Sunday Night Open Thread

The sequel to Shantaram is finally coming. Gregory David Robert's Mountain Shadow, will be available Oct. 13. You can read the first five chapters here.

Shantaram introduced millions of readers to a cast of unforgettable characters in the hidden heart of Bombay through Lin, an Australian fugitive, working as a passport forger for a branch of the Bombay mafia. In The Mountain Shadow, the long awaited sequel, Lin must find his way in a Bombay run by a different generation of mafia dons, playing by a different set of rules.

On TV tonight: Blood and Oil (with Don Johnson) and Quantico, The Great Food Truck Race, and on Unimas, Nino Santo, which is a very strange drama that pits young doctors against a religious cult figure in the jungle, where the doctors end up questioning whether science is more powerful than faith. It's based on the real legend of Niño Fidencio, a 1920's faith healer who never made it to sainthood, but is considered one by many anyway. It just started last week, and only airs on Sunday nights. It has subtitles.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

Update: In Narcodrama viewing, I thought Paradise Lost was boring. Better is The Two Escobars, (free on Netflix) referring to Colombian soccer star Andres Escobar and Pablo Escobar (not related) was very good -- although it does overly focus a lot on Escobar's humanitarian good deeds and skimps over the violence with just a shot or two of each incident. Pablo's first cousin, the brother of Gaviro, is very good, as is the sister of soccer star Andres Escobar. The focus is the rise of Colombian soccer team Nacional and its failure at the 1994 World Cup. Escobar scored a goal against his own team and was murdered sometime thereafter. There are still doubts as to who killed him. Regardless, the film does an excellent job of showing how soccer played such a large role in uniting Colombians during the violent times of Pablo Escobar (and his enemies, Los Pepes.)

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

< Trump to Unveil New Tax Plan, Falls in Poll | U.S. Trained Rebel Defector Gave Equipment to al Nusra >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    I'm watching... (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by desertswine on Sun Sep 27, 2015 at 08:44:43 PM EST
    the harvest moon eclipse.  It's about halfway through.

    Definitely (none / 0) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Sep 27, 2015 at 08:49:29 PM EST
    Go look!

    FAN-tastic! (none / 0) (#4)
    by desertswine on Sun Sep 27, 2015 at 09:08:06 PM EST
    Ooo just saw a falling star... (none / 0) (#5)
    by desertswine on Sun Sep 27, 2015 at 09:21:09 PM EST
    just to its right.. beautiful

    So cool (none / 0) (#6)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Sep 27, 2015 at 09:24:47 PM EST
    We watched for over an hour (none / 0) (#8)
    by Peter G on Sun Sep 27, 2015 at 10:16:39 PM EST
    in the park near our home in suburban Philly. Very cloudy, but every few minutes we could see the ever-changing moon through a break in the clouds. Almost more interesting that way. Then, a few moments after it went total, the orangey post-eclipse full moon emerged. Super cool.

    I happened to wander outside (none / 0) (#11)
    by ZtoA on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 07:01:47 AM EST
    at the exact moment it was fully eclipsed. It had been a wonderful but extremely stressful, painful few days and I was having difficulty just walking into my driveway. But what a reward! However I nearly literally fell over. It was the moment the eclipse was s completely full - no white whatsoever. It was just a fully 3D orange, yellow and red ball. No wonder the ancients freaked. People were gathered on the streets watching cheering. I had to find a place to sit right away. I felt like an ancient in oh so many ways.

    If a rainbow can be a lucky omen then this moon is one too! And on an equally rare completely clear evening in Portland! :) Our moon is a peach! Or maybe a blood orange.


    The 3D part (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 07:32:51 AM EST
    Was extremely cool.   I've never seen the moon look more like a planet.   Don't recall every seeing a total lunar eclipse.   I sat out in the yard for hours.   It was perfect.   Cool breezy.  There has been no rain in so long here there was no bugs at all.

    All and all quite an evening.  Most of the time on the phone with my sister watching it from her house across town.

    Although I think I like the parts when there was just a tiny bit if light appearing on either side was visually even more amazing.


    It was too cloudy here (none / 0) (#21)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 11:33:32 AM EST
    Really sorry to have missed it. Got a little testy with a friend in Utah texting me about how great it was, as I was getting bitten by mosquitoes and seeing nothing.

    It was really hard (none / 0) (#24)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 11:49:54 AM EST
    To not gush.

    I'm With You... (none / 0) (#30)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 12:30:13 PM EST
    ...they it showed during the game last night, so I went outside and all I saw was some rain drops and yellow clouds from the city lights.  But they kept going back, so I essentially saw a couple 5 second live clips.

    Sucks because the night before I was in Galveston and there is no light pollution or clouds and the moon was bright and large.


    A clip of (5.00 / 3) (#7)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 27, 2015 at 10:00:53 PM EST
    an interview of Elizabeth Warren by Stephen Colbert.

    It is really nice to hear a democrat sounding like one.


    We watched "Indian Summers" on PBS. (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 03:54:32 AM EST
    It's a British period drama set during the twilight of empire in 1932 colonial India's summer capital at Simla. Its stellar cast includes the great Julie Walters, 1983 Oscar nominee for best actress in "Educating Rita."

    The reviews for "Indian Summers" in Britain, where the 10-part first season has already aired, have been stellar, praising it as "not just a sumptuous drama, but a gripping and unpredictable political thriller," and "an intriguing and vibrant kaleidoscope of conflict." Judging by tonight's first installment, the series looks extraordinarily promising.


    Agreed. Indian Summers, (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by KeysDan on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 11:00:57 AM EST
     portends a most enjoyable Sunday night at the t.v. The first episode sets the stage of haughty Brits lording it over the Indian people while unaware of being in a cauldron of slowly boiling water.

     The first hour and a half introduced viewers to the characters and the plot.  A lot of irons in the initial fire, no doubt, to be pulled out over the next 10 episodes. Interesting and informative portrayal of events of the  period, albeit soaped and sexed-up (more steam than Downton Abbey, making the matter of Mr. Pamuk seem like Sunday school).

    Beautiful production, pretty people, great costuming--could not help thinking of the heat and all that formal-wear. No A.C., no cargo shorts, and no perspiration. Thought about all those down drafts, too. Maybe,the Brits had their sweat glands removed in a Swiss clinic, or something.  

    All the elements co-exist-- with a Romeo and Juliet type romance, the nasty missionary's wife, and the unknown position of the missionary. The private secretary to the Viceroy, who has a little too much fondness for his beautiful and mysterious sister. But, he needs a wife to move along to become Viceroy--since he is thought "not steady." Eligible or ineligible bachelor.  Civility with a thin veneer abounds.  I like it. Thanks again to Mrs. Darlene Shiley.


    Me too, loved the first episode (none / 0) (#20)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 11:31:26 AM EST
    I hadn't read anything about it beforehand, so there were plenty of surprises for me, both in plot and overall quality. (Though I don't know why I was surprised by the quality.)

    Don't you wish you could watch it with Mrs Darlene Shiley? She seems very nice.


    Yes, Darlene Shiley (none / 0) (#66)
    by KeysDan on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 02:30:31 PM EST
    does seem nice, and has done some very nice things. Mrs. Shiley has continued the philanthropy that she and her late husband, Donald, started together.

      Not only $1 million specifically to Masterpiece Theatre but also $millions for other arts. And, to higher education. $12 million to the Univ of Portland school of engineering ( Donald's alma mater); a pledge by Mrs. Shiley of $20 million to the Univ of San Diego school of engineering.

    Mr. Shiley, a pioneer in bioengineering,  was a co-inventor of the Bjork-Shiley prosthetic heart valve--a tilting heart valve that permits a better flow of blood--reducing turbulence.  He also invented an improved tracheotomy tube.

    A May/November relationship, Mrs. Shiley was a young actress when she married the 57- year old widow in 1979. Shiley, Inc was sold to Pfizer permitting the Shiley's to devote their time to philanthropy.  


    thanks for the info (none / 0) (#96)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 04:37:01 PM EST
    You'd think I would have looked her up by now. What a sterling example of what can be done with hard work and a well-deserved fortune.

    That's not unlike the ... (none / 0) (#106)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 05:37:59 PM EST
    ... late Oscar-winning actress Jennifer Jones, who also married a much older man, the billionaire industrialist Norton Simon, and then enthusiastically embraced her husband's yen for art collecting. After Simon's 1993 death, she transformed his privately-owned but musty Pasadena (CA) Museum of Art into the magnificent Norton Simon Museum, which stands today as compelling testament to both her love for her husband and her appreciation for his vision and desire to use his vast collection for public education and benefit. The Norton Simon Museum attracts nearly 200,000 visitors annually.

    Gees, I am ignorant! I had no idea Jennifer Jones (none / 0) (#114)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 09:11:29 PM EST
    was married to Norton Simon. Beautiful museum.

    The Norton Simon is a real gem. (none / 0) (#117)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 02:49:19 AM EST
    It's one of my favorite places in Pasadena to spend a long afternoon. Another is the Huntington Museum and Gardens in neighboring San Marino.

    And when we go to SoCal this Thanksgiving, I want to visit the Broad Museum, a brand-new contemporary arts venue showcasing the vast collection of billionaire philanthropists Eli and Edythe Broad, which just opened eight days ago in downtown L.A.

    (Check the above link if you're in L.A. and want to visit the Broad. Right now, during the period of the museum's opening, admission is free but reservations are highly recommended.)



    Thanks for the heads up (none / 0) (#13)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 08:19:44 AM EST
    Reading about this I think I'm in.

    In other TV news

    Fear The Walking Dead is kicking butt.   It started a bit slow but I can't believe we are already to the season finale next Sunday.   It's shaping up to be better than the original.   And I think the original was excellent.  I agree with the review that said the original was like a dry run for this.   We have seen what's coming.  We have met the cast which is excellent.  Maybe better than the original, which was great. We have learned most if all that you never EVER trust the government to have your best interests at heart.

    This was a short season.   Just six episodes.   AMC is rerunning them all in the run up to the finale next Sunday.   Two words.

    Watch it.   Or maybe Record it.  And watch it later.


    Ray Donovan: I thought this may have (none / 0) (#14)
    by Anne on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 09:05:04 AM EST
    been the best season yet.

