Happy Valentine's Day Open Thread

TalkLeft wishes everyone a Happy Valentines Day, especially El Chapo's lawyers, Eduardo Balarezo, Jeffrey Lichtman and William Purpura, who didn't win, knew they wouldn't win, but relentlessly pounded away at the government's evidence, and despite being ham-stringed by the judge in every cross-examination,were rock stars in the courtroom and did the best they could do for their mythical client.


Valentine's Day is a good day to send some love to all criminal defense lawyers. In the words of Carol A. Brook, Deputy Director, Federal Public Defender for Northern Illinois:

Don’t do it for the money, there isn’t enough. Don’t do it for prestige, you won’t get any. Don’t do it for the thrill of victory, victory rarely comes.

Do it for love. Do it for justice. Do it for self-respect. Do it for the satisfaction of knowing you are serving others, defending the Constitution, living your ideals.

The work is hard. The law is against you. The facts are against you. The judges are often against you. Sometimes even your clients are against you.

But it is a great job – exhilarating, energizing, rewarding. You get to touch people’s hearts and fight for what you believe in every day.

Happy Valentine's Day to Ema Coronel Aispuro and all the other supportive loved ones of the incarcerated.

An Unhappy Valentine's Day to Ted Cruz who continues to pander his worthless "El Chapo' border wall bill to under-informed Trump supporters who don't realize that neither our Government nor Mexico has found a dime of El Chapo's money, let alone enough for a border "wall". Ted Cruz has become so noxious that I blocked the words "Ted Cruz" from appearing in my Twitter feed. Also, we have laws on how forfeited money is spent. Here's what was collected and how it was spent in 2018.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< The Grammy's: So Many Awards, So Little Time | Un-President's Day #3 Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Thank you, J (5.00 / 4) (#1)
    by Peter G on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 03:21:58 PM EST
    And the same to you. Carol is right.

    Amazon chased (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by MKS on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 03:22:54 PM EST
    away from building offices in New York.  AOC cheers the loss because of Amazon's labor practices.

    Talk about cutting of your nose off to spite your face.   If you do not like Amazon's labor practices, still solicit them to locate their offices in your state, then work on the labor issues.

    Is this the Brave New World of the Left?   The Green New Deal is fine as a statement of aspiration and direction; Medicare for All is similar.  But reality requires some pragmatism.

    If this is the new Left, then mark me down as a moderate Dem.

    Klobuchar is looking pretty good right now.  I could even do Uncle Joe.

    There are v (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by KeysDan on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 08:34:48 PM EST
    other than AOC who have questioned the wisdom of the $3 billion incentive package for Amazon.  Michael Bloomberg, who has never been accused of being among the new left (or any left) had registered his concern.  Labor leaders expressed  worry for reported Amazon practices.  Some of the old left consider billions in incentives to the world's richest man to be similar to city support for stadiums benefitting billionair owners.

    The impact on neighborhoods should not be overlooked or underestimated. And, there appears to be blame to go around.  Amazon was silent in the face of public questions. No reassurances.  Take it or leave it.  While Bezos has been distracted, of late,he might of found time to return calls to the governor of the state and mayor of NYC, something the NYTimes Reports was not done, and only at the last minute informed these elected officials of their decision to pull out.  Indeed, the initial sweepstake competition among cities was unseemly.  Not encouraging as good corporate citizens, espescially given the recent Wisconsin experience.


    FK (5.00 / 2) (#98)
    by FlJoe on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 07:45:20 PM EST
    Amazon they are corporate leeches
    Amazon hasn't paid any taxes to the US government in the past two years. Actually, Amazon received hundreds of millions of dollars in federal tax credits in 2017 and 2018.

    That might seem nuts, considering Amazon is the third-most valuable company in the world and earned a record $10 billion last year. But critics of Amazon's tax bill aren't accusing Amazon of doing anything improper.

    Then they want to strong arm the state and local authorities to give them more free rides.

    That's the overarching story that needs be told, jobs are nice but at what cost? There is never a question who is actually going to pay for it, it's always the middle class.


    How about (none / 0) (#99)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 08:23:23 PM EST
    no freebies for anybody? No freebies for millionaires and their companies and no freebies for people unwilling to work?

    Yes, (none / 0) (#10)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 05:53:07 PM EST
    the last thing we need is a left wing version of Sarah Palin.

    Crazy Uncle Joe is a bridge too far for me but Klobuchar is not. There are others I think are good candidates too. IMO so far Harris for me is not living up to the hype but I'm willing to have my mind changed.


    How do we feel about (none / 0) (#11)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 05:56:46 PM EST
    Eric Holder?

    I don't think I have a strong opinion either way yet.

    Might be a good VP?


    I really don't (none / 0) (#12)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 06:01:02 PM EST
    have much of an opinion on him other than what does he add to the mix that isn't already there? I don't know of anything really outstanding he did during his tenure and I do know that he did not fight against the voting rights law being stripped. As I see it right now others have more to offer than he does.

    Klobuchar/Castro (none / 0) (#14)
    by MKS on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 07:17:54 PM EST


    Klobuchar has got to win Iowa; Harris, South Carolina.  And Harris should do well in Nevada which does come early, and in California.  But if Harris has third place finishes in Iowa, (where both Warren and Klobuchar would do well), and in New Hampshire, then she could fall too far behind early.    


    Pretty much (none / 0) (#15)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 08:07:39 PM EST
    everybody (pundits) seem to be saying Klobuchar has to take Iowa. If she doesn't take Iowa I don't know if that's the end but it sure is gonna be hard for her for a while. Don't be surprised if Booker wins in SC. Or Booker and Harris could split voters and someone else could come out ahead. Warren would probably win NH unless Bernie gets in and they split the votes there and someone comes out ahead of them. Right now there's so many variables that can happen there is no telling who is going to win it all. We haven't had this kind of primary since like 1992.  

    Not the best source (none / 0) (#20)
    by ragebot on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 10:40:35 PM EST
    but Harris is sending out fundraising blurbs saying she needs money.

    Probably have to wait a while to see just how bad, or good, her money situation is.


    The new DNC rules say that each (none / 0) (#136)
    by ruffian on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 09:29:20 AM EST
    candidate had to have a certain number of individual donors in at lest 20 states to (I think) get into the debates. So regardless of their overall totals that may or may not be PAC or large donor generated, they need to get individual donors. I expect a lot of donation requests int he next 6 months from everyone.

    I haven't seen enough of him in this (none / 0) (#137)
    by ruffian on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 09:55:19 AM EST
    role yet. Comes across as kind of boring which I think is the kiss of death this round.

    I'm enjoying just watching it unfold at this point. Klobuchar's performance in the snow was spectacular. She has more charisma than I gave her credit for.


    Are you putting AOC and Palin in the same league? (none / 0) (#61)
    by Steve13209 on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 04:03:28 PM EST
    That's just plain wrong. I am from NY and think the Amazon deal was ill-advised. Maybe in Syracuse or Buffalo, but not a stone's throw from Manhattan.

    You know (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 04:06:43 PM EST
    a little common sense can be called for here. Don't celebrate people not getting jobs and explain why the deal was bad instead of celebrating some sort of "win" over Amazon.

    The people getting jobs (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by Steve13209 on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 04:10:30 PM EST
    would not have lived in her district. The price of housing in the LIC area would skyrocket and taxes would be raised. It was not a good deal for the people in the area. The celebration is by the LIC residents who stopped this boondoggle from happening.

    Giving away $3 billion for a promise of 25 years is not a good bet...who is to say that Amazon will even be around in 25 years?


    Agreed. (none / 0) (#153)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 04:58:45 PM EST
    This was shaping up to be a major windfall for Amazon (which cleared $11 billion in profits last year), and a lousy deal for New York taxpayers. For that very reason, if the politicians really wanted public buy-in, then the details of this negotiation needed to be discussed publicly. Instead, the public was iced out by state and city officials, who were hoping to present constituents with a fait accompli. Those constituents thought otherwise, and said so.

    Maybe (none / 0) (#155)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 06:56:07 PM EST
    in the future they can hold public hearings and Amazon or whomever can defend themselves on these deals.

    Public hearings were held... (5.00 / 2) (#191)
    by kdog on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 11:25:45 AM EST
    by the NYC Council in December, the Amazon colonizers didn't appear to be prepared for or enjoy being questioned by lowly natives.  Amazon was sorely mistaken to think Cuomo and De Blasio speak for or truly represent the people.

