Wednesday Open Thread

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

< Obama Commutes 214 More Sentences | Rio Summer Olympics Begin >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    4 ballot questions out today in MA (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by CST on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 04:28:12 PM EST
    Question 1 expands the number of legal slot parlors from 1 to 2.  We already legalized gambling for up to three casinos and 1 slot parlor back in 2011.  But due to the glacial pace of development in MA - only the slot parlor has actually been built, although 2 casinos are under development.  To be honest, on the legality issue, I'm inclined to say yes, but on the economic viability front - this seems like overkill.  Especially considering that we haven't even built casinos yet.

    Question 2 expands the Charter school cap.  This is the one I'm most conflicted on. Charter schools in MA have shown to be pretty successful at educating poor and minority students.  Teachers in MA have high salaries in general - although Charter teachers likely benefit from the strong teachers union in the public schools, since they sort of set the market rate.  Right now I think it's a decent balance, I worry that this might upset that balance.  Leaning no, but on the fence.  I'm sure many people here are strongly against charters - I don't feel that way - not the way it's been done in MA, there is something to be said for providing opportunity to communities lacking that, even if they only reach a small number of students.  But I can certainly understand a lot of the complaints.

    Question 3 - would ban certain types of farming - specifically all eggs would have to be cage free.  Again, on the fence.  I already practice this in my own shopping habits, but I have a bit of trouble telling everyone else they have to.  The state is already expensive to live in.  Then again, it doesn't raise the price THAT much and I do think that as a society we need to move toward better farming practices.

    Question 4 - Legalize pot for everyone over 21.  Duh.

    Seeing reports from Kansas (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by ruffian on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 04:50:14 PM EST
    that tea partiers were resoundingly trounced in primaries. Moderate (well, for Kansas) GOP candidates won. Perhaps a return to sanity is possible in the next Congress.

    Hoping that the Kansas results (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by Peter G on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 08:40:29 PM EST
    bode ill in some way for Kris Kobach, KS secretary of state, who is the evil genius behind both the national plague of vote ID laws and the efforts to enact local (city and state) anti-immigrant laws all over the country.

    Apparently Kobach hosts evangelical (none / 0) (#19)
    by jondee on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 10:08:04 PM EST
    church services right in his Kansas secretary of state office; said church services seeming to function in part as a kind of unofficial conservative loyalty test for those 'invited' to attend. A way to separate the wheat from the chaff, as it were.

    Giddily posted about Huelskamp (none / 0) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 04:58:58 PM EST
    Last night.  

    Establishment weighed in (none / 0) (#4)
    by TrevorBolder on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 08:05:56 PM EST
    With serious outside money.

    Huelskamp, who received 43.5 percent of the vote, blamed his loss on $3 million of super PAC money that went to support his opponent

    That proved costly for the third-term congressman on Tuesday, as he lost the GOP nomination to continue representing Kansas' largely rural 1st District to Roger Marshall, a political newcomer who had the backing of powerful farming and business groups.

    Huelskamp is an idiot (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 08:25:07 PM EST
    Who was actually kicked off the agriculture committee for being an insufferable azzhole.  I'm sure he is blaming outside money, Obama, Hillary and aliens.  He lost because he was an idiot and an azzhole who was not doing his job representing his constituents.

    He was so well liked by us colleges (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 08:30:58 PM EST
    No (none / 0) (#9)
    by TrevorBolder on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 08:45:04 PM EST
    He didn't blame Obama or Hillary. because they did nothing to hurt his campaign. Nor aliens either.
    But there was 3 million of outside money that poured into the campaign, that might have made a difference

    He lost by 13 points (none / 0) (#14)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 09:16:32 PM EST
    Maybe if he was not so despised he might have gotten some pac money of his own.  Poor him.



    What you (none / 0) (#15)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 09:18:26 PM EST
    are seeing is money pouring in to get rid of tea party candidates. It may have made the difference here or it may not have. You know sometimes all the money in the world can't fix a bad candidate.

    There's a civil war going on in the GOP and the moderates are fighting back to take the party away from the conservatives.


    The establishment (none / 0) (#20)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 05:26:58 AM EST
    Will pick its spots carefully. This is a totally safe seat.
    And Huelskamp was reviled by the Establishment, they punished him , and the district, by kicking him off the Agriculture committee, making it easier for the establishment guy to win

    And that is fine with me for now (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by ruffian on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 07:11:45 AM EST
    Just getting back to establishment GOP congresspeople is a step in the right direction. I do think we will see more and more of it after Obama leaves office. Hmm, I wonder why his election brought the crazies out of the woodwork?

    Mostly (none / 0) (#61)
    by Jane in CA on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 06:32:46 PM EST
    It was the Affordable Care Act.

    The guy (none / 0) (#21)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 05:40:16 AM EST
    was a conservative whack job but it's more than that. The majority of Brownback's cronies went down to defeat in Kansas.

    Trevor seems to have (none / 0) (#90)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 08:27:33 AM EST
    Contracted whatever disease Trump has that makes him think that if he just says this stupid bullsh!t often enough and confidently enough it will be true.  It's illustrated well in the back and forth with Donald in this thread (I think) about "fixed" primaries.  

    Here is what ROLLCALL said about Huelskamp being kicked off the agriculture committee-

    Apart from Jones, all were rebellious right-wingers. Huelskamp and Amash voted against the budget proposed by Budget Chairman Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin in committee and on the floor, saying it did not cut spending fast enough. They also voted against the continuing resolution that is funding the government through the end of March. - See more at:

    This is how congress as always worked.   Trevor notwithstanding he was not punished "so the establishment guy can win" he was punished because he was an idiot and an azzhole.   Like I said.

    Now we will get the standard Trevor comment about how I "didn't read his comment".   I did actually.  I'm replying to the typical smarmy innuendo.  His specialty.


    You know (5.00 / 2) (#93)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 09:39:21 AM EST
    though if you spent any time watching the Benghazi hearings it was beyond obvious that conservatives have no idea how government works. They embrace the ignorance.

    The Tea Party rebellion created (none / 0) (#92)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 09:10:46 AM EST
    a momentary percieved opening for the Huelskamps of the world..

    A kind of rural radical libertarian anti-any-kind-of-regulation agenda embraced and promoted with a quasi-religious fervor and bankrolled by the "anti-establishment" Koch brothers..

    Trevor is one of the True Believers. That became glaringly apparent the other day when he couldn't stop using the Cliven Bundy-speak expression "jack booted EPA"..

    There's no arguing with a True Believer. They've seen the Light.


    Jack-booted EPA :D (none / 0) (#94)
    by FreakyBeaky on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 09:46:47 AM EST
    EPA does have a criminal investigation division that carries guns. But in general not real jack-booted.

    It all depends (none / 0) (#128)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 08:56:25 PM EST
    Upon perspective. If it was your family home or farm threatened with $35k daily fines, before you even get a hearing , for having created a stock pond on your property,  then you might consider that approach to be Jack Booted. I do.

    "Created a 'stockpond' on your property" (none / 0) (#129)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 09:04:09 PM EST
    By building a dam on a waterway that effected everyone on that river who is south of you.

    Incorrect once again (none / 0) (#142)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 05:31:24 AM EST

    Jack Booted thugs , the EPA

    But EPA won't budge, or even explain why it should be able to ignore the law's exemption for stock ponds."

    six-mile creek is not a "water of the United States." The water that flows over Johnson's property is return flow from upstream agricultural users as it makes its way to a controlled irrigation canal and reservoir. It is not a tributary of any traditional navigable water nor is there any significant nexus between it and any traditional navigable waters.

    I am familiar with EPA's approach (none / 0) (#136)
    by FreakyBeaky on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 10:13:55 PM EST
    It's very legalistic and by-the-book. If EPA has time and resources to propose a $35k fine over a stock pond ... I want to hear the other side of the story before jumping to conclusions.

    In any case, jackbooted it ain't. You don't like it, go to court.


