Leave me alone.
This is an Open Thread.
Make a new account
So, I'm sure tomorrow will be loads of fun trying to get new plates at the DVM tomorrow. Wonder how many times I'll get pulled over on the way there.
Oh well, at least it is a good excuse to miss some work on a Monday.
Clever of him, I must say, to stick a plate on your car after he took yours. How long do you think it would have taken you to notice it yourself if "DPD" hadn't alerted you? Might well have taken me a few days. Parent
I might not have ever known. It's not like I check my plates that closely or even have the plate # memorized.
They did a good job of switching too--even put the frame back on. Parent
I'm thinking the vehicle with your plates on it was stopped, or someone reported it for some reason. When the plates didn't match the vehicle description or owner name, they knew you had been stung. Heaven knows they didn't steal your plates so they could use the vehicle they were putting them on to drive the homeless to shelters :)
You have my empathy...one of my greatest peeves is people doing something that causes me to give hours of my otherwise scheduled time for my life events to fixing the damage they've done. Parent
You have my empathy...one of my greatest peeves is people doing something that causes me to give hours of my otherwise scheduled time for my life events to fixing the damage they've done.
(Is this what he meant by "leave me alone"?" Parent
As for yesterday, I would completely agree with Tebow: "They were just better than us today, offense, defense, special teams." Parent
On the other side, too much was put on the shoulders of Tebow to do not only all the passing but all the running. Tebow also blew a big chance to bring his team back when he failed to gently toss, rather than zip, an easy pass to a wide open tall receiver standing near the back of the end zone which could have made things interesting.
The other takeaway for me was seeing the weirdness of Tebow citing NT scripture on his eye black. Wow. For this factor alone, here's hoping the guy has only a benchwarmer role in the NFL, like some of the other highly touted UF qb's of the past. Parent
A guy who quotes the Bible, is an outstanding student, plays football the right way, never has anything bad to say, and spends his summers going to foreign countries to help those in need? We should hope for more intolerable guys like Tebow.
But it's fine, there's no shortage of money-driven, wife-cheating, steroid-using superstars for you to cheer for in the NFL. Parent
I'd also like to see the NFL develop some fool proof system to eliminate the steroid situation, say to the point where the average lineman goes back to something closer to the norm of 35-40 yrs ago, or about 260 lbs, instead of today's 325. The league also needs to work more diligently on the concussion issue, which should get highest priority.
Meantime though, I'm hoping the NFL still will enforce its No Message rule on uniforms or any part of the player. So long as that remains the law, then I suppose guys like Tebow -- sans religious messages -- can go ahead and enjoy as much success as they're capable of. Parent
Unhealthy athletes? Sure. Being an athlete doesn't mean you are automatically healthy.
LINK
The study group was small - but I'd be surprised if subsequent studies showed radically different results. Parent
Truthfully, the religion stuff makes Tebow seem dumb as a phucking brick to me. Sure he's a nice kid in many ways, but in that way...get lost. Parent
Goody Two-Shoes just ain't as much fun. Parent
Nothing better bro...we celebrated at the park till sundown...so much so that I needed a ride home and gotta go pick up my car tonight:) Parent
(Well, except to say that if the game had been played at Camp Randall, subjecting the Hawaiians to temps in the '30s, it could have been an even worse trouncing. Getting out the snow shovels here for a big one tonight. . . .)
IOW, I don't think an electoral map tells us anything useful.
It also doesn't seem to me that partioning Afghanistan into several different actual countries would be a great idea. Even it those countries were effectively governable, you'd end up, among other things, with another Taliban-stan negotiating directly with Pakistan and having a seat in international bodies, etc., not to mention officially sheltering al Qaeda types in what would be sovereign territory again. Seems to me that would recreate the whole problem all over again. Parent
But as administration officials touted the President's Afghanistan strategy this morning on the Sunday political talk shows, they underscored that the U.S. troops may not be coming home in 2011: Gen. David Petraeus: "There's no timeline, no ramp, nothing like that." [Fox News Sunday] National Security Adviser James Jones: "It is not a cliff. It is a glide slope. And so certainly, the President has also said we are not leaving Afghanistan." [CNN State of the Union] Defense Secretary Robert Gates: "Well, first of all, I don't consider this an exit strategy. And I try to avoid using that term. I think this is a transition." link
Gen. David Petraeus: "There's no timeline, no ramp, nothing like that." [Fox News Sunday]
National Security Adviser James Jones: "It is not a cliff. It is a glide slope. And so certainly, the President has also said we are not leaving Afghanistan." [CNN State of the Union]
Defense Secretary Robert Gates: "Well, first of all, I don't consider this an exit strategy. And I try to avoid using that term. I think this is a transition." link
So once again, the White House can't seem to manage a coordinated message. Parent
Here's my two cents, which matches yours: if the president is so committed to a firm, defined, and apparently non-negotiable date for withdrawal, shouldn't that have been made clear to current and former military leaders, as well as current administration officials, and shouldn't they all be singing the same song?