    Good riddance to extortionist rubbish I say...If Amazon wants to pay full tax freight to take advantage of our talent and infrastructure, as well as offset the negative consequences their HQ would have had to the community, I'm sure my hometown would hear them out. But anyway you slice it, this was a raw deal for NYC for a measley 25k jobs of which the high paying gigs would be most likely be filled by transfers from Seattle or recent fancy college graduates who have no shortage of employment opportunities.  Joe Blow from LIC might have been lucky to get a janitors job outta the deal, and still come up short for the new jacked-up rents.  That's not a fair deal, that's highway robbery...and the people are wising up to these robber baron shenanigans.  


    I am interested in hearing your thoughts (none / 0) (#193)
    by vml68 on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 01:34:28 AM EST
    The author seems to put a lot of stock... (none / 0) (#195)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 11:51:37 AM EST
    in a vague poll to assume people of color wanted Amazon in NYC more than white folks. I think all people who are unemployed or underpaid who are asked if they want 25,000 new high-paying jobs in their city are gonna say hell yes and get all excited, and perhaps more so people of color who have historically been denied those kind of job opportunities. But the devil as we know is in the details, and the details I think said those jobs weren't gonna be had by working class NYers who need them the most.

    The author is right that the issues surrounding redevelopment and gentrification and affordable housing remain with or without Amazon.  But I think Amazon would have surely made all those problems worse, with not enough benefits to the community to make it a good deal.

    I fail to see any white privilege angle to the success of the counter-Amazon movement the author alludes to....people of color were a critical part of that movement.  


    Thanks, kdog. (none / 0) (#196)
    by vml68 on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 12:53:11 PM EST
    Honestly, I thought there were more pros than cons to the deal.

    No worries... (none / 0) (#197)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 01:28:03 PM EST
    Amazon would probably have made a better tenant in NYC than say Goldman Sachs or JP Morgan Chase, but those finance grifters got here before the tech grifters and I feel we are already at grifter over-capacity. ;)

    One loss to all the gentrification/redevelopment in the LIC area is to the arts. Twenty years ago friends of mine used to rent studio space in LIC for pennies back when it was occupied by crackhouses and streetwalkers. Those days are obviously over, and aspiring artists are getting priced out of Gotham along with all the old neighborhood folks that gave our city flavor. Cultural loss is more significant to me than money or job losses.


    Hey now, be nice... (none / 0) (#199)
    by vml68 on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 02:10:26 PM EST
    The majority of my family and friends would fall in the finance grifters category. For the most part, we are all good peeps :-)!

    I make a grimy living too... (5.00 / 1) (#200)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 02:42:54 PM EST
    we are all whores in our own way and make our deals with demons. But we should at least remain conscious of it.. conciousness may one day lead to evolutionary and revolutionary change for this here human race.  

    Till then when the human race resembles the human race on Star Trek, yes...we could at least be kind to each other while we lie, cheat, and steal. Sad how so many cant even manage that simple task.


    Hell (none / 0) (#201)
    by CST on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 03:15:58 PM EST
    I'm a grifter for development and that's one of the reasons this makes me mad.  If you put in an affordable housing development, or shopping plaza, or smaller office you have to mitigate your impact but apparently adding a giant office complex means you get a big fat tax break instead.

    That would be a good start. (none / 0) (#171)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 05:00:22 PM EST
    I'm certainly not opposed to government stipends or subsidies to businesses and industries per se, so long as there's a cost-benefit ratio that validates and warrants such public expenditures.

    But in this particular instance, Amazon just shouted, "Who loves us most, baby?" And numerous cities and states tripped all over themselves for the chance to lure the corporation their way, all expenses paid for the most part. It was an irrational enthusiasm that spurred public officials to give away the store.

    In this instance, New York was assuming a disproportionate share of the total financial risk associated with Amazon's proposed expansion back east. It was a great deal for the corporation. But for New York residents, not so much.



    It's more complicated than that (none / 0) (#16)
    by CST on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 08:13:06 PM EST
    Housing prices have become a huge issue in major cities.  There's become a sense that unfettered economic growth is not in everyone's best interests.  What does Amazon actually bring to the people who currently live in her district that would make up for the inevitable displacement?

    She represents the views of her age demographic better than just about anyone else I can think of, and is the first millennial who is flexing the political potential of the next generation, a lot of whom are not fans of capitalism - for good reason as it hasn't done much for them.


    Unfettered growth (none / 0) (#18)
    by MKS on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 09:36:14 PM EST
    It was to be located in Queens, I think.

    Not sure how unfettered growth would be a concern.  It is so heavily urbanized already.  No real environmental concerns that I can think of.

    Too turn up one's nose at jobs......That is a new world.  I suppose you can just redistribute the wealth that already exists.  

    But count me out of this approach.


    Most of the people in her district (5.00 / 4) (#22)
    by CST on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 10:47:27 PM EST
    Aren't tech workers who will be getting jobs at Amazon, at least not the good ones.   There is collateral damage to something like Amazon coming in, and rather than trying to fix that collateral damage they were getting a $3 billion dollar break.

    I think as a country we ignore the housing crisis and income inequality at our own risk. If you don't think there is a crisis there, you probably won't see any collateral damage to something like Amazon. I can assure you that it is very real for anyone who doesn't own a home, which includes about 70% of her district.


    There does seem to be an unquestioned (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by jondee on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 11:27:36 PM EST
    assumption that so-called unfettered growth is integrally connected to that mythic rising tide that lifts all boats..

    And no, it hasn't played out that way at all for a lot of people living in the vicinity of a lot of major metropolitan areas.


    Crystal City doesn't want them either (none / 0) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 04:54:35 AM EST
    Crystal City is very expensive and land locked. They bought out a theater space for their headquarters. Just about the only "art" space left in Crystal City. Amazon is not going to be paying its workers in Crystal City enough to live well in Crystal City, so they will be exploiting an already overtaxed mass transit system.

    The. division (none / 0) (#29)
    by KeysDan on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 09:59:20 AM EST
    of new headquarters between two states seems to be less a business decision and more a political one.  Amazon interests will be represented by four US senators.

    I would say the military industrial complex (none / 0) (#52)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 02:58:34 PM EST
    Will garner Virginia's Senators before Amazon will. Why not Detroit and Pittsburg?

    I don't really understand how Amazon thinks they are going to funnel their workforce through that underground mall in Crystal City either. You know it is already packed in the morning and evening as everyone comes and goes. That is where the space they procured so far is, the underground mall. The theater produces very little day traffic, just the few actors and dancers and crew coming in and out rehearsing.


    It's location, (none / 0) (#63)
    by KeysDan on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 04:07:54 PM EST
    location, location.  Amazon passed up other locales that offered greater incentives than Virginia.  Even Maryland, although geographically close, has access to similar labor markets, and offered ten times greater incentives than Virginia, was rejected because it offered a far less desirable site.

    Surely the Amazon calculus took into account the political competition of the military-industrial complex and concluded there was room for such a rich company owned by the world's richest person.

    As for lessons to learn, I do not believe it is that NY should have just given Amazon whatever it wanted, but that negotiations can no longer be done in private and ignore voters who may be most directly impacted.  And, too, politicians need to look to grand deals such as Foxcom and the fate of Scott Walker.


    There are plenty (none / 0) (#66)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 04:13:18 PM EST
    of places with low housing costs and plenty of people who would love to work at Amazon. Like they could have their pick in S. GA. but apparently we've reached the point where employers don't want to locate in rural areas where there are actually a lot people needing and wanting jobs and they want to locate in places where there are lots of things to do. I mean I can't blame them on one hand but then if you really need people and need land there are lots of places that accommodate both.

    Yes, tax payer (none / 0) (#71)
    by KeysDan on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 04:34:07 PM EST

    subsides and incentives have an important role in the development or revival of communities.  It seems a much lower priority to work toward a more diverse economy of one already booming.  At least, not to the tune of $billions for what is already one of the most successful corporations, and one whose hubris included something akin to AMI's below the belt pics of Bezos,

    This whole thing (none / 0) (#72)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 04:59:23 PM EST
    Is God's gift to Chuck Todd.

    It will be the subject of MTP Sunday.


    At long last, (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by KeysDan on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 05:25:30 PM EST
    Chuck Todd may have hit pay dirt.  The Amazon fiasco is ripe for his raison d'ete: bothsiderism. There is something for everyone in this from missed opportunity to avoidance of a major boondoggle. And, some stuff in-between.