    Fact check dot org (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 10:46:03 PM EST
    Ah. That explains it. (none / 0) (#141)
    by FreakyBeaky on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 02:23:13 AM EST
    Damming and diverting waterways will do it.

    Jack Booted it was (none / 0) (#143)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 05:47:06 AM EST

    sending Johnson a compliance order in January 2014 instructing him to remove the stock pond or face $37,500 in fines for every day he refused to do so.

    Shouldn't his case be heard before they fine him? The daily fine is Jack Booted tactics, meant to scare people into compliance even though the law is on their side


    et despite the victory, Wood said all of this could have been avoided if the EPA had simply listened to Johnson....
    "Stock ponds are exempt from the Clean Water Act, and the stream Andy dammed isn't under federal jurisdiction," Wood said. "It has to open into a navigable waterway to be subject to (the Clean Water Act), and this one doesn't; it flows into a manmade irrigation canal."

    would you be ok with the stock pond (none / 0) (#148)
    by ding7777 on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 11:13:10 AM EST
    if you were down stream from the flowing stock pond  pollutants?

    The EPA gave him multiple warnings (contrary to your jackbooted description) but he refused to seek a permit


    He received (none / 0) (#150)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 12:02:41 PM EST
    Permits from the State

    And the Courts found in his favor.

    The most objectionable part, the one that raises the Jack Booted imagery, is the threats of $35k daily fines, it is the intimidation factor, that anyone who dares challenge the authority of the EPA, and loses, will lose everything. As it takes 2 years to get to Court, as what happened in this case.
    Never mind that as the law is written, it appeared to be a open and shut case. But the threat of losing everything, must scare off so many people that they just knuckle under to the arbitrary edicts of the GOVERNMENT. I am just so confused though, I thought liberals would be on the side of the little guy, risking all to fight City Hall. Boy, that worm has turned


    Jack boot (none / 0) (#151)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 12:40:53 PM EST

    Your honor (none / 0) (#152)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 01:45:12 PM EST
    I rest my case

    Modern times....just logged into Facebook (5.00 / 4) (#6)
    by ruffian on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 08:29:25 PM EST
    and learned my aunt passed away yesterday morning.

    My mom, her sister,  passed away in 1989. She would not have been able to fathom this, even though they were about as close as Olivia De Havilland and Joan Fontaine.

    Thanks everyone (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by ruffian on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 07:17:01 PM EST
    Bright spot is that it has prompted a priceless email trail with my siblings of reminiscences of our mom and aunts. There won't be a service so we'll do our cyber service in their honor.

    I'm so sorry to hear that. (none / 0) (#10)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 08:45:25 PM EST
    Were you close to your aunt? Our family in Pasadena lived in close proximity to my mother's siblings, and I was always hanging out with my cousins, so  in many ways my aunts and uncles also served as my surrogate parents whenever Mom wasn't around.

    As we get older, it's always somewhat disconcerting to see members of the prior generations pass from the scene, which serves to remind us that or own time on Earth is also limited. My sincere condolences on your loss. May your next few days be filled with warm and happy memories of her and the times you shared.



    Thank you Donald, really appreciate the (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by ruffian on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 08:58:22 PM EST

    We were all a lot closer when I was a kid, and my aunt her daughters lived in Elgin and we in Rockford.  Her husband died suddenly at the age of 40 or so of a brain anuerism. She had three daughters, the youngest of which is about a year older than me, so we always looked forward to seeing them - they were so pretty and 'cool', but we did not see them all that often. Then when I was 19 my mom and sibs moved out to California, and about the same time she had a falling out with that sister.  I've only seen them all a few times since then, most recently about 12 years ago. Gees, it seems impossible it has been that long. But I have reconnected with my cousins somewhat on Facebook, so that has been nice.

    I'm the type that likes to keep everyone in touch, so I hate that we have not been closer. My cousins all have kids and grandkids - by far the most prolific wing of the family, and they seem to have such great relationships. I wish we were not all so scattered. I'dl love to be hanging out with them a lot!

    Actually one of them lives in Ellicot Maryland where they had the horrible floods over the weekend. She is having a hard time leaving since the road to her house was washed out.


    So sorry, ruffian. (5.00 / 4) (#17)
    by caseyOR on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 09:28:35 PM EST
    It is tough losing family members. We're connected to them, even the ones to whom we were not all that close. They were still family.

    Sometimes harder (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 09:30:13 PM EST
    If there are unresolved feelings

    This story (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by jbindc on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 06:40:11 AM EST
    Made me smile. The defense attorneys here should too. (And I expect the defendant to get real representation very soon).

    Missouri public defender, fed up with meager funding, appoints governor to defend assault suspect

    Fed up with what they say is "reprehensible" underfunding, Missouri public defenders are calling out their governor by forcing the man they blame for a lack of resources to take a case of his own.

    The state's top public defender laid out his grievances in a letter to Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon: A vetoed bill that would have lightened public defenders' caseloads. Repeated budget cuts. Unfairly withholding money allotted to the office.

    Using a power granted to him in a single line of state law, Missouri's top public defender appointed Nixon as attorney for a central Missouri man charged with assault. But the decision has little to do with the man's case -- it's an attention-grabbing cry for help in a state where public defenders have long said they are overworked and underfunded

    I'm thinking the governor would actually be conflicted out of representing a defendant, being that he is the head of the executive branch of government (and prosecutors are part of the executive branch), but I applaud the Public Defender's move here.

    Great piece (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by Nemi on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 07:49:36 AM EST
    with lots of great links (if you need 'ammunition'!) by Sandy Garossino What's written in the scars of Hillary Clinton:

    Until she ran for president, Clinton was the most admired woman in the world

    This might surprise you now, but according to Gallup, in 2015 Americans admired Hillary Clinton more than any other woman in the world. More than Michelle Obama, Malala Yousafzai or Oprah.

    A lot more.

    [...] Clinton's extraordinarily high approval rating during her tenure as Secretary of State, when she reached a high of 66%. That's far above anything Barack Obama achieved in his entire presidency, and it's well above even Michelle Obama today.


    Negative media coverage flipped perception

    Harvard Kennedy School's Shorenstein Center reports that in comparison with all other candidates, coverage of Hillary Clinton went overwhelmingly negative, with 84% of stories taking a negative slant. That compares with 43% negative reporting on Donald Trump and 17% on Bernie Sanders.

    To put it another way, the most qualified presidential candidate in history got twice the negative media as a racist four-time bankrupt con artist who is manifestly unfit for public office.

    And Trump won HUUGE on earned media, garnering an estimated $2 billion in free coverage for his campaign, just by February alone--more than twice the coverage accorded Hillary. [...]

    And it worked. Her approval ratings dropped like a rock.


    Clinton objectively rated the most honest candidate, yet is perceived as dishonest

    She's been rated by Politifact, the Pulitzer-prize-winning fact-checkers, as more honest than every other major candidate.

    And despite being widely perceived as a puppet of Wall Street, her Senate voting record is rated mainstream progressive--more progressive than Joe Biden's or Barack Obama's.

    Nate Silver ranks her record in liberal terms as comparable to Elizabeth Warren, and not at all distant from Bernie Sanders. [...]

    Even on the explosive issue of her emails, Clinton was singled out for special condemnation. Both Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice followed a similar approach to Clinton's. Yet after months of virtually non-stop negative coverage, in defiance of all independent assessments, it's almost an accepted fact that she's more dishonest than any of her colleagues or predecessors.

    Hmmm, woman as liar. What an awfully familiar stereotype.

    The most qualified candidate in history could lose to the least

    The most qualified presidential candidate in history is running against the least qualified, and it's a close race! [...]

    Sorry for the long post above (5.00 / 4) (#26)
    by Nemi on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 07:58:18 AM EST
    ... but actually I wanted to quote the whole piece! Instead -- ;) -- I'll post the author's reply to a hateful commenter -- whether pro-Bernie or pro-Trump is hard to tell. They often sound eerily similar:

    Thank you for commenting, Deborah. It may seem to you that Sanders got the short end of the stick in coverage, but in fact he got very little negative coverage, and certainly didn't undergo the scrutiny that Clinton faced.