    What a sad group of people, though; so damaged and so dark.


    I will catch up (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 09:22:45 AM EST
    I dropped showtime but I will catch up.  I have read that.

    I recorded it (none / 0) (#80)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 03:26:03 PM EST
    Didn't watch it yet. Glad something is coming on I might find intesting. For me there hasn't been much on.

    From our "Ebony and Irony" file: (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 04:16:22 AM EST
    As LAPD personnel and their supporters were getting ready to stage a "Blue Lives Matter" rally in Hollywood today, officers shot and killed a woman just south of downtown for allegedly threatening them with a knife. According to the Los Angeles Times, LAPD officers have shot 31 people this year, 17 of whom were killed.

    Clearly racist cop (none / 0) (#15)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 09:22:26 AM EST

    Offering to cut your liver out is no reason to initiate violence.

    Clearly an individual (5.00 / 3) (#17)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 09:31:43 AM EST
    who believes killing the homeless and possibly mentally ill is the best way to thin the herd.

    Clearly an uninformed wingbat ... (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 11:42:30 AM EST
    ... who possesses no further details about the incident other than what's in the article, yet who nevertheless offers up his own opinion of what happened based solely upon his own biased assumptions.

    If Two Cops Can't Figure... (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 12:26:34 PM EST
    ...how to disarm someone with a knife without killing them they should find another line of work.  Taser or non lethal shots come to mind.

    But I will save my judgement when we see the body cam video, if by some miracle, it doesn't disappear.


    How exactly will you save your judgement? (none / 0) (#68)
    by McBain on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 02:36:56 PM EST
    You already said they should find another line of work.  You already judged them to be bad cops.

    That Was in General... (none / 0) (#71)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 02:58:43 PM EST
    ...obviously there are exceptions, but if history is any indication it's a miracle she even had a weapon.  Don't blame me for jumping to conclusions about cops killing people, that is on them for killing people, who pose zero to minimal threat, and then lying about in their reports.

    Funny that the biggest cop apologize here hasn't already decided when last, you saw a cop shoot an unarmed guy in the back and told us it was inclusive and made up S in the cops defense.

    But as long as you are more opened minded then all of us...


    I assume you're talking about the Walter Scott (none / 0) (#78)
    by McBain on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 03:24:20 PM EST
    case? What S did I make up? Be specific.  

    Seems you still have a problem with the innocent until proven guilty concept.   I do blame you and others  for jumping to conclusions.  In cases like this, history has taught us what a big mistake that can be.


    Why, then, do you always seem to assume (5.00 / 2) (#128)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 09:09:04 AM EST
    that blame for the outcome of police-involved incidents lies with the citizen?

    Yes, innocent until proven guilty applies to those on trial, and no one's suggesting that it shouldn't, but in a confrontation with a member of law enforcement, the prevailing conclusion seems to be that the citizen must be guilty of something.

    We had another police-involved shooting last night.  

    Police said the officer was by himself in a patrol car when he stopped a man at the intersection of Washington Boulevard and Reynolds Street to speak with him.

    Police said the officer told a 40-year-old man to show his hands, but police said he refused.

    "As this encounter took place, and the officer continued to give commands, the officer fired a single shot, striking the suspect in his leg. The person was taken to the hospital, where he has non-life-threatening injuries.

    Detectives spoke to witnesses after the shooting. They stress that they are still in the preliminary stages of the investigation, but no weapon was found at the scene.

    From the video, a witness states:

    "You see the man walking across the street. The truck pulled right in front of him, pulled pass him. He jumped out the car, said 'Get on the ground.' The man kept continue walking. The police ran around the car with a gun in his hand and shot him," said a witness who did not want to be identified. "Nothing else was said, just 'Get on the ground.'"

    No word on why the man was stopped in the first place.

    But I suppose the good news is that once he shot the man, the officer rendered immediate aid.

    Did any of this have to happen?  And no, I'm not looking for you to tell me that if the man had just done what the officer commanded him to do, he wouldn't have been shot.  It's possible that might be so, but go back a step or two: what was the reason for the immediate and adversarial confrontation?

    I guess if you ever, just once, looked at these things from the citizens' point of view, if you ever questioned how law enforcement was treating the people it is supposed to serve, ever held police to the same standard to which you hold private citizens, you might not get the kind of pushback you get here.


    Anne, the only thing I assume (none / 0) (#142)
    by McBain on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 02:56:29 PM EST
    in these police shootings is there's probably more to the story than what's first reported.  

    I hold the police to the standard of the law.  Under the law, they're allowed to shoot and kill people in certain situations.  

    The "pushback" in here comes from emotional thinking, laziness and ignorance.  


    The thing is, McBain, that you don't seem (5.00 / 2) (#144)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 03:11:03 PM EST
    to have as much regard for the rights of citizens as you do for the right of cops to use the law to justify shooting and killing them.

    If I'm walking down the street with my hands in my pockets, what right does law enforcement have to command me to remove them?  Do they have any more right to do that than demand that I produce identification?

    I don't think so, and the problem I have is that we, as citizens, should hot have to sacrifice our rights in order not to be shot.  The cops should not get to trample on people's rights, then use the situation they unreasonably escalated as justification for shooting someone.

    You get pushback not because people are lazy thinkers acting out of ignorance, but because you never question how the rights of the citizen in question may have been compromised.  That doesn't seem to be information you're particularly interested in.  In fact, I would say that your quest for more information goes to 2 places: looking for a reason why the cop was justified, and proving the victim was low-life scum who should have known better.

    It's a heads-I-win, tails-you-lose mindset that isn't fooling anyone.


    You just proved my point (none / 0) (#150)
    by McBain on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 07:25:38 PM EST
    Your lazy emotional thinking led you to believe I'm anti citizen rights.  I am an citizen.  I'm not cop and don't have any relatives or close friends who are.  

    How many times do I have to say it?.... I'm against the rush to judgement that happens every time in high profile cases. O.J. Simpson, Scott Peterson Zimmerman, Casey Anthony, Darren Wilson, Duke Lacrosse, Freddy Gray, Amanda Knox, Walter Scott, Tamir Rice, Eric Garner... on and on.

    What's with the big rush?  


    Since This is America... (none / 0) (#81)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 03:34:11 PM EST
    ...and I have absolutely no bearing on the case...

    I forget exactly, but I think you were insisting something with the taser, that maybe Walter fired it or something in which there was absolutely no basis other than you imagining what 'really' happened.  And that somehow was a defense for the cop who shot him in the back.

    Not sure why I am tasked to remember your dumb comments.


    Scott, I believe you are talking about my post (none / 0) (#112)
    by McBain on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 08:44:30 PM EST
    that included this link..
    and quote...
    Slager's defense team believes his Taser was fired six times and that both the officer and Scott were each hit twice, suggesting there was more of a struggle than prosecutors have revealed.  

    Or perhaps a later post where I wrote this...

    "We don't know for sure if he was armed at some point or not.  We don't know if this is murder or manslaughter or something else."

    Go ahead, make another false accusation and be sure to include an insult.


    False Allegation ?? (none / 0) (#125)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 08:35:21 AM EST
    So the evidence you present is what the defense team believed happened.  Yeah, Ted Bundy's defense 'team' believed the killer was still at large.

    I think your response would find better play over at the Onion.  It not like there is a video or anything showing a cop a shooting a unarmed guy running away, then the cop picking up the taser and dropping next to the body.

    You post only adds merit to my claim that you are not the objective soul you claim to be in regards to police shootings.  


    When you accuse someone of making S up (5.00 / 1) (#135)
    by McBain on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 12:47:46 PM EST
    and they provide you links that prove they didn't, it's called a false allegation.  Here's a link that goes into much more detail
    You don't have to like the sources but stop with the nonsense.  

    My opinion is that I don't everything that happened during the struggle.  I'd like to know more about what happened with the Taser before I make any conclusion about guilt.  For all I know, Scott might have shot Slager with his own taser. In the world of criminal law, "might" or "possibly" is huge.  


    Yawn... (none / 0) (#138)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 02:02:17 PM EST
    You got me, you found a website with the same made up non-sense, theconservativetreehouse.com, I bet they know who killed Kennedy and JR too.

    Making up S and sourcing a place that makes up S are one in the same.  You are a child, using obscure links to prove some idiotic point, which is what anyways, that you don't make S up, you just find obscure websites that make shit for you and source them ?

    Good GD grief, most people stop shoveling as the sides start caving in.  If your standard of information gathering is, "It exists on the internet" then you have bigger problems than me calling you a hack.

    This is what you offer:

    Dick Cheney was the real master-mind of 9/11 attacks

    Complete and utter non-sense.


    Blame the source, blame me (2.00 / 1) (#141)
    by McBain on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 02:48:35 PM EST
    blame everyone except yourself.  You made the false statement but can't admit it.  Then, as you usually do, you throw in an insult.  

    All you had to say is "I don't agree with you because..... "  

    I have no idea why you include something about Dick Cheney.  Stay focused and try to adhere to the blog rules.  


    That's a Source... (none / 0) (#146)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 04:28:44 PM EST
    ...OK then I think we are done.

    Note: DC was brought in to show you that just because you read it on the internets doesn't mean it true and worthy of discussion by adults.

    You can't be that dumb...

    Either way, end of discussion for me.


    So, you'll take your ball and go home? (none / 0) (#149)
    by McBain on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 07:15:12 PM EST
    You had nothing to add to this discussion other than false accusations and insults.

    You could have been man enough to say you were wrong about me making stuff up but you still believe you're overall point to be correct.  That would have been cool.  We don't have to agree on anything but we should treat each other with respect.


    "Links that prove they didn't" (none / 0) (#161)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 09:18:30 PM EST
    Conservative Treehouse.

    It's like you're trying to be funny, but just don't know it.


    That will be the opinion many will take (none / 0) (#69)
    by McBain on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 02:39:49 PM EST
    without knowing the facts.  

    I want to know how "threatening" she was.  


    Of course you do (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by sj on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 03:21:58 PM EST
    Yes SJ, all I know about this shooting is (none / 0) (#79)
    by McBain on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 03:25:59 PM EST
    what I read in the link Donald provided.  We need a lot more information.  