    P.S. My writing above reminded of the movie "Something for Everyone"  (1970), where the butler, Konrad Ludwig (Michael York) works for the Countess Herthe von Ornstein (Angela Lansbury).  A fun movie, have you seen it?


    If he wanted to do something (none / 0) (#67)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 04:17:53 PM EST
    Good he would locate it in an area like mine where there are no jobs.

    We have Starbucks and scenery


    Yes, (none / 0) (#77)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 05:13:29 PM EST
    that was kind of my point. There are plenty of places willing to accommodate Amazon but apparently none of those he really wants to locate too. Maybe one day when subsidies don't matter anymore people will start moving to places where it is actually just cheap to hire and cheap to live.

    Doesn't mean (none / 0) (#81)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 05:31:49 PM EST
    I necessarily agree with you.

    I'm trying to picture 12,000 (none / 0) (#68)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 04:19:26 PM EST
    More bodies trying to get to work safely and not throwing elbows in the underground hallway of that mall. I'm not getting there.

    I have (none / 0) (#25)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 08:10:25 AM EST
    read though that the people in her district wanted Amazon to come in.

    I'm sure some did (5.00 / 3) (#26)
    by CST on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 08:28:58 AM EST
    The only poll I've seen was for the entire city - which I agree stood to benefit - and was conducted in English only.

    FWIW, my point is not that Amazon HQ2 is an unequivocal bad thing, its that it can't only be seen as an unequivocal good thing.  Dismissing the opposing point of view as if it's stupid or illogical does a disservice to the real issues surrounding displacement that people are facing with this kind of growth.

    Dismissing a congresswoman who represents a growing political demographic that are unapologetically socialist also comes at its own risk.  The future isn't here yet but it is coming, and the house is exactly where I'd hope and expect to hear that growing voice.  It sounds a bit like rage, which imo, is exactly what's called for.  And unlike the tea party, its rage with some very specific goals.


    I just think (none / 0) (#33)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 11:49:59 AM EST
    some tempered responses are in order. You don't need to be dancing on the graves of people who wanted jobs. Maybe the people who wanted jobs don't fully understand the cost associated with those jobs. I also understand that many of these young people came of age during the Bush era of crony capitalism and basically see capitalism as cronyism.

    The problem AOC presents is that instead of using incentives to get wealthy people to do something with their money like create jobs she is basically advocating taking their money and giving it to someone else. There's also a big disconnect when it comes to the word "socialism" where it apparently means different things to different people. Yes, we definitely are not there yet with socialism since only about 37% of the country would vote for a self professed socialist. I hope she learned something from botching the GND and learns to temper some of her policy positions. Living in +19 D district is something that she needs to take into account when it comes to going nationwide with something. In the end if her constituents are not happy with her they will vote her out. If they're happy they'll reelect her.


    She doesn't represent (5.00 / 2) (#35)
    by CST on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 12:05:32 PM EST
    The entire country and shouldn't have to.  That's not what the house is for.

    It's not like she's running for president. There is a fundamental disconnect where you are expecting her to represent your positions, but she wasn't elected to do that or represent suburban Atlanta.  32% of people is enough to deserve vocal representation in Congress.  And if you look at the age breakdown,  that number is probably only going to go up.  I agree that at the end of the day the voters will decide,  but it's not like she hid who she was the first time.


    Right. (3.00 / 1) (#37)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 12:28:23 PM EST
    She should stick to just working for her own district but that's not what she did with the GND. She sent out FAQ's to the media all across the country. That's where her problems arose. She was attempting to write legislation for the entire country.

    What do you mean (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by CST on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 01:19:43 PM EST
    "Stick to working for her district"?

    Putting forth legislation that represents their views is exactly what that means in the context of the house.  Whether or not it passes depends on convincing the rest of the country, but putting forth your ideas is the entire point of getting elected.


    Most people (none / 0) (#42)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 01:28:16 PM EST
    do not sit in a corner and write legislation by themselves. They confer with other members of congress and try to build a consensus. She so botched the GND that McConnell wants to hold a vote on it to use it as a divide and conquer mechanism. She also said that she wants to give money to people unwilling to work. So she has handed a HUGE gift to the GOP. And the media is going to carry water for the GOP. I've really more or less had no problems with her until now and she really stepped in it.

    As someone (none / 0) (#44)
    by CST on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 01:40:03 PM EST
    Whose senator sat down and wrote it with her I take issue with that characterization.

    I also don't think Mitch McConnell is as smart as he (and the media) think he is.  But if we start letting him decide what acceptable legislation for the left is we are in for a world of hurt.


    I think (none / 0) (#47)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 02:03:06 PM EST
    two things are being conflated. One is the nonbinding resolution and the other is the FAQ's sent out by AOC's office. The problem was created by AOC's office sending out FAQ's to the press and uploading it to her website with basically saying the GND is some kind of unicorn crackpot resolution which pays people unwilling to work while the actual resolution is more general. However AOC's FAQ's since she was a sponsor completely botched the whole thing. Now her FAQ's are politically attached to what should have been a general nonbinding resolution. So no, this is all on her and her team.

    Imo (none / 0) (#51)
    by CST on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 02:33:52 PM EST
    You're making a mountain out of a molehill.  If you let the 24 hour news cycle and Mitch McConnell decide what you should be upset about, frankly I'm surprised you're not outraged by Dems all the time.

    No, I don't (none / 0) (#56)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 03:35:52 PM EST
    let the news cycle decide anything but this is a huge mistake. This is the kind of mistake that ruins careers. Now her people are doubling down and defending people unwilling to work. I hear how millennials are financially stressed and now AOC is advocating for them to support people unwilling to work along with their high college debt and all that?

    No it's really not going to ruin her career (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by CST on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 03:49:41 PM EST
    And I honestly can't believe that you think it is.

    Also, universal basic income is not nearly as controversial among millennials as you'd think, nor was AOC the first person to come up with it.


    I don't think (none / 0) (#59)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 04:00:22 PM EST
    UBI is all that controversial but even Ro Khanna who has been an advocate of it ran from AOC's suggestion that people unwilling to work get money.

    Your own link (none / 0) (#64)
    by CST on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 04:08:53 PM EST
    On the subject is all about how that's exactly what this is - UBI.  Will it pass tomorrow?  Almost certainly not.  Should we start talking about it now? Absolutely.

    I think its astonishing that you'd honestly think that one example of poor framing around a concept that is a legitimate discussion will kill someone's entire political career just as its getting started.  I seriously doubt you hold any other politician to that standard.


    And, (none / 0) (#36)
    by KeysDan on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 12:19:19 PM EST
    she was not elected so as to be re-elected.  The term of a Representative, it may be recalled, is two years.  

    I am shocked that a TalkLeft contributor (4.20 / 5) (#39)
    by Peter G on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 12:44:20 PM EST
    who is generally liberal in her views would describe a fair progressive tax rate in terms of "taking" some people's money and "giving it to someone else." Particularly in the face of increasing wealth inequality and rapidly increasing concentrations of unproductive extreme wealth at the very top. That's right-wing rhetoric, not a real discussion of tax policy.

    She is (none / 0) (#40)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 12:56:11 PM EST
    not describing the tax rate as anything other than that unfortunately. Maybe she needs to explain it better then.

    She herself (none / 0) (#43)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 01:29:35 PM EST
    has said she wants to give money to people who are unwilling to work. I don't see anybody else who is talking about the tax code being a problem saying that kind of thing. She seems to stand alone on that policy.

    Those were her exact words? (none / 0) (#50)
    by jondee on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 02:25:35 PM EST
    that she wants to "give money to people who are unwilling to work"? Really?

    Unfortunately (none / 0) (#55)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 03:25:42 PM EST
    yes, it was in her FAQ's about the GND.

    I'm surprised (none / 0) (#57)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 03:37:13 PM EST
    you did not know it already link

    Lord love a duck (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by MKS on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 05:35:43 PM EST
    AOC is young and knows not much.  She may be popular, and may represent an "eff you" attitude of many, but she apparently has not clue one how to actually promote good paying jobs.  

    And she apparently does not give a flying f*ck about jobs anyway.  But, oh my, she is popular.

    I do not envy Pelosi here.  


    Popularity can be fickle. (none / 0) (#121)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 05:04:27 PM EST
    Just ask Howard Dean.