    It might have been a much more interesting race if he had.

    I appreciate your comment that sexism plays no role in your opinion, though your focus on "power-hungry" (as if Bernie was not) Clinton's wardrobe makes a nice point.

    You may think that some other woman would make a better candidate, but let me ask this question: If a woman had sat as an independent in Congress for 25 years and produced only one bill in all that time, if she were unable to muster more than one or two supporters among the hundreds of senators and representatives she'd served with in all that time, if she were known for her attacks on her natural allies and had no international experience and no record of negotiating major agreements, would she have received so little negative media scrutiny as Bernie Sanders?

    Would all those voters flock to her with such certain conviction of her qualifications to serve as president?

    That's the real theme of my column.

    That (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 08:46:00 AM EST
    was an awesome response. Also can you imagine a crotchety elderly lady with gray hair going everywhere screaming about millionaires and billionaires named Bernice Sanders getting anywhere near the numbers Bernie got? She would have been laughed out of the primary.

    Not to mention (none / 0) (#48)
    by Nemi on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 03:57:52 PM EST
    looking as if she's combing her hair with a balloon. :)

    please don't post whole articles (none / 0) (#41)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 02:16:45 PM EST
    and limit yourself to a few paragraphs. It takes up too much bandwidth, violates copyright, and makes people have to scroll too long to see the next comment.

    I know (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Nemi on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 03:50:50 PM EST
    and why I already apologized. I just couldn't stop myself as Sandy Garossini points to so many important facts in that piece. Mea Culpa, Jeralyn.

    In a somewhat similar vein, this compilation of questions is currently 'making the rounds' on social media. Wish someone would question all the 'interrogators' appearing in that video, about how they see their own role in the 'Hillary Clinton is unlikeable'-meme gaining traction over the years. Over decennials actually.


    Watching Obamas pentagon presser (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 04:49:27 PM EST
    Thinking about some things we have come to take for granted.

    Like a smart engaged president who is capable of giving thoughtful serious answers to thoughtful serious questions.  Regardless if your agreement with the answers.

    Lest we forget (5.00 / 2) (#56)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 05:03:54 PM EST
    Trump is getting crushed (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by CST on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 11:55:29 AM EST
    with young voters:

    "The McClatchy poll shows Trump pulling just 1 in 10 votes -- 9 percent -- among Americans under 30 years old. Hillary Clinton is at 41 percent, while Johnson is at 23 percent and Stein is at 16 percent. Trump is basically tied with "undecided," which is at 8 percent."

    "A Fox News poll this week didn't include Stein, but it showed Trump and Johnson close among voters under 35 -- the generally accepted definition of the millennial generation. Trump was at 23 percent, while Johnson was at 19 percent."  (Hillary got 50% in this poll)

    "In early July, a Pew study that included a larger sample -- and larger subsample of voters under 30 -- also showed Trump and Johnson virtually tied among teens and 20-somethings." (Trump and Johnson got 21% and 22% respectively, Hillary got 47%)

    The kids are all right.

    They really (none / 0) (#102)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 01:20:11 PM EST
    should drop polling Stein because she's not on the ballot in a lot of states.

    Shhh! Don't tell her that. (none / 0) (#105)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 01:57:02 PM EST
    You'll hurt her feelings, and then her running mate will call you out as a bourgeois capitalist tool.

    SITE VIOLATOR (5.00 / 2) (#123)
    by Peter G on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 07:03:43 PM EST
    and word salad. A Twofer.

    But it's a word salad that quotes Sophocles. (none / 0) (#125)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 07:19:29 PM EST
    At least TL is now attracting a more educated, sophisticated and discerning type of site violator. The ones from Turkey and Vietnam were so gauche and run of the mill.

    Sophocles's muse must've taken the day (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 09:56:56 PM EST
    off when he came up with that one..

    It reminds me of the "Knowledge Is Good" quote at the beginning of Animal House.


    Sophocles's muse didn't take days off. (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 10:33:15 PM EST
    But she was known to go off on an occasional bender.

    You might like this (none / 0) (#146)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 08:19:03 AM EST
    I might indeed like it, at that. (none / 0) (#154)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 03:43:31 PM EST
    One of the most consequential tactical blunders ever committed during the Second World War occurred in the midst of what was arguably Nazi Germany's greatest military triumph, the conquest of Holland, Belgium and France in the spring of 1940. Inexplicably, Field Marshal Gerd von Rundstedt, who commanded German Army Group B, ordered a halt to his forces then moving on the French port of Dunkirk.

    Instead, Gen. Rundstedt redeployed his panzer divisions to the south for an advance on Paris, trusting in Luftwaffe chief Hermann Goering's boastful promise that he could finish off the retreating and demoralized Allied forces with punishing air strikes alone. It was the first of many occasions in which Herr Reichsmarshal overestimated the Luftwaffe's capacity to finish off an adversary and in this case, his inflated sense of self-bravado ultimately proved to be Britain's salvation.

    That decision by the German High Command afforded the Royal Navy and UK Civilian Defense Auxiliary the sufficient time necessary to successfully extricate about 200,000 British and 140,000 French troops from the collapsing pocket at Dunkirk over the course of nine days between May 27 and June 4. Further, they did so in the very face of the relentless and punishing Luftwaffe bombardment promised by Goering.

    In particular, the collective performance of those thousands of British civilian mariners who answered their country's call at this dark hour, and bravely sailed their vessels into harm's way at Dunkirk to assist the Royal Navy in the rescue of Allied forces while enduring heavy enemy fire, was nothing short of heroic.

    Because the seaport docks at Dunkirk had been destroyed by initial German air attacks, British naval vessels were compelled to remain in the English Channel while over 900 smaller civilian watercraft ferried the evacuating troops from the beaches and seawalls to the much larger Royal Navy ships offshore, and RAF Spitfires and Hurricanes above them sought to fend off the German aerial assault as best they could.

    Over 200 of these smaller craft were eventually destroyed by German fire over the course of those nine anxious days, along with 175 fighter aircraft, with an accompanying loss of about 450 British civilians and 150 RAF pilots. Nevertheless, because of their uncommon valor and sacrifice, the "Miracle at Dunkirk" stands as perhaps the single greatest ad hoc logistical accomplishment in military history. Allied losses were 11,000 killed and 40,000 taken prisoner, but it really could have been much worse. Instead, an outright disaster was averted and some 340,000 Allied troops lived to fight another day -- and fight they did.

    I think the only major motion picture that ever dealt directly with the Allied debacle and subsequent deliverance at Dunkirk was "Mrs. Miniver" back in 1944, in which the title character's husband sailed the family's yacht to the French seaport as part of the armada of pleasure craft, tugs and ferries which assisted in the evacuation. Even then, the action took place offscreen, while the Miniver family awaited his return.

    It will be interesting to see how director Christopher Nolan treats and portrays this rather sweeping epic story.



    THE FALL (5.00 / 2) (#156)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 07:36:54 PM EST
    Been binging this Netflix crime drama.  It's really good.

    The Atlantic

    The Fall: The Most Feminist Show on Television
    The BBC drama stars Gillian Anderson as a detective investigating a serial killer, but the series' treatment of women defies the genre's conventions.

    I enjoyed that as well (none / 0) (#157)
    by McBain on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 08:12:53 PM EST
    There are several good BBC/UK crime shows with a strong female lead...
    The Fall
    Happy Valley
    Top of the Lake
    Appropriate Adult (excellent mini series)

    I tried Top of the Lake (none / 0) (#161)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Aug 07, 2016 at 08:28:28 AM EST
    And it didn't hook me.  Maybe I will try again.

    Have you seen The Lobster? (none / 0) (#167)
    by McBain on Sun Aug 07, 2016 at 02:17:38 PM EST
    Watched it last night.  I thought it was hilarious but it's definitely not for everyone.  