    We (with reading comprehension... (5.00 / 2) (#85)
    by sj on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 03:49:48 PM EST
    ...and retention) also know that unless "what we find out" unequivocally exonerates the cop that you (yes, you specifically) will never have enough information.

    The best strategy is to wait for more information (none / 0) (#110)
    by McBain on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 06:58:28 PM EST
    before making up your mind.  It really isn't that difficult to do.  Jumping to conclusions in these high profile cases has led to riots and possibly murder.

    Thought Black Folks... (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 08:50:54 AM EST
    ...were to blame for riots, now it's the ole 'jumping to conclusions crowd', hot damn, who isn't to blame for the riots, let me guess, the police who killed a man in custody.  I never knew some schmuck in Houston could be behind riots in Baltimore.

    But the idea that you think you are objective is really the funniest thing I have in a while, next up Jim will be objective in regards to Obama, house republicans will be objective in regards to planned parenthood, and Fox News is the most objective channel in the line-up.


    Really Scott you embarrass yourself (none / 0) (#155)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 08:10:49 PM EST
    with all these wild eyed claims.

    I have never claimed that Repubs will be objective and I have never claimed to be objective about Obama. I consider him the worst president in history . Period.

    And there are no objective news sources. Never have been. But you have to be an adult to understand that.

    And each one of them have OPINION shows and NEWS shows. Your problem is you think O'Reilly is a news show.


    Is that why you posted (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by MKS on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 08:24:49 PM EST
    a photo of Obama with a bone through his nose?

    And that is not racist?


    Insulting someone is not racist (none / 0) (#163)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 07:12:16 AM EST

    the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

    I find many people worthy of insults. Obama is one of them.

    What is racism, and what is wrong, is the treating of people as if they're not big enough/smart enough to take care of themselves.

    So while you may accurately describe the picture as insulting, it is not racist.

    No charge for the education.


    Ok (2.00 / 1) (#166)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 08:14:07 AM EST
    We have this POS lecturing on what is and is not racism.

    Is it clear NOW that bantering with the thing is pointless.  IS IT CLEAR NOW?   What will it take to get people to understand that his entire point is t get you to respond?  That you are being manipulated like children to do exactly what he want you to do?

    What will it take?  Do we want some more BS arguments that his ridiculous clap trap "must be responded to" to protect the world or are we ready to admit that the actual reason is it's an easy way to feel superior?

    How about that. Clearly this thing is not going away.  Perhaps it's time for another tactic.  Calling out his enablers.

    One more time.


    Clearly he is smart enough t know this.  I'm not sure why everyone else here seems unable to.

    It's not fu@king rocket science.

    IMO you keep enabling him you are as bad as he is.


    No charge (2.00 / 1) (#167)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 08:16:40 AM EST
    For the education

    And so you respond (none / 0) (#193)
    by MKS on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 10:39:09 AM EST
    to Jim by telling everyone not to respond?

    I was responding to you (2.00 / 1) (#195)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 10:48:21 AM EST
    Not according to the "Parent" (none / 0) (#197)
    by Anne on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 10:59:37 AM EST
    reference, but that's an easy enough mistake to make when replying.

    And you think ... (none / 0) (#162)
    by Yman on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 09:19:52 PM EST
    ... that Fox is a "news" channel.

    Define news (none / 0) (#164)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 07:16:23 AM EST
    Perhaps it depends on what the meaning of "is" is.

    They all provide news. Their fans love'em and yell at the other side. Kinda like a football game.

    And I am sure you think Tweety and Sharpton are crackerjack reporters.



    Ri-i-ight (none / 0) (#111)
    by sj on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 08:29:48 PM EST
    jumping to conclusions led to the riots.



    I saw the movie Black Mass (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 11:45:52 AM EST
    yesterday. It is the story of the rise of Whitey Bulger, with a big boost from his pal in the FBI. Johnny Depp is fantastic - it is so good to see him in a true dramatic role again as opposed to a cartoon character. The whole cast is great, as a matter of fact. Graphic violence, as you would expect from the subject matter, but not gratuitous.

    Praise for the writing and directing too. Really the best flick I have seen all year.

    Also, in keeping wih the post on this site (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:14:38 PM EST
    about the DEA and other low enforcement abuses, Jeremy Renner's crooked FBI agent is almost as despicable as Depp's psychopath.  

    Another under appreciated talent (none / 0) (#41)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:16:16 PM EST
    Just because he can play a superhero

    Actually, ruffian and Cap'n, ... (none / 0) (#100)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 04:57:34 PM EST
    ... the role of corrupt FBI agent John Connolly was played by Australian actor Joel Edgerton, and not by Jeremy Renner.

    No doubt, fans of "Breaking Bad" will also come to recognize the now bulked-up Jesse Plemons as Kevin Weeks, Whitey Bulger's brutish enforcer. And Dakota Johnson, daughter of Don Johnson and Melanie Griffith, was cast in the small but pivotal role of Lindsey Cyr, the affable but terminally clueless prostitute-girlfriend of one of Whitey's close associates.



    Wow thanks Donald. I was sure that was Renner. (none / 0) (#113)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 09:07:15 PM EST
    Should have paid more attention to the credits. Yes, I did recognize Jesse Plemons under the belly fat and bad hairdo. Didn't realize that was Dakota Johnson until the credits though. She was really good too.

    I don't think there was an off kilter performance in the film.


    in real life (none / 0) (#51)
    by CST on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:26:23 PM EST
    He was that despicable too.

    I'm strangely torn about this movie.  I'm a bit over the glorification of Whitey, but I'm glad it was a good movie.

    Maybe glorification is the wrong word, but... I do wish he'd disappear into the abyss never to be heard of again.  That won't happen if they keep making movies.

    I will probably see this film at some point, just like I eventually saw the departed, and I'll probably even enjoy it if it's as good as everyone says.  But something about it all just feels off.


    One of the things I liked about the film is (5.00 / 2) (#58)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:50:12 PM EST
    that it does not make Bulger even an anti-hero, or glorify him at all. OK, he does love his mother, but that's about the only human quality he shows. In retrospect I'm not sure if even that was not just an act to keep his family on his side.  He is a monster and I have rarely been so relieved as when Cory Stoll's district attorney takes over and yo know there is going to be some relief. I almost said 'oh thank god' right aloud in t e theater.

    I understand (none / 0) (#55)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:34:21 PM EST
    Whitey is from your neck of the woods. You know the names and faces of those who lost their lives. It's not a story to you. It's real.

    That's certainly some of it (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by CST on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:44:51 PM EST
    It's also that - it was a different era.  One not very long gone.

    And I feel like there are those in the city that glorify that era today even if they don't glorify Whitey.  Between the changing demographics and the church scandal the old power structure is finally crumbling.  For me - I say good riddance to all of that.


    And we love to make entertainment (none / 0) (#59)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:59:01 PM EST
    Out of different eras that always leaves out the cruelty, death, and destruction.  The Kincade affect :)?

    From What I Have Read... (none / 0) (#70)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 02:39:50 PM EST
    ...the movie makes it seem more like Whitey was killing other low lifes and that they didn't 'glorify' the damage, including killing, done to many completely innocent people.

    There is a show on Netflix about Whitey in which they talk to the relatives of people he killed and it's heartbreaking because Whitey was a maniac who killed indiscriminately, including girlfriends of other gangsters who knew nothing just in case they did know something.  It follows a couple of them who have been waiting decades to testify in court.

    I would hate to see a movie giving him Goodfella like status, the miss understood gangster who only killed people who deserved it.

    I am sure I will watch it when it's on the TV.


    I did not get that from it at all (none / 0) (#94)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 04:33:20 PM EST
    It was pretty clear they were not all 'low-lifes'. Obviously in a two hour movie they did not show every single one.  But it was clear his decisions of who to hit was pretty broad. He was portrayed as a viscous...I was going to say psychopath, but the movie does not attempt a psychological profile!

    I think the film clearly suggests that ... (none / 0) (#102)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 05:04:51 PM EST
    ... Bulger harbored distinct sociopathic tendencies. Forget the violence and mayhem for a moment. How else to interpret the backyard BBQ scene at John Connolly's house, where he goes upstairs after dinner to intimidate his host's wife, who obviously does not appreciate the man's presence in her house? That was bone-chilling.

    Actually, Scott, the "Black Mass" ... (none / 0) (#98)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 04:43:57 PM EST
    ... storyline centers itself upon James Bulger's obvious and well-documented effort to use his status and position as a so-called "FBI informant" to first rid Boston of his (primarily Italian-American) criminal rivals, specifically the Patriarca family, which then afforded his (Irish-American) Winter Hill gang the opportunity to fill the subsequent void in the city's underworld left by the Patriarcas' removal.

    (It's important to note the respective Italian and Irish backgrounds of the Patriarca crime family and Winter Hill gang, because ethnic bigotry underscores not only Whitey Bulger's own personal resentment of his underworld rivals, but apparently the FBI's as well.)

    The film neither glorifies not apologizes for Bulger and his criminal activities, and further pulls no punches in portraying that demented sociopath for what he truly was. In fact, one of the film's most heartbreaking and chilling scenes concerns one of those instances you referenced in your comment about the Netflix show.

    It's a movie that's well worth seeing, if only for the prospective Oscar-nominated turn by Johnny Depp, who inhabits the role of "Whitey" Bulger to the point where he's all but unrecognizable personally. It's arguably the best performance of his career.



    It's fairly well at the box office too ... (none / 0) (#27)
    by Robot Porter on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 12:00:12 PM EST
    which is a bit of a surprise.  In the last few years, pretty much every gangster picture has tanked.

    Makes sense...it is the first one I have even (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:05:44 PM EST
    wanted to see for a long time. Maybe I am tired of the Italian mob, and the Irish mob was at least a change of pace.

    We need more Jewish mob material (none / 0) (#45)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:20:08 PM EST
    In Peaky Blinders, Tom Hardy represents the Jewish mob. He is due back this season too.

    Saw a preview for a movie where Tom Hardy (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:22:15 PM EST
    plays twin brother mobsters in London. Looked good!

    You may like (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by KeysDan on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 02:02:29 PM EST
    "The Drop,"  a Brooklyn mob crime thriller, with Tom Hardy and the late James Gandolfini (aka Tony Sopranl)

    Legend (none / 0) (#53)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:29:12 PM EST
    The mob is back, we've just jumped the pond in a time machine :)

    I'm so glad. There hasn't been much out there for me lately. Started rewatching older things. Rewatched The Departed this weekend. I never get tired of it.


