the hate about the show out there.

    I figured Vince was gone. Didn't expect Ray tho. They should've at least made it off w/the money. Maybe that was the happy ending I was looking for. Vicarious living thru the show - an "easy" payday.

    Makes you wonder how much corruption DT's have actually uncovered that is never brought to light.


    T-Bone (none / 0) (#133)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 06:34:18 PM EST
    Even before T Bone Burnett recruited Lynn as a co-writer for the series (along with Rosanne Cash), her music seemed tailor-made for soundtrack syncs. There's an uncanny emotional component to her work, with echoing guitars that quiver like a nervous lip and lyrics that place enough cracks in the narrative to let a dreamlike sense of wander settle in. Far from simplistically gloomy, The Avenues garnered comparisons to Chris Isaak and a musical version of David Lynch because it focused on a certain kind of hazy, low-light mystery; a perfect point of view for a television show that is exactly that.  

    As a writer, Lynn enjoyed the exercise of creating for a character and not only herself -- even though she had very little tools at her disposal. Due to the iron gates protecting True Detective's storyline, she wasn't allowed to see a script. The only thing Burnett provider her was a copy of a record by Mexican folksinger Lydia Mendoza, who centered her songs on 12-string Tejano riffs and sung in Spanish, not English.

    ET (none / 0) (#84)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 11:53:33 AM EST
    A part of this review's (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by KeysDan on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 03:27:41 PM EST
    description is true, but I come to a different assessment.  For example, I enjoyed the "incoherence" if that is what it was--but I saw it as viewer challenging.

     Most mysteries that are worthwhile take convoluted processes along the way, provoking the viewer with false leads and complexities.  Allowing us plenty of opportunity to  speculate on the next steps.  

    The acting is generally accorded high marks, but the story line less so.  Again, I found both to be good and interconnected. The story without the quality acting may not have brought out the undergirding of the story to the  quality of the show.

    The finale clarified without a Charlie Chan-like mystery finish--where the murderer is someone introduced for the first time and you shake your head.  And, even in its finale, it allowed some mystery--fun for guys like you and me to continue to talk about it all the next day.

    Events had a false patina of hope for the first hour. But we know that.  Frank and Ray getting the $millions, diamonds, and escape pathways in line. The Russians got theirs, the girl was on the bus, and the Armenians seemed content.  But, what about the Mexicans, we wondered.

    The playground detour to see Chad, the little red-headed boy of size, was a little too reserved in the enthusiasm department, especially in light of what came next.   Not only no happy ending, but no ending.  Corruption goes on save for Ray and Frank.  Just a "replacement" for Ray, thanks to Ani--the True Detective (detective in the singular).


    Personally bad reviews (none / 0) (#134)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 06:37:02 PM EST
    its like Thomas Harris.  I don't get it.  Or rather I DO get it and don't understand why those who don't seem to take it personally.



    The Strain (none / 0) (#76)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 08:10:54 AM EST

    A Scalp From New York
    On The Strain, one notable character finally unplugs the rug and chromes that dome.

    Now we can move on.

    Someone posted up a story a few months ago (none / 0) (#82)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 11:42:56 AM EST
    about a Seattle credit card processing co that raised the salaries of all its employees to $70K.

    Here is the followup from the NYTimes.

    Certainly a well-intentioned move by the company's founder, however the result was not good for the company.

    Them jealous... (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 01:29:53 PM EST
    middle-managers piss me off...never let it be said the sin of greed is exclusive to the wealthy.  We're our own worst enemies.  

    Sound like the same types who don't want to see the minimum wage raised because then they can't feel as superior to min. wage earners as they used to.  Not cool to gauge your worth by how much you make Man...haters gonna hate.


    Well, the middle managers were working (none / 0) (#99)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 01:59:50 PM EST
    well over 40 hours/week, but they were getting paid the same or maybe a little more than the 40 hour employees.

    The manager types are involved in making real decisions for the co, busting butt to make things happen, getting and keeping customers, etc., while some, anyway, of the 40 hour week people, are simply shuffling paper from one box to another.

    Are the manager's frustrations uncalled for?