    Yes (none / 0) (#169)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Aug 07, 2016 at 07:34:46 PM EST
    Definitely for me

    Happy Valley is so good, really liked it (none / 0) (#162)
    by ruffian on Sun Aug 07, 2016 at 12:07:30 PM EST
    Accents hard to get used to though.

    The only one I had not seen is Appropriate Adult - will look that up!

    Also concur on The Fall - been a while since I watched it, maybe I'll watch it again.


    If you want to see Dominic West (none / 0) (#166)
    by McBain on Sun Aug 07, 2016 at 02:16:51 PM EST
    as you've never seen him before, Appropriate Adult is a must view.  

    I have to watch some of these UK shows with closed captioning on.  Even with that, I still have a hard time figuring out every line of dialog with fast talking slang.


    Lol (none / 0) (#168)
    by TrevorBolder on Sun Aug 07, 2016 at 07:24:42 PM EST
    My father used to do that a lot with the British shows.
    I bought him a Netflix subscription years ago for Christmas (against my sisters advice, said he wouldn't like it)
    Well, he liked it, but I had to order everything on line for him, lol. After a while I was ordering what I thought he might like, I would get the reviews later on to see how I did.

    Best Ray Donavon ever (none / 0) (#170)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Aug 07, 2016 at 10:23:28 PM EST
    Mickey is in prison.  They thought the Russians were going to protect him, no.  So they have to get him into the gay wing to protect him.   There was a scene with him and his elderly cell mate that I'm still laughing about.   And I feel terrible about it.  It you saw it you know why.

    Conversation between his Rays two brothers

    If a guy from the prison calls we have to tell him Mickey is gay.

    I think he actually did some stuff in Walpole. (Etc etc)

    I don't want to hear that.

    Actually I think he's sort of proud of it.  Said its like being ambidextrous.


    There was other stuff that had me rolling on the floor that I will be surprised if someone is not offended by.

    Oh, and they waterboarded a Hollywood agent.


    Entertainment Weekly (none / 0) (#171)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Aug 07, 2016 at 10:29:46 PM EST
    Later that night, his cellmate keels over in pain. Mickey, realizing his cellmate is dying, calls for medical help, but when he sees the guard who's evaluating his transfer paperwork coming, he decides to use his dying pal as evidence of his homosexuality. He pulls his pants down and pretends to have sex with him in plain sight of the guard, hoping that'll bolster his chances of getting transferred. The Emmy-nominated drama Ray Donovan, everybody!

    And (none / 0) (#172)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Aug 07, 2016 at 11:42:31 PM EST
    The Night Of


    Opening the door and quickly throwing arm loads of cat toys at the bored looking cat or laughably gratuitous reoeated close ups of the spectacularly endowed dead man.


    And finally getting around to Trevor's pal.


    Yes, the pace of The Night Of has (5.00 / 1) (#180)
    by KeysDan on Mon Aug 08, 2016 at 03:25:50 PM EST
    picked up. So much good film fare in Episode V, all that you mentioned along with John Stone addressing the class, his "getting ready" for Champagne with his girlfriend, only to be put off because she was "working;" seeing Naz's raging anger side (call him a murderer and he will simply deny it; call him a f@g, and he almost kills the guy); Naz as mule.  Still the two possibilities: Naz did it; Naz did not do it, maybe the second passerby, started as a robber at knife-point, ended, with an unfortunate 22 year old/22 knife wound birthday event.  

    I almost got the feeling (none / 0) (#182)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 08, 2016 at 05:06:26 PM EST
    This week they were trying to make us think he did it.  The hair, the beating, the attitude.  

    I was trying to remember, I deleted the back episodes from my DVR, wasn't the knife left sticking in the victim?  He pulled it out?  Right?  

    Strange thing for a hardened criminal to do no?


    I mean t leave the knife sticking (none / 0) (#183)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 08, 2016 at 05:07:38 PM EST
    In the victim.  If that's true.

    Don't recall (none / 0) (#184)
    by KeysDan on Mon Aug 08, 2016 at 06:53:24 PM EST
    the knife sticking out of Andrea part.  But, yes, it did seem that they were shifting the guilt to Naz, the choir boy moving to the jail house survivor.  Not a good boy, since amphetamine in his (not her) blood. And, the shaved head, the symbolism of Delilah cutting Samson's hair and taking away his power. In fact, that is the title of the next episode.  So much finger pointing, and then that second passerby to unsettle matters. I am inclined to go with Naz being innocent, and becoming a criminal by the criminal justice system.  Oh, and what about the cat?

    And, thanks for the recommendation of Animal Kingdom.  A great movie, only issue was trying to catch all of the Aussie accents.  


    I love that movie (none / 0) (#185)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 08, 2016 at 07:00:23 PM EST
    There is now (or soon will be?) a TNT series of that story with Ellen Barkin in the Jackie Weaver (who was fantastic) role.

    ANIMAL KINGDOM (none / 0) (#187)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 08, 2016 at 07:25:45 PM EST
    Just noticed that full film is on YouTube.  Totally worth the time




    No (none / 0) (#186)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 08, 2016 at 07:10:08 PM EST
    I just checked the first episode online.  The knife was laying on that table downstairs.  He grabbed it when the grabbed his keys his coat and the K.

    It still has me hooked (none / 0) (#179)
    by ruffian on Mon Aug 08, 2016 at 01:10:01 PM EST
    due to stuff like you mentioned....but OMG, this is not exactly a thriller, pace-wise. Even the drama of the revelations of Bodie's buddy (sorry, I can't think of him as anyone but Bodie, moved from B'more to NYC.) was not as dramatic as it should have been.  

    Ha (none / 0) (#181)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 08, 2016 at 04:31:00 PM EST
    Bodie and Omar.  In the joint.

    yes - the alternate ending of The Wire (none / 0) (#188)
    by ruffian on Mon Aug 08, 2016 at 08:38:16 PM EST
    Can someone (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 08:16:36 PM EST
    explain why Trump and Jill Stein have such an affection for Putin? Trump I understand mostly because he loves authoritarians and apparently owes the Russian oligarchs a lot of money. Stein thinks Putin has been great on human rights. That is just bizarre.

    I saw Woody Allen's 'Cafe Society' yesterday (5.00 / 1) (#163)
    by ruffian on Sun Aug 07, 2016 at 12:10:44 PM EST
    It's amusing and visually amazing. Perfectly satisfying 90 minutes.

    Did not win me over on Kristen Stewart.

    Most memorable line..."Sophocles may have said 'The unexamined life is not worth living'...but the examined life is no great bargain"

    I enjoyed Cafe Society. And also (none / 0) (#165)
    by oculus on Sun Aug 07, 2016 at 01:52:35 PM EST
    Irrational Man.

    What to make of this (none / 0) (#12)
    by CoralGables on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 09:02:14 PM EST
    New Poll from FOX today has Clinton at +10

    I hope it drives a stake through the heart of the (5.00 / 3) (#13)
    by ruffian on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 09:04:57 PM EST
    talking point that Trump is winning, or even tied.

    A few state polls came in overnight (none / 0) (#24)
    by CoralGables on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 07:42:15 AM EST
    Michigan - Clinton +9
    New Hampshire - Clinton +17
    Pennsylvania - Clinton +11

    The hits will keep coming from a combination of the greatness of the Dem convention and the damage Trump does to himself. Numbers coming out everywhere today and tomorrow should show a nice boost for Hillary.


    NH (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 08:43:26 AM EST
    is a real surprise there to me.

    me too (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by CST on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 08:51:18 AM EST
    Trump has seemed to overperform in the northeast and the other NH polls I saw seemed close.

    This is a very good sign if it holds.

    I've never wanted a landslide election more in my life.  I could live with a squeaker against McCain or Romney.  I want to bury Trump, and the horse he came in on.