    Good small screen stuff coming up (none / 0) (#93)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 04:30:04 PM EST
    Leftovers is returning.  I'm looking forward to the new AMC series Into The Badlands.  Sort a kung fu quest thing.  Of course I am all atwitter about American Horror Story-Hotel.  With Lady Gaga.
    Fargo is returning.   And STARZ has Ash VS The Evil Dead.  With Bruce Campbell and Sam Rami.

    I did get to The Leftovers (none / 0) (#120)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 08:05:10 AM EST
    If a storyline is a little disturbing, but still good, I will wait for a low stress time and binge watch it. Curious about Badlands. I had to quit watching American Horror Story. It's just too freaky. My daughter loves it though.

    I will probably binge watch Fargo when my visiting FIL starts driving me bonkers :)

    I don't know why mob stories don't bother me, other than I have really never lived anyplace with much mob history, so it all seems like myth to me in a more familiar context than Greek mythology.

    My husband has a hard time watching disturbing stories in a familiar context. I think that's why he likes sci-fi, because it's so far removed from reality. And that's the reason why I can't do a lot of sci-fi. He watches The Strain, and I have tried to watch it with him but just can't get into it. It's too gruesome.

    Do you watch Faceoff? The guys here love it


    Ash Vs The Evil Dead (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 08:26:41 AM EST
    Could be awsum.   Gorey but funny.   Bruce Campbell and director Sam Rami are both living legends.

    Ash v Evil Dead (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 08:53:46 AM EST

    NSAAS (not safe at any speed)


    The Americans (5.00 / 2) (#124)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 08:34:48 AM EST
    Will also be returning.  I'm not sure when.  I love that series.  I really think it's been one of the best things on tv for a few  years.

    Definitely the best thing ignored by all awards shows.  Most critics agree with that.


    I love The Americans (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 10:44:45 AM EST
    I love the sets, the clothes, the music. It brings that time right back to me and being spoonfed Reagan's Red Menace daily. Wondering when I went to sleep every night if a nuclear holocaust wasn't going to be the reality tomorrow.

    My father lived in Anchorage then, and Russian freighters would dock there. He would tell me stories about partying with Russians and how much they loved our cigarettes, he would trade them cigarettes for the novelty of it. My father was very kdog :) That was when I realized though how much crap we were all fed in the lower 48. If the people of Russia are so dangerous, what the hell is Anchorage doing allowing them to dock and party in port?


    Not regularly (none / 0) (#122)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 08:24:43 AM EST
    I seen it mostly only when some one on FB says ___. will be on FaceOff.

    I guess it's to much like work.


    It's about the Kray brothers ... (none / 0) (#134)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 12:44:25 PM EST
    and it's called LEGEND.

    There was a movie about the Krays back in 1990, irresistibly titled THE KRAYS.  It starred Martin and Gary Kemp of "Spandau Ballet" as the titular gangsters and was directed by Peter Medak.


    Goody goody (none / 0) (#28)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 12:05:47 PM EST
    It's what I'm doing tonight then. Thanks for the review.

    I always remember Roger Ebert (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:10:57 PM EST
    saying, on his first show when I was a kid, the great actors can act with their backs to the audience. Made an impression on me.

    Watch for my favorite scene in the movie...you'll know it when you see it. Johnny Depp is in the front passenger seat of a car, your viewpoint is from the back seat, and all he says is 'hi' to someone approaching the car. OMG it is great.


    Maybe he will get some respect for this (none / 0) (#38)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:13:09 PM EST
    IMO he has been an under appreciated talent for many years

    I hope so - hard to explain how good he really (none / 0) (#44)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:18:57 PM EST
    is. Very understated, he can do so much with just a tone of voice and slight facial change. I was afraid the make-up would be too much of a mask, but it is just enough.

    Johnny Depp paid $2 M for (5.00 / 4) (#119)
    by fishcamp on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 06:50:43 AM EST
    Hunter Thompson's memorial extravaganza outside of Aspen at Owl Farm.  I wanted to meet him, but he is very short and was continually surrounded by his entourage, so I barely even saw him.  John Kerry and George McGovern were also there and I did speak with them.  They kept asking me who the different people were, and what was their story.  I didn't know absolutely everyone, so I just made up answers, like they do.

    Depps discovery story (none / 0) (#132)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 11:11:36 AM EST
    Is a Hollywood fantasy.  I've read this but never tried to confirm it so

    His first film was the original Nightmare On Elm Street.  He came along with a friend who was auditioning with no intention of auditioning himself and was seen by someone, possibly Wes Craven possibly some casting person I'm not sure, and offered a chance to audition himself.

    The rest is history.


    The Bulger story is one of my (none / 0) (#43)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:17:18 PM EST
    Mob favorites.  Not sure how healthy my mob fascination is, but I'm stuck with it so might as well make it fun somehow.

    You'll love it then..I only knew the broad strokes (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:21:07 PM EST
    of the story.

    did I mention Benedict Cumberbatch plays his brother? Good part for him too - sympathetic yet compromised.


    How cool (none / 0) (#47)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:22:02 PM EST
    Mars has running water (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by CST on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:23:38 PM EST
    All it needs now is an atmosphere.

    Did you see (none / 0) (#52)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:27:15 PM EST
    Elon Musks (what a great name) plan to bomb Mars to make it habitable?

    Seems it's a real thing.


    Ironically (none / 0) (#54)
    by CST on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:32:32 PM EST
    This is my answer when people ask me how to fix the roads in Boston.

    A good fire would probably do the trick too.

    But yes, all Mars really needs is a lot of greenhouse gases.  I feel like that's something humans can accomplish...


    Thanks for the heads up on the Shantaram (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 09:14:24 PM EST
    sequel. Will look forward to that!

    Read the first 5 chapter preview... (none / 0) (#143)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 02:59:34 PM EST
    I'm hooked...haven't been this psyched for a literary sequel since "Banco" by Henry Charriere.

    Now I have a decision to make (none / 0) (#153)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 07:53:46 PM EST
    I started the first one on audiobook, but switched to ebook because it was just taking too long to listen and I was too impatient. I've never had to do that with any other audiobook. Think I will start right out on ebook this time.

    And we wonder why the world (5.00 / 3) (#129)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 09:44:50 AM EST
    No longer respects us-

    WATCH: Alabama KKK member tells horrified British reporter Auschwitz was `summer camp' for Jews

    BBC Three's documentary "KKK: The Fight for White Supremacy," which aired on Monday, follows members of the Klan as they prepare for what they say will be a race war.

    As Klan members assemble 3,000 fliers to deliver to a predominately black neighborhood, the BBC interviewer notices a photograph of Adolf Hitler on the wall.

    "Sorry," the stunned interviewer interrupts. "You're telling me Auschwitz was like a summer camp?"

    "Well, they had a swimming pool, a movie theater and everything else," the Klan member insists. "You know, you don't see in prisons today any kind of swimming pool being in the middle of the prison hall."

    "So what do you think the Jews were doing in Auschwitz?" the interviewer asks.

    "Swimming," the white supremacist replies. "And working. Because they didn't want to do any work, and what Hitler was trying to do was he was trying to teach them to work, trying to rehabilitate them, if you will."

    "Where did you hear this?" the dumbfounded interviewer wonders.

    "It's all history," the Klan member says.

    You know, I'm all about free speech but I tend to agree with what the BBC guy later suggests, it should be illegal to be this stupid.

    I don't usually watch WWII stuff but last there was one about the last days of the war.  I went to bed so angry I couldn't fall asleep and had to get up and take a pill

    Howdy, this is horrifying (none / 0) (#139)
    by Zorba on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 02:24:04 PM EST
    Absolutely horrifying.
    And if you want to feel even more despair, people who believe this type of sh!t can vote.  And they reproduce.   :-(

    It's really getting hard (none / 0) (#145)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 03:25:50 PM EST
    Not to wish we could send them to summer camp.

    I'd send them to the funny farm, ... (none / 0) (#154)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 07:57:23 PM EST
    ... and preferably wherever Nurse Mildred Ratched is presently employed.

    Sorry you were disappointed (5.00 / 1) (#205)
    by CST on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 12:41:05 PM EST

    No surprise here that the head of the Catholic Church is a mixed bag at best.

    I'll still take the one that brings some good with the bad.

    Church doctrine is what it is.  Priorities matter too.  I had lower expectations.

    Come CST (5.00 / 3) (#208)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 12:50:13 PM EST
    it was pretty clear just from the comments in this thread that I'm not the only one surprised and disappointed that he had a private meeting with the face of hateful bigotry in this country right now.

    Do I welcome dome climate change sanity?  Sure.
    But this is fu@ked up.   Take a moment and consider how much fuel this is going to give her and her ilk.

    The KY governor filed a motion to dismiss her stupid lawsuit today.  How will this effect that?

    It shouldn't affect it at all (5.00 / 1) (#210)
    by CST on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 01:17:37 PM EST
    This is a country of laws.  The pope can have whatever opinion he likes.

    I'm not saying you're the only one, I didn't mean to imply that.  Just that I'm not surprised.  My expectations for this stuff will always be low.

    In a way, it will be interesting to see how the people who hate the pope for climate change will find a way to like him now.  I don't think he gives her fuel, she doesn't need it, homegirl is running on fumes at best and is dealing with a judge who blatantly can't stand her, I don't see her as a real threat.  I think she's toast.  It might give the rest of what he's saying fuel in the right places though.

    For most of human history (5.00 / 1) (#213)
    by CST on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 01:33:07 PM EST
    Bigotry has been validated by the Pope and the Church.

    Donaldif you are going to crib your jokes (5.00 / 3) (#218)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 04:13:34 PM EST
    Papal visit dot com you might at least give them credit-

    7. Most of all, despite what Ms. Davis said, a meeting with the pope does not "kind of validate everything." Again, the pope meets with many people, some of whom he may know well, others of whom may be introduced to him as a reward for long service, and perhaps others who will use a meeting to make a political point. Meeting with the pope is a great honor, but it does not betoken a blanket blessing on "everything" one does. Not to put too fine a point on it, but Pope Francis also met Mark Wahlberg, and that does not mean that he liked "Ted."