    Peter (none / 0) (#80)
    by MKS on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 05:28:25 PM EST
    the idea here is a social compact where people want to work, and do work, but that some leveling out is needed.

    AOC chasing away business, and saying good riddance to your stinkin' jobs, and trying to rely on redistribution instead, is not at all in the tradition of liberal economic policy.

    If rents would rise, there are many other ways of dealing with that than chasing away viable businesses.


    dancing on the graves (none / 0) (#78)
    by MKS on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 05:23:04 PM EST
    of people seeking jobs.

    I agree.

    I really don't get it.  I suppose rising rents could scare people.  But this is New York.  How many times has it been built over?

    Do not want jobs or Amazon.  I am sure they will go elsewhere.

    So, they do not want jobs, just redistribution of OPM?  Good luck with that.

    Amazon got too good a deal, or too may tax breaks?  Could be.  But AOC sounded like she just scored a great victory.  It sounds like a clusterf*ck all the way around. Maybe she can chase away even more business next month.  

    AOC sounded absolutely looney to me, and I am very predisposed to like her.

    Lordy, the French Revolution appears upon us.  


    I do not agree (5.00 / 2) (#82)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 05:35:29 PM EST
    But even if I did I would still cheer for her.

    I have been asking for years where are the democrats pulling left?  We have for decades had nothing but right wing nutters pulling us relentlessly right.  The Overton window was getting jammed so far right there was diminishing hope it would ever  come back.

    I do not agree necessarily she is the left's Michelle Bachman.  OTOH it's about F'ing time there was one.

    Or more.


    I suppose (none / 0) (#84)
    by MKS on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 05:39:35 PM EST
    she can be said to help move the Overton Window leftward.   But.......

    So (none / 0) (#85)
    by MKS on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 05:40:33 PM EST
    I do think there will be an ideological battle in the Dem Primary.   This will be interesting.

    It indeed will be (5.00 / 2) (#87)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 05:49:10 PM EST
    I am really looking forward to the debates.

    AOC has already helped define the turf for those debates.  I believe this is a great thing because that is exactly where vast numbers of unregistered but eligible young voters are.


    AOC as Robespierre? (none / 0) (#110)
    by jondee on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 01:31:10 PM EST
    Ilhan Omar (5.00 / 6) (#3)
    by MKS on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 03:37:10 PM EST
    is right about Elliott Abrams.  He is a bad egg who was an apologist for genocide in Guatemala.

    Omar may have other problems, but she was right on the mark here.

    Nice (5.00 / 4) (#4)
    by FlJoe on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 03:59:26 PM EST
    Enabled/covered up atrocities in Central America
    Hip deep in Iran/Contra scandal.
    Convicted of lying to Congress.
    Pardoned by Bush the elder.
    One of prime the architects of the Iraq war.

    That kind of resume is an instant hire for Republicans and pure gold on the wingnut welfare circuit.

    Kudos to Omar for speaking this kind of truth to power. IMO these young guns need to temper and channel their "brashness" into more showdowns like this.


    Agred. (none / 0) (#9)
    by KeysDan on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 05:43:24 PM EST
    Rep.Omar was well-prepared and effective in recalling, for the contemporaneous record, Abrams' past crimes in governmental service and the wariness that needs to accorded to anything he says to the Foreign Affairs Committee.

    Abrams, rather than feigning umbrage at Rep. Omar' s commentary, should be thanking his lucky stars for escaping legal sanctions and his disbarment----he was sanctioned by the DC bar in 1997 and likely would have been disbarred but for the concern for the effect of Daddy Bush' s pardon.  A pardon made in cosultation with Wm. Barr, the then, and now, AG.  Barr seems to be called on when there is a need for clean-up on the Republican side of the aisle.

    And, too, Rep Omar needs to be circumspect  in "governance" by tweet.  Most of bedeviling issues need context and nuance, not Trumpian shooting from the hip or lip.


    They need to understand (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 06:05:27 PM EST
    The two sides have different rules

    No republican cares about King or Trump or any other right wing racist

    But they will use every word said by any democrat to damage the party and the media will help them

    And it will work because we do care.

    Hopefully it will be a learning curve


    How do we deal with this? (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by Steve13209 on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 04:00:48 PM EST
    and not violate our own rules of conduct? It a conundrum.

    Getting the press to openly recognize it would be (none / 0) (#133)
    by ruffian on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 09:10:31 AM EST
    a good start. I know they see it, but their distorted sense of 'fairness' prevents them from calling it out.

    Justice Ginsburg (5.00 / 6) (#27)
    by Zorba on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 09:47:11 AM EST
    Is back in her office today.  
    Hurray for her!

    Everything is (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by KeysDan on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 01:42:01 PM EST
    coming up roses  Trump on his National Emergency Declaration, direct from the White House garden:
    " I didn't need to do this.  But I' d rather do it much faster..I just want to get it done."
    "Republicans didn't step up and they should have.  It would've been easy."
    These admissions will probably show up in Court.  No doubt his lawyers had hoped his emergency declaration steps would stick to his tried and true: throw paper towels.
    And, after the emergency declaration, Trump was off to Palm Beach...watch this swing!

    If republicans deserve to be re-elected (none / 0) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 04:21:49 PM EST
    Anywhere they would stand up to this.  There has never been a more straight up power grab from one branch to the other

    Bill Krystol is right the courts should say if this is ok with congress it's ok with us.

    Make way for a national climate change emergency.


    The law is written (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 04:25:45 PM EST
    Rachel explained this last night, so that IF the House passes a resolution against this the Senate MUST vote on it.

    I think Nancy will do this and the republicans in the Senate will have to do something beyond "being troubled", tweeting their unease or writing strongly worded op eds.


    D U N E ! (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 08:59:44 AM EST
    Very excited about this
    Villeneuve did ARRIVAL, SICARIO and BLADE RUNNER 2049.  The casting just gets better by the day.

    Here's an exciting bit of news to head into the weekend with: according to The Hollywood Reporter, Warner Bros. has officially slated Denis Villeneuve's Dune for a November 20th, 2020 release. On that day, it'll hit theaters in both 3D and IMAX. Our understanding is that this one's intended to be the first in a two film adaptation, so...if you're hoping to see this thing finished, make sure you see Dune upon release!

    As previously reported, Villeneuve's film features a staggeringly awesome cast, including Timothee Chalamet (in the role of lead character Paul Atreides), Charlotte Rampling (as Reverend Mother Mohiam), Jason Momoa (Duncan Idaho), Dave Bautista ("Beast" Rabban), Oscar Isaac (Duke Leto Atreides), Rebecca Ferguson (Lady Jessica), Josh Brolin (Gurney Halleck), Javier Bardem (Stilgar), Zendaya (rumored to be playing Chani), and Stellan Skarsgard (the villainous Baron Harkonnen).

    My second favorite SF book (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by ragebot on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 03:06:57 PM EST
    only to Ringworld.

    Can you get them to make a Ringworld movie.


    Done (none / 0) (#120)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 05:04:13 PM EST
    Deadline has word on three new shows in development at Amazon, all in the sci-fi genre. There's an adaptation of Larry Niven's classic Ringworld, an adaptation of Greg Rucka and Michael Lark's comic book Lazarus, and the cult novel Snow Crash by Neal Stephenson. If you're not familiar with any of these titles, we'll break each of them down briefly below



    ... with South Bend, IN Mayor Pete Buttigieg, a highly intelligent and very thoughtful young man whose prospective aspirations will likely be summarily dismissed by far too many people on the sole basis of his sexual orientation. Which is too bad, unfortunately, because they really don't know what they're missing:

    New York | February 14, 2019
    A Long Talk With Pete Buttigieg - "We're in a moment that's not really about people with good intentions. We're in a moment that's about nihilism. And somewhere along that slippery slope from moral laziness - which all of us have - to outright nihilism hangs the future of our republic."

    It's worth a read. If you're truly ready to walk away from the politics of the past, then Pete Buttigieg is definitely someone who should be on your radar.


    If the touring production of Hamilton (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by ruffian on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 10:02:43 AM EST
    comes to your locale, do whatever you can to see it. The cast is dynamite - Nik Walker as Burr is just superb. I can't imagine it done better. I call him the sexy Burr - he is tall and charismatic and totally commands the stage.

    The whole thing was at least as good as the hype, and I had been waiting and expectant for what, 2 years now?