    We were talking about this here... (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 02:33:15 PM EST
    in the cubes on Friday...I and some others said we would not be upset if we got a raise to 70k and the warehouse guys got a bigger raise to same.  Others said they'd be miffed if they made the same as the warehouse guys.

    The way I look at it, I think we all work hard in different ways and I'd be happy for all to make a living wage in our area with a high cost of living. I don't need the ego boost.

    As for some busting butts and others not, that's always an issue whether under widespread income inequality or more egalitarian income gaps...some are hustlers and some are lazy. It doesn't piss me off that Lazy Employee X makes Y, though it might piss me off that Employee X is lazy, period.


    I was discussing this with my husband (none / 0) (#115)
    by vml68 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 03:45:51 PM EST
    over the weekend. While I can't and don't speak for everyone, I think the comment that some of us feel we need to make more than the next guy just so we can feel superior to them, is truly unfair.

    Our feeling is that if we have put in x amount of years towards our education, and/or have x number of years of experience on the job, it should count for something.
    If I have worked at a company for 15 years and am now a middle manger and make $70k, I would seriously be pissed if someone who has been at the job for 2 months now gets bumped up to the same salary. It is like all those years of working for the company and all your experience have no value.
    What would be fair, is if all salaries get bumped up by the same/similar amount, i.e, if the starting salary gets bumped from $40k to $70k, then the $70k salary needs to be moved up to $100k.


    oh I get it... (none / 0) (#129)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 05:17:17 PM EST
    It's certainly the first base instinct...I just think it short-sighted.

    Ideally yes, CEO and upper exec pay would come back to earth. Upper middle up a little, middle up, lower  middle up a bunch, poverty level skyrockets.

    Not gonna happen all at once...I think if we raise the floor substantially the rest will take care of itself over time.


    I Would Add... (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 02:48:26 PM EST
    ...the manger most likely are college educated whereas hourly most likely not.  

    The notion that this is about simple jealousy is silly and a very simplistic view of a very complex issue.


    "It is not enough to succeed. (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 02:50:41 PM EST
    Others must fail"

    Gore Vidal


    Wow... (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 03:15:43 PM EST
    ...he been slinging mud for so long with Jim you have adopted his bumper sticker reply reflex.

    Being upset that others are rewarded for something other than their work, at the the workplace, in no way equates to wanting them to fail.


    Reward? (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 03:46:17 PM EST
    Some would call it a long overdue wage correction...not a reward.

    "Workers of the world, unite! (none / 0) (#118)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 03:58:23 PM EST
    You have nothing to lose but your LinkedIn accounts!"

    Most Would Call... (none / 0) (#123)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 04:25:10 PM EST
    ...the doubling of new hires salary what it is, a windfall.  

    What it is called has nothing to do with the animosity it created.  He rewarding people for nothing and lost good employees because of it, most notably what he describes as most valued employees left.

    It backfired, and while I applaud his generosity, he idiocy in not recognizing the obvious strife it would create, should not.  The worse thing any business can do is create an environment where people feel they are treated unfairly.  Just because they are not at the bottom doesn't make their concerns any less valid.


    I suppose... (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 05:32:33 PM EST
    such pettiness is unavoidable, human nature and all.
    And naive to think middle management would get on board, perhaps he could have sold it better to his staff to retain key people. I applaud the effort, and hope other decent owners contemplating similar efforts are not discouraged.

    As for creating an unfair environment, I think it was unfair before too. I don't know how we break the mindset that most workers deserve check to check livin' for their labor, if not poverty for their labor. Guaranteed Income?


    I don't know that it is always pettiness. (5.00 / 2) (#144)
    by caseyOR on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 08:49:54 PM EST
    There is a difference between paying everyone a living wage and paying everyone the same wage.

    It is possible to believe that all workers should be paid a living wage (whatever a living wage is determined to be) and, at the same time, not believe that all workers should get the exact same wage.


    Well I Seem to Remember... (5.00 / 2) (#174)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 10:47:38 AM EST
    ...you making comments about CEO pay.  Using your logic, you are being everything you are accusing others of, petty.
    Ideally yes, CEO and upper exec pay would come back to earth.

    Are they just lucky, shouldn't the haters just let the lucky ones be and quite worrying about everyone else.  Rhetorical.