    I want (none / 0) (#30)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 09:01:07 AM EST
    to bury the entire GOP. They have spent 25 years doing nothing but having stupid investigations that waste money and never end up finding anything. Then we have the 8 disastrous years of George W. Bush with his lies to the country about Iraq and a complete collapse of the economy.

    I heard Trump is campaigning in Maine today (none / 0) (#31)
    by ruffian on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 11:33:30 AM EST
    MAINE. If he is worried about Maine, it is indeed going to be a landslide in Nov.

    I should have looked it up first (none / 0) (#32)
    by ruffian on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 11:35:33 AM EST
    Seemed obvious to me that Maine would be a red state, due to the Bushes, but I guess not - it is pretty blue.

    Maine and NH (none / 0) (#35)
    by CST on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 12:27:27 PM EST
    Are the two "reddest" states in New England.  But they're still in New England.

    Also (none / 0) (#36)
    by CST on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 12:28:15 PM EST
    pretty sure Maine is one of the few states that splits its electoral college votes.  So you can lose the state and still win an electoral college vote if you perform well in some areas.

    He ought (none / 0) (#33)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 11:54:34 AM EST
    to be worried about places like GA which he seems to be completely ignoring.

    If he loses Georgia (none / 0) (#34)
    by CoralGables on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 12:00:25 PM EST
    He will have also lost Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania and Georgia will not make any difference at all

    45 states or so... (none / 0) (#37)
    by kdog on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 01:21:53 PM EST
    seem to make no difference at all.

    Electoral College bl0ws.


    Well...without it even more states (none / 0) (#38)
    by ruffian on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 01:24:44 PM EST
    would not matter. If it were just popular vote, you may as well have the election just in California and Florida.

    How so? (5.00 / 3) (#40)
    by kdog on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 01:49:02 PM EST
    Alotta voters in Cali, Fla, NY, Texas, to be sure...but each vote would count the same as Mississippi or Wyoming.  As opposed to a conservative's vote in NY or a liberal's vote in MS meaning absolutely nothing with the stinkin' electoral college.  That sh&t just feeds the rigged meme, and for what benefit?

    It should be impossible to win the national popular vote and lose.


    kdog (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by CoralGables on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 03:13:48 PM EST
    this is one political topic where we are in complete agreement. I also believe every vote should be equal to every other vote no matter the state of residence when it comes to presidential elections.

    The problem with that idea ... (none / 0) (#44)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 03:44:15 PM EST
    ... is the fact that we presently don't have any mechanisms or laws in place to hereby conduct a national election. Rather, we designate each of our 50 states to conduct its own election for federal offices per its own respective standards, in which your mileage may vary.

    (And as we saw in your own state of Florida back in 2000, because that mileage can also vary rather greatly by county, an activist conservative majority on the U.S. Supreme Court used those 67 differentiating county standards as a key part of its rationale for prematurely short-circuiting Florida's presidential vote count that year, and thus deliver the White House to their good friend George W. Bush.)

    Abolishing the Electoral College and nationalizing our federal elections would require a constitutional amendment to that effect. The last amendment which modified our process for electing federal officials was ratified back in 1913, with the 17th Amendment finally providing for the direct election of U.S. senators by popular vote, rather than a majority vote by state legislatures.

    And given that our Constitution has only been amended 27 times in our 240-year history, well, good luck with that.



    the alternative to that approach (none / 0) (#49)
    by CST on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 04:11:03 PM EST
    is - like everything else in this country - to go state by state.  We already have two states, Nebraska and Maine that divide their electoral votes in some kind of proportional manner.  We may not get a federal law, but if enough states decided to give their electoral votes to the popular vote winner, that would do it, without requiring a constitutional amendment.

    If Texas, NY, CA, and FL did it, we'd already be more than half way there.


    ... and pursue that. But speaking for myself only, that's not a high priority with me right now. I would note one thing, however, in that I oppose such a proposal at our state level unless every state agrees to implement it simultaneously.

    You don't want to create a multi-layered system whereby some states would award their electoral votes on the basis of who won the majority vote nationally, while others would continue to award electoral votes to the winner of the state popular vote, while still others split their electoral votes by who won what congressional district. There needs to be a uniform system in place, not one which is further splintered.

    That's simply asking for serious trouble. You might even increase the possibility that the winner of the presidential popular vote nationally could lose the race in the electoral college, rather than diminish or preclude that chance. Either all states do the same thing, or none of them should do anything.



    Whatever, kdog. (none / 0) (#43)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 03:15:54 PM EST
    Those who want change, act. Those who won't act, b*tch. And b*tch. And then break for coffee where they b*tch some more, usually about those who want change not acting fast enough.

    So you're saying... (none / 0) (#98)
    by kdog on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 11:52:55 AM EST
    Do not observe and comment on the rackets unless you want in on the rackets?

    Whatever you say Don.


    But if ALL you do is observe and comment ... (none / 0) (#103)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 01:31:08 PM EST
    ... about "rackets," then what's the point, really, if you're not then willing to get up off your own arse and do something about it personally?

    I mean, by your own admission, you weren't even motivated enough to register as a Democrat and vote in your state's primary for Bernie Sanders, whose virtues you regularly extolled here in these threads. You apparently expect others to do something about those "rackets" for you -- which, if you really think about it, is rather selfish on your part.

    Look, kdog, if you don't want to get involved politically, that's fine. It's a perfectly legitimate choice on your part. But you then need to own it, and not regularly denigrate the efforts of those progressive Democratic candidates like Hillary Clinton who choose to be in the arena, or cast aspersions upon the integrity of those of us who support her, as though we're all somehow culpable for the choice you've made. We're not.



    All I was denigrating here... (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by kdog on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 01:57:20 PM EST
    was the Electoral College.  

    I do not want to get politically involved, I feel dirty enough after a day slinging plumbing supplies tyvm...but I reserve my right to comment on the political involvement I must suffer.  You are free to ignore, totally legitimate choice my brother.

    And we're all culpable...those that don't get involved, and the co-conspirators....those that vote, those that don't...no doubt about that.


    What political involvement? (none / 0) (#140)
    by Towanda on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 12:15:12 AM EST
    What suffering?  You don't register, you don't vote.  You type and post here.  That's suffering?

    Come again? (5.00 / 2) (#189)
    by kdog on Tue Aug 09, 2016 at 10:05:31 AM EST
    I'm registered and always vote...the suffering I was referring to is living under the laws passed and policies enacted by the politicians we elect.

    Are you not suffering Scott Walker?  

    Just don't comment about him unless you're gonna run for office or get a job in politics, according to our friend Don.  


    Such a polite retort. (5.00 / 1) (#190)
    by oculus on Wed Aug 10, 2016 at 01:24:36 AM EST
    Each vote would count the same, true (none / 0) (#52)
    by ruffian on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 04:30:58 PM EST
    but if it were a national popular vote, the great population centers would flood the field. A candidate that was popular in cities, but not as popular in rural areas would have a much better chance at winning. Flyover country would pretty much be ignored in campaigning.

    Not saying that is not fair, but that would be the outcome.


    Illustration (none / 0) (#53)
    by ruffian on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 04:40:20 PM EST
    As shown on this census map, the top 5 most populous states have 37% of the population. you campaign heavy there and in a few more states and you've pretty much locked it up. No need to bother with either Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, etc, most of the south, etc.

    I mean... (none / 0) (#54)
    by CST on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 04:44:12 PM EST
    it's not like they currently bother with either Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, etc, most of the south, etc...

    You've got a point there (none / 0) (#65)
    by ruffian on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 07:28:56 PM EST
    That's actually what happens now (none / 0) (#85)
    by jbindc on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 07:04:24 AM EST
    Look at a map of past elections. 2008, for example, Obama won of course, but if you look at the map - it's mostly red.  Obama won mostly in the cities and urban areas ( with pockets of blue in other areas). Same in 2012.

    I know, but I guess at least now (none / 0) (#111)
    by ruffian on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 04:24:03 PM EST
    the smaller population states have at least a glimmer of a hope. If it went to a national popular vote election they would not even have that.

