Sunday Open Thread: Change Your Clocks

Don't forget to turn your clocks ahead today. The opposition to Daylight Savings Time seems to be growing. I don't get the fuss over it. I like it, especially in the spring because it means it doesn't get dark at 5:00 p.m. any more. I don't see the difference between sleeping 6, 7 or 8 hours. It all feels the same to me (as opposed to 3 hours vs. 7 or 8 hours, which I can feel.)

Nor am I afraid of loss of melatonin from the blue light on my cable box. And I like to see the city lights out my bedroom window as I fall asleep and the morning light -- blackout shades remind me of the 1980's and Las Vegas hotels.

But that's just me. This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Preet Bharara Fired as SDNY US Attorney | Wednesday Open Thread: Ketchup Edition >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Guns and trhe Old West (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by Repack Rider on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 10:44:24 AM EST
    The iconic western image cultivated by TV and film includes one ubiquitous element. The large (.44 or .45) handgun carried on a belt made for the purpose, in a low slung holster strapped to the leg for fast draw, with five pounds of extra ammo in loops along the back. This means of carrying a firearm is called the "Buscadero Rig." We have all seen it worn by Roy Rogers, Hopalong Cassidy, Gene Autrey, John Wayne, James Stewart, Henry Fonda, Clint Eastwood, the Magnificent Seven, Palidin, and every member of the Cartwright family. It didn't exist in the 19th Century.

    Never mind that most towns didn't allow the carrying of firearms and almost no one carried one anywhere else either. The purpose of the Buscadero rig is to get that shootin' iron out quick! How often does the average citizen need to do that? But the Cartwrights wouldn't go out to the barn without the artillery close at hand. Even Maverick, portrayed as a gambler who preferred to avoid a fight, is strapped for a quick draw. And everyone has enough ammo in bullet loops to defend the Alamo.

    In western reality of the 19th Century, almost no one but a violent thug or a peace officer needed a five pound open-carry heavy sidearm.  Billy the Kid carried his holster on his regular belt, and it was practically in his armpit.  James Butler "Wild Bill" Hickok usually carried his two Navy revolvers backwards in a sash.  A cowboy on the range would more likely have a rifle. For anyone else who was armed, a concealed smaller weapon was much more likely.  

    The Buscadero rig was invented in the 1920s for film and later TV. The "walk and draw" duel that ends virtually every western movie never existed. There was no "Code of the West." Only a fool would let the other guy draw first. In reality, if you were in danger of your life from anyone and you were armed, you got the weapon out of your pocket as soon as you spotted him and long before he was in range. You started shooting with a two handed grip as soon as you figured you could hit him before you ran out of ammo. You shot him in the back if you got a chance.

    The history of Western holsters is interesting even if most of what we think we know is seriously bogus.

    One other thing.  In the 1880s the United States went crazy for bicycles.  They were everywhere, but you never see one in a western set in that era.

    Bicycles (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by MKS on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 10:53:21 PM EST
    See Paul Newman in Butch Cassidy and Sundance and the kid.  Riding around on bike while the bubble gum hit "Raindrops keep falling on my head" is playing.

    Lordy, sometimes academics get too book bound (and now I sound like Jim, God help me.)


    Worse (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Towanda on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 12:45:06 AM EST
    as what the h@ll do academics have to do with it?  Why the gratuitous hit?  Academics wrote the movie?

    Hmm, your'e right (5.00 / 2) (#53)
    by MKS on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 10:41:27 AM EST

    The inchoate thought (none / 0) (#123)
    by MKS on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 09:07:54 PM EST
    as unformed as it was at that late hour, was something along the lines that the original theory about cowboys not wearing gunbelts should have been tested by looking at original source data (like the photo of Great Grand Dad) and not just secondary articles.  

    Not aimed at you at all.


    i love that pop song !! (none / 0) (#37)
    by linea on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 01:21:01 AM EST
    but i love the american pop song by Israel Kamakawiwo'ole even more!

    music video links (none / 0) (#39)
    by linea on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 01:48:32 AM EST
    Burt Bacharach - Raindrops Keep Falling On My Head (1969)

    funny!! the right-side list on youtube also features these 1969 songs:

    i've heard venus but not this santana. it's not for me but i know santana is popular with some (mostly boys?)

    The song was "Venus" ... (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 05:36:35 AM EST
    ... and the group that recorded it was Shocking Blue, not vice versa. The group was from the Netherlands.

    Carlos Santana's career has spanned 50 years. He's long been considered one of rock's greatest guitar players, and his fan base is incredibly diverse. I've seen him in concert on six different occasions over the last 35 years, and have tickets to see him again for a 7th time at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May 2 at the Maui Arts & Cultural Center in Kahului. I think that Santana is awesome.



    Not. Heard. of. Santana??? (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:12:58 AM EST
    I now have a better understanding of the bubble to which you live. Carlos Santana. Winner of numerous Grammy awards. Winner of a Kennedy Center Honor for the Performing Arts (presented by Obama). Blazing performance at Woodstock. To quote DFH, "Santana is awesome." Saw him live at the Open Air Theatre at San Diego State. Excellent venue. The Padres were playing the Cubs in the NLCS that same evening at home. Carlos stopped during the show to give the score (the Padres won that night).

    i saw Santana t the Fillmore East (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:37:37 AM EST
    in the 70s.  definitely one of the best shows ive ever seen.  quite a few "girls" there as i remember.

    This "girl" is most definitely a Santana (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by vml68 on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 12:12:14 PM EST

    The only show at the Fillmore East (none / 0) (#71)
    by Peter G on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 04:16:23 PM EST
    that I ever saw, in all my years growing up near NYC and attending many concerts and shows in the City between 1967 and 1975, was Quicksilver Messenger Service. Not sure anymore who else was on the bill. I can still visualize the light show, though.

    The best band from that era (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by jondee on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 04:22:55 PM EST
    imvho, was one no one seems to remember now: the Paul Butterfield Blues Band, when Mike Bloomfield was still in the band.

    Ask Carlos about them. He'll talk your ear off for a half an hour.


    They actually played a dance (none / 0) (#75)
    by Peter G on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 04:26:44 PM EST
    at my college when I was a frosh or soph. Incredible.

    And let's not forget.. (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by jondee on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 04:37:39 PM EST
    they helped Dylan "go electric." Much to the chagrin of many at the time..

    I saw the Police at UW ... (none / 0) (#109)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:06:12 PM EST
    ... in my freshman year when they played a gig at the Husky Union Building (HUB) ballroom, before their careers took off like a projectile. It was awesome.

    the police at uw (none / 0) (#114)
    by linea on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:27:05 PM EST
    i like the hives and saw them at the showbox here in seattle. you might like them if you like the police?

    Bands are often at their best (none / 0) (#133)
    by jondee on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 11:32:09 PM EST
    when they're in that just-breaking-through stage.

    IMO Quicksilver (none / 0) (#86)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 05:09:12 PM EST
    that i caught a couple of times was the best band ever.  period.  along with the Dead they created art that sounded literally completely different, and a million times better, on psychedelics.  

    i always wondered if that was intentional or organic.  


    organically grown intentionality? (none / 0) (#100)
    by jondee on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 06:49:29 PM EST
    Organic Dead. Does that (none / 0) (#201)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 06:21:47 PM EST
    apply re Ratdog?

    I saw Santana audition (5.00 / 1) (#135)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 12:58:53 AM EST
    ...at the Fillmore West in March 1969.  On Tuesday night it was a dollar to get in and the bands played for free to see if they could get a weekend gig.  I came to support other friends who were on the bill, but they had the bad luck to follow the "Santana Blues Band."  

    Santana blew the room away, and in a couple of months was a regular on the circuit. (Only one other band made it from Tuesday to a headline gig, Tower of Power.)  I was a roadie for another popular band called the Sons of Champlin.  Since most shows featured three bands, I worked on a number of Santana shows, one in Milwaukee in 1969 when both bands were on tour.

    More recently my moving company delivered Carlos' new appliances.  He lives in the town that borders mine.


    Carlos tells a funny story about (none / 0) (#81)
    by jondee on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 04:46:37 PM EST
    that Woodstock gig. Apparently he took too much acid before they went on stage, and the guitar neck turned into a writhing serpent, which is why, he says, he was grimacing so much while he was playing.

    Santana's well-deserved popularity (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by caseyOR on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 01:48:04 PM EST
    crosses gender lines. IMO, Carlos Santana is one of the greatest guitarists of all time.

    If your preferred genre is light pop music then Santana may not be the music for you. For myself, music, all genres, is critical to my well-being. I equally appreciate the work of Carlos Santana and Burt Bacharach.


    I don't know if I've ever truly liked ... (none / 0) (#62)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 02:36:22 PM EST
    ... Burt Bacharach's music, even while acknowledging that the ability to compose is a talent not gifted to everybody. I've always considered his work to be somewhat on the schmaltzy side.

    Buy, hey, that's just me. If people in general didn't like Bacharach's songs, he wouldn't have enjoyed the considerable success he has garnered over the decades. The true joy of the musical arts is that there's something in it for everybody, regardless of one's particular or even peculiar tastes.

    And let's face it, there are a lot of otherwise popular songs out there that caused each one of us to have probably wondered aloud at one time or another, "WTF?"