    Fair pay doesn't mean rewarding everyone on the bottom, it means paying a person what they are worth and to insinuate anyone who opposes this move as being petty or not wanting someone to earn a livable wage is not reading the words we are typing.

    For me, I went into the military so I could afford to go to college, between that and the 5 years in school, then another 3 a night to get my Masters.  I sacrificed a lot so that could bring more to the table and add more value, with the understanding that the dollars going into my pocket would reflect my investment.  The idea that people who didn't sacrifice, who work just as hard, but add less value, should make the same as the people who have sacrificed, is absurd.

    Seems like you are saying that the people who sacrificed and invested in themselves should just STFU when the people who haven't, are rewarded for no work related reason, because the only reason one could possibly have a problem with it is because they are petty.

    I think it's rather petty to assume that because you work the hours I work, we are one in the same, that the additional education & sacrifice I put in is irrelevant when it comes to salary, because you can't physically see it in the day-to-day operations.

    For the record, I have fought for years trying to get my assistant on the bonus plan because about 5 years ago it was decided that hourly wage earners aren't bonus worthy.  I have never felt that to be fair and I have pushed to get her salaried, even going as far as assigning her work she is not qualified to do in hopes of getting her on a salary and into a bonus.  I believe it's hurt me to some degree, but I am not positive, and I have not succeeded.

    The idea that she should make the same as me is insulting, the idea that I don't want her or any other person to make a wage they can live off is putting your belief about me as something I actually wrote.  I want everyone to earn a living wage, but at the same time I want my wage to reflect the sacrifices I made, it's why I made them.  Not understand that is showing you chops.

    I do not feel better about myself because my coworker doesn't get a bonus, that BS is enraging and like I said above, a very simplistic view of a very complex issue.

    And for the record, the advise you got about salary discussion may be good advise, but I have always held the secretive nature of wages is what allows companies to get away with gender/age/race wage discrepancy.  IMO salaries should be posted so employees can judge for themselves how the company values them and decide for themselves if they are being treated fairly.  Secretive pay benefits the company greatly, and allows them to exploit people base on what they will take, rather than what they are worth.


    That's the rub Scott... (none / 0) (#187)
    by kdog on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:31:47 AM EST
    what's it worth?  I'd say there is no full-time job in American worth less than 50k a year.  

    Yes it is complex, too complex for the free market to fix. Case in point right here, guy tried and all hell broke lose.  Income inequality has become such a pretzel on roids, it can't be untwisted by the private sector without a lot of hurt feelings.

    Which brings me back to Guaranteed Income.  If every adult citizen is guaranteed 30-40k a year, the income inequality in the private sector ceases to be a big issue imo...the CEO's can keep paying themselves 100 times their workers, middle/upper execs can keep making what they've sacrificed for (or lucked into), and Guaranteed Income can pick up the slack for the working class.  Everybody wins???



    Hardly petty, Mr K. (none / 0) (#146)
    by vml68 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 08:51:09 PM EST
    The employees who left were not against raising the base pay to $70k. These long time employees are the ones who worked overtime to build the company to where this CEO could even consider raising the wage to $70k. They just did not appreciate the fact that they got screwed over in the process.

    This guy was giving himself a million dollar salary for the past few years. If he could reward himself so handsomely for taking a risk and starting a company, he could reward the people who helped him make it successful before he rewarded the new hires. Calling them selfish when they are the ones who contributed to his success says more about him than them.


    Bingo... (none / 0) (#109)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 03:00:01 PM EST
    Give Mr. Vidal a cigar.

    kdog (none / 0) (#126)
    by CoralGables on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 04:31:27 PM EST
    the two best bits of job related advice I ever received came from a 5th grade dropout that moved up the ladder until he was running a pari-mutuel racetrack.

    1. Never discuss your pay with anyone.
    2. Never sh!t in your own backyard.

    I don't know (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by CST on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 02:08:53 PM EST
    that it's "not good for the company".  I think it's too soon to tell.  It seems like it brought some good things and some bad things, but it's not as if the company is failing, and some of the larger issues like the dispute with the brother seem more personal than professional.