    But the point is moot as someone pointed out since a constitutional amendment would be needed and that is nearly impossible these days....or any days,actually.


    Well, (none / 0) (#39)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 01:44:08 PM EST
    the news this year is the number of states that "matter" seem to be expanding. Georgia seems to be going into swing state status.

    However I think the electoral college actually depresses voting because guess what? My vote in Georgia pretty much counts for nothing in the past. It's one of the reasons I rarely get into political discussions with the people around here is because what's the point? Georgia almost always votes for the Republican and arguing with one person is not going to change that.


    IN that same poll (5.00 / 5) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 09:27:25 PM EST
    Interesting question

    Who you you trust to make decisions about using nuclear weapons




    Just saw on tv (none / 0) (#47)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 03:56:00 PM EST
    Discussing Pennsylvania, that in the Philly suburbs, home of 1 in 5 votes in the state, where Mitt lost to Obama by, 10 (can't remember exactly but that's close) Hillary is ahead by 40.  That's forty.

    as James Carville once said (none / 0) (#62)
    by ding7777 on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 06:33:44 PM EST
    "Pennsylvania is Philadelphia and Pittsburgh with Alabama in between" and that's where the Trump supporters are

    Not on my street. (none / 0) (#80)
    by Chuck0 on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 09:01:23 PM EST
    I live in that middle. York county. Mostly conservative. But no one on my one way residential street seems to support Drumpf. I'm one of those old guys who sits on the front porch in evening and everyone knows my left leanings and atheism. Its easy to spot the ACLU and Rational Houshold stickers on glass part of the screen door. (Though many are puzzled by the sticker with  pink sneakers and 'I stand with Wendy'. A nod to my former city councilperson in Ft Worth). But folks in the neighorhood do speak some politics with me. And everyone is pretty disgusted with Drumpf

    I've far more Trump signs (none / 0) (#81)
    by Chuck0 on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 09:10:44 PM EST
    In northern Maryland counties (Cecil, Harford counties than south central PA. Good ol'blue Maryland my Maryland (I was born on Naval Base there some 57 years ago)

    Been thinking (and reading) about this (none / 0) (#45)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 03:46:25 PM EST
    The last few days


    There are some totally wacky ideas on that page and some thought provoking ones.
    Mark Hughes, Forbes

    People who dismiss the idea that Clinton and others privately encouraged Trump to run because they smartly calculated it would create disarray in the GOP (which has indeed happened) and help the Democrats in the long run, are vastly underestimating the brilliance of the Clintons and their inner circle.

    The point is, the Clintons have a more nuanced and complex an understanding of politics and strategy, and of undermining an opponent, than anyone involved in modern politics.....Imagine having a former U.S. president -- and one commonly perceived as being among the smartest and most astute -- tell you you should run for president while he fans your ego (and in this theory, imagine you have possibly the biggest and hungriest ego in the galaxy).

    Does someone have to KNOW they are a plant, in order to be one? Do you have to realize you're being used as a tool to dismantle a party machine, in order to function effectively as that tool? I say the answer to that is "no." If the Clintons and others secretly worked behind the scenes to convince Trump to run and fed ideas and encouragement to his worst tendencies in order to derail the already-shaky GOP nominating season, and if Trump listened to them and took their advice to heart, then he is functioning pretty effectively as their intended plant.

    Now, IS it true? Well, I think it's clear Clinton had private conversations with Trump; it's clear Clinton wants to deny and silence any talk of having played a role in Trump's candidacy; it's clear Trump doesn't want anyone to think the conversations were a factor in his decision to run; and it's clear that Trump's campaign has had exactly the same impact it would have if the Clintons had planned it out and encouraged it.

    Lots more at the link.  Pro and con

    This discussion (none / 0) (#57)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 05:09:42 PM EST
    came up yesterday as a matter of fact with a friend on Facebook. First off the reply was yes, he's a plant to destroy the GOP. I said well, that blows up when you consider he got the most votes. So the next thing thrown up was he "bought" the votes. I said how? He's not the one with all the money. That was Jeb and if money was the thing Jeb would have won. I said Trump is a master manipulator of the media though and was very adept at using them to get his message out.

    I did not know that Trump had run for president before on the reform party. I guess he was attempting to get the nomination there but failed.


    If he goes down in flames (none / 0) (#58)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 05:12:39 PM EST
    The conspiracy theory that he was a plant will live forever.  It's better than Mena or Vince Foster or anything.

    Funny you (none / 0) (#59)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 05:43:10 PM EST
    mention Mena because that was another conspiracy theory that is making the rounds yet again. And there's a movie and it's not going to come out until after the election so there's a conspiracy theory in there too. Even though the Benghazi movie did nothing and was done by a conservative director and the star spoke at the DNC and since he played Chris Kyle that has sent minds off into outer space too. Really I think I need some way of keeping up with all this stuff.

    Ha (none / 0) (#60)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 05:47:34 PM EST
    A flow chart?  Trading cards?

    The thing is of all the silly nonsense through all the decades this is the one that actually seems plausible to me.  At least in the sense it is described by the person I quoted.  His entire post is much longer.  I recommend it.  


    Ha. (none / 0) (#70)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 08:03:39 PM EST
    Yes, a flow chart. I have not done one of those in years. Perhaps I need to bone up on that!

    Even if all this were true (none / 0) (#86)
    by jbindc on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 07:08:05 AM EST
    Trump is not a stupid man.  He ACTS stupid and SAYS stupid things, but he is not so stupid to be duped like this.

    And if the Clintons are really that smart and powerful, maybe they should just be in charge of running the world - forever.  


    Rhetorically (none / 0) (#113)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 04:27:17 PM EST
    If he acts stupid and say and does stupid things why can't he be stupid?  Because he's rich?  Please.

    I just posted a link to a NYTimes OpEd where the former CIA chief says Putin did pretty much exactly the same thing to Trump.

    Personally I suspect Bubba is a cagey as Putin on his worst day.


    He knows exactly what he's doing (none / 0) (#159)
    by jbindc on Sun Aug 07, 2016 at 08:19:22 AM EST
    Yeah well (none / 0) (#160)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Aug 07, 2016 at 08:26:47 AM EST
    I've said that too.  But I sometimes revise my opinion with new information and as fas as I can see if in fact "he knows exactly what he is doing",  "what he is doing"  is apparrently not just trying to lose but to destroy his brand in the process.

    Another landslide poll this afternoon (none / 0) (#50)
    by CoralGables on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 04:20:16 PM EST
    Hillary Clinton has surged to a 15-point lead over reeling, gaffe-plagued Donald Trump, according to a new McClatchy-Marist poll.

    Heh (none / 0) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 04:24:00 PM EST
    If this keeps happening look for increasing references to the subject of my comment #45

    looks like hillary will win (none / 0) (#63)
    by linea on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 07:13:24 PM EST
    looking at FiveThirtyEight (somebody here posted the link) it seems the trump would need to keep arizona where he is leading by only a slight margin AND flip florida, ohio, north carolina AND iowa to get enough electoral votes to win. that doesn't seem reasonably possible. maybe he can flip north carolina but that doesnt really get him much closer.

    Melania's racy photos (none / 0) (#66)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 07:37:12 PM EST
    It seems the real issue about those photos is not what she was or was not wearing but that her visa did not allow her to work as a model.  Or something.

    Gaps in Melania Trump's immigration story raise questions
    A racy photo shoot is prompting fresh scrutiny of the would-be first lady's early visits to the United States.

    It's an interesting angle in this story considering how concerned her husband is about illegal immigrants taking our jobs.

    no it's not (none / 0) (#67)
    by linea on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 07:39:04 PM EST
    it's just stupid. leave her alone.

    Thank you for your input (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 07:40:00 PM EST
    And as for "stupid" (none / 0) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 07:57:37 PM EST
    You might want to actually read it.  