    I find it interesting how the arc of the comments went from "are you kidding, thus can't possibly be true"
    Smoothly to
    "Well it doesn't really matter if it is"

    But, you know, whatever works.


    I Find It Difficult to Swallow... (5.00 / 3) (#219)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 05:47:41 PM EST
    ...that someone can go on a 'stop the hate and prejudice' tour and find time to visit with someone using their job to discriminate.  I doubt the Pope apologists would be singing the same tune if he had met with David Duke.

    Beyond the religion and everything else, what he did was say one thing and support another, which is pretty much protocol for politician.  The Pope meeting with a nobody because that nobody discriminated in the name of god, is supporting them.

    He also turned to lot of people who were warming up to religion, even further away.  F the Pope, when all is said and done he believes god discriminates, that gay people have no business marrying the person they love because it is a sin.

    It is interesting to see people I normally respect, defending the indefensible.  If KD needed a moment to ensure she is the first living breathing martyr, the Pope just gave it to her.

    There is no stopping her know, Kentucky is probably off the hook in that KD has much bigger things to accomplish that denying the occasional gay marriage certificate.

    Guido Sarducci ? (5.00 / 1) (#222)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 01, 2015 at 10:04:16 AM EST
    I bet I haven't heard that name in a decade, but hot damn if that did not make me laugh.

    Candidate Ben Carson says (none / 0) (#3)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Sep 27, 2015 at 08:57:07 PM EST
    He'd Consider Religion As Probable Cause For Searches

    Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson told ABC's This Week that he "would certainly be willing to listen to somebody" argue that the religion of Middle Eastern refugees should be considered probable cause for searches or wiretaps.

    "I personally don't feel that way, but I would certainly be willing to listen to somebody who had evidence to the contrary," Carson said on the program Sunday morning. "I think that's one of the problems, we get to our little corners and we don't want to listen to anybody anymore."

    The funniest thing about that interview ... (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Robot Porter on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 11:57:02 AM EST
    was Martha Raddatz' obvious dismay that she couldn't get Carson to say anything overtly prejudiced.

    You could almost read her thoughts:  You did it for everyone last week? What happened?  Why not me?


    So what is wrong with listening? (2.33 / 3) (#18)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 09:57:14 AM EST
    And given the past history involved, how would you vet the "refugees?"

    What is wrong with listening? (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Anne on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 12:51:17 PM EST
    In and of itself, and on the basis that people are free to babble away discussing things that reveal them to be utterly ignorant of the law and of history, nothing, I suppose.

    So you go right ahead and listen away.  Listen until your ears bleed, if that makes you happy.

    Maybe someone will think to ask the good doctor if that's a road that anyone really wants to go down.  Maybe he will be asked if there is anything in his understanding of the Constitution and the amendments thereto that suggest that religion, all by itself, is ever or should ever be probable cause for any kind of search or seizure.

    How far back in someone's history would you want to go, jim?  If someone has Muslim relatives, would that subject them to searches?  

    As for Dr. Carson, he may be fooling some of the people with his soft-spoken manner, but his greatest purpose seems to be in making it possible for you and people like you to believe that maybe one day, your ignorant and dangerous biases will rule the day.

    Seems like someone who served 10 years in naval aviation ought to have a better idea of the freedoms this nation has fought and died to preserve, but perhaps I am giving you too much credit.


    et al (none / 0) (#99)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 04:53:43 PM EST
    anne - Exactly what are you claiming re Carson? Abre you afraid to say it?

    Donald - Playing the racist card is what you do. But no one is paying attention anymore. They see what the "refugees" represent and are rightly concerned.

    And why aren't you screaming for SA and the rest of the Islamic states to be taking these refugees??

    I am vetted every time I get on an airplane. Do I have less rights than a Muslim pushing his/her presence into a sovereign country?

    BTW - Did you watch the video??


    Well, a very good place to start ... (4.00 / 3) (#26)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 11:57:52 AM EST
    JimakaPPJ: "And given the past history involved, how would you vet the 'refugees?'"

    ... would be to absolutely keep such Islamophobic "patriots" as yourself and the pandering Dr. Carson, as far removed from the process as is humanly possible.


    "John Boehner was a terrible, (none / 0) (#32)
    by KeysDan on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 12:51:35 PM EST
    very bad, no good speaker of the House.  Under his leadership, Republicans pursued an unprecedented strategy of scorched-earth obstructionism, which did immense damage to the economy and undermined America's credibility around the world." According to the analysis of Dr. Paul Krugman.

    " Still, things could have been worse.  And, under his successor they almost will be worse.  Bad as Mr. Boehner was, he was just a symptom of the underlying malady, the madness that has consumed the Republican Party."

    "But Republican leaders who have encouraged the base to believe all kinds of untrue things are in no position to start preaching political rationality. Mr. Boehner is quitting because be found himself caught between the limits of the politically possible and a base that lives in its own. reality."

    A representative reaction to Boehner's tear-a-thon, was a Mr. Mike Fultz, a 59-year old who voted for Boehner "time and time again,"  "Yippie is what I thought, Mr. Fultz is quoted as saying in the NYTimes, "I think Boehner was a disgrace to the conservative movement.  He came to Obama on everything, and he never put up a fight.  He was elected as a conservative, and then he turned into a liberal."  Yes, life in its own reality. A party gone mad.

    I saw Boehner on Face the Nation (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 04:40:33 PM EST
    and as usual with these rejected-by-the-crazies types, they always start telling the truth on the way out the door. If he had talked 4 years ago the way he talked yesterday maybe he could have stopped all this nonsense.

    Instead he aided and abetted them until even he could stand it no more. Well gee,John, now you know how the rest of us feel. It IS enough to make a grown man weep.


    I didn't (none / 0) (#108)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 06:10:29 PM EST
    see him but darn I agree it's the same story everytime something happens. Oh, the GOP has become full of crackpots and crazies they say as they are walking out the door. No guts to stand up to them when they're actually in a leadership position it seems. Newt Gingrich really ruined the GOP. He set the standard for the house to be shopping conspiracy theories and bomb throwing.

    Dang, missed it (none / 0) (#121)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 08:13:48 AM EST
    Hunting for it online. Not available On Demand with Direct TV.

    Watched it online (none / 0) (#131)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 10:49:05 AM EST
    Yes, some truth. And tears. Why do I bristle everytime that man tears up? You would think I would be grateful he possessed emotion. I suppose it is because of the subjects that tear him up verses what he is dry eyed over.

    We are both going to feel bad (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 07:50:44 PM EST
    If it turns out he has PBA

    PseudoBulbar Affect (PBA) symptoms are frequent, uncontrollable outbursts of crying or laughing in people with certain neurologic conditions or brain injuries. PBA is not a new condition. In fact, it was first described in medical literature over 130 years ago by Charles Darwin.

    Oh yeah (none / 0) (#158)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 08:37:41 PM EST
    I'm double horrible because on first reading I thought it said pseudo blubber affect.

    My father had suffered a traumatic brain injury when I was little. I don't know if as he aged that was what occurred, or he was simply able to cry. Something in his generation men were discouraged from doing, perhaps he overcame it.

    When my husband adopted our daughter the judge had this wonderful ceremony he did with adoptions, where the child agrees to take this person to be their parent through groundings, lectures, etc. And the parent takes the child for better or worse, through wrecked cars, ditching school, etc. It was very charming. My father was there and sobbed through the whole thing poor guy. But it was emotional, he loved her dearly and had the rough handed childhood so many had had. He was easily in tears though over anything dealing with his grandchildren. I cry easily discussing any of the hurts we experienced during the wars. I can't even really talk about those we knew who have suicided. I can type about it. But I really can't utter much of a clear word.

    I have Boehneritis :)


    That would be a (none / 0) (#34)
    by CoralGables on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:02:02 PM EST
    Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Speaker.

    Please paraphrase Alexander correctly.

    However, not nearly as bad as those he was attempting to control.


    Krugman may have (none / 0) (#42)
    by KeysDan on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:16:50 PM EST
    wanted to "soften" the Disney way.  But, Krugman should not hold back, tell us what he really thinks.

    Ladies and Gentlemen... (none / 0) (#33)
    by kdog on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 12:55:27 PM EST
    your 2015 NL East Division Champion New York Mets!!!

    Magic Number for NLDS homefield advantage stands at 5.  

    Almost as much fun as watching the Mets celebrate was watching the Nationals kill each other.  LOL

    Congrats Kdog!!! (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 02:09:55 PM EST
    Only you can make me happy to see the Mets do well!

    Believe it's safe to say (none / 0) (#35)
    by CoralGables on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    Papelbon's stay in DC will be short. Indeed his season in DC is already over.

    Equally safe to say... (none / 0) (#39)
    by kdog on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:14:09 PM EST
    Matt Williams will be shown the same door as Papelbon.

    Too bad for the Nats Bryce Harper's lack of hustle and piss-poor attitude can't be separated from the insanely talented player and shown the door.  If I played with him, I'd wanna choke him out too.


    I suspect (none / 0) (#49)
    by CoralGables on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:23:16 PM EST
    You'd  love to have Harper on your team as he'd be the Mets leader in HR's, Batting Avg, OB% and Slugging %

    At what cost to the clubhouse? (none / 0) (#56)
    by kdog on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 01:43:46 PM EST
    I'll take loveable Yoenis over bratty Bryce tyvm.

    MVP Player, LVP Attitude....but he's still young, he might grow up.


    Harper is so much better than Yoenis (none / 0) (#62)
    by CoralGables on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 02:05:59 PM EST
    that he makes Cespedes look like therestofus.

    Perhaps... (none / 0) (#65)
    by kdog on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 02:28:59 PM EST
    too bad for Harper he didn't take up golf or tennis, he'd probably excel as well as win at those individual sports.  

    But this is baseball, you need to play well with others, and that is not a skill in Harper's wheelhouse.  


    Good for the Mets (none / 0) (#61)
    by Zorba on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 02:03:51 PM EST
    While I am still a die-hard Cardinals fan, and I truly hope they go all the way, if the Cards don't win the National League title, I will root for whoever wins the National League.
    National League, all the way!