    Yes, there are some ruffled feathers, but they also got a lot of business and plenty of people who want to work there.  It's just been a lot to handle, but it doesn't necessarily mean the business won't be or isn't successful.  Sure a few people are not happy with it but they also have a ton of incoming resumes.


    Fair enough. (none / 0) (#114)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 03:31:56 PM EST
    I came away with a different feeling from the article, this paragraph seemed telling to me oregarding the core of the business's status:
    Even so, they [the pay raises] clearly are critical to the outcome. With profits, at least in the short term, shifted to salaries, there is little left over to buy out his brother, let alone pay the legal bills or make longer-term capital improvements in the company, Dan said.

    But I am certainly no expert on this.


    I agree it is too soon to tell. (none / 0) (#128)
    by vml68 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 04:59:11 PM EST
    IMO, he needs to get the issues with his brother resolved asap. He is draining capital there. He is not going to be making money off his new customers for another year or so and from articles I have read elsewhere, it appears he does not have enough reserves to cover the new increase in salaries, expand his business or deal with any rough patches he might hit. That is not good.

    Also, even though he is getting a lot of new resumes, the loss of his long time senior employees who helped build the company will hurt. If loyalty and hard work in a company are not valued, the company is going to have very high turnover, which is never a good thing.

    At the end of the day, he is running a business and he has got competitors. He needs everything to go right for him for this to succeed.


    here, but is anyone watching "Unbreakable Kimmie Schmidt"?

    My nephew turned us on to it, and it is seriously funny.

    Oh, (none / 0) (#88)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 12:02:08 PM EST
    man that show is awesome. Is there a new season out?


    Really is an awesome show.


    or something, they dance around chanting "I'm not really here! I'm not really here!"

    Too funny.


    Trump vs FOX (none / 0) (#121)
    by CoralGables on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 04:10:01 PM EST
    It's been said this is a battle Trump can't win.

    Or can he...

    Trump tweeted that Ailes called to assure him that Fox will cover him "fairly" going forward. According to two high-level Fox sources, Ailes's diplomacy was the result of increasing concern inside Fox News that Trump could damage the network.

    Immediately following Thursday's debate, Fox was deluged with pro-Trump emails. The chatter on Twitter was equally in Trump's favor. "In the beginning, virtually 100 percent of the emails were against Megyn Kelly," one Fox source, who was briefed on the situation, told me. "Roger was not happy. Most of the Fox viewers were taking Trump's side."

    After burying the hatcHet (for now) Trump will appear on Fox and Friends tomorrow

    Trump (none / 0) (#122)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 04:15:58 PM EST
    dumping on Fox and Hillary on the NYT. It's all good in my opinion. Maybe they will start to shape up.

    Another reason for FOX to backdown (none / 0) (#124)
    by CoralGables on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 04:26:18 PM EST
    another nationwide post debate poll. This one from Morning Consult:

    Trump 32
    Bush 11
    Walker 6
    Rubio 6
    Paul 5
    Cruz 4
    Huckabee 4

    and so on and so forth


    That one (none / 0) (#125)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 04:29:21 PM EST
    showing Bush going down to 7 points must be an outlier because PPP had a poll with about the same numbers for Bush today. However they all show that Trump is leading. No doubt about that.

    Next thing you know Fox will fire Megyn Kelly.


    The other 16 (none / 0) (#131)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 06:22:58 PM EST
    are trying to arrange an intervention.   If Rand and Lindsey keep it up Trump will probably give both of them a wedgie in the next debate.

    Awesome. (none / 0) (#143)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 08:45:13 PM EST
    I can think of nothing else that might so stimulate one's mind in the morning, as a conversation between Donald Trump, Elisabeth Hasselbeck, Brian Kilmeade and Steve Doocey.

    WTF ? (none / 0) (#127)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 04:37:49 PM EST
    ...you just posted links that have nothing to do with anything, banning chick-filet and a quotes from a student about cops, notes on cars ?

    Good god man, clearly the the Trump/Fox rub has you in disarray.  You are not good when you have to think for yourself.

    What does Letterman or Maher have to do with anything, that is your grand point, a talk show host took a swipe at Palin.

    When either run for President, you might have a point, otherwise you should got back to Fox, at least then you didn't resemble a schizophrenic off their medication.