    I think this might be the money paragraph

    Visa fraud would call into question a green card application and subsequent citizenship application, said immigration lawyers -- thus raising questions about Melania Trump's legal status, even today, despite her marriage to a U.S. citizen.

    i did read it (none / 0) (#71)
    by linea on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 08:04:43 PM EST
    stop picking on her. just leave her alone.

    hillary already has the states to secure the electoral votes to win. trump can't win. the mean boys can stop picking on the girl now. just leave her alone.


    Lock her up (none / 0) (#72)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 08:06:28 PM EST
    Lock her up

    Lock her up

    Lock her up

    Lock her up


    Ha. (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by ruffian on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 08:09:35 PM EST
    The Donald hoisted on his own petard. It does not get any better than that.

    what, are you eight? (none / 0) (#74)
    by linea on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 08:16:06 PM EST
    "the republican's do it too!"

    she's a wife. she's married to him. just leave her alone.


    He wants to deport millions of people (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by ruffian on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 08:44:47 PM EST
    that are married to other people for the same thing...so is the system rigged for wives of rich guys?

    Actually it's worse than that (none / 0) (#76)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 08:48:35 PM EST
    They were asking Tr@mp supporters about this on TV.  Their response was its ok because she is "European". "We're down with western civilization" they said.

    Which is, I don't know, what is she?  Slovenian? Is Slovenia even part of Europe?


    They're down with it.. (none / 0) (#77)
    by jondee on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 08:53:27 PM EST
    they just haven't caught up to it.

    Slovenia is considered part Central Europe, I believe.

    According to Trump, a lot of hot ass comes from over there.


    Check (none / 0) (#78)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 08:54:25 PM EST
    You could (none / 0) (#79)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 08:57:30 PM EST
    say she's from "New Europe".

    Slovenia is 75 miles east of Venice, ... (none / 0) (#82)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Aug 04, 2016 at 10:30:03 PM EST
    ... and nestled between Italy, Austria, Hungary and Croatia. A small and picturesque country of some two million residents, it was the first of the former Yugoslav republics to break away from Belgrade after Slobodan Milosevic rose to power.

    The U S Ski Team (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by fishcamp on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 08:14:13 AM EST
    used to pass through Slovenia on our way to Kranjska Gora Yugoslavia for races.  That ski area is now in Slovenia I believe.  It was not a very developed ski area, and they always put the Americans on the 11th floor of the hotel with the broken elevator.  It rained all the time too.

    Actually we didn't pass through (none / 0) (#91)
    by fishcamp on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 08:53:19 AM EST
    Slovenia back then since it hadn't been created yet.  We just went to Kranjska Gora for the races that were in the former Yugoslavia.  Strange food there.  They put piles of paprika on everything.

    A rather cursory treatment of Slovenian (none / 0) (#100)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 12:12:50 PM EST
    history, I'd say..

    Where's the peasant rebellions of the 1500s and the incorporation into Austro-Hungary during WWI?


    It's just a story jondee... (5.00 / 2) (#101)
    by fishcamp on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 01:04:36 PM EST
    jondee, you're confusing Slovenia with ... (none / 0) (#104)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 01:53:52 PM EST
    ... Bosnia-Herzegovina, which was first occupied by Austria Hungary per the 1878 Treaty of Berlin ending the Russo-Turkish War, and subsequently annexed by Vienna in 1908, an act which angered Serbia and made Sarajevo the flash point which sparked the First World War.

    Slovenia had actually been absorbed by Austria back in 1797. Prior, it was part of the Republic of Venice, which ceased to exist after its conquest by Napoleon and incorporation into the French Empire.

    You asked for the history lesson. Enjoy.


    Melania Trump may (none / 0) (#95)
    by KeysDan on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 11:16:28 AM EST
    have been involved in visa fraud.  Which, if true, may result in revocation of citizenship and deportation.  I think we need to know..what's going on.

    That Karl Rove (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 11:30:47 AM EST
    Mans a genius.  

    If she is deported Donald should go to just to, you know, avoid breaking up families.  


    Can Baron stay as a Dreamer? (5.00 / 2) (#112)
    by ruffian on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 04:26:13 PM EST
    Sure (none / 0) (#115)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 04:30:17 PM EST
    D!ckhead Von Fu@kfaceTrump, and Thurston Sh!tbag the Third have to go.   But Ivanka and the kid are cool.

    It is rather amusing (none / 0) (#83)
    by Redbrow on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 04:20:57 AM EST
    Watching democrats gleefully believing and spreading Rove's propaganda for him.

    Huh? (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 07:09:33 AM EST
    Rove is on the Trump Train.

    do you have any links (none / 0) (#84)
    by ding7777 on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 05:28:30 AM EST
    to Rove's propaganda re Melana Trump?

    Worste.. (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 07:52:18 AM EST

    You know, your comment has me wondering ... (none / 0) (#96)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 11:22:40 AM EST
    ... whatever happened to "Baghdad Bob."

    of the Philandro Castile shooting:
    [Castile's uncle] said he was told that state investigators are sifting through police squad-car video, which includes audio, from the night his nephew was fatally shot by a St. Anthony police officer.

    Linkage (none / 0) (#108)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 02:59:03 PM EST
    Seems Trump will be (none / 0) (#109)
    by KeysDan on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 04:14:53 PM EST
    back in good stead with the Republican Party--he plans, at long last, to endorse the smartest Republican ever, Paul Ryan,  in his primary.

     Trump can say anything he wants about women, the disabled, Mexicans, federal judges, Muslims, Gold Star Mothers, be a Putin Bro, call on Russia to cause espionage against the US government, give a green light to invade the Baltic states, allow that he is fine with Russia's actions in the Crimea and other parts of Ukraine, be an unwitting agent of Russia, look at nuclear weapons cavalierly, and lots more; but he sure got in trouble when he unsuccessfully pulled the tablecloth out from under the china by not endorsing Ryan. A step too far.

     Now Trump will be back in the Club, Reince Priebus will simmer down, and as for Ryan, he will polish anew those words of his  at the Republican Convention, "only with Donald Trump and Mike Pence do we have a chance at a better way."  

    You've probably seen this (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 04:22:43 PM EST
    I Ran the C.I.A. Now I'm Endorsing Hillary Clinton.
    By MICHAEL J. MORELLAUG. 5, 2016

    President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia was a career intelligence officer, trained to identify vulnerabilities in an individual and to exploit them. That is exactly what he did early in the primaries. Mr. Putin played upon Mr. Trump's vulnerabilities by complimenting him. He responded just as Mr. Putin had calculated.

    Mr. Putin is a great leader, Mr. Trump says, ignoring that he has killed and jailed journalists and political opponents, has invaded two of his neighbors and is driving his economy to ruin. Mr. Trump has also taken policy positions consistent with Russian, not American, interests -- endorsing Russian espionage against the United States, supporting Russia's annexation of Crimea and giving a green light to a possible Russian invasion of the Baltic States.
    In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.

    That is (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 05:52:20 PM EST
    an awesome endorsement and Hillary saying "screw the white house correspondents dinner" is probably one of the reasons the press hates her.

    Yup...Hmmmm (none / 0) (#130)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 09:04:49 PM EST
    He was an active participant in painting the Benghazi attacks as caused by YouTube video. When Hillary Clinton says 'best information provided by the intelligence community" she is referring to her man in the CIA: Michael Morel Morell.

    In 2013, he left the CIA to join a Wash DC consultancy group with strong links to Hillary Clinton. Beacon Global Strategies, Morell's employer, is a ten-person firm whose co-founders include Philippe Reines, a senior counselor to Hillary Clinton when she ran the State Department. Reines is still her spokesman, serving in that capacity in what New York magazine calls 'a second full-time job.


    I don't think (5.00 / 3) (#131)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 09:11:38 PM EST

    Is going to help you.  


    ROTFLMAO (none / 0) (#132)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 09:20:34 PM EST
    I thought they would have given that one up but then again I go back to the article that I found that points out that facts and reason don't penetrate with Trump supporters.