    Yeah, me too (none / 0) (#63)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 02:08:51 PM EST
    Even if both the Cards and the Mets beat the Cubs...I'll never cheer for the American League!

    Yes... (none / 0) (#67)
    by kdog on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 02:32:53 PM EST
    very rare to root for an AL team, has to be a very special case like last year's Royals to root for the bush league.  

    National League all the way...like my Little League coaches always said, "if you wanna hit, you have to play the field."  


    It's only a matter of time (none / 0) (#74)
    by jbindc on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 03:18:49 PM EST
    Before the National League will be forced to play with 9 real batters instead of 8 and one who is basically a wasted at-bat. (And let's face it, the NL has multiple DH's anyway, since their pitchers are generally pulled earlier than AL pitchers).

    But I will be at Citi Field Saturday night rooting on the Mets, and their pitcher who may bat once or twice, and will probably get two (or more) outs.


    Ya don't know what you're missing... (none / 0) (#84)
    by kdog on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 03:47:52 PM EST
    when you miss the pitcher at the plate...especially when that pitcher is Bartolo Colon.  

    Of all the highlights this year, Bartolo's 8 hits and 4 rbis are near the top of my list.   Wasted at bat?  Not when Colon got lumber in his hand...you will be entertained.


    And the National League... (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by kdog on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 03:54:01 PM EST
    will never adopt the DH, if anything the American League will end the failed DH experiment and start playing real ball again.

    It was a gimmick to sell tickets, and will always be a gimmick no matter how long it lasts...think Bill Veeck signing Eddie Gaedell.


    Well, that's how I feel (none / 0) (#103)
    by Zorba on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 05:17:02 PM EST
    But I'm not so sure that the AL will do away with the DH and that the NL will never adopt it.
    Fans like to see hits, after all.  Not all of them appreciate the subtleties of the game, and the fine line that managers have to walk in deciding whether to pull a pitcher who is pitching well, but the team needs a hit.

    They've been saying that since ... (none / 0) (#118)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 03:20:13 AM EST
    kdog: "And the National League will never adopt the DH, if anything the American League will end the failed DH experiment and start playing real ball again."

    ... I was playing high school ball. It's not going to happen. If the designated hitter is a "failed experiment," then it's one that's somehow lasted for 42 seasons since Jan. 1973

    Further, the DH has since been adopted by the minor leagues, high school and college baseball, so as much as I might share your dislike of the DH, I seriously doubt that it'll be abandoned any time soon.

    On the contrary, I'm afraid that there will be increased pressure on MLB to unify the DH rule and compel the National League to adopt it. And eventually, the opposition to the DH will sound increasingly like thos long-ago purists in Chicago who used to say that there would never be a night game at Chicago's Wrigley Field, because -- well, you know, tradition and all.



    The only time (none / 0) (#76)
    by CST on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 03:22:35 PM EST
    I'll ever root for a NL team is if they're playing the Yankees.

    Even if the Cubbies, (none / 0) (#72)
    by Zorba on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 02:59:42 PM EST
    our biggest rivals, win, I will root for them over any American League team.  ;-)

    Far out no more (none / 0) (#73)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 03:14:07 PM EST
    They started showering (none / 0) (#77)
    by jbindc on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 03:22:58 PM EST
    No we didn't (none / 0) (#82)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 03:37:27 PM EST
    No They Got Good Jobs... (none / 0) (#91)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 04:26:32 PM EST
    ...and started voting for their 401k's right after making sure their kids wear bike helmets.

    I wish I was kidding, but to me at least, all the hippie ideals, which I really like, have pretty much vanished.  You still aren't anything in America unless you are a producer/consumer.  We are as shallow as a nation can get, we worship the famous and undergo dangerous medical procedures in hopes of becoming one of the glitterati.

    I think many of the hippies, either gave up or went straight because now my options only seem to vary in the social scale, in the financial, everyone looks the same with the exception Sanders, whose ideas have almost a zero chance of succeeding because greed straighten out a lot of hippies.

    We are still waging unwinnable wars, the military has become a country in-itself, the government has more power to observe us then ever.  Just seems to me like everything they fought for got lost, well except for weed and alternative clothing, which is probably more related to time than a movement.

    Where did they all go is what I would like to know, especially the musicians & artists who weren't afraid of authority, who spoke about the ills of society rather than copyright infringement and shiny rims.


    You didn't read it did you (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 04:34:18 PM EST
    It says we won.  I sort agree.  I'm still a hippy.  Most everyone I knew then is still a hippy.
    Particularly the childless ones.  As you say parenthood sucks.

    No offense to parents.

    But pot is legal in two states and counting.  LGBT rights are farther than anyone believed they would be at this point.

    Cheer up.


    I Got Half Way Through... (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 05:04:05 PM EST
    ...I stopped when they gave credit to the hippies for the increasing divorce rate.  

    I just feel like we live in this machine run by corporations and the military, where if you step outside your role, the hammer comes down to put you back in your place or prison.

    I know it says they won, but come one, legal weed and LGBT rights isn't exactly what they were after, and the latter isn't exactly all due to hippies, time is as much as part of that as anything.

    I just feel like they said the hell with once the 70's rolled over.  Keep in mind I was born in 70, so it's all second hand, and maybe I am idealizing the actual times, but I always thought that era represented people with principles, principles and ideals that were to better people, things you simply don't find in any volume today.  They were the far left, which today is almost non-existent.

    Who protested Iraq, Cindy Sheehan ?!?!?!  No one give a F anymore about human issues, they give them lip service once in a while.  Yeah,  like Obama and LGBT rights, has it not been popular he would not have gave it a second thought.  He certainly did jump on-board out of principle.


    Shared suffering? (5.00 / 1) (#147)
    by christinep on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 05:00:45 PM EST
    As the Vietnam War grew and more people died ... and more were drafted <to die or be wounded> the opposition grew.  As one who participated in the opposition to the war from the mid-60s, I can say that the Vietnam War and all it represented galvanized an age.

    In the early and mid-sixties, meanwhile, the folksong style of singing became increasingly popular with us children being born and growing up after WWII. With JFK's election, the world seemed rosy ... then, JFK was killed.  Contemporaneously, the drive for Civil Rights had been growing since the days of Little Rock ... and many young people felt a calling to help in Selma and throughout the South.  More killings with Martin Luther King's death followed shortly thereafter with that night in California and Bobby Kennedy's death.  

    Idealism mixed with new thoughts with the realities of brutal assassinations in our county.  And, all the while, our land became more mired in Vietnam.  You couldn't keep count of the coffins. Because of that, the early rah-rah (or semi-rah) of going to fight wore off.  It wore off especially for those of us coming of age at the time; and, we all had friends or relatives who were killed, wounded, or narrowly escaped Vietnam.  He!% to remember: The lies of Tonkin, Cambodian excursions, "the light at the end of the tunnel," political pandering, etc.  

    Scott: I do think that you idealize the age.  While there were some very heroic actions by people at all levels, there was the same sense--for a long time--of powerlessness under the auspices of McNamara, Haig, and the whole lot.  Looking back, I am thankful to have been so fully active during the 60s ... but, I have also come to believe that <in the very ironic sense> the Draft caused most people to close ranks Against the War.  Strange how that happens.  

    On a less somber note, the great music of the 60s really was spawned by the turbulent times.  Thank goodness for our shared music.

    Oh, I do believe that the Culture Wars are finally drawing to a close.  And, we did win! Look around at the strides in every area of personal and community life.  Age, demographics, learning, nose to the grindstone.  

    Don't give up. You have a special challenge that we did not have.  That is: Cynicism and Overcoming It.  What I forgot to mention that added to that challenge, of course, was Watergate and later government scandals such as Iran Contra.  True scandals, you know.  The shadow of cynicism confronting modern generations in this age of disconnected connectivity is not unlike the shadows on the cave walls. Until something is defined, it is hard to prevail.


    The draft absolutely (none / 0) (#148)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 06:03:14 PM EST
    Galvanized opposition to the war.  It's a lesson learned.  It's the reason we now have an "all volunteer army".  The Vietnam era made them understand if they wanted to wage unending open ended war that no one would really pay that much attention to they had to stop drafting the sons of the affluent and start creating an environment that forced the children of the poor to volunteer.

    Guess what, it worked.


    Yes it did... (none / 0) (#201)
    by kdog on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 11:09:30 AM EST
    as did creating a police/surveillance/prison state that has created a fear of protest and a sense of hopelessness amongst youth who would be otherwise inclined to get involved.  

    We won the culture war, but they won the rest...economics, military industrial complex, etc.


    Well sure (none / 0) (#105)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 05:32:08 PM EST
    But the thing was about winning the culture war.   IMO we won the culture war.  I think most conservatives would agree.

    Was there light years more idealism and activism then? yes.  

    I was 19 in 1970.  The 70s was my hippie decade.   I know it had really crested and started to normalize by then.   Then the 80s happened.   Reagan and AIDS.   I believe it would have been much worse without the gains made in the previous two decades.


    Thank (none / 0) (#107)
    by FlJoe on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 05:54:14 PM EST
    (insert preferred deity here) the hippies won the culture war, it remains one of our last bastions in the war against the oligarchy. The counter-culture/rebel/rage against the machine seeds strewn in the 60's still lie fertile and still dangerous to the powers that be.

    I suppose you think (none / 0) (#83)
    by sj on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 03:47:38 PM EST
    that's funny. It's actually pretty insulting.

    It's ok (none / 0) (#86)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 03:51:28 PM EST
    It must be upsetting to be wrong about everything

    Trump: The Meaning of Populism, v 0000.01 (none / 0) (#88)
    by Mr Natural on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 04:05:08 PM EST
    Well that tears it (none / 0) (#89)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 04:13:18 PM EST
    I can blow off Robert Reich not Josh Barrow.  He's just to cute.

    Goodbye dreams of republican populism


    Shocker (none / 0) (#92)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 04:27:53 PM EST
    Spider in the house. (none / 0) (#104)
    by lentinel on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 05:28:58 PM EST
    I love this one.

    Been there.


    Born Dead, Still Weird (none / 0) (#109)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 06:24:37 PM EST
    I've been watching this excellent doc about Gahan Wilson.

    Why is the fact he was the Ivory Snow baby creepy?  Dunno.  But it is.