    I mean, is there anyone out there who can truly explain the nascent popular appeal of Richard Harris's overblown, angst-riddled cover of "MacArthur Park"? While no doubt many felt captivated by the song, which is why it rose to the top of the charts, I remember it more at the time as akin to being held hostage. My apologies (and condolences) if anyone reading this was / is one of its fans. ;-D



    Alfie is a lovely, wistful song.. (none / 0) (#77)
    by jondee on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 04:29:09 PM EST
    I heard the late great alto sax player Art Pepper take that one to the moon and back once at Parnell's in Seattle.

    Have you heard the collaboration (none / 0) (#179)
    by ruffian on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 04:19:00 PM EST
    Bacharach did with Elvis Costello a few years ago - Painted From Memory? Costello gives it just the right amount of emotion, IMO. A few clunkers on that record, but some of the songs are among the best either have done. 'God Give Me Strength' and 'This House is Empty Now' are my favorites.

    Actually (none / 0) (#38)
    by Repack Rider on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 01:21:19 AM EST
    I was aware of that single exception.  That film is set in the 1890s, when the "penny-farthing" had given way to the "safety bicycle."

    "walk and draw" (none / 0) (#2)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 11:21:08 AM EST
    "fair and balanced"

    Them's fightin' words, pardner. : ) (none / 0) (#3)
    by desertswine on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 02:07:00 PM EST
    Well, pardner (none / 0) (#16)
    by Repack Rider on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 08:04:04 PM EST
    Them's fightin' words, pardner. : )

    Smile when you say that.  Wait, you did.


    it seems a Buscadero Rig for eveyone (none / 0) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 05:36:18 PM EST
    is exactly what the gun nuts want.  i know some that im absolutely sure practice "drawing" in front of a mirror when no one is watching.

    "You talkin' to me? (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 08:43:46 PM EST
    "You talkin' to me? You talkin' to me? Then who the he11 else are you talking... you talking to me? Well I'm the only one here. Who the f**k do you think you're talking to? Oh yeah? OK. "

    Uhm, but I have a photo (none / 0) (#21)
    by MKS on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 10:18:56 PM EST
    of great-grand on a horse with a gunbelt below his belt, and 45 in his holster.  The belt has spaces for bullets.  Some have bullets some do not.  Photo circa 1890.

    The toes of his boots are a little worn--from running starts of his horse so that he would end up dragging his back foot a little.

    He has sweat through his hat.  And he is next to his best fried also mounted on horseback. Lassos in hand.

    Sometimes myths are correct. After all, sometimes people are not that creative.

    Great grad was a cowboy. And his daughter, my grandma was raised on a ranch, had her own ponies, a rifle (not a six shooter) and went bu Bill until she was a teenager.  


    Photo of Great-Grandad (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by MKS on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 10:33:34 PM EST
    How can I upload it?  Is that okay?

    Posted photo on Big Orange (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by MKS on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 10:44:10 PM EST
    Diary and photo of Great Grand Dad with six shooter on horseback.

    And don't you go and call us a liar.  (ha!)


    you can (none / 0) (#24)
    by linea on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 10:42:14 PM EST
    upload it to your wordpress account and use that link to the image.

    The pointed toe (none / 0) (#26)
    by MKS on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 10:48:03 PM EST
    "cowboy" boot of today,, however, is definitely a later creation.  For dudes or dancing later, I guess.  Those pointy toes would not last long getting rubbed in the dirt and kicking up against rocks and all sort of things.



    wow !!! (none / 0) (#34)
    by linea on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 01:11:19 AM EST
    it's like... to me it's almost imaginary. like scottish leprechauns (no troll slander allowed!!)

    rats !! (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by linea on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 01:14:36 AM EST
    that's ireland not scotland. i'm in for a serious chastisement now!

    line, I'll let that one slide... (5.00 / 4) (#47)
    by fishcamp on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:10:39 AM EST
    MKS will NOT! (none / 0) (#197)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 06:06:19 PM EST
    No segue:  if only I could figure out how to change the Prius clock.  

    MKS will NOT! (none / 0) (#198)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 06:07:33 PM EST
    No segue:  if only I could figure out how to change the Prius clock.  Yes, I read the mamual.  

    The pointed toe is to help (none / 0) (#57)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 01:28:19 PM EST
    insure the boot slides into the stirrup...the high heel is to insure the boot doesn't slip through the stirrup...

    Yes, that is what they say now (none / 0) (#89)
    by MKS on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 05:32:12 PM EST
    But look at Great Grand Dad.  No pointed toes.  They look like they were poured into the saddle, so much time they spent there.

    The pointed toe boots are not what cowboys who spent a lot of time in the saddle wore.  Those are fancy boots or boots of those who ride a little bit or for show as performers.


    Maybe. Maybe not. (none / 0) (#110)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:15:20 PM EST
    Sounds like a subject for a doctorate. Get yourself a grant from the EPA to study the effects of uncomfortable boots on man made climate change and your fixed up for 10 years or so.

    I'm more familiar with farmer boots, which have square toes and regular length heals. The purpose of these are to keep cattle manure, often wet, from squashing up and over the shoe tops and down the inside. A secondary advantage is that they protect against snake bite while wandering around pastures and woodlots.

    In the spirit of glasnost I will point out that if you ever get invited to a cow chip throwing contest you should never lick your fingers. ;-)


    My great grandfather wore six guns (none / 0) (#134)
    by Green26 on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 11:50:12 PM EST
    on occasion. One on each hip. In late 1800's and after the turn of the century. Sources are family photos, family history, and a newspaper article. He was a rancher. A few thousand head of horses and some cattle at the turn of the century. We had 350 head of Black Angus cattle and planted 1200 acres of wheat while I was growing up on the ranch.  On a Sioux Reservation. James J. Hill used to hunt ducks on our ranch, at the family lake. Never heard of a gun fight in any family stories, lore or history. The market for horses fell apart when the military stopped buying horses around WWI. Not too long later, the Depression came along. Tough times for the ranch and family. The ranch was put back together by my uncle and dad after WWII. Grew up in a 2-room shack, without electricity or running water. Ranch still exists. Oil and oil leasing helps. When I was about 21, the best thing I could do was ride horses. Cutting horses. Bringing in the cows for artificial insemination or branding. Rope a bit. Still love branding at the ranch, or anywhere.

    And read the papers (none / 0) (#22)
    by MKS on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 10:20:37 PM EST
    from El Paso in the late 1800s and early 1900s.  Gunfights did occur.

    Four Dead in Five Seconds Gunfight (none / 0) (#28)
    by MKS on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 11:03:57 PM EST
    in 1881 El Paso.  Link.

    Shoot happens (none / 0) (#36)
    by Repack Rider on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 01:19:13 AM EST
    Gunfights did occur.

    I am not arguing that.  After all,  I used famed gunfighters Billy the Kid and Bill Hickok as examples, but they did not carry in fast-draw holsters.  Hickok preferred a shotgun, and his pistols were carried pointed backward.  The OK Corral fight was an ambush by the Earp brothers of some hungover cowboys, not a fast-draw duel, and the weapons were drawn long before the shooting started.  (Wyatt Earp was forced to leave Arizona after being indicted for murder.)

    The first Western films were made in the 'teens and 'twenties by men whose exposure to the "Wild West" had been the Buffalo Bill show in the 1890s.  That tells you something.


    Clearly, a brief (none / 0) (#54)
    by MKS on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 10:50:57 AM EST
    snapshot of a rapidly changing time that has been greatly exaggerated.  It was a tough, often isolated and physically demanding life.

    Grandma, after starting out life working cattle and being called "Bill," was quite happy to leave riding horses behind and drive her Oldsmobile to get groceries.


    Speaking of the true spirit of the Old West (none / 0) (#132)
    by jondee on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 11:28:10 PM EST
    a friend of mine told me a guy once walked up to him in a bar in Texas and said "when a man stares at another man like that, he either wants to fight or suck his d*ck. Which is it?"

    ... in the Old West, at least in the traditional sense of movie westerns. As you noted, what happened at the OK Corral wasn't so much a gunfight as an ambush and cornering. Further, most of Billy the Kid's eight documented victims were killed from ambush, just as he ultimately was at the hands of Sheriff Pat Garrett in July 1881. But shootouts did occasionally occur, and a couple were spectacular.

    One of them was recounted by The Eagles in "Doolin-Dalton," the first track of their 1973 album "Desperado," in which the Dalton Gang brazenly -- and foolishly -- tried to rob two banks simultaneously on opposite sides of the street in Coffeyville, Kansas in October 1892. They were shot to pieces by the town's residents for the effort and four were killed, including two of the Dalton brothers.

    Another great shootout in Northfield, Minnesota effectively spelled the end of the notorious James-Younger Gang in September 1876, after townspeople contested by force of arms their attempt to rob the First National Bank. While Jesse and Frank James managed to escape, two gang members were killed outright, as were two Northfield residents, and the Younger brothers were all wounded and subsequently captured during the subsequent vigorous pursuit.



    Cole Younger's confiscated revolver (none / 0) (#101)
    by jondee on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 07:02:07 PM EST
    was auctioned off, with supposedly ironclad provenance, some years ago. In the high five figures as I recall..

    He survived something like five or six bullet wounds, did a long stretch in the pen, and after release "turned his life around" as they say..


    Bob Younger died in prison in 1889. (none / 0) (#120)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:55:31 PM EST
    Cole and Jim Younger were paroled in 1901. There were certain conditions to which Cole and Jim agreed as part of their release, which was opposed by many Minnesotans who had long memories. They were not to make any public appearances or in any way attempt to profit from their notoriety, nor were they allowed to get married. Jim committed suicide in 1902, while Cole lived until 1916.