    It's funny (none / 0) (#133)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 09:25:38 PM EST
    I've been listen to and reading people discuss this OpEd and how absolutely devestatimg it is for Trump all day and that is the first mention of BENGHAAAAAIIII I have heard.

    First one.  And I even had FOX on for a while.


    Gen. Michael Hayden (none / 0) (#139)
    by MKS on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 11:12:31 PM EST
    says basically the same thing.  And he is a Republican's Republican.

    Wow, this is a great ad (none / 0) (#114)
    by ruffian on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 04:28:55 PM EST
    Questioning Trumps ties to Russia. In his own words, and Putin's, and the media's.

    Howdy, your Morning Joe pals are in it.

    Those are all cnservatives (none / 0) (#116)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 04:35:47 PM EST
    And republicans.  Or former republicans



    The interesting thing (none / 0) (#126)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 07:36:55 PM EST
    About that and the other shorter one that's being broadcast is how much is NOT in there.  There is so much more to use.  Like the townhall with Tweety where he threatens to use nukes in Europe and asks if we are not going to use nukes why do we have them.

    I think we might be in for a 90 day Daisy Commercial.


    Good discipline on what they used (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by ruffian on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 08:11:46 PM EST
    I heard John Dickerson say that focus groups show that when other people quote what Donald says it is not perceived nearly as negatively as when they hear him say it himself. They just don't believe it second hand.

    ... today, and the ruling ANC is presently on track for its worst electoral performance since the abolition of Apartheid. Preliminary indications are that the Democratic Alliance (aka DA) has beaten the ANC across the board in municipal races in the capital city of Pretoria.

    Immigrants, Black Americans and muslims will (none / 0) (#118)
    by Redbrow on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 05:11:40 PM EST
    never vote for Trump.

    I guess somebody forgot to tell the President's black muslim immigrant brother.

    Obama Endorses Donald J. Trump - Make America Great Again

    Shocker here (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 05:17:22 PM EST

    The relationship between Mr Malik and his famous brother has been frosty. Mr Malik in 2008 opposed then senator Obama's candidature for the US presidency.

    On Monday, Mr Malik accused President Obama of ignoring his Kenyan family and the African continent after he was elected the first black president of the US despite using his Kenyan roots as a strong pillar of his 2008 presidential campaigns.

    I especially like the part about using his Kenyan roots as a pillar of his campaign.   I guess I missed that part.


    ... to support Trump, especially now that the campaign is currently having trouble explaining how Melania first received a green card "based on marriage" in 2001, when she didn't actually marry Trump until Jan. 22, 2005. (She apparently first met him in 1998.) Presumably, his proposed new "get tough" policies on immigration makes an exception for undocumented mistresses.

    As summer and their hopes wind down.. (none / 0) (#135)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 05, 2016 at 10:05:19 PM EST
    you can sense the trolls beginning to lose their luster along with the foliage. Soon they'll have nothing left and just blow away with the other detritus.

    Does anyone know how Trump's event (none / 0) (#144)
    by sallywally on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 07:38:28 AM EST
    last night went? I was getting a sleep study and hospital TV had Fox and CNN only and all talking about how Trump could come back if he can hold it together. Heard he endorsed McCain, Ryan and Ayotte and bitched about Hillary, which was the goal.

    Meh (5.00 / 2) (#145)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 07:43:49 AM EST
    He read some comments.  One pundit said it seemed as if he was trying to translate an alien language.   Of course others fake swooned.  He completed a coherent sentence!  We have turned the corner!

    If there is one thing I would bet on its that if there is a script he will not stay on it.


    Trump is really a bad (5.00 / 2) (#149)
    by KeysDan on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 11:53:03 AM EST
    candidate when staying on script.  Trump read his speech as if he was quoting a stranger with whom he often agrees; when he read something he particularly agreed with, he would go off script and marvel at how cogent those words were--usually by repeating it a couple of times or re-stating it with his sixth grade vocabulary. Easier for both he and his followers to grasp.

     Overall, he is very boring when on script, even his audience is muted, waiting for the "good part" where he says something that is not politically correct (e.g., something cruel, bigoted, and, of course, a mere mention of Hillary).  

    And, after his boring speech and bland presentation of it, he endorsed Ryan, Ayotte, and McCain, untethered from anything, as if beamed in from outer-space.  A place he seems to inhabit more comfortably than the realities place on him by planet earth.


    Didn't watch (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by Nemi on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 03:05:45 PM EST
    but here's Bernie Sanders' 2018 would-be challenger, Al Giordano's tweets about the event. ;)

    Trump, in Green Bay, is reading from a speech printed on paper.

    Trump: "This is a movement." (Politicians should stop using that word!)

    Will Trump's next book be titled "Mein Movement"?

    Oh god! He's off script already and re-litigating whether he yelled at a baby the other day!!!!! Don't ever stop, Donald.

    Ha ha ha. Trump just endorsed Paul Ryan after reading his written speech about "party unity."

    Hey, @realDonaldTrump, listening to your speech right now. You just let the Washington establishment neuter you! Ouch!

    Now he's endorsing McCain and Ayotte. They're both doomed.

    KATE PLAYS CHRISTINE (none / 0) (#147)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 10:52:40 AM EST
    A documentary about the making of a movie about an event that inspired the iconic movie NETWORK.

    A gripping non-fiction thriller, Robert Greene's KATE PLAYS CHRISTINE follows actress Kate Lyn Sheil (House of Cards, The Girlfriend Experience, Listen Up Philip) as she prepares for her next role playing Christine Chubbuck, a Florida newscaster who committed suicide live on-air in 1974. As Kate investigates Chubbuck's story (long rumored to be the inspiration for the classic Hollywood film NETWORK), uncovering new clues and information, she becomes increasingly obsessed with her subject. Winner of a Special Jury Prize at the Sundance Film Festival, KATE PLAYS CHRISTINE is a cinematic mystery that forces us to question everything we see and everything we're led to believe


    Outliers??? (none / 0) (#155)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Aug 06, 2016 at 07:31:31 PM EST


    Recent LA Times daily tracking poll, and Reuters.

    Although considering the recent accuracy of polling lately, one can't be sure of anything.

    But these are so far off from all the others. Cannot imagine that they are accurate

    I'll take Hillary (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by Repack Rider on Sun Aug 07, 2016 at 01:20:45 PM EST
    ...and spot you 100 electoral College points for even money.

    That is a bet (5.00 / 2) (#173)
    by CoralGables on Mon Aug 08, 2016 at 07:21:24 AM EST
    that should be taken in a heartbeat by any Trump supporter. If they don't take your bet instantly, every "Trump can will" or "Hillary will lose" post they make between now and November 8 should be viewed as trolling buffoonery

    Scarborough says (none / 0) (#174)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 08, 2016 at 08:32:46 AM EST
    His little birds are telling him there will be a republican independent with serious money behind them announcing soon.  Possibly today.
    He went on to say the goal was honestly more to assure a Trump loss than a win.  It was said it was still possible to get on the ballot in enough states to get around 300 EVs.

    Sounds (none / 0) (#175)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Aug 08, 2016 at 09:46:45 AM EST
    like a plan to hide their white nationalism xenophobia problem more than anything else.

    So he pulls enough votes so that a state like SC gets carried by Hillary therefore denying that SC really has a whole host of problems in the racism xenophobia area.


    IMO (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 08, 2016 at 10:18:38 AM EST
    You are over thinking it.  It's the never Trump people.  They actually hate Trump.  For many reasons.  What you say may be an added benefit but I think it's pretty straightforward.  They hate Trump and they want to make sure he loses.

    And according to Scarborough they are willing to spend real money to make it happen.


    Cue (none / 0) (#177)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Aug 08, 2016 at 10:32:44 AM EST
    the conspiracy theories then that Bill Clinton is the money behind this candidate too.

    Excellent (5.00 / 1) (#178)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 08, 2016 at 10:42:44 AM EST
    If this happens it's a fair bet Donald will say it's funded by the Clinton cartel

    More popcorn.