    Obv an early Ivory Snow baby, and not (none / 0) (#116)
    by Mr Natural on Mon Sep 28, 2015 at 10:45:41 PM EST
    the infant held by Marilyn Chambers.  Because he was older than she, which would have made an even creepier image.

    Recipe request. (none / 0) (#133)
    by caseyOR on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 12:35:10 PM EST
    Anybody have a good recipe for squash soup? Or squash/apple soup?

    I have never had either, but I want to try it. I finally have an immersion blender, so I can easily make all kinds of pureed soups. Yea!

    The endless recipes for (none / 0) (#136)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 01:28:55 PM EST
    Anything and everything has become one f my favorite things about the inter webs.

    I just jumped in and found one for creamy beef and mushroom soup for lunch.

    It was great.   I ate too much.


    I do a butternut squash soup, that (none / 0) (#137)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 01:38:32 PM EST
    has a little heat to it...

    I cut and de-seed a good-sized butternut squash, brush it with oil and put some peeled garlic in the "wells," drizzle a little more oil in there, and salt and pepper everything.

    I then roast the squash in a 400 degree oven until you can get a knife into the flesh easily.

    Cool and peel, and cut into chunks.

    Then, chop up some onion, carrots and celery and a few more cloves of garlic if you like garlic - saute in a little oil, salt and pepper until soft.  Add the squash, the roasted garlic, and 4 cups of chicken stock, bring to a simmer, cover and let it go for 20-30 minutes.

    You can puree with your immersion blender until smooth, then taste for salt and pepper and add more if necessary.  You can also add more stock if it seems too thick.

    At this point, you can also add some finely chopped chiles in adobo (half of one is usually enough), along with a little of the adobo itself (or skip the chile and just add a little adobo sauce), and run the blender through it.  I'd start with a little, and taste for heat level.

    You can also, if you like it creamier, add some cream or half-and-half - but be careful not to heat too high because the milk could curdle.

    It's delicious, also, served with a blob of sour cream in it!

    Hope you like it - it's a great fall soup, good with a nice salad and some good bread.


    Yum! (none / 0) (#140)
    by Zorba on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 02:27:59 PM EST
    Sounds great, Anne!  I'm saving it to try soon.
    (As soon as the weather cools off again here!)

    Chris Hayes is interviewing Al Gore (none / 0) (#151)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 07:29:22 PM EST
    It's very good.  You should watch it online.

    (Big disappointment - it's been going on for 20 minutes and he STILL has not asked or encouraged him to run against Hillary)

    Interesting side note
    The subject is the environment.
    You may have seen that Shell is abandoning its effort to drill in the Arctic.   You may have heard me mention I have friends who live in Mercer Island WA.  it turns out that guy is an old friend who I know from my old Merchant Marine days.  He now has a company that moves very large equipment around in the ocean.  His company was supposed to move the drilling equipment for Shell.  Not anymore.
    He is really not a bad guy.  He's an old hippy just like me and seemed apologetic telling me that.

    Is there (none / 0) (#157)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 08:30:11 PM EST
    anybody that you don't know??? LOL. Or any inside contacts you don't have?

    That ones (none / 0) (#159)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 08:58:26 PM EST
    Not going to make me many friends

    Also I said "he has a company" (none / 0) (#160)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 29, 2015 at 09:06:27 PM EST
    Sorry.  That's not what I meant.  He WORKS for a company.
    But he's been doing it for s long time and is a big cheese as far as I can tell

    Foss Marine


    Mercer Island is very posh... (none / 0) (#165)
    by fishcamp on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 07:45:38 AM EST
    It is (none / 0) (#170)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 08:43:29 AM EST
    But they have been there since the early 70s.   Their house is amazing but they built it.  With their hands.

    Kim Davis MEETS WITH the Pope (none / 0) (#168)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 08:28:17 AM EST
    cue apologists

    Attorneys for Kentucky official Kim Davis claimed Tuesday that she had a secret meeting with Pope Francis during his trip to America -- and said he told the defiant county clerk to "stay strong."

    You know what pisses me off the most (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 08:41:50 AM EST
    About this?

    That it was "secret",

    Clearly he knew how this would play wth gullible hicks like me who were eager to be fleeced with a few kumbaya bones pitched in my direction.

    I'm done.  This one is no different from the others except he is smarter.  And therefore more dangerous.

    You were absolutely right Dadler.  I stand corrected.

    Vague statements of support are one thing.  An actual honest to god audience with the Pope for this hateful bigot is so totally different.

    I eagerly await the rationalization said.


    I'll wait for the proof, first (none / 0) (#171)
    by jbindc on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 08:58:12 AM EST
    You know, the pictures her lawyers say exist.

    Maybe they do, but I'm skeptical.


    Yeah! That it! (none / 0) (#172)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 09:04:44 AM EST
    They just "made up" and audience with the Pope.

    However (none / 0) (#173)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 09:07:12 AM EST
    I would be surprised if the Vatican doesn't try to suppress that proof.

    There was a reason it was secret.  I'm pretty sure they will not be happy with this announcement.


    So, what you're saying is (none / 0) (#174)
    by jbindc on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 09:08:10 AM EST
    If you were a county clerk who felt persecuted for your religious beliefs, and you had a private audience with the Pope because he is on your side of being a religious conscientious objector, you're going to wait (even after he left the country) to release the photographic proof?  Are they getting these pictures developed at Fotomat???

    You are such a tiny ball of (1.00 / 1) (#177)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 09:14:05 AM EST

    Why do you assume there was pictures?  If it was a secret meeting would it not make sense to disallow cameras?  Not a hard thing to do around the Pope.


    However (1.00 / 1) (#178)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 09:16:19 AM EST
    Your obtuse knee jerk illustrates the brilliance of it.   No "proof"?  People like you can just shove there head in the sand and "believe" whatever you want.

    I think the (none / 0) (#180)
    by KeysDan on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 09:31:43 AM EST
    disbelief is palpable. That is why so many are questioning its happening.  For Davis and her husband to meet, supposedly alone for 15 minutes, in a very, very crowded schedule, is unbelievable.

      And, for the Pope to, later, on the plane back to Rome entertain a question that included the issue of gay marriage (with Clerk Davis in the news) and tell reporters that "I do not recall all the cases of .....conscientious objection...." encroaches on a violation of the 8th Commandment.  Francis better hit the confessional, if this is true.  


    Why would they tell (none / 0) (#182)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 09:35:22 AM EST
    Such an easily disprovable lie?



    And (none / 0) (#183)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 09:36:13 AM EST
    Of course disbelief is palpable.   It's unbelievable.

    Google is your friend (none / 0) (#179)
    by jbindc on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 09:25:10 AM EST

    Mat Staver, the lawyer for Davis, said the session lasted 10 minutes and was just between the Pope, his client and her husband. He said pictures were taken and will be released at some point. He didn't say when or why they weren't being released immediately.

    Pictures were (none / 0) (#181)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 09:34:06 AM EST
    Reportedly taken.

    And are in the possession of the Vatican.   That is who must release them.   Yeah, we will wait for that.

    Your assumption that Davis took pictures and "only has to release them to price it" seems to be like many of your assumptions.


    So why would the Vatican (none / 0) (#184)
    by jbindc on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 09:43:29 AM EST
    Take pictures of a SECRET meeting, one they obviously would not anyone to find out about??

    I find it hard to believe that and her husband were snuck into the Apostolic Nunciature with NOT ONE person seeing.  Do you fully appreciate just how many people were there with cameras at all times???  Do you realize how visible the Nunciature is to the street???


    Breath (none / 0) (#185)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 09:45:10 AM EST
    Oops (none / 0) (#186)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 09:46:10 AM EST

    And while you are breathing (5.00 / 1) (#187)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 09:50:51 AM EST
    If you can at the same time, ask yourself why

    But the Rev. Federico Lombardi, a Vatican spokesman, didn't deny the encounter took place but told The Associated Press that he had no comment on the topic.

    One more (none / 0) (#189)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 10:08:39 AM EST
    From Scitts link

    n response to news reports of the purported meeting, the Vatican released a statement saying the Holy See 'does not confirm the meeting, nor does it deny the meeting.'
    This was unusual for the Vatican, which normally issues either denials or confirmations.

    Neither confirm nor deny is a bad sign.. (none / 0) (#194)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 10:39:40 AM EST
    So, he would actually take time away from say, visiting poor children in shelters and people in hospice care and prison to meet with Kim Davis?

    Say it ain't so, Joe.


    What I don't understand is, why (none / 0) (#190)
    by Anne on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 10:16:59 AM EST
    wouldn't the Pope want a public meeting?  If he believes, as he said he does, in the validity of conscientious objection, why not be public about it with a very public example?

    Too political, maybe?  

    I guess what this comes down to for me is that I don't believe a word that comes out of Kim Davis' mouth; I am now more than ever convinced that she may have started out with pure motives, but I think she's fallen in love with her own story and all the attention she's getting as a result.  I've begun to question whether what she says is from her heart, or from a desire for attention.

    Makes her sound a little like Trump, doesn't it?

    Oh, well.


    Why wouldn't he want a public meeting? (none / 0) (#192)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 10:28:26 AM EST
    Is that not obvious?  

    He was vague about his statements of support for her.   In spite of the fact that it was clear to most of us that is exactly what he was talking about.

    Let's play this out logically.

    One of two things is going to happen.  The Vatican is going to admit this happened, at which case there will be some pretty red faces, or they will not admit it happened.  
    Now, ask yourself, if they did this one would assume knowing that the Vatican might at best no comment (explain that please) or that they would deny it, might one not assume they have some other "proof" they are holding?
    In which the Pope is included in the red face brigade.

    This will be fascinating to watch unfold.

    I would just like anyone to answer two questions.

    Why tell a lie that's easy to disprove?

    Why will the Vatican not confirm or deny it?

    Especially the last one please.


    According to an article in (5.00 / 1) (#196)
    by Anne on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 10:57:19 AM EST

    If anyone suspected that Pope Francis didn't really mean the strong words he spoke on religious freedom last week in the United States - that he was phoning it in, while his real concerns were elsewhere - claims that he held a private meeting with Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis certainly should lay that suspicion to rest.

    The meeting was first reported by Robert Moynihan of Inside the Vatican magazine. A Vatican spokesman said Wednesday, "I do not deny that the meeting took place, but I have no comments to add," which, in effect, is a way of allowing the report to stand.