    Did you perchance see Walter Hill's 1980 western "The Long Riders"? He ingeniously cast four sets of Hollywood brothers to play the four sets of brothers who comprised the James-Younger Gang at various times -- James and Stacey Keach as Jesse and Frank James; David, Keith and Robert Carradine as Cole, Jim and Bob Younger; Dennis and Randy Quaid as Ed and Clell Miller; and Christopher and Nicholas Guest as Charley and Robert Ford.

    (Robert Ford, of course, is notorious in his own right for having shot and killed Jesse James in April 1882 while the latter's back was turned, an act for which he was forever branded a coward by Jesse's multitude of fans.)

    The climactic Northfield shootout's choreography was certainly a tribute to Sam Peckinpah's "The Wild Bunch." Curiously, the scene was shot in and around the town of Parrott, Georgia, an area which is 1,000 to the southeast of Northfield, Minnesota and looks nothing like the northern Great Plains.



    Yeah, I saw the film.. (none / 0) (#130)
    by jondee on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 11:01:33 PM EST
    I especially liked that sterling soundtrack by Ry Cooder, with a lot of period music. An inspired choice!

    Overall, I thought it was one of the better Westerns, though I thought Walter Hill got a little carried away with the slow-motion shootings; like he was trying to out-Peckinpah Peckinpah. David Carradine as Cole Younger was one of his better roles, imo.


    I would be happy if we never went (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by caseyOR on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 02:57:06 PM EST
    back to standard time. Just stay on Daylight Saving Time all year. I hate when it gets dark at 4 pm. Absolutely hate it.

    Tallulah or any film (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by fishcamp on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 04:54:14 PM EST
    would be just fine for me, if I could get it.  After paying $8.36 per month, I can never get on Netflix, I'm dropping them, and my collision insurance, Marlin magazine, NYT, and taking my Constitutional handbook to Aspen , tomorrow.  Wish Hunter was still on the planet, I have several topics to discuss.  Maybe Jeralyn will come up for the festivities.  I may be able to get tickets.  More reports to follow...

    Good luck with your trip!!!! (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by ruffian on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 01:03:31 PM EST
    Looking forward to a full report!

    im sorry {{ }} (none / 0) (#8)
    by linea on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 04:58:19 PM EST
    couple of interesting quotes (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 05:32:41 PM EST
    from the bobblehead shows today

    "im afraid that if they vote for this bill they will put the house majority at risk next year"

    Tom Cotton on TRyan Care  (adding its pointless because it will not pass the senate)

    "there are a lot more shoes to drop on this centipede"

    John McCain on Russia

    More quotes to (none / 0) (#11)
    by KeysDan on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 05:58:19 PM EST
    note,  starting with:   "I will repeal and replace Obamacare with something terrific."  

    For terrific reassurances. "Nobody will be worse off,"  Tom Price;
    "Can't answer how many will lose coverage by the Republican plan." Paul Ryan.

    If this terrific plan is NOT passed, "there will be a bloodbath." Paul Ryan. Also, see Tom Cotton, above via the Captain, on his take on blood-bathing.


    ha (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 06:04:16 PM EST
    you beat me by seconds.  i literally have the Ryan quote captured and ready to paste.

    thing is i think Ryan and Cotton could both be right.  rock, meet hard place.

    that performanve by Price was unbelievable.  on the upside it was shredded by "the panel".  even David Brooks was making sense.


    what i mean (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 06:13:17 PM EST
    is midterms are always about turnout.  imo democrats will turn out.  if they dont repeal evil obamacare the red brigades might not.  similarly if the house passes it the fear and uncertainty could have the same effect even tho they cleverly made sure the worst stuff would not happen until after the 18 midterms.

    i think they are overestimating the stupidity of their base.  understandable given their history of estimating it.


    in my opinion (none / 0) (#29)
    by linea on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 11:25:18 PM EST
    by CaptHowdy
    imo democrats will turn out.

    you are correct.  but i also feel young-progressives will turn out and vote democratic party. and i believe that the number of young people and progressives voting will be much greater than typical for a midterm election.


    Bloodbath (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 07:18:35 PM EST
    either way. They have been protected from the consequences of what they have been telling their voters by at first the senate and later Obama. I don't know but it seems these red state voters are liking being lied to. That's the only reason I figure they keep coming out and voting for these scam artists.

    DJT on MSNBC split screen (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Ladyjustice on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 06:35:18 PM EST
    Tried again to watch MSNBC and AM Joy this morning.  Watched, and then struck us why we had stopped watching since the election --- Trump was on a constant split screen. It was very hard to concentrate on what Joy and panel were discussing, as DJT is such a detestable human being.  And his constant visible presence anathema to our country, culture and sensibilities.  Imagine Joy sitting in the center of this 4 person panel and behind her is the vision of Trump depicted on all four corners of her panel, much like a third-world dictator's on every poster, on every corner and every currency.  Is there nowhere we can go to avoid being affronted by this mentally deficient individual?  

    Agreed. Join Jeralyn (none / 0) (#31)
    by Towanda on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 12:48:24 AM EST
    and others of us (per a previous post) on HGTV.

    Curb appeal! Water features! And not that creature.


    A threat to Medicare: Balance Billing. (5.00 / 2) (#56)
    by KeysDan on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 12:34:04 PM EST
    Current law does not permit physicians participating in Medicare to bill patients more than the program's payment rate for any service.

     For example, if a flu shot is billed at $39, Medicare allows for payment at $20. Since a preventative measure, Medicare pays the total allowable amount. The patient pays nothing. Under "Balance Billing," the provider may bill the patient for $19. And, of course, the balance gets greater with larger billings.

    Tom Price, an orthopedist, when in the House, introduced legislation that would permit "Balance Billing," on multiple occasions. That legislation never gained traction. During Price's confirmation hearings for Secretary of HHS, he affirmed his support for such legislation.

     Price argues that "Balance Billing" will be a positive, increasing the number of physicians willing to see Medicare patients--a solution to a problem seen, according to the Medicare Advisory Committee, primarily, by Price.

    "Balance Billing" is, essentially, a stealth destruction of Medicare, with Medicare reimbursement to providers serving as a "coupon" to be used toward medical services. The costs for services will go up immensely, in the short-term, and, in the longer term, make a very popular program, very unpopular. According to design for administrative deconstruction.

    Tom Price, as Secretary of HHS, brings his radical ideas to the fore, and has the ear of a president tutored in health care by Dr. Harold Bornstein and believes "no one knew" that health care is complicated.   First, repeal and replacement (or, if Trump's "terrific care" fails, left to wither  on the vine) of Obamacare, and then attempts at Balance Billing.

    For someone like my mother. (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 01:48:31 PM EST
    The "balance" would go unpaid. She does not have the income to pay balances above what her Medicare pays. More proof that the GOP healthcare plan is really "die soon, real soon."

    Actually that is not in the health care plan (none / 0) (#66)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 03:41:56 PM EST
    and would be a drastic change for Medicare.

    But if you want to help you can your reps and/or send emails.


    Thanks I just got off the (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 02:07:25 PM EST
    phone to both my senators and my rep.

    We seniors need to be on the lookout for such.

    And since Medigap insurance pays only the difference between the Medicare approved amount  and the 80% paid it wouldn't cover the differeence between doctor billed amount and medicare paid.

    e.g. now

    200.00 doctor billed

    80.00 Medicare approved

    64.00 Medicare paid (80%)

    16.00 Patient owed and covered by Medigap

    With balanced billing

    200.00 doctor billed

    80.00 Medicare approved

    64.00 Medicare paid (80%)

    16.00 patient owed and covered by Medigap

    120.00 owed by patient and not covered by Medigap.



    Tom Price (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 02:10:51 PM EST
    wants to get rid of price negotiation with doctors for private insurance too. He seems to think that the insurance companies should pay a flat fee like $50 towards an office visit and the rest should be balance billed to the patient. I guess when he was practicing he never talked to his office manager about uncollected or noncollectable balances.

    Tom Price thinks a lot of things (none / 0) (#65)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 03:35:18 PM EST
    So did Jonathan Gruber.

    Hopefully we will have a better shot at heading off problems this time than we did when Nancy was busy screwing us.

    "we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy."Nov 17, 2013

    Have you called your elected reps or do you justr wanna complain??

    Lead, Follow. Or Get Out Of The Way.


    Since you can't (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 04:24:30 PM EST
    discuss what a disaster TrumpCare is you're screaming about something 8 years ago. yes, this seems to be the new keep the Trumpers in line talking point by dangling something else in front of them. There is no chance what the GOP has proposed is going to pass because it has to be BETTER and what they are proposing would be WORSE where a 62 year old living in rural Nebraska would pay 20K in insurance premiums a year on a salary of 18K. Which basically means he is going to lose his insurance under TrumpCare. Probably around 1/2 of the people under Obamacare are going to lose their insurance.

    Hooey, GA (2.00 / 1) (#113)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:26:34 PM EST
    I've noted problems and also said that we don't know.

    That's your problem. I say we don't know and you think it's approval.

    And when you start tossing around numbers, keep them in context and show examples including all the rebates on taxes, etc. Otherwise you'll get ignored.

    And that's important. We need to keep our credibility when we want to shut down some bad stuff.