    There are seats available on StubHub for all price ranges, not that much above what the original box office price was if you wait until a day before the show to get it, as the price comes down.

    Trump got Abe to nominate him for a (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by ruffian on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 10:13:23 AM EST
    Nobel Peace Price.

    I sh*t  you not.

    .....at the US government's request. (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by KeysDan on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 01:32:53 PM EST
    Poor Abe, sort of like being asked by your friend to borrow your tooth brush. Just don't know how to say no, so you somehow find a way around it.

    But, we need to remember, it is not all that prestigious to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.  Indeed, nominees/losers include Stalin (1945), Putin (2017), Rush Limbaugh (2007), and der Fuhrer (1939).


    I swear to god (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 11:18:31 AM EST
    If I hear one more idiotic talking head say the democratic primary will only be defined when Bernie and Biden get off the pot I will throw something at my expensive tv.

    Bernie should (5.00 / 1) (#148)
    by KeysDan on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 12:53:35 PM EST
    continue to contribute as a US senator (I. Vt) as long as the people of Vermont want him as their senatorial representative.  Joe should enjoy his retirement and contribute as a senior Democratic sage.   Probably will not happen, but it should.

    The odd thing (5.00 / 2) (#149)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 12:54:14 PM EST
    is the only people who seem to be talking about those two are the pundits and a few others. Since so many have declared already or have formed an exploratory committee it seems a lot of voters have moved past those two.

    Cheeto is about to declare (none / 0) (#5)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 04:12:44 PM EST
    A fake national emergency.  Nancy, and lots of republicans, say get ready for a real president using this for actual unaddressed emergencies stonewalled by republicans.

    Maybe (none / 0) (#6)
    by FlJoe on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 04:29:03 PM EST
    the plan is to never have a "real" president again.

    One naked power grab after another and pretty soon you have the the thousand year Republican Reich.


    Counter threatens (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 04:32:03 PM EST
    To stomp her feet and hold her breath until she passes out and wets her pants if Trump doesn't shut down the government.

    Hannity might just cry on tv


    Don't get what they are (none / 0) (#8)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 04:39:14 PM EST
    So upset about.

    I think a nice security hedge on the southern border would be good.  Might add to the resale value.


    A couple of shrubberies (5.00 / 3) (#19)
    by jondee on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 10:03:26 PM EST
    with a path running through the middle, for a two-tiered effect. Like the knights who say "Ni!" requested.

    Watched the AAC games over the weekend (none / 0) (#21)
    by ragebot on Thu Feb 14, 2019 at 10:43:11 PM EST
    By most accounts it was a success.

    Found this blurb today.  Seems like Kapernick was approached to play and his price was $US20,000,000.  Tebow was also approached but he seems to be concentrating on baseball.

    Just in (none / 0) (#48)
    by ragebot on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 02:07:16 PM EST
    Kaepernick and NFL settle.

    Agreement is confidential.  


    I'm not a fan of Kaepernick or the NFL (none / 0) (#93)
    by McBain on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 06:47:41 PM EST
    I'm somewhat a fan of Kaepernick's lawyer, Mark Geragos.

    Justice Ginsburg (none / 0) (#28)
    by KeysDan on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 09:50:39 AM EST
    has returned to her office at the Supreme Court building and  is participating in Court conferences.  Justice Ginsburg has been recuperating from lung surgery last December and has been working from home.  

    I see (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 11:10:14 AM EST
    Broken hearts

    But (1.00 / 3) (#38)
    by ragebot on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 12:43:16 PM EST
    you can't see pix.

    At some point she will have to appear in public and the longer she keeps wearing Romulan cloaking device the more questions will be asked.

    If Trump fell and broke his ribs and a couple of weeks later had a lung operation and stayed out of sight for a couple of months you would be demanding proof of life.  Even after his last medical check up there were claims of a cover up and peeps here demanding he take a VO2 Max test.

    What is good for the goose is good for the gander.


    It appears that (none / 0) (#46)
    by leap on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 01:42:34 PM EST
    you need some recipes, too.

    You really have been sounding like (none / 0) (#88)
    by Zorba on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 06:02:01 PM EST
    You are almost wishing her dead.
    What are you going to do, clunk her over the head?



    You totally missed my point. (1.67 / 3) (#112)
    by ragebot on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 02:45:07 PM EST
    To the best of my knowledge the last time RGB was seen in a semi public setting it was her last visit to a SC case.  As The Atlantic reported it was embarrassing to watch as she was the last to leave the bench and seemed to have problems getting out of her chair.  Since no one is suppose to leave the court everyone was compelled to stay and watch her unsteady walk out.

    All this was before she fell and broke ribs or had the lung surgery.  Putting out press releases that she is fine and back at work invites the question; who are you going to believe the press releases or your lying eyes.

    She is an old woman who has been in poor health for quite some time, often hiding from the public eye for as long a possible.

    What ever you want to say about Trump no one doubts he is able to talk in public; something that RGB has not done in some time.


    ..Trump no one doubts he is able to talk in public (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by Erehwon on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 08:37:18 PM EST
    Yes, but someone should remind the buffoon of "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt."

    Or let him speak.


    "Best of my knowledge" - heh (5.00 / 1) (#160)
    by Yman on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 10:18:22 AM EST
    You can rest assured that any time a winger prefaces a statement like that, whatever follows is complete BS.

    She literally went to a musical 2 weeks ago.

    All this was before she fell and broke ribs or had the lung surgery.  Putting out press releases that she is fine and back at work invites the question; who are you going to believe the press releases or your lying eyes.

    Or, more accurately - who are you going to believe, actual media or a lying winger?


    A lot of people (4.00 / 1) (#115)
    by KeysDan on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 03:03:41 PM EST
    are saying that about Clarence Thomas.  Haven't heard him speak since his Anita Hill hearings.  But I am with you and Seb,  I also wonder if Generalissimo Franco is still dead. A lot of people don' t know that.

    Seem to remember him (none / 0) (#124)
    by ragebot on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 05:38:17 PM EST
    calling liberals snowflakes last year.

    For an originalist (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by jondee on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 06:06:38 PM EST
    He doesn't seem to have many original thoughts.

    Speaking of people playing the "victim" though, I seem to remember that when Clarence the Snowflake was in the hot seat during his confirmation hearings, he evoked the country's racist past by comparing himself to a lynching victim.


    Cheeto BANDERSNATCH (none / 0) (#30)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 11:09:52 AM EST
    I have spent the morning looking at Cheeto do his Fidel Castro imitation on mute while watching BANDERSNATCH on NETFLIX.

    Seriously, Bandersnatch is good.  To be fair there has been some pi$$ing and moaning about NETFLIX "collecting your choices"
    Seriously, so what ?
    So NETFLIX knows more about my entertainment choices.  So f'ing what?

    BANDERSNATCH  is amazing. Really.  It is.  I could give a Shi+ if they are monitoring me.  

    I plan to do it at least 2 more times.  Once making different choices once making no choices.

    It is something new.  Dialog -

    Main character discussing with his therapist he is being controlled -

    Therapist - So, you are being controlled by someone from the future on "Netflix"?
    Is this a planet?

    Seriously watch this.

    But set aside a couple of hours.  It took me at least that long to get through it.

    You keep thinking it's over and it just keeps going and going and going.

    But it's never boring.  Not for one second.

    Have you seen Russian Doll yet? (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by ruffian on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 09:21:44 AM EST
    It is so good. I need to watch it again to catch everything. Natasha Lyon is perfect.

    On my list (none / 0) (#142)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 10:17:27 AM EST
    I just got Netflix again after an absence

    Some great stuff coming

    Think I will wait for RINGWORLD to get Prime


    Thanks, I (none / 0) (#146)
    by KeysDan on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 12:33:11 PM EST
    should have stuck with it. My viewing rule is if not grabbed after two episodes, I try another. With Russian Doll, I couldn't determine what is was or where it was going.  I keep ending up in the black-tiled bathroom, and watching her repeatedly falling down the stairs.  But, based on your review, I will give it another try.  By, the way, give "YOU" a try.

    Do - I stuck in after the second (none / 0) (#156)
    by ruffian on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 07:36:56 PM EST
    because of reviews I had heard. It takes a twist after that. I was watching it last weekend when I was sick and that 2nd episode with the many deaths did start to increase my nausea and headache! But it gets a little less manic and more methodical after that.

    'You' is on my list too. Sounds interesting and entertaining in a twisted way.