    Perseid Meteor Shower (none / 0) (#137)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 08:17:47 PM EST
    A reason to wake up early

    This year, the meteor shower will be most visible at its peak activity from Sunday (August 9) until August 14. If you're looking for the optimum window to view the meteor shower, you'll want to be looking to the skies during the early hours of the morning at the showers' peak on Tuesday (August 11).

    The shower will be so bright against the night, you won't even need binoculars or a telescope, and with no moonlight during its peak activity this will be one of the best year's to observe it.  "Remember, your eyes can take as long as 20 minutes to truly adapt to the darkness of night," said EarthSky.org's Bruce McClure. "So don't rush the process."

    To spot the shower, look for the constellation of Perseus in a northeast direction. Not an astronomy aficionado? Perseus forms a `Y' shape in its stars. The meteors will appear to shoot outwards from that cluster.

    We're heading up to the ... (none / 0) (#139)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 08:32:56 PM EST
    ... Mauna Kea visitor center tomorrow night to check it out. When you're away from the ambient light of urban areas, the skies really open up in rather spectacular fashion.

    All I have to do is go out in the yard (none / 0) (#141)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 08:41:17 PM EST
    You can look for Cassiopeia... (none / 0) (#145)
    by desertswine on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 08:50:19 PM EST
    in the northeast.  It's easy to spot, it looks like a giant W.

    Believe I saw Cassiopeia (none / 0) (#153)
    by CoralGables on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 09:29:28 PM EST
    on Kate Beckinsale's arm in Serendipity.

    I Have Always Considered That... (none / 0) (#178)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 10:57:53 AM EST
    ...to be just for me, the 'W' in the sky at night.

    Also, Google Sky is a great app for seeing what is up there and where they are at.  Saturn will be front and center this month.

    If you have binoculars, a spotting scope, or a telescope I highly recommend taking a look.  You can see the rings, which to me at least, are truly inspirational.  Rather than being some abstract thing in a book or on the web, you can follow the ringed planet across the sky.


    Even better. (none / 0) (#147)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 08:54:48 PM EST
    We're at sea level here in Hilo, and it's been rather cloudy around here lately, while the MK visitor center sits on the mountain's southeast flank at 9,200 ft. elevation. It'll be worth the 80 min. drive for the unobstructed view of the stars.

    It's been very rainy here (none / 0) (#148)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 08:56:41 PM EST
    but it stopped today and it's supposed to be very clear and in unmuggy and unhazy for several days.

    I woke up at 4 (none / 0) (#173)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 10:45:08 AM EST
    rolled a fat one and went out to watch the show.   It was fun.

    Post GOP (none / 0) (#159)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 10:13:42 PM EST
    debate poll:

    Clinton 41% Bush 29%
    Clinton 44% Walker 24%
    Clinton 42% Christie 25%
    Clinton 44% Carson 24%
    Clinton 41% Cruz 27%
    Clinton 41% Rubio 28%
    Clinton 43% Trump 29%

    It's Ipsos and I don't know their accuracy but apparently Americans did not like what they saw in that GOP debate.

    But, but Trump is our worse nightmare! (none / 0) (#160)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 at 10:26:18 PM EST
    And yet Democrats are the ones (none / 0) (#166)
    by CST on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 09:40:00 AM EST
    who "don't understand the American people".

    The Newburgh Sting (none / 0) (#163)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 06:47:58 AM EST
    i saw this excellent HBO doc last night.  It's a very disturbing look behind the curtain at the war on terror.


    The case made -- convincingly -- by the documentary "The Newburgh Sting" is that the four upstate New York men convicted of plotting to bomb synagogues in the Bronx and destroy airplanes in 2009 were the fall guys in an elaborate, cinematic performance orchestrated by the F.B.I. The film, showing Monday on HBO, offers a competing narrative to the one presented at trial and in the news media by the government. So far, the government's story is winning: The men are all serving 25-year sentences in federal prisons.

    In a broader sense, though, the film builds a credible circumstantial case for the entrapment defense. It does so through the standard techniques of true-crime documentary: interviews with sympathetic, cogent relatives and acquaintances of the four men; an evocative depiction of life in a depressed Hudson River Valley town; the canny juxtaposition of just-folks black and Muslim Newburghers with a succession of suited, white law-enforcement officials, politicians and television talkers, often saying things we can see aren't true.