    We do know (none / 0) (#121)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:58:09 PM EST
    Jim. The CBO has scored it. Trump definitely needs to give up the idea of campaigning in red states for the policy and he himself doesn't even want his own name on it.

    There's a whole chart on how much everybody is going to lose with TrumpCare. The only "winners" are 20 year olds who are now allowed to return to the junk insurance market. Junk insurance is now called "winning". We have the clown car cavalcade running the country.


    The CBO was wrong on Obamacare (none / 0) (#145)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 11:38:06 AM EST
    and is likely wrong here.

    e.g. The number insured goes down? Yes. When not forced some people won't purchase.

    Obamacare collapsed when the mandate wasn't immediately started.

    This was further aided with "one size fits all" policies that ran up costs for everyone.

    Look at premiums they have gone out of sight and many counties have only 1 company to purchase from.

    With across state lines competition and policies designed to cover what each person needs the Repubs think the premium prices will drop and more companies will enter the market.

    Will that happen? I don't know and neither do you.

    But rather than be specific on the problems and suggest you just complain.

    Lead. Follow. Or Get Out Of The Way.


    Jim (none / 0) (#158)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 01:44:56 PM EST
    the CBO scored Obamacare correctly just as they are scoring TrumpCare correctly.

    What you don't understand is taking away the mandate jacks up the price for almost everybody. A lot of people are going to be pushed once again to high risk pools in states that failed. Why on earth do Republicans want to return to a known failure?

    So you're okay with people buying junk insurance? Do you realize the costs of junk insurance is increasing the costs on people like you? You guys always ignore the price of cost shifting. More people uninsured means the people with insurance pay more.

    The reason those counties only have one policy is lack of competition and barrier to entry for insurance carriers. A lot of insurance carriers don't want to write insurance in rural areas and new companies that might have high barriers to entering the market as in high start up costs. And what TrumpCare is doing is making things worse for these same people. Maybe more insurers will come in but they are either going to be selling worthless junk insurance or extremely expensive policies. Someone paying 1K a month now could easily have their premium increase to 4K with TrumpCare. Look even Trump admits it's a disaster and doesn't want his name on the policy.

    I've already been over this selling across state lines issue with you. It's been tried and it failed.

    You may continue to apologize for the GOP for the rest of your life for all I care.


    Trump: we will repeal and (none / 0) (#78)
    by KeysDan on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 04:36:17 PM EST
    replace Obamacare with something terrific.  And, he and Ryan succeeded with Trumpcare, if success means increasing the number of uninsured by 14 million next year and up to 24 million in a decade, according to the CBO scoring.  No wonder the CBO has been the subject of demonizing. Price can't believe it.

    Ya vol !! (none / 0) (#67)
    by jondee on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 03:46:36 PM EST
    Hate to break it to you, but people who shill for the hard-right are in the way of everyone in favor of single payer healthcare.

    How'd that work out for ya? (none / 0) (#70)
    by Yman on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 04:08:30 PM EST
    Did the Republican Rep and Senators that you elected promise to fight against any of their fellow Republican's efforts to slash Medicare and Medicaid, including this one?



    Politicians I vote for do all sorts of (none / 0) (#115)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:33:03 PM EST
    things I don't like or want.

    Being an adult I try to decide what are the important issues for the country and then me.

    And if I disagree I try to influence/change the results.

    We didn't have a chance on Obamacare.

    We do nave some now. Why don't you:

    Lead. Follow. Or Get Out Of The Way.


    what a bunch of bullroar (5.00 / 2) (#148)
    by mm on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 12:27:23 PM EST
    We didn't have a chance on Obamacare

    that freakin bill was debated around the country for a full year


    See #170 (none / 0) (#174)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 04:03:35 PM EST
    Shorter answer - no (none / 0) (#118)
    by Yman on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:39:11 PM EST
    That didn't do a thing for you, because they already have your vote.  You put them in office and they're doing exactly what they said they would do when you voted for them.

    BTW - Your stupid moniker "Lead, follow or get out of the way" means literally nothing - even when you type it in bold.  It's an old man trying to sound tough and yelling at kids to get off his lawn, while they just laugh at him.  You're not "leading" when you phone your representatives to complain they're doing what you elected them to do.  You're just adding the punchline to a pathetic joke.


    Wrong. (none / 0) (#143)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 10:43:17 AM EST
    What they want is your vote NEXT election.

    And if they think your locked in they will ignore you.

    Look at how Democrats have and do treat the black vote. I mean, what have they done for blacks lately?


    Lead. Follow. Or Get Out Of The Way.


    100% correct (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by Yman on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 11:54:42 AM EST
    You think they'll pay attention to you in the next election???!??

    Hahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahaha ...

    Why?  They didn't break a promise to you.  They did exactly what YOU elected them to do.  They'll just laugh at you when you call their offices and complain they did what you elected them to do (not to your face - just after u hang up).  They  also know you'll do exactly the same thing in the next election, because you've voted for Republicans and their Medicare/Medicaid slashing platform since 1976.

    BTW - Your faux concern for AAs and lack of knowledge about them and the Democratic party is funny.

    But not remotely surprising.

    BBTW - See the CBO score for your Trumpcare plan?  24 MILLION to lose coverage.  The poor, working class and the elderly to have their premiums skyrocket.

    That's on YOU and the people you elected.


    Nope (none / 0) (#154)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 01:14:16 PM EST
    My hot button was immigration and the flooding of hundreds of thousands of refugees and undocumented persons.

    I knew that Obamacare would have to be replaced no matter who won.

    I mean, what do you do when the one company providing coverage in county X shuts down and leaves?

    Now, will the Repub plan work?

    One more time. I don't know and neither do you.

    And you actually believe the CBO figures? Really? Come on. You're smarter than that.

    But hey! Unlike the Demos the evileeee Repubs are having a discussion. Why don't you make some suggestions?

    Lead. Follow. Or Get Out Of The Way.


    Hahahahahaaa .... (none / 0) (#159)
    by Yman on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 01:49:00 PM EST
    Just a few days ago - while you were pretending  you didn't support Trumpcare - you said we should at least wait for it to be scored.  To which I proposed a bet - namely, that the score would show less coverage for fewer people and that you would then ignore and attack the very score you said we should wait for.  Which is exactly what you've now done.  Is almost like the dishonesty and hypocrisy of some people is entirely predictable.  

    But your latest claims are even more laughable - no easy feat.  I couldn't care less what your "hot button issues", nor what you pretend you "know".  The Dems and your fellow Trumpets aren't having a "discussion" at all.  YOU Trumpets are pushing through a plan that will leave tens of millions without insurance and without care.  It will raise premiums drastically for the poor, the elderly and the working class.

    BTW - Your stupid moniker is also funny.  You're not "leading" anything.  You're making a couple calls to Republicans you put in office, who will quickly ignore your call, because they know this isn't an issue you really care about.  They know they have your vote no matter what.  Then you post a comment on a blog.  That's not "leading", although it IS "following" ... much like a good, little sheep does.  In the meantime, the rest of us will actually lead, by actively opposing the war on the poor, the elderly and the working class that you enable.


    Yman, how can you say this. (5.00 / 3) (#161)
    by vml68 on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 02:04:29 PM EST
    You're not "leading" anything.

    He bolded and underlined it.

    I was so impressed, I was ready to follow but now you've sown a seed of doubt in my mind :-)!


    Personally, I found that saying Fascistic (none / 0) (#164)
    by jondee on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 02:21:30 PM EST
    when it popped up as a bumpersticker in the eighties, and our resident fascist beating it to death now just reaffirms my earlier interpretation.

    He keeps saying Lead. Follow.. and all I keep hearing is Achtung! and Ya Vol!


    Your attempt at sarcasm (none / 0) (#170)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 03:35:15 PM EST
    is good humor if you want to ignore the fact that
    yman makes no attempt to suggest the obvious.

    The time is right for people to start demanding a single payer system.

    Because the truth is clear. Without a mandate the premiums will be sky high and the deductions immense.

    Yet yman, and others, just look at this as a political issue. That neither the Repubs or Demos are right doesn't seem to occur to either of you.

    And yes, there are bills now available for discussion. Something the Demos didn't provide in '09.

    "we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy."

    And yes, I used bold for emphasis. If I had been in front of him I would have been shouting. Why?

    Because in my 79 years of living I have learned that people who just want to complain will never be part of the solution.

    Lead. Follow. Or Get Out Of The Way.


    More wingnut lies (none / 0) (#172)
    by Yman on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 03:53:33 PM EST
    What Pelosi really said.

    Obamacare was debated for a year with numerous hearings before it was passed.  You Trumpers passed this bill without so much as a CBO score, which YOU said we should wait for, then claimed want credible when it pointed out the obvious - he fact that tens of millions will lose their health insurance.


    BTW - If you were "standing in front of me" you wouldn't have been shooting at all. Conservatives can only act like tough guys when they're safely hidden away at a distance.


    Debates aren't the bill. (none / 0) (#175)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 04:04:56 PM EST
    A Follow. Follow. Follower (none / 0) (#180)
    by jondee on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 04:19:18 PM EST
    Of Bannon, Trump, Pence, Carson and wingnut radio being for single payer is like a follower of Bin Laden being for peaceful coexistence.

    Pssssstt .... (none / 0) (#182)
    by Yman on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 04:38:17 PM EST
    And yes, there are bills now available for discussion. Something the Demos didn't provide in '09.