It is, in my estimation, uncharacteristic for Obama not to allow himself any wiggle room, which may be one reason there is a level of distrust in his new-found certainty - that and years of seeing others move the goalposts again and again and again.
Sometimes I honestly do not know whether to be impressed, or frightened, that Obama is so sure that he will be able to do what no one else has been able to accomplish in Afghanistan. I'm leaning toward "frightened" as Obama also believes he is the only one who will finally be able to reform health care, and we see how that's going. Parent
I'm more and more inclined to think MT's theory may possibly be right, that there's something they think they've discovered, like Taliban types getting close to copping one of Pakistan's nukes or something slightly less frightening, that's put some kind of urgency into this that they're not telling us about, and which they think they can actually deal with in the timeframe he's talking about.
I don't know. Otherwise, it all seems perfectly senseless. Parent
It's really pretty silly for a bunch of stateside civilians to be sitting around and opining on the precise number of troops needed for this or anything else. Parent
I dont think that there was anything like Booman said. I just think the WH made that up to keep people like Booman in line and keep them from getting mad about the surge. Anyway, I still see it as grossly inept if what the obamapologists are shopping is the truth. He took months and months to make a decision on something that serious? Parent
Seems to me Obama already has some credibility issues building up with his base -- who find he's governing far more in a center-right direction, and domestically with timid incrementalist steps -- which would be made all the worse with a backtrack on an important public pledge.
Hard to believe Obama would take the politically suicidal route of not disengaging from Afghan. But then, I can recall two other smart Dem presidents -- Lyndon and Carter -- who also acted stupidly and ineptly in the period leading up to their re-elect year. Parent
ROBERT GATES: We're not talking about an abrupt withdrawal. We're talking about something that will take place over a period of time. Our commanders think that these additional forces, and one of the reasons for the President's decision to try and accelerate their deployment is-- is the view that this extended surge has the opportunity to make significant gains in terms of reversing the momentum of the Taliban, denying them control of Afghan territory, and degrading their capabilities. Our military thinks we have a real opportunity to do that. And it's not just in the next 18 months. Because we will have a significant -- we will have 100,000 forces -- troops there. And they are not leaving-- in July of 2011. Some handful or some small number or whatever the conditions permit, we'll begin to withdraw at that time. link
Our military thinks we have a real opportunity to do that. And it's not just in the next 18 months. Because we will have a significant -- we will have 100,000 forces -- troops there. And they are not leaving-- in July of 2011. Some handful or some small number or whatever the conditions permit, we'll begin to withdraw at that time. link
Tim Tebow frequently wears eye black that references Bible verses. In last week's game against Florida State, his eye black said "Heb 12 1-2." This week he has written "John 16:33," referencing a passage from the Gospel of John from the New Testament.
John 16:33 reads:
I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.
Heb 12 1-2 reads:
Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles, and let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us. Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. Parent
That might have been, um, awkward. Parent
Thinking back on the documentary The Staircase, I'll note that film, by itself, convinced me the defendant shouldn't have been convicted. However, it failed to mention a key piece of evidence that jurors relied on to convict him. My memory is not perfect, but I believe it had to do with actual time of death - suggesting the accused waited a couple hours to call 911.
In this case, I'd like to know more about her statements to the police - which were made in which order. I.E., I'd probably give more weight to her initial statement, than those made after sustained interrogation. From my read of reports, she was quick to allege a local bartender murdered her roommate, a theory which was discarded by prosecutors after it was shown he had an alibi. If her initial statement can be demonstrated to be a lie, I have to question her innocence, even if this, by itself, wouldn't necessarily cause me to vote for conviction as a juror.