    Hi Donald, looks like hurricane Hilda (none / 0) (#164)
    by fishcamp on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 07:50:35 AM EST
    could touch down on your new island towards the end of the week.  It's not supposed to be a biggie, but I'm sure you will be getting wind and rain.  They say there will be wave activity on the eastern side of the big island.  Not sure if I've been to the eastern side of your island, what's out there?  I get directions terribly mixed up while visiting the outer islands.  I do know that Hanalei Bay, Kauai is on the north shore of the most northern of the Hawaiian Islands.

    ... of the Big Island, at the head of Hilo Bay. With about 44,000 residents, it's the largest town on the neighbor islands and the seat of local government for the County of Hawaii, which encompasses the entire island.

    Our side of the island is where all the major rain forests are, while the Kona side -- where the tourists hang out -- is considerably drier. Hilo averages about 130 inches of rain annually, and as you head out of town and upslope, it gets much wetter and can average nearly 300 inches at 2,000-3,000 ft. elevations.

    For that reason, tourists tend to eschew Hilo, but as an historic plantation community the town is not without its rustic but considerable charms. If you're planning on spending any time in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, it's much more accessible from Hilo than from Kona, which is 70 miles due west of us as birds fly, or a 90-mile drive if you take the new Daniel K. Inouye Hwy. through the center of the island.

    Our hotels are much cheaper than in Kona, too. If you're into vacation rentals, one of the best in the entire state is The Falls at Reed's Island, which is just outside downtown in the heart of the Hilo rain forest. And we've got some great restaurants, such as Café Pesto on the old downtown waterfront, where Younger Daughter has been working as a waiter this summer.

    Our town is dominated by the presence of Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa, which are both just below 14,000 feet in elevation. They're often obscured by the clouds, but on clear days the view can be breathtaking, particularly after a winter snowfall.  In fact, Hilo is one of the very few places on earth where you can see 13 of the world's 14 climate zones in one locale. The only one we lack is the arctic zone.



    MoBlue, if you are with us, today, (none / 0) (#175)
    by caseyOR on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 10:49:50 AM EST
    I wanted to tell you that I saw your Sweet Claire on Charlie Rose yesterday and, of course, thought of you.

    She has been (none / 0) (#177)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 10:53:36 AM EST
    and will be everywhere.   She is promoting a book.

    I think FOX has picked a side (none / 0) (#179)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:01:32 AM EST
    ohhhhhhhhhh to be a fly on the wall at the Koch compound-

    Neil Cavuto reads Erick Ericsson sexist tweets on air

    FOX will get a bigger viewing share (none / 0) (#195)
    by CoralGables on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:45:47 AM EST
    with Trump than by promoting some guy no one knows. Trump wins this round.

    EVERYbody (none / 0) (#198)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:48:37 AM EST

    Jeebus, people (none / 0) (#182)
    by sj on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:28:26 AM EST
    Stop feeding that d@mn thing. It won't die but maybe it will shrivel up a little.

    I'll have you know (5.00 / 1) (#189)
    by CST on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:35:06 AM EST
    I've typed out at least five responses I didn't send.  I'm trying not to.  It's just infuriating at times.

    You're right, of course. (5.00 / 1) (#200)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:50:39 AM EST
    And once again, I plead guilty as charged. It's like arguing with a child, and I certainly need to better resist getting sucked into that vortex. I don't know about the others here, but you certainly have my permission to upbraid me for henceforth even going there. I'll consider it the online equivalent of slapping a lit cigarette out of my mouth.



    I feel ya (none / 0) (#203)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 11:55:23 AM EST

    Be strong and imagine what happens if he is ignored.


    kdog (none / 0) (#206)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Aug 11, 2015 at 12:37:47 PM EST
    I have more to say, but the thread is full, so the quick and easy.

    The guy could have met your wage requirements and also gave decent raises to everyone that deserved one, including the bottom tier.

    I do like your idea, if this is what you were getting at, of having a min wage for full time employees that is above the reg min wage.

    I will never concede that the only motivation for being disgruntled was pettiness.