    Hey Einstein ... try comparing apples to apples.  This Trumpcare bill is only a preliminary version of the House bill.  They want to vote on it next week in the House and have it through the Senate and a final vote by Easter.  The final version of the House ACA bill came out in July, 2009, several months before the final vote was held (October).

    I'd hazard a guess that your "confusion" and false claims are unintentional, but even my 6th grader knows these basic facts.


    Well, the bolding and the underlining (none / 0) (#178)
    by vml68 on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 04:18:23 PM EST
    is not working. Have you thought about increasing the font size?
    Maybe, that will do the trick and Yman and Jondee and the rest of us will buy what you are selling....or maybe not, LOL!

    I would like to say that I absolutely loved this gem.

    The time is right for people to start demanding a single payer system.

    I hear that is exactly what Paul Ryan was aiming for with his plan. I'm sure the Republican President and Republican Senate and House are just champing at the bit to pass a Single Payer plan, like they've always wanted to. They just need a little encouragement from us.


    When the only insurance provider leaves.... (none / 0) (#176)
    by Jack E Lope on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 04:14:28 PM EST
    I mean, what do you do when the one company providing coverage in county X shuts down and leaves?

    Prevent that company from gaming the system for even more monopoly power?

    [U.S. District Court Judge John] Bates also concluded that Aetna tried to "leverage" the company's continued participation in federal Affordable Health Care Act exchanges in exchange "for favorable treatment from DOJ regarding the proposed merger [with Humana]."

    The judge cited court records in which Bertolini and other Aetna executives suggested the company would withdraw from the exchanges if the Department of Justice sued to block the merger with Humana.

    "This is persuasive evidence that when Aetna later withdrew from the 17 counties, it did not do so for business reasons, but instead to follow through on the threat that it made earlier," Bates wrote. He added that internal company emails and other records show that Aetna "tried to conceal from discovery in this litigation the reasoning behind their recommendation to withdraw" from the exchanges.

    Plus, an abandoned-market is one of the many problems with Obamacare that are arguments-in-favor of single-payer.


    Spying Appliances. (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by KeysDan on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 03:49:48 PM EST
    Kelly Ann Conway suggested that Trump Tower may have been the spying victim of an appliance: a camera-equipped microwave.  John LeCarre was prescient with his 1963 novel, "The Spy Who Came in From the Cold," the cold war story of surveillance by a spy who resided in a suspect's refrigerator.

    Yes, I now (5.00 / 3) (#76)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 04:27:41 PM EST
    wonder if that guy that came to fix my microwave was actually not installing spy equipment in it. If he did whatever he put in there is probably covered by broccoli now anyway.

    Kelly Ann (5.00 / 2) (#83)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 05:04:15 PM EST
    should definitely ditch the curling iron.  just in case.

    Also Maybe (none / 0) (#142)
    by FlJoe on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 10:24:57 AM EST
    her "toys"
    Users of We-Vibe sex toys were being tracked and they didn't even know it.

    OMG! Kellyanne was right! (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 07:30:08 PM EST
    Quelle surprise! Who knew? Scheiss is what happens when you place your political faith in a chinchilla-haired huckster and an Ayn Rand aficionado.

    Ryan is "encouraged' by the report (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 05:37:04 PM EST
    and that it "exceeded his expectations"

    laugh or cry.  cant decide.


    the democrat news conference (none / 0) (#84)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 05:05:35 PM EST
    that just ended had a giddy feel

    24 million who will still get sick (none / 0) (#87)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 05:09:48 PM EST
    And all will die someday, and we can't just leave the bodies in the streets cuz that makes the rest of us sick before our time.

    Going down in a blaze of glory though, all of us.


    This turkey (none / 0) (#93)
    by KeysDan on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 05:41:23 PM EST
    is going to require frequent basting with alternative facts.  But, Trump and his sous chefs are on it.

    "It's not my job to deal in facts."

    How Dems Became the New Party of No (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by Green26 on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 06:35:33 PM EST
    this is awsum (5.00 / 3) (#139)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 07:11:31 AM EST
    From (5.00 / 2) (#149)
    by FlJoe on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 12:49:20 PM EST
    the Flim-Flam Flynn files
    A recently retired FBI agent, Brian McCauley, was the fact witness at the center of yet another Clinton email 'scandal' which broke about three weeks before the November 2016 election....... It turns out that about two weeks before that story came out, McCauley had been placed on retainer by Trump advisor Michael Flynn, a retainer/consultancy agreement which eventually totaled $28,000.

    Documentary Podcast on Freddie Gray (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by ruffian on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 01:09:37 PM EST
    I strongly recommend the podcast Undisclosed's current series 'The Killing of Freddie Gray'. Rabia Chaudry is joined by Baltimore reporters to tell the story, folding in the history of the projects and police relations, many interviews, and upcoming details of the trials. a 'must listen' for anyone interested in this case. If it were on TV, it would be up for awards, it is that well put together.

    I listened for about 15 minutes until (none / 0) (#185)
    by McBain on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 04:56:02 PM EST
    Marcia Chatelain, a professor of history and African American studies, said Freddie Gray's story begins "hundreds of years" before the day he died.

    No Marcia, Gray's death had nothing to do with slavery. Nothing to do with the death of other African Americans. It had to do with what happened that day.  

    An African American judge decided the officers weren't guilty (one had a jury trial that ended in a mistrial).  Three of the officers are African American.  Justice was served.  

    Because of the riots and bad behavior of mayor Stephanie Rawlings Blake and state's attorney Marylin Mosby, The Gray family received a 6.4 million dollar settlement from the city of Baltimore.  


    quote of the day (5.00 / 1) (#171)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 03:40:51 PM EST
    so far

    "....Bannon may have "some kind of sway" with this group...there has been litle to NO reporting that Bannon is in any way connected to Breidtbart coverage..."

    -Robert Costa

    hashtage shive Ryan and blame him

    About those lower premiums (5.00 / 1) (#195)
    by Yman on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 05:46:45 PM EST
    ... in Trumpcare.  Surprisingly enough, the promised 10% reduction in premiums will be because older people (50-64) will be priced out of the market and will simply be unable to afford insurance.  The uninsured rate in this group will increase from 12% to 30%.  Oh, and the deductibles will be higher than the ones Republicans complained about under the ACA.


    * (Trump voters and defenders)

    Now you worry about Trump (1.50 / 2) (#147)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 12:25:11 PM EST
    saying wire tapping instead of surveillance or listening or something....

    Everyone knows what he meant. "They" were spying on me and "they" were Obama.

    Now here's the irony.

    The government is doing exactly what you were complaining about when Bush was Prez...only thing is  Bush claimed conversations with US citizens would have the US citizen portion deleted....

    How'd that work out? Well, you said they wouldn't be...and you were right.

    But if it's your folks that's okay??? Really??

    I would be interested in seeing a link (5.00 / 4) (#155)
    by Peter G on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 01:17:27 PM EST
    to support the notion of any progressive suggesting that it would be "okay" (or any similar position) for the White House to have any government agency conduct electronic surveillance of any kind on political adversaries for political reasons. I sure haven't seen any such thing, and wouldn't support any such thing. All I've heard is fair-minded people (liberal, conservative, and otherwise) saying it is absolutely not "okay" for the President of the United States to accuse his predecessor of "wire tapping" him or his residence or offices during the campaign (whether or not the President knows the meaning of the word "wiretapping" and whether or not he meant that expression to be understood in some more general sense), when he has no real basis for believing it to be true, and it is almost certainly not true. And no, I most certainly did not "know what he meant," assuming he meant something different from what he wrote.

    You are focusing on what Trump said (1.00 / 1) (#156)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 01:37:41 PM EST
    about Obama because you find it nasty.

    The cynic in me says that Obama knew. He may not have asked directly. But he knew.

    "Who will rid me of this meddlesome priest?"

    Just as Henry II knew what he wanted. Just as Nixon knew what was going on.

    And if the Left, as a group, truly opposed spying on American citizens the Internet, and this blog, would be lit up.

    I give you this example of a post from this blog


    It has 4 comments.


    I was not focused on the naming of (5.00 / 1) (#167)
    by Peter G on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 03:19:34 PM EST
    former President Obama in Tr*mp's tweet. Although I do believe Tr*mp has a personal dislike for Obama (whether founded in jealousy or in something more toxic, I cannot say), I understood that tweet to be about Tr*mp's unfounded belief, predicated on some sort of right-wing website or radio show that he relies on for "information" (instead of reliable professional news sources and a competent professional staff), that his predecessor (or his predecessor's administration) had engaged in surreptitious, politically-motivated surveillance of him (or his inner circle) during the campaign. So, if you thought my comment was about the use of Obama's name, Jim, you are mistaken.
        Your link to an eight-year-old post of Jeralyn's on a very different subject neither proves your point nor deserves further response.

    However, I should have also point out (5.00 / 2) (#169)
    by Peter G on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 03:28:32 PM EST
    that ending the tweet with the comment, "Bad (or sick) guy," pretty much eliminates the possibility that when Tr*mp wrote "Obama," was he "really meant" was "people in the Obama Administration."

    The link was (1.00 / 2) (#181)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 04:21:48 PM EST
    just pointing out that spying on US citizens was a hot item during Bush's terms.

    Not so much under Obama.

    Just like there are "moderate Republicans" but no "moderate Democrats."