    PS (none / 0) (#32)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 11:26:37 AM EST
    Watch it on a tablet or a laptop

    Or a desktop you are literally sitting in front of.

    Many MANY choices.

    "Bury the body" "burn the body "


    I'm with you on this. (none / 0) (#34)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 11:52:02 AM EST
    I'm glad Netflix does the you may like thing. My only problem is my boys watch it too which totally screws up the data on that. So I get things on my suggested watch list that I would never watch.

    The Jussie Smolett case (none / 0) (#53)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 03:11:29 PM EST
    continues to get weirder and weirder.

    Smollett (none / 0) (#54)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 03:11:48 PM EST
    Just starting to follow this (none / 0) (#95)
    by McBain on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 07:07:03 PM EST
    Anyone have a fact based opinion yet?  

    Betcha a quarter (none / 0) (#100)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 10:41:57 PM EST
    This is a hoax aimed at people itching to believe it was true.

    you need (5.00 / 5) (#101)
    by leap on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 11:03:56 PM EST
    some recipes, too.

    Got it (none / 0) (#108)
    by Zorba on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 11:54:39 AM EST
    Melomakarona (none / 0) (#107)
    by Zorba on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 11:53:40 AM EST
    Greek walnut cookies, also known as finikia.

    1 cup unsalted butter
    1 cup vegetable oil
    1 cup sugar
    3/4 cup orange juice
    1/4 cup brandy or cognac (or use 1 cup juice and leave out the brandy)
    1 tsp vanilla
    Grated rind of one orange
    1/2 tsp ground cinnamon
    1/2 tsp ground cloves
    2 cups coarsely ground nuts (your choice- walnuts or almonds; we used walnuts), divided
    1 tsp baking powder
    1/2 tsp baking soda
    minimum of 4 cups (or more) flour

    Melt butter and cool. Add oil. Beat until creamy. Add sugar and beat a long time- about 20 minutes. (Use an electric stand mixer, for pity's sake!) Add juice/brandy, vanilla, spices, rind, 1 cup of the nuts, baking powder and soda. Mix well and add flour, a little at a time, until a good dough is formed. Take a small ball of dough (maybe about 1-2 tablespoons worth or so) and roll into an egg shape. Flatten one side and lay on a baking sheet. Press each top lightly with a fork to make slight indentations. Bake in 375 degree oven 30-35 minutes until done. In the meantime, simmer 2 cups of honey and 1 cup water for a few minutes. (Or you can also use the sugar syrup, as we make for baklava, with some honey added.) While cookies are still warm, dip in the honey syrup and sprinkle with the reserved chopped nuts. (Do not refrigerate these, by the way.)


    Oh boy, that sounds wonderful (none / 0) (#122)
    by leap on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 05:20:15 PM EST
    Think I'll have to copy this one and try it out. Thanks, Abdul Abulbul Amir!

    Yesterday it was reported (none / 0) (#125)
    by ragebot on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 05:43:26 PM EST
    he hired Cohen's defense attorney, but he just denied it.  LEOs have confirmed the two Nigerian brothers who are extras on Empire were present at Smollett's "attack"; but LEOs are still saying he is a vic.

    You can't make this stuff up.


    A lot of (none / 0) (#131)
    by KeysDan on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 10:49:30 PM EST
    fake going around.-----emergencies and what-have-you.  Jussie Smollett may have caught it.  Maybe,  in his case, Muchausen syndrome in need of professional care.  If his reporting is fake it is, of course, sad for him and future prospects for his career, and, more importantly, damaging to real victims.  There certainly is racism and homophobia that manifests itself in violence, all too often.

    CNN reports (none / 0) (#139)
    by McBain on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 10:08:41 AM EST
    Smollett "orchestrated" the attack...
    Two law enforcement sources with knowledge of the investigation tell CNN that Chicago Police believe actor Jussie Smollett paid two men to orchestrate an assault on him that he reported late last month.
    Smollett denies playing a role in his attack, according to a statement from his attorneys...
    ...The sources told CNN there are records that show the two brothers purchased the rope found around Smollett's neck at a hardware store in Chicago.
    Smollett's attorneys, Todd S. Pugh and Victor P. Henderson, issued a statement to CNN Saturday night saying Smollett was angry about these latest developments.

    Again, very interesting but CNN "sources" aren't always accurate.

    You asked in an earlier (5.00 / 1) (#147)
    by KeysDan on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 12:38:38 PM EST
    comment for fact-based opinions.  While easy to give an opinion, or at least, an impression, it was difficult to back it up with facts, since they were like nailing jelly to a tree.

    My impression at the time, and now, is that Jussie Smollett's story was preposterous.  It just did not add up. Hope that impression is off-base.  


    Ya. Also... (none / 0) (#163)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 12:06:13 PM EST
    If the hate letter that he received a week or so earlier was also part of his grand plan, and he lied to the FBI about it, that could get him in some serious doo doo...

    ... then he should be held fully and publicly accountable for allegedly perpetrating a public fraud, which caused local law enforcement to waste precious man-hours and public funds on a snipe hunt. It's certainly not a case of "no harm, no foul."

    But for Smollett's brothers and sisters in the African American and LGBTQ communities, who took him at his word and defended him and now have egg on their faces, well, I'll just say that they deserve better than the self-absorbed antics of a drama queen who channels the ghost of Blanche DuBois.

    If nothing else, this is yet another lesson why we ought to avoid making snap judgments on a breaking story, and instead wait until that story becomes more clear.



    ... and weirder (none / 0) (#192)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 05:41:54 PM EST
    Cook County State's Attorney Kim Foxx recused herself from the Jussie Smollett investigation after facilitating conversations between Smollett's family and the Chicago Police Department, the state's attorney's office said Wednesday.

    "Shortly after the incident occurred in late January, State's Attorney Foxx had conversations with a family member of Jussie Smollett about the incident and their concerns, and facilitated a connection to the Chicago Police Department who were investigating the incident," Robert Foley, a senior adviser to Foxx, said in an emailed statement Wednesday.

    According to TMZ... (none / 0) (#167)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 03:13:40 PM EST

    Jussie Smollett rehearsed the "attack" against him days before the incident and it was all staged for the camera, this according to what the 2 brothers told cops.

    Law enforcement sources tell TMZ, Abel and Ola Osundairo told cops they got in a car with Jussie and scouted a location, settling on the one right outside the actor's apartment. The brothers said Jussie chose the spot because he believed a camera would have captured the action...


    ... when cops arrived, Jussie took them down to the area he said the "attack" went down and pointed to the camera, saying it was good the incident was captured on video. What he didn't know was that the camera was pointed in the wrong direction and didn't capture the incident.

    Roger Stone (none / 0) (#73)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 05:01:30 PM EST
    Gets a gag order.

    This is going to be good.

    However will he bilk (none / 0) (#74)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 05:09:08 PM EST
    His cheer squad if he can't inform them of his suffering?

    It a rather limited one at this point (none / 0) (#76)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 05:13:24 PM EST
    The over under seems to be about a week until he gets, seriously, STFU.

    Rogers swoopy middle hair on top (none / 0) (#86)
    by fishcamp on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 05:40:51 PM EST
    changes from white to yellow under certain lights.

    Carolyn Maloney (none / 0) (#89)
    by MKS on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 06:26:42 PM EST
    D-New York on CNN now.  Just apoplectic about loss of Amazon.

     She says she, not AOC, actually represents the District where Amazon was to be located.  She says that if the deal would have gone through, New York would have become high tech capital of the East Coast.

    No worries.   Go West, Amazon.  Gavin Newsom won't botch it like AOC did.

    Just say no to $3bn public giveaways. (5.00 / 4) (#132)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 11:40:57 PM EST
    A corporate behemoth like Amazon can afford to pay its own way, thank you very much. Far better that New York City instead make such an investment in its education system and infrastructure, and ensure that its own children are properly prepared to one day emulate Jeff Bezos and create something comparable.

    That assumes (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 07:02:43 PM EST
    Amazon was going to be given $3 billion that already existed in an account somewhere.

    I do believe, however, that the $3 billion represented the foregoing of future tax revenue, not a direct subsidy payment.  But such tax revenue could only be forgiven if Amazon actually set up shop and generated sales, etc. or improved the property.

    AOC said just give the $3 billion to schools.  But the $3 billion in tax breaks do not exist absent Amazon actually going forward.