    Taken together with his unscheduled stop to see the Little Sisters of the Poor, the Davis encounter means Francis has expressed personal support to leading symbols of the two most contentious fronts in America's religious freedom debates - the contraception mandates imposed by the Obama administration, and conscientious objection on gay marriage.

    Before unpacking what it means, let's roll out the necessary caveats.

    First of all, the fact that someone arranged a brief encounter between Francis and Davis does not necessarily mean that Francis initiated the contact, or even that he necessarily grasps all the dimensions of her case. By her own account it was an extremely brief greeting, just long enough for the pope to tell Davis to "stay strong" and to give her a rosary. Asking for prayers and offering a blessed rosary to individuals following a meeting is a customary gesture for Pope Francis.

    There's more - and you can take from it what you will.

    What I take from it is that this is the Pope, he's going to support the Catholic doctrine, and while I appreciate his comments on climate change and the poor, I am not under any illusions that he's softening the Church's stances on same-sex marriage, abortion or birth control.

    What I do feel more than a little is a bit played, I guess.  Like he softened us up with all his progressive-sounding pronouncements - the things he, as Pope has no real power to enforce - while quietly making it clear that in the areas where he does have the power, he's not monkeying with core beliefs.

    He kind of bright-shiny-objected us: "listen to me sounding like a liberal, and pay no attention to my meeting with nuns who have a case before the Supreme Court, or this defiant Kentucky clerk imposing her beliefs on others."

    As I've said, I'm not Catholic, so he's not the boss of me, but now that the hoopla has died down and everyone's had a chance to stop being dazzled, it's a little easier to see the strategery..


    Exactly (none / 0) (#199)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 11:02:48 AM EST
    I feel the same.  

    Actually I'm pissed BECAUSE I feel played.


    One thing (none / 0) (#198)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 11:00:49 AM EST
    Davis says the pope gave them rosaries.

    I'm not a rosary expert but I doubt if the Pope gets his gift rosaries at WalMart.

    Anyone know if Pope rosaries are identifiable?


    Apparently, he gives them away all (none / 0) (#200)
    by Anne on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 11:08:01 AM EST
    the time - pretty standard thing.

    Charlie Pierce has a few thoughts on the whole thing:

    This is, obviously, the dumbest thing this Pope ever has done. It undermines everything he accomplished on his visit here. It undermines his pastoral message, and it diminishes his stature by involving him in a petty American political dispute. A secret meeting with this nutball? That undermines any credibility he had accrued on the issue of openness and transparency. Moreover, it means that he barbered the truth during the press conference he held on his flight back to Rome, in which he spoke vaguely about religious liberty, and freedom of conscience, but claimed, "I can't have in mind all cases that can exist about conscience objection."  He certainly knew the details of this case.


    So not only has the pope trashed whatever good will he'd accrued here, he (or someone) did so through a publication aligned with the forces in the church opposed to everything for which his papacy allegedly stood. He did a really stupid thing and he (or someone) is dealing with the dingier elements of the religious media to get the news out. Somebody needs to get fired behind this. Who are you to judge, Papa Francesco? I'm afraid you just did. I will pray for you, because, damn, son, you need it.

    Would it be bad for me to say: "Oy?"


    Just as Bad... (none / 0) (#175)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 09:09:15 AM EST
    ....KD couldn't wait 5 mins to let everyone know about the 'secret' meeting.

    I never thought I would meet the Pope. Who am I to have this rare opportunity? I am just a County Clerk who loves Jesus and desires with all my heart to serve him.

    Oddly enough the Vatican is neither confirming or denying the meeting.



    You know what (none / 0) (#176)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 09:11:52 AM EST
    I hope it's a lie.  It would discredit Davis forever and give me back a tiny portion of the warm and fuzzy Frank left me with.

    Some secret.. (none / 0) (#191)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 10:20:03 AM EST
    I seriously doubt, with all his full itinerary and with all the suffering and spiritual malaise going on in this country that Pope would make time to have a "secret meeting" with that deluded backwoods harpie.

    IN other news (none / 0) (#188)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 09:54:45 AM EST
    Russia is launching air strikes in Syria

    kdog & the culture war (none / 0) (#202)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 11:32:28 AM EST

    Yes it did... (none / 0) (#201)
    by kdog on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 11:09:30 AM EST
    as did creating a police/surveillance/prison state that has created a fear of protest and a sense of hopelessness amongst youth who would be otherwise inclined to get involved.  
    We won the culture war, but they won the rest...economics, military industrial complex, etc.

    You know kdog, I've wondered if "allowing us" to win the culture war was not a distraction so they could do all the rest.

    After all, do we really think they care who is screwing who as long as they get everything else you mention.

    Am I too cynical?  Is that possble?

    Well, all the screwing and drugs are kind (none / 0) (#203)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 11:40:07 AM EST
    of the ultimate distraction, aren't they?

    Kind of like the boys romping around in the amusement park in Pinnochio right before the gates slam shut..

    Here we go (none / 0) (#204)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 12:33:18 PM EST
    The Vatican on Wednesday confirmed that controversial Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis met with Pope Francis on Thursday during his U.S. visit.


    Oh well (none / 0) (#206)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 12:43:37 PM EST
    those kids in the homeless shelter could just wait for a while until he finished with Kim Davis.

    I wonder if Francis is aware that many American fundementalists say Catholics are destined for the Lake of Fire?

    FYI "Secrecy?" (none / 0) (#207)
    by christinep on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 12:48:44 PM EST
    Popes have many short meetings with many people.  They are not announced because they are typically last minute/spontaneously scheduled greetings (see, e.g., the meeting with the family that drove by old van from Argentina to see the Pope, and--when it was suggested to the Pope that he might want to greet them between meetings, the Pope did greet them.)  These are not calendar events; there is no transcript.  

    Remember: The Pope heads a Church ... and, this Pope meets with all manner of people, imparting his Blessing to those who seek him out.  Saints & Sinners alike, so to speak. If the Pope wanted to deliver a formal or near-formal message to our government or any government, he would ... he knows how to make public statements ... and, in this case (in which I understand that Vatican reps/local staff are reported to have arranged for the courtesy & blessing as they do with others throughout Vatican trips) neither Pope nor staff made any such comment.  To counsel a person to stay strong in one's beliefs--quite frankly--is what this Pope does ... nowhere, does it appear that the Pope injected himself into U.S. governance issues.  

    Once again, Howdy, not an apology.  The Church has its beliefs ... the government has its position.  He gets to express his beliefs as to marriage just as you get to express yours ... from him anyway I see no sign of condemnation.  He gets to bless people ... even people with whom we disagree.  

    I have no intention of trying to tone down your anger.  And, I have no intention of holding back when I say:  That level of anger toward all religious--or especially toward anyone who doesn't share all your beliefs, positions-- has an ugly narrowness as its own.  


    Addendum on religion (none / 0) (#209)
    by christinep on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 01:15:35 PM EST
    Religion is not a popularity contest.  And, for those who need a Church leader or any leader to agree with one on all major issues, I think that need or want becomes an invitation to disillusionment.  Like CST, I expect the Pope to insist on matters traditionally associated with the Church ... he IS the Pope after all.

    Although some might feel disappointed, I cannot argue to alleviate that feeling.  I can say that this Pope has opened up many avenues for all of us within and without the Church ... and that his openness, humility, and attitude of non-judgmental forgiveness all the way around is something in short supply heretofore among his predecessors and among all world leaders. Whatever the feelings or reflection, I think it is fair to say that Pope Francis is "playing" no one ... sometimes we won't agree with him (as is the case with anyone, if you think about it) and lots of times we will.  

    The Charles Pierce piece linked to this (none / 0) (#211)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 01:28:26 PM EST
    In the National Review

    Why the Popes meeting with Kim Davis matters

    They are right.  It matters.   Her bigotry was just entirely validated by the fu@king Pope.  You are too smart not to realize how much this matters.

    That response was to CST (none / 0) (#212)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 01:29:39 PM EST
    Christine's 5s keep moving your comments.

    Where the 5 christine? (none / 0) (#214)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 01:35:58 PM EST

    Denial (none / 0) (#215)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 01:51:34 PM EST

    I think that about covers it.

    I taking a nap now.

    Re Howdy's #166 (none / 0) (#216)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 02:06:24 PM EST
    Howdy, you define yourself with your potty mouth and your inability to debate. And since you want to argue with plain words from the dictionary you prove my point.

    I stand behind what I posted on my blog. And I remind you all of the caricatures of Bush, mostly as a chimp/monkey, that was published by the Left.

    If you can't stand the heat...insult and whine.

    Exactly, Christine. (none / 0) (#217)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 03:54:26 PM EST
    christinep: "Popes have many short meetings with many people. They are not announced because they are typically last minute / spontaneously scheduled greetings[.] These are not calendar events; there is no transcript."

    Pope Francis also reportedly met with Mark Wahlberg. Should we therefore assume that His Holiness enjoyed and recommends "Ted 2"?


    Where's Father Guido Sarducci when he's needed? (none / 0) (#220)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 08:00:54 PM EST
    Natural (none / 0) (#221)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 30, 2015 at 08:21:38 PM EST
    Saint of Genocide.  I like it.

    Re the Pope (none / 0) (#223)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 01, 2015 at 10:15:37 AM EST
    Yeah but he believes in man made global warming. Surely you aren't going to reject him just because he is against gay marriage and abortion...not to mention birth control.

    Yup... (none / 0) (#224)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Oct 01, 2015 at 12:47:45 PM EST
    ...now that the Pope has supported discrimination, republicans can _____ (fill in the blank).

    • once again sleep at night
    • move the fainting couch to the russian spam room
    • pull their undies out
    • hold another vote to repeal Obamacare

    Feel free to to add.

    Reports today indicate that another meeting (none / 0) (#225)
    by christinep on Thu Oct 01, 2015 at 03:17:18 PM EST
    was held this year--with no or little national coverage or announcement--when Pope Francis granted a short meeting with a transgendered individual from Spain.  

    Some suggest that the meetings/greetings with all manner of individuals on this earth may show a compassionate & caring pontiff...to all.  I guess that would be confusing for pigeon-holer types.