    If your claim about Obama getting a free pass (none / 0) (#186)
    by Peter G on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 05:03:32 PM EST
    on surveillance from progressives is "just like" a claim that there are plenty of moderate Republicans today but "no moderate Democrats," then I guess I would have to agree with you. In other words, both claims are more or less the opposite of the truth.

    There isn't a Left that (none / 0) (#165)
    by jondee on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 02:47:47 PM EST
    "thinks as a group"

    The world isn't made up of competing anthills and termite mounds where angry swarms "Lead. Follow. Or get out of the way."

    You're projecting your own psychology onto a world that's more complicated than you have the ability to conceptualize.

    Ditto for projecting a Nixonian dirty trickster mentality onto the rest of the world.


    Peter, I generally agree with you (none / 0) (#157)
    by Green26 on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 01:44:54 PM EST
    However, Trump is a different animal. Very imprecise. Loose with words. Dishonest. It's hard to figure out what to take seriously when he talks or tweets. Gets away with a lot of stuff.

    I can buy the argument that wire tapping can be interpreted to mean general surveillance. I can certainly buy that Obama means his administration and not Obama personally.

    I keep wondering where the leaked intelligence info involving contacts between Trump people and Russians, people, government or spies, came from. How did all that get picked up? Just from monitoring some Russian officials and spies? Isn't there noise about  various US investigations of some of this? What's the authorization for those supposed investigations? What surveillance orders may have been obtained? Could Trump have been picked up on some of those "wiretaps", if there were any related wiretaps?

    Of course, I have no clue. Just wondering. And doesn't excuse Trump from his accusations against Obama. Just wondering if there is any conceivable basis for the claim.


    Agreed. Trump (5.00 / 2) (#166)
    by KeysDan on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 03:16:52 PM EST
    is a different animal and gets away with a lot. With a lot of help.  But, the tweets are anything but imprecise. Nor, broad-brushed.

    "Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my 'wires tapped' (sic) in Trump Tower just before victory. Nothing found.  This is McCarthyism."

    "How low has President Obama gone to tapp (sic) my phones during the very sacred election process . This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy."

    Other of his tweets are similarly specific and targeted at President Obama. As president, Trump could readily determine information about his wires being tapped, who told him nothing was found, and, of course, who and how he "just found out" about the tapp. This is stuff even different animals should not be allowed to get away with.  Dismissed as being just another lie of Trump's.  


    Why (none / 0) (#173)
    by FlJoe on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 04:01:18 PM EST
    the confusion? There has been a well publicized ongoing investigation into the Russian hacking. Multiple agencies were involved as early as last spring with public announcements by the FBI and IC by mid summer.

    The biggest leak of course was Steele's dossier which was floating around DC last October, the only surprise is that it didn't leak out sooner, possibly as intended by Steele himself. Much of what has leaked out later was just verifying some of the allegations.


    Okay, then let's take the headline of (none / 0) (#183)
    by Green26 on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 04:38:58 PM EST
    your linked article. "6 different agencies have come together to investigate Trump's possible Russian ties". Note that it says "Trump's" possible ties. If 6 agencies are investigating Trump's possible ties, then how are they doing that? Are they not conducing surveillance? I assume they must be. If they are investigating "Trump", is it not possible that there was some surveillance of Trump? The agencies are all under the US government, and Obama is the head of the US government. If there was such surveillance on Trump, or even close to him, to me, that would support his general statement that Obama (his agencies and administration) ordered or conducted surveillance on him.

    Not saying this occurred. But, to me, it's not entirely consistent to say that 6 agencies are investigating Trump's ties to the Russians, but no surveillance was ordered or conducted on Trump. Of course, I agree that it's not impossible that 6 agencies could conduct such investigation or investigations and not have surveillance that might be close to Trump.


    "Possible" doesn't cut it (5.00 / 1) (#184)
    by Yman on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 04:53:54 PM EST
    Anything is "possible".  Trump didn't claim it was "possible" - he said it actually happened.  Moreover, he claimed it was done for political purposes.

    However, Trump is a different animal. Very imprecise. Loose with words. Dishonest. It's hard to figure out what to take seriously when he talks or tweets. Gets away with a lot of stuff.

    I can buy the argument that wire tapping can be interpreted to mean general surveillance. I can certainly buy that Obama means his administration and not Obama personally.

    That's no excuse.  Words have meanings.  Trump is now POTUS and has to learn that basic lesson.  He has to use words honestly and can't dissemble and have others later attempt to excuse his dishonesty as just being "loose with words". Read his actual tweets.  Wiretap means wiretap.  Obama means Obama.  phone means phone.  Trump Tower means Trump Tower.

    If there was such surveillance on Trump, or even close to him, to me, that would support his general statement that Obama (his agencies and administration) ordered or conducted surveillance on him.

    He lies ... chronically and repeatedly.  Pathologically.  He didn't make a "general statement".  He made a specific accusation without the slightest bit of evidence.  Until he offers such evidence (which  he never will), it's just  another lie.


    It's (5.00 / 1) (#189)
    by FlJoe on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 05:35:11 PM EST
    extremely unlikely that this task force would be conducting surveillance without a proper warrant and it is highly likely  that the existence such warrants would have leaked by now and in any case tRump could unseal them if needed.

    Actually, it would be entirely consistent (5.00 / 3) (#192)
    by Peter G on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 05:39:29 PM EST
    that there was no surveillance directed at Tr*mp, even though there are six agencies that may have information about his (and his proxies') ties to various Russians and Russian agents. This is because -- in case you hadn't thought of it -- there is intense surveillance directed at the Russians, both in and outside the U.S. (hence, multiple agencies, with differing realms of jurisdiction), and that surveillance is likely to have picked up many of the contacts that those Russians and Russian agents had with various Americans. Some contacts being entirely innocent, and some no doubt less so.

    Yes, I understand the surveillance of Russians (none / 0) (#196)
    by Green26 on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 06:04:56 PM EST
    However, I thought it would not be legal to record a US citizen if they were caught up in such a general surveillance. I thought that there is some doctrine of "minimizing". Once it was known a US citizen was involved, no recording could occur. If automatic recording had occurred, then some corrective action would have to be taken. The identity of the US citizen could not be made known.

    The media reports indicated that there was a "transcript" of the conversation between Flynn and the Russian ambassador. If so, and this was done under general surveillance, then it's my understanding that Flynn couldn't be identified and this transcript couldn't be used or disclosed.

    The alternatives are only warrants under FISA or some crime code section.

    I will see if I can locate some more/better info on this, including the minimizing doctrine.


    "Everyone knows" - heh (5.00 / 1) (#187)
    by Yman on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 05:04:12 PM EST

    Don't pretend to speak for "everyone".  Those of us in the real world laugh at these silly excuses offered by you Trump apologists.  Wiretap doesn't mean wiretap.  Obama doesn't mean Obama.  Phone doesn't mean n phone.  Trump Tower  doesn't mean Trump Tower.

    Over a week later, he hasn't offered one iota of evidence to back up his latest tinfoil conspiracy theory, which leaves his apologists hanging out there trying to explain what he "really meant".  It's pathetic.  Words have meanings.  These words are not complex, technical terms.  Learn to use them.  When you make serious accusations against a former POTUS, you'd better have evidence to back it up.  Particularly,  if you happen to be someone with a history of lying consistently and pushing wingnut conspiracy theories.

    BTW -  How's that "voter fraud investigation coming?  Or that promised special prosecutor for Hillary?

    Heh, heh, heh ...


    Depends on the stress level for and (none / 0) (#4)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 02:51:51 PM EST
    Daylight savings time. If family stress is low I don't mind jumping an hour forward. Lots of stress right now, so not enjoying it.

    i recommend (none / 0) (#6)
    by linea on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 03:02:30 PM EST
    TALLULAH on netflix.

    though i dont expect the lawyers here to be sympathetic to "i thought it was the right thing; that's the only reason i did it."

    Did you really say you don't expect (none / 0) (#85)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 05:07:11 PM EST
    Lawyers to be sympathetic to a defendant's mistakes? Holy snot

    And here I was taught that that was why 100 of them at the bottom of the sea is a good start :)


    i watch too much tv (none / 0) (#105)
    by linea on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 07:39:34 PM EST
    i always think of lawyers/barristers as being unsympathetic law-and-order types.

    actually, i dated a lawyer briefly. he didnt have "two nickles to rub together" and didnt seem particulately bright or sympathetic. pretty sure he was a libertarian-republican too.


    Date a bright sympathetic one next time (5.00 / 2) (#141)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 08:19:26 AM EST
    He may not have more nickels though.

    Without a legal system and lawyers arguing against the human inclination toward mob rule, we'd just be a mob.

    There are many rights abuses and it never ends.


    7 charts (none / 0) (#17)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 08:15:39 PM EST
    showing Trump's connections to the Russians here

    it's not the cold war (1.00 / 1) (#20)
    by linea on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 09:58:18 PM EST
    anymore. im not sure anybody cares about the russians.

    americans my age dont care about the russians. the french certainly dont care.  it's little more than an intellectual exercise for the british.  the only people who care are those with an actual border with russia - norway, finland, estonia, latvia.  in my opinion.

    p.s. i feel finland is right to not be part of nato. i feel the centrist swedish-people's-party goal of 2025 membership for finland is a horrible mistake.


    Then Americans your age (5.00 / 4) (#32)
    by Towanda on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 12:50:01 AM EST
    are ignoring history.