    If you disagree, show me the $3 billion that AOC wants transferred.  It does not exist.

    I get that tax breaks can be overdone.  But the rhetoric here makes some fundamental mistakes.  


    No, this assumes (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by BGinCA on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 07:25:52 PM EST
    that the property Amazon wished to occupy would not generate any tax revenue without them. I imagine there are business ready to set up shop in Queens that would generate the tax revenue Amazon would not pay. That is where the $3b is. At 4% unemployment, NYC is not so desperate for these jobs. Plenty of tech there already.

    We will see, then (none / 0) (#184)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 09:55:51 PM EST
    Good riddance to Amazon.....They really have other businesses lined up?  

    If it is that simple, then, of course, go with the better deal.


    Was Amazon (none / 0) (#185)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 09:58:26 PM EST
    going to displace other viable, ongoing businesses?

    Not simple (none / 0) (#186)
    by BGinCA on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 12:06:48 AM EST
    But there are already taxpaying businesses in that area of LIC and several other developers have presented plans to the city. For example
    These giveaways are totally unnecessary.

    Not so sure about "totally unnecessary." (5.00 / 1) (#189)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 11:45:53 AM EST
    Amazon's pitch was that they were going to bring in 25,000 high paying tech jobs to NYC w/in a short time.

    Then of course, there would be many other similar satellite businesses/jobs that also would develop locally, due to Amazon's presence.

    iow, local jobs, tax revenues, etc., would increase rapidly and markedly with Amazon.

    I'm not sure that is going to happen w/o Amazon.


    I have (none / 0) (#91)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 06:35:20 PM EST
    been thinking that Charlotte will probably end up getting one of these because it invested in high speed rail. I've heard around here all the begging for Amazon but until we get our traffic situation fixed there is no way Amazon is going to put anything here. Also I'm sure our neo confederate governor is probably driving businesses away too.

    Modesto (none / 0) (#92)
    by MKS on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 06:47:18 PM EST

    Many other places.....


    Stockton needs jobs. (none / 0) (#96)
    by Chuck0 on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 07:22:10 PM EST
    They could always pave (none / 0) (#97)
    by fishcamp on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 07:37:02 PM EST
    more of The Everglades.

    Nope (none / 0) (#113)
    by ragebot on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 02:48:11 PM EST
    they won't pave it, just got the OK to drill for oil there.

    I think it would take more than (none / 0) (#140)
    by ruffian on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 10:10:08 AM EST
    just that one Amazon location to make NY a tech industry capital. Takes a lot more than that. I'm not up to speed as to what else NY has going on tech-wise, I know there is a lot of aerospace work on Long Island, but that is not generally considered innovative tech industry.  And IBM flexes back and forth so much I don't think they are considered an innovator as much as a services provider these days.

    Since we (none / 0) (#90)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 06:32:17 PM EST
    have been discussing tax rates I will explain my ideas. My ideas are use tax policy to increase the economy. That does not mean taxing the wealthy at 70% and then nothing. What I think is that the tax rate should be 70% for the ones who sit on their butts. You do nothing with your money and you're going to be sending it to the government. We all know tax incentives don't do anything for the middle class because generally we don't have money lying around to use to do things with other that do the basics like buy a house etc. In my area to rent a studio apartment is around 700 at the lowest. So you tell these millionaires that if they build an apartment complex and rent to people below market rates like 350 they get a 350 tax write off. You provide all kinds of incentives for them to do something with their money to help the middle class. You have them pay their employees more or pay more taxes. If they don't pay decent wages then they are going to have to pay it out in taxes. Give them lots of lots of incentives and tax penalties to do something. Right now they are just sitting on the money buying yachts. No tax write off for yachts either. You can help the middle class or you can write big checks to Uncle Sam.

    Old sailors always say (none / 0) (#114)
    by ragebot on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 03:01:05 PM EST
    it is a yacht when you are trying to sell it and a boat when you are trying to buy it.  Something I have seen personally in South Florida.

    Research indicated that Florida's marine industry was losing sales to nearby states and foreign countries with lower or no sales taxes at all.
    The new sales-and-use tax cap generated in excess of $13.46 million in direct sales tax revenue for the state, compared to a $1.5 million first-year loss that had been projected by a Florida legislative staff analysis.

    But even that does not prevent the real super yachts being built in virtual third world countries.  When Tom Perkins built the Maltese Falcon (still my choice for the best super yacht ever built) it was in Turkey, but designed and supervised by an Italian firm.

    Most unbiased policy wonks distain a complex tax plan like you advocate.  If you want to subsidize something the best way to do it is direct payments.  


    I'm not (none / 0) (#117)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 03:56:17 PM EST
    talking about state sales tax. That is a state issue not a federal issue. I'm talking about people not writing off yachts on their federal taxes.

    And so now (none / 0) (#118)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 03:58:07 PM EST
    you're saying government ownership of things is better since it's direct ownership of low cost or low income housing?

    All the policy (none / 0) (#126)
    by ragebot on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 05:48:41 PM EST
    classes I took in grad school supported the theory that if you want to subsidize something do it directly.  This means if peeps need money for rent you give it too them.

    That was the problem with the CRA.  The government backed loans for low income housing.  So lender lent money to anyone to get their cut knowing that if the loans went bad the government would cover it.

    History of low income housing is that finding success stories is much harder than finding failures.  I know in the harbor where I keep my boat there is some low income housing; but not nearly enough to meet the demand.  Problem is it is run by a local political machine and only Cubans live there; much to the chagrin of both blacks and whites in the area.


    Since we (none / 0) (#94)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 06:53:17 PM EST
    were discussing sentencing the other day, Renatto Mariotti tweeted that the case that Paulie Walnuts has already been tried and found guilty will have a minimum sentence of 19.5 years. So that's just the EDVA case and we don't know about any of the others yet.  

    As I have explained repeatedly (none / 0) (#144)
    by Peter G on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 11:38:09 AM EST
    and in detail, Manafort does not "have a minimum sentence of 19.5 years." That is the low end of the applicable federal sentencing guidelines range, and it is what Mueller's team is recommending. But the Guidelines are advisory not mandatory. Likewise, the prosecutor's recommendation is in no way legally binding. The judge has substantial discretion to go lower.

    It's also just the first judge (none / 0) (#145)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 12:05:44 PM EST
    The second judge gets a whack at it.

    Under federal sentencing law and procedure (none / 0) (#158)
    by Peter G on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 11:46:24 PM EST
    When judge #2 imposes sentence on a defendant who is already serving a sentence in a different and unrelated case, the second judge is supposed to determine and impose "a reasonable incremental punishment," not simply a consecutive sentence that ignores (or expresses disagreement with) the previously-imposed term.

    THE HAUNTING OF HILLHOUSE (none / 0) (#103)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 10:40:16 AM EST
    The Netflix series.  This is so good.  I was almost afraid to try it because the movie (the original 1963 black and white Robert Wise version not the krappy 90s remake) is one of my very favorite movies of all time.
    It's so effective because it does not use gore or effects or jump scares.  It gets in your head.  If you have never seen it you should.
    The series does it honor.  Almost no gore or effects.  It gets in your head.
    I have a very high tolerance for this stuff and I find myself watching through my fingers.

    A friend (none / 0) (#104)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 11:20:36 AM EST
    of mine was talked into watching it by her neighbor who is an actress in the series. She had the same reaction you did to it. She said something about how it affected her walking to the front door of her house. I haven't watched it so I don't know what she meant but maybe you do.

    I do (none / 0) (#105)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 11:34:48 AM EST
    Which actor (none / 0) (#106)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 11:36:02 AM EST
    That Robert Wise version (none / 0) (#109)
    by jondee on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 01:20:38 PM EST
    creeped me out to the nth degree as a kid.

    I think (none / 0) (#111)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 01:34:46 PM EST
    it is Anna Ritch but if it's not, it's one of the actors that lives here in GA.

    Bruno Ganz died (none / 0) (#119)
    by ragebot on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 04:53:11 PM EST
    He played Hitler but was probably better known for the numerous vids made on the caption generator web site.  Here is one from my local mountain bike club.

    "Downfall" is an overlooked gem. (none / 0) (#129)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Feb 16, 2019 at 06:21:15 PM EST
    Bruno Ganz's near-flawless performance as Adolf Hitler in that film is definitely underappreciated. Such is the ferociousness of Der Führer's historical reputation that all too often, he's been caricatured by actors in film, rather than portrayed accurately. Ganz's brilliance as an actor was that he inhabited the truly demonic character of the man in his final days, and rendered him still-frightful yet ultimately pathetic.

    He's not homophobic. Just like Seth MacFarlane, Maher's a acerbic comedian who dances on the fine line between provocative and offensive. But I suppose when you embark on a search-and-destroy mission for reasons to be outraged, you'll likely find at least one:

    "Look at the Oscars -- they're being ruined by these same kind of ridiculous purity tests. Bohemian Rhapsody is flawed--flawed because it is gay, but not gay enough. Really? That's what they're saying: it's insensitive to the extremely gay. What? For years, the beef around gay characters in movies was they were reduced to their sexuality. Now, the sexuality is placed in the background and it's, where is the d!ck-sucking?"

    This is why, on the seventh day, the Lord created the TV remote. And He saw that it was good, rolled his eyes and said. "Jesus H. Christ, people! If you don't like what Bill Maher's saying, then for Heaven's sake, change the channel and find something else to watch. Now, please excuse me as I seek out Mike Pence and goad him into saying something that's truly homophobic, just to show you silly ninnies the difference."


    Most upsetting Valentine's Day (none / 0) (#135)
    by ragebot on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 09:24:03 AM EST
    stuff I have seen.

    Truth be told I don't know much about these products and have no real desire to learn.

    In fact I was not aware there were "smart $ex toys" less yet that they could be hacked.

    Anthony Weiner has been released from (none / 0) (#151)
    by desertswine on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 01:54:15 PM EST
    prison.  He's served 15 months of a 21 month sentence.

    Anthony Weiner was released from a federal prison in Massachusetts and is now under the watch of a re-entry program in New York, according to Federal Bureau of Prisons records.

    Actuallty, Weiner will serve 18 months of the (none / 0) (#152)
    by Peter G on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 02:13:29 PM EST
    21-month sentence, like any other federal prisoner. The only reduction, about 15%, is for good conduct. While confined at a halfway house he remains in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons and continues to serve his sentence. The same is true if he is granted home confinement during the final 10% of his sentence, as also allowed by federal law.

    I forgot what he actually did to justify prison? (none / 0) (#154)
    by McBain on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 06:25:00 PM EST
    Did he ever meet any of the underage women in person or did he just send naughty pics?  

    And did you also forget (5.00 / 2) (#157)
    by Peter G on Sun Feb 17, 2019 at 09:01:00 PM EST
    how to find out? I mean, if you actually "forgot," that is.

    I forgot it can be difficult to have (none / 0) (#161)
    by McBain on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 11:28:33 AM EST
    a discussion about a topic like this.... possible excessive prison sentence... without snarky comments.  I'm not perfect but, overall, I do a pretty good job of researching the topics I'm interested in and linking appropriate articles. In this case I'm curious to hear if people think Weiner deserved the sentence he received? I believe our country still has an immature view of sex and people tend to overreact to internet mischief and pornography.

    I appreciate the legal insight you give to this blog Peter, like your recent posts about Manafort, but you're not always the greatest at backing up your claims when there's a disagreement. Maybe you can clean up your own backyard at some point.  



    Express your own opinion and try to back it up (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by Peter G on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 11:40:10 AM EST
    rather than post a disingenuous statement like "I forgot," then. What sentence does a middle-aged, married man "deserve" for a second offense of texting a photo of his own p*nis to a 15-year-old girl, in violation of a federal felony statute? That's an entirely subjective question. You're the one who thought this was an interesting or fruitful topic to bring up for discussion. I have repeatedly expressed my opinion that federal criminal sentences in general are excessive and overly punitive, including those imposed on people whose politics or personality or even behavior I find repulsive.

    At least we agree on one thing (none / 0) (#164)
    by McBain on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 12:14:43 PM EST
    federal criminal sentences in general are excessive and overly punitive

    Well, ok then, don't (5.00 / 1) (#165)
    by Peter G on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 12:50:44 PM EST
    express your own opinion and back it up, with respect to Weiner's sentence. Even though it was you who apparently wanted to open a discussion of the subject.

    since McPain is being disingenuous, (5.00 / 2) (#168)
    by leap on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 03:58:26 PM EST
    just give him an indigenous recipe. In this case, it also gives him something with which to spend his time productively, instead of trolling.

    I tried to take the high road with you (1.00 / 2) (#190)
    by McBain on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 04:09:41 PM EST
    and not start a silly blog war.  Are you being hypocritical on purpose? As I pointed out, you haven't been very good at backing up your claims/opinions when we've disagreed.

    Clearly this topic touches a nerve with you. This isn't the first time we've clashed on a sex crimes related thread.  I can point those out if you like.  Do you really want to have a discussion or do you just want to vent?

    If you want a discussion, I'll go to more detail about Weiner/pornography/and sex in this country but please, no more false accusations.  



    What on earth are you talking about?? (5.00 / 3) (#198)
    by Chuck0 on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 01:48:46 PM EST
    Peter G simply challenged you to state an opinion. You've yet do to that.

    By the weekend (none / 0) (#159)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 08:58:48 AM EST
    We are expected to be in the second wettest February on record with half the month to go.

    The wettest February on record was 2018.

    Then in March the rainy season officially starts.

    Man the lifeboats.

    It has (none / 0) (#166)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 02:22:40 PM EST
    been horrible here and I guess a lot of other places. The only thing good about freezing temperatures was the ground was not mushy. It has never dried up here.

    Very few days of cold here (none / 0) (#169)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 04:15:03 PM EST
    Not a typical winter at all

    Like I've said it seems to be becoming sub tropical


    Hit (none / 0) (#170)
    by FlJoe on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 04:43:01 PM EST
    88 degrees today.

    Yes, (none / 0) (#173)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 05:45:57 PM EST
    I have a friend who lives in Florida and she was complaining that summer was already there. She's beyond tired of FL weather at this point and FL politics and looking (or was looking) to move to VA.

    An interesting little tool... (none / 0) (#177)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 07:47:32 PM EST
    What will your city's climate be in 60 years.

    Very interesting (none / 0) (#178)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 07:53:40 PM EST
    Branson Mo seems like the closest dot probably 20 or 30 miles farther north

    For high emissions, Branson's climate in 2080 will feel most like today's climate near Brookhaven, Mississippi.
    The typical winter in Brookhaven, Mississippi is 13.4°F (7.4°C) warmer and 125.2% wetter than winter in Branson.

    pretty much what I would have thought


    Denver is going to be like... (none / 0) (#179)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 08:00:32 PM EST
    the Texas panhandle. Yuck. Seattle will be like Salem, OR. Strangely, Victoria and Vancouver will be like Seattle.

    Not sure it will (none / 0) (#180)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 08:07:40 PM EST
    Take 50 years here

    Last winter was closer to normal.  It got cold stayed cold for days at a time.

    But other than that every winter I have been here since 2011 has been warmer and wetter.  Wetter summers too. When I was a kid there was always a drought at the end of summer.  Not any more.

    Last winter and the one before all the blooming plants got screwed up because it got so warm in Feb everything bloomed and then froze just enough to kill them.  Look like that could happen this year.


    During the whole polar vortex thing (none / 0) (#181)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 08:09:57 PM EST
    It really stayed just north of here

    We never got much of that for some reason even tho places farther south did.


    "Last winter and the one before " (none / 0) (#182)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 08:12:18 PM EST
    Should have said "the winter before last and the one before "

    That was Seattle this year. (none / 0) (#183)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 08:26:44 PM EST
    One of the driest, warmest January's ever - without a good freeze, so things were starting to bloom. Then BOOM! - record snow and cold once February hit.

    Atlanta (none / 0) (#187)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 06:02:32 AM EST
    is the new Saraland Alabama according to that site. Apparently I get to live on the gulf coast weather wise but no ocean view. Florida is going to be uninhabitable.

    You might have (none / 0) (#188)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 08:04:11 AM EST
    An ocean view

    Big storm comin' tonite.... (none / 0) (#174)
    by desertswine on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 06:29:38 PM EST
    Here in Nuevo Mexico it's windier than anything and colder than a witch's you know what.  Batten down the hatches.

    Must (none / 0) (#194)
    by FlJoe on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 09:37:37 AM EST
    see TV

    Dutch Historian: You're a millionaire funded by billionaires.

    Tucker Carlson: Go fk yourself.