    Which also explains why so many voted so stupidly.  


    Agreed. Don't care about (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by KeysDan on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 09:02:44 AM EST
    Russia---is a startling statement....ignoring the spectrum of time--- past, present and future, as if coming from a " Macedonia spammer." Trump, would not even agree...he surely cares about Russia.

    i meant (none / 0) (#108)
    by linea on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:04:37 PM EST
    regular americans born after the cold war dont see russia as a threat to fear. im not talking about foreign policy or political wonks.

    That you "don't care" is irrelevant. (5.00 / 5) (#41)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 05:53:54 AM EST
    You are not final arbiter regarding what is important or newsworthy. This is a national security issue.

    i didnt say i dont care (1.00 / 1) (#102)
    by linea on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 07:19:57 PM EST
    i think my opposition to russia is clear from previous posts.

    im saying that the "trump + russia" meme probably doesnt go anywhere with the average american my age because there is little animus to russia for people born after the cold war.


    You're speaking for others (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by Yman on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:21:17 PM EST
    it's not the cold war anymore. im not sure anybody cares about the russians.  americans my age dont care about the russians. the french certainly dont care.  it's little more than an intellectual exercise for the british.  the only people who care are those with an actual border with russia - norway, finland, estonia, latvia.  in my opinion.

    ... and - as usual - you're absolutely wrong.  Even among young people (18-34), 58% believe Russia is a moderately or very serious threat.  55% are somewhat or very concerned by the connections between the Trump campaign and Russia, while only 26% are not concerned at all.

    Rather than just making it up and adding "in my opinion", these are facts which you can very easily determine with a 10-second Google search.


    Then people (5.00 / 4) (#45)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 06:53:46 AM EST
    your age don't understand that this is not about the Cold War and that Russia is a conservative dictatorship not a communist country anymore.

    please (5.00 / 3) (#46)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 07:03:59 AM EST
    dont smear "people" of any age with the thoughts of that commenter.  

    while my perceptions (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by linea on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:39:37 PM EST
    are admittedly annecdotal (how my friends answer when i ask them questions) i did find this GALLUP poll from 2016:

    Americans See Russia Less Negatively, as Less of a Threat

    Younger Americans Have Highest Favorable Opinion Toward Russia

    Americans between the ages of 18 and 34 gave Russia the highest favorable rating across all age groups at 43%. This is significantly higher than those aged 35 to 54, and more than double the percentage of Americans aged 55 and older. In the past four years, young Americans have maintained a relatively positive opinion of Russia, with the exception of last year. This may be attributable to most of this age group not living through the Cold War and not viewing Russia as the enemy to the U.S. that other generations experienced.

    Aand yet, this poll ... (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by Yman on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 09:41:37 PM EST
    ... doesn't back up your claims.

    43% is a majority (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by Towanda on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 10:56:29 PM EST
    in alternative-facts land.

    What about some pride in your country? (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by vicndabx on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:14:35 AM EST
    Good lord, a border? As though an ICBM cares about a border.

    i have no idea (none / 0) (#126)
    by linea on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 10:05:23 PM EST
    what you mean, or what you assume, or what you are implying.

    by vicndabx
    What about some pride in your country?

    They certainly do (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by Nemi on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:20:21 AM EST
    im not talking (2.00 / 1) (#106)
    by linea on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 07:56:17 PM EST
    about the news or political wonks!

    have you been to south-eastern france? if la pen wins it exactly means the french dont care about russia.

    but im telling you that my feelings are they dont care. france isnt nuke'ing moscow or even dropping conventional bombs on moscow if there are tanks in tallinn or tromsø next sunday morning.


    It is not the same concern as it (5.00 / 1) (#190)
    by ruffian on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 05:35:41 PM EST
    was during the cold war. No one is afraid of a communist takeover, and I doubt many even fear a nuclear war.

    the issue is that they are meddling in our elections to elect a person that will enrich the leaders of their kleptocracy, as well as himself. I fail to see how anyone can be ok with that.  


    Feud: Bette and Joan (none / 0) (#19)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 12, 2017 at 09:54:46 PM EST
    I love this almost as much as the I love the movie it's about.  

    Sadly, much as I wanted (5.00 / 3) (#33)
    by Towanda on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 12:51:58 AM EST
    to watch more about that marvelous feud, I just can't watch Sarandon anymore.  

    I'll read about it, as Considine's book gets better reviews.


    i decided (none / 0) (#43)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 06:41:09 AM EST
    i was not going to let politics stop me from enjoying this.  she is in fact giving a helluva performance as Bette.  emmy worthy.

    I can't do it (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 05:18:30 PM EST
    Politics has done Sarandon in for me. Doubt it will ever be repaired. Oh well,

    Include me in the club. (5.00 / 1) (#163)
    by vml68 on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 02:14:56 PM EST
    Though to be honest, unlike most people I have never particularly cared for Susan Sarandon (or Nicole Kidman). The general consensus is that they are both great actresses and yet when I watch them, I find both of them very off-putting. Don't ask me why, I can't explain it.

    Susan Sarandon is a great actress. (none / 0) (#107)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 07:58:36 PM EST
    When it comes to politics, she's a noisy dilettante. But I refuse to personalize it, and I further refuse to treat either Sarandon, Clint Eastwood or Jon Voight the same way the right has long abused Jane Fonda.

    I guess that because I worked in politics for so long, I had to learn to turn off my antennae occasionally and not allow the subject to consume me. It was the only way to hang onto my sanity.



    I agree (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:23:55 PM EST
    If you start culling your entertainment becAuse of the politics of the performers it's going to get way to complicated.

    Anyway who doesn't love Thelma and Louise.


    Sarandon screaming (5.00 / 2) (#128)
    by Towanda on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 10:58:05 PM EST
    at the great Dolores Huerta just can't be erased from my memory bank.  Nor ought it be forgotten.

    I'm with her....Towanda (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 08:11:36 AM EST
    And it is our right to choose to not expose ourselves to someone or further enrich them. I won't do it. Sarandon gets nothing more from me.

    I'll never forget how if Trump is elected then the revolution starts. Yup Susan, looks like people will begin to die and scholars fear for the survival of the democracy.And it's just the start. I don't know how many will die of poverty or lack of real access to real healthcare. And I don't know if the US makes it out of this Presidency in one piece, but you got something destructive and death causing started. Good on you untouchable girl in your ivory tower! You won't miss a meal or a mammogram, and all the latest medical treatments are at your fingertips. Must be nice, but you've got your revolution honey. And you can watch it from on high...hooray


    I missed that one (5.00 / 2) (#160)
    by MKS on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 02:02:58 PM EST
    It is just not the same for me regarding Sarandon and Rosario Dawson.  Can't get out of my mind what they did and said.

    And Clint Eastwood berated an empty chair. (none / 0) (#137)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 05:29:39 AM EST
    So what? As I said, Susan Sarandon is a dilettante who play-acts at activism. For all her noisy attention-seeking, what has she ever actually accomplished in that realm? Anyone who's calling for revolution from the comfy confines of her $2 million Greenwich Village penthouse is not someone to be taken seriously as a left-wing provocateur. Mother Jones, she's not.

    If Ms. Sarandon's yelling at Dolores Huerta is meaningful to you in any way other than as an intemperate, ill-mannered and disrespectful outburst, it's only because you're allowing her offensive behavior to bother you personally. I'm sure that Ms. Huerta has heard and experienced far worse during her 50+ years as a labor organizer. It wouldn't surprise me at all if she didn't even know who Susan Sarandon is, much less cared.

    So, I'll watch Ms. Sarandon chew the scenery as Bette Davis in "Feud," which has been an enjoyable mini-series thus far. And when she shows up on MSNBC's "All in with Chris Hayes" or similar cable news shows to talk in superlatives and glittering generalities about issues she otherwise knows little or nothing about first-hand, I'll simply change the channel and not waste my time.



    We have answered your question, Donald (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by Towanda on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 10:58:22 AM EST
    As to our reasons, but do feel free to 'splain for several paragraphs as to why our reasons are not valid, and yours are. Do you really think your 'splaining will be persuasive to Tracy and me? Seriously? (snort)

    And to be sure, it IS a grudge. Personally, I don't get that, particularly when you were not the aggrieved party here. By and large, grudges tend to impose limits upon those who carry them, rather than upon their intended targets.

    But here's the point, Towanda. Howdy and I were discussing his enjoyment of "Feud: Bette and Joan" and the original film it's based on, and you curtly swept it aside because of -- what, exactly? Some boorish and immature behavior directed at Dolores Huerta by Susan Sarandon nearly a year ago?

    If your ill will toward Ms. Sarandon is none of my business as you now apparently insist, then why did you even bother to share it in the first place? Was it your intent to shut down the original conversation, because our opinions of "Feud" somehow pale in comparison with your perceived grievance with one of its stars?

    For that very reason, I find grudges to be a counterproductive waste of time and energy. While we can't change the events of the past, we can control and amend our prospective reactions to them. And speaking for myself only, I don't want to be weighted down by any sort of useless baggage as I go forward.



    I wanted to resist, but I could not (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by ruffian on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 01:12:21 PM EST
    She is just too good an actress. Same as I can set aside Clint Eastwood's beliefs when I watch his movies.

    I only have resistance to purveyors of art I am not enjoying. I am weak.


    For many years, everything I knew about ... (none / 0) (#42)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 06:24:39 AM EST
    ... "Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?" was through caricature. When I finally saw the 1962 film itself on TCM about 15 years ago, I was absolutely blown away by how good it actually was. Bette Davis' ferocious performance as Baby Jane Hudson was a tour de force, and she probably deserved the Academy Award for best actress that year.

    its one of my all time favorites (none / 0) (#44)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 06:42:16 AM EST
    watching the backstory is wonderful.

    It has been a favorite of mine for so long (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by ruffian on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 01:14:00 PM EST
    I remember watching it as a kid - with my sister, whith whome I have a turbulent relationship. Made an impression. I sure do not want to end up in a chair.

    'But you ARE in that chair!". Was glad the TV series included that line. Best ever.


    a gay friend lost in the plague (none / 0) (#168)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 03:24:19 PM EST
    had a standard, exeremely effecitve - knowing me better than anyone as he did - reponse to whatever i might be whining about at any given once every 5 years or so crysis:

    but ya are.  ya ARE in that chair Blanche.


    My old cubemate and I would crack eachother (none / 0) (#191)
    by ruffian on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 05:38:08 PM EST
    up with that line in the same type of circumstances. She did a great Bette Davis.

    I remember that the canary-lunch (none / 0) (#63)
    by jondee on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 02:46:29 PM EST
    scene was as shocking to some viewers at the time as the Psycho shower scene had been.

    It was indeed shocking, as was ... (none / 0) (#80)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 04:45:53 PM EST
    ... the scene in which Jane brutally assaults her paraplegic sister Blanche. The supreme irony of the sisters' entire tormented relationship was only revealed toward the film's end, when -- SPOILER ALERT -- we learn that Blanche herself was the primary catalyst for the bad blood between them because years earlier, she tried to kill Jane in a fit of jealous rage and was herself crippled by the attempt. So all along, she had been effectively trapped in a horrible situation that was primarily of her own making. "You mean all this time, we could have been friends?" LOL! Deliciously sick and twisted!

    "New" Mike Brown video proves... (none / 0) (#64)
    by McBain on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 03:22:37 PM EST
    what exactly?

    A convenience store is disputing a new documentary's claim that previously unreleased surveillance video suggests Michael Brown didn't rob the store shortly before he was fatally shot by police in Ferguson, Missouri, in 2014.

    The filmmaker, Jason Pollock, claims Brown wasn't stealing anything, he was making a drug deal and came back later to pick up what was agreed upon.  He also claims the police hid this video because it didn't support the robber narrative.

    There are several problems here.  You can't legally excange drugs for mechandise at a convenience store.  The store owner, clearly didn't approve of what Brown was doing and got shoved out of the way.  Also, why would the police hide a video that shows Brown to be drug dealer?  

    Of course there was a protest over this, including gunshots.  

    I used to wonder (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by Repack Rider on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 04:06:29 PM EST
    ...why my Black friends were terrified of police.  I always defend my rights to the letter.  If the officer is not entitled to my identification when he asks, he does not get any, or even my name.  I once dropped my pants to the ground when a deputy told me he as going to (illegally) frisk me.  I actually dared him to arrest me for it so we could take the matter before a judge.  He declined.

    I'm white, 71 and never been arrested.

    When I started hanging out with my Black friends and was the only white face in a crowd of them, I found out about the other side of policing.  I was granted honorary "black" status by local police because of my associations, and started receiving the same treatment they did.

    It's an eye-opener.  Of course, it doesn't matter how many times I am stopped and asked for identification, I never get arrested because I am a law-abiding citizen.  It never seemed to happen before I started hanging out with Black guys.


    ever considered (none / 0) (#122)
    by linea on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:59:49 PM EST
    maybe it makes it hard to investigate crime when the eldre folk are acting curmudgeonly? we have identification so we can be identified. go along to get along.

    No thank you. (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 11:25:03 PM EST
    No (5.00 / 3) (#136)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 01:23:57 AM EST
    ever considered maybe it makes it hard to investigate crime when the eldre folk are acting curmudgeonly? we have identification so we can be identified. go along to get along.

    If you don't defend your rights, you don't have any.

    The purpose of asking me for ID is to run a warrant check.  I already know I don't have any warrants.  I am not required to prove my innocence in the absence of a specific accusation.  Under some circumstances an officer is entitled to my ID, in some he is not.  I know the difference and I do not even give my name if I'm not required to.

    This has become a favorite subject for me.  I can go on at some length about my adventures defending my rights from unreasonable police demands.


    The video is shown to be edited. (none / 0) (#116)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:34:49 PM EST
    Here's an interview of the director (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by McBain on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 09:40:51 PM EST
    of the documentary. He might just be a little bit biased

    he accuses (none / 0) (#129)
    by linea on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 10:59:18 PM EST
    everybody who disagrees with him of being "bigots" and pushes a conspiracy theory that the obama justice department and the fbi colluded with the saint louis county presecutor to hide evidence.

    Suddenly, "bias" is an issue? (none / 0) (#138)
    by Yman on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 07:00:26 AM EST
    I'll have to remember that every time you post a tinyurl hiding the name of some winger website.

    Forrest Sessions "justice department" (none / 0) (#90)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 05:32:37 PM EST
    have officially and at the last moment officially requested more time to find the non existent evidence that Obama listened in on Trump tower with appliances.

    im seeing Dubya lifting up the table cloth "nope, not under here"

    Now, I am really confused. (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by vml68 on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 05:39:04 PM EST
    Sean Spicer just said that Tr*mp was talking about "wiretapping" not wiretapping. Apparently, they are not one and the same. So, what evidence are they looking for, the microwave cameras?!

    did he do (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 05:45:47 PM EST
    "finger quotes"?

    OMG (none / 0) (#96)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 06:05:47 PM EST
    i just saw the clip.  FINGER QUOTES.  not once.  not twice.  not thrice.

    four times.


    these are questions (none / 0) (#94)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 05:44:50 PM EST
    the intelligence committes need to answer.

    wait, could you repeat the question?


    I watched. Spicer really did 'splain (none / 0) (#98)
    by Towanda on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 06:37:13 PM EST
    that by wiretapping, Trump did not mean wiretapping -- and that bynObama, Trump really did not mean Obama.

    Repoerters valiantly reminded Spicer that he had said that they were to take Trump's tweets on the topic literally.

    And it went downhill from there, again and again, as Spicer got huffy about it.  SNL can give the writers a week off and just hand Melissa McCarthy the transcript, full,of howlers, for a script.


    March 6th (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 06:42:11 PM EST
    REPORTER: For clarification, did the president mean in anyway to suggest that the FBI broke the law or any other intelligence agencies in this allegation of wiretapping?

    SEAN SPICER, WHITE HOUSE: Um, in the tweet?

    REPORTER: Yes.

    SPICER: I'm just going to let the tweet speak for itself.


    In all fairness to Spicer what he meant (5.00 / 5) (#117)
    by vml68 on Mon Mar 13, 2017 at 08:38:58 PM EST
    to say was that "he was just going to let the tweet speak for itself" instead of he was just going to let the tweet speak for itself.

    Who knew quotation marks were magic and could change the meaning of the words in "quotes" to whatever you want them to mean at any given time. What with alternative facts and spying appliances and certain (or all) people in the administration "not in the job of having evidence", it is a whole new fantastical world out there.


    I see a divorce (none / 0) (#177)
    by KeysDan on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 04:18:05 PM EST
    coming. facilitated by Bannon...repeal and replace Ryan.  Maybe, Steve King as Speaker... perfect.

    Yes, it is (none / 0) (#188)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 05:10:24 PM EST
    full on war trying to blame Ryan for that stinking TrumpCare.

    Couldn't happen to a more deserving guy (none / 0) (#193)
    by ruffian on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 05:39:37 PM EST
    They had 8 years to come up with something in case their bluff ever got called. Total fail.

    Ryan is not without juice (none / 0) (#199)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 06:12:16 PM EST
    and is generally not seen as insane.  if nothing else.  my money, as far as longevity, is on Paulie.  as far as any "plan"  this healthcare thing is hard to reconcile with particular blurb.  maybe just opportunism or an attempt to make lemonade...

    i think Bannons days are numbered.  he is very low hanging fruit.  you'll pardon the expression.


    I would put (none / 0) (#200)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 06:20:07 PM EST
    my money on Paul outlasting Trump too but I think Bannon only goes when and if Trump goes unless the NSA has the goods on Bannon being tied to the KGB.

    The Canadian Girl Scouts.. (none / 0) (#194)
    by desertswine on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 05:46:04 PM EST
    aren't going to come to the US anymore.

    The Girl Guides are choosing to not travel to the United States for the foreseeable future due to safety concerns. They want to make sure members don't get stuck at the border.

    All trips to the US, including those that have connecting flights through US airports, are canceled. Trips already planned and paid for are being reviewed on a case-by-case basis.

    Re Canadian Girl Scouts at 194 (none / 0) (#202)
    by ruffian on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 06:34:16 PM EST
    Way to go Tr*** . Florida is a blot on the good jobs report - we lost jobs last month. Have not seen the breakdown but since there are also reports of a sharp decline in tourism, it seems there is a probable link there.

    Ttrump tax returns (none / 0) (#203)
    by Yman on Tue Mar 14, 2017 at 07:47:02 PM EST
    Rachel Maddow says she has some and will be discussing them tonight.  Looks like she later said it was his 2005 1040 form.