It will be interesting to see recap news reports that will hopefully present the story factually, without bias towards or against Amanda. I imagine they will come over the next couple years. Parent
The prosecutor is nuts. Parent
There should be a basic set of rules when on trial for murder: Don't antagonize the prosecutor and judge. Dress appropriately in court. Don't let your family pose for photos in front of the crime scene. These basic tenets have somehow escaped Amanda Knox, the 22-year-old Seattle native whose trial for sexually assaulting and murdering her British roommate resumes on Friday. Over the weekend, Knox's mother, Edda Mellas, and her two younger sisters, Deanna, 20, and Ashley, 14, were featured in the Italian women's magazine Gente. The women, in Perugia to support Knox (who turned 22 on July 9 in Capanne Prison), posed somberly in front of the courthouse and leaned on a perch overlooking the Umbrian hillside. One photo showed Knox's younger sisters in short-shorts standing in front of the house that Knox and her murdered roommate, Meredith Kercher, once shared. Understandably, the Kercher family's attorney described the photo as "macabre," but Mellas blamed the photojournalist: "The photos were the photographer's idea, showing Amanda's sisters near the house where Amanda lived," Mellas told NEWSWEEK. "No disrespect to Meredith or her family was ever meant." The photos have caused yet another uproar here in Italy, where everything Knox and her supporters have done for the past 20 months has been closely scrutinized. And the jury in Perugia, like the rest of this country, is paying attention. During court breaks, jurists have lunch and coffee at the same cafés as lawyers and journalists. In fact, while jurors cannot be quoted in the press, they are still allowed to discuss the case and follow the press coverage. They're probably horrified by what's happened in the courtroom, too. Two weeks ago, Ashley Knox defied the prohibition on minors attending sex-related hearings and had to be removed from the proceedings. Then Deanna Knox showed up in a red, white, and blue ensemble, complete with hotpants, on July 4. "The jury pays attention to much more than the testimony," says Alessandra Batassa, a Rome-based criminal lawyer who has defended a number of murder suspects. Ideally, "the lawyers should take control of the client's complete image--including who attends court with her--not just the client's personal behavior." Image is important in this trial, something at which neither the prosecution nor the defense has excelled. The prosecution took five months to make its case, which relied heavily on circumstantial evidence, including Knox's lack of alibi, her behavior after the murder, and contradictory statements she and her co-defendant, Rafaelle Sollecito, made during questioning. The prosecution's forensic evidence cites locations in the house the girls shared where Kercher's blood was found intermingled with Knox's DNA. Prosecutors also offered a knife that has Knox's DNA on the handle and, they claim, Kercher's on the blade. Still, says Batassa, Italian courts have handed down guilty verdicts on less evidence than this. It is not uncommon in Italy to give equal weight to circumstantial evidence, especially in cases where the defendants have been caught making false statements. Knox, during an interrogation days after the murder, admitted to being in the house when Kercher was killed, and then accused Patrick Lumumba, her former boss, of the murder (he was later cleared). Sollecito at first said he didn't remember if Knox was with him that night and then said he was at home downloading cartoons, even though his computer and Internet records said otherwise. Confronted with records showing that the cell phones of both suspects were turned off at the same moment the night before the murder and then turned on again the next morning about 6--Knox and Sollecito told police that they slept until after 10 a.m.--the two changed their story. They also said that Sollecito called the police the morning after the murder, though phone records show the call was made after the police had already arrived at the at the scene of the murder. "Lies can discredit the suspects as much as hard evidence," said a Perugian judge who preferred to remain unnamed.
Over the weekend, Knox's mother, Edda Mellas, and her two younger sisters, Deanna, 20, and Ashley, 14, were featured in the Italian women's magazine Gente. The women, in Perugia to support Knox (who turned 22 on July 9 in Capanne Prison), posed somberly in front of the courthouse and leaned on a perch overlooking the Umbrian hillside. One photo showed Knox's younger sisters in short-shorts standing in front of the house that Knox and her murdered roommate, Meredith Kercher, once shared. Understandably, the Kercher family's attorney described the photo as "macabre," but Mellas blamed the photojournalist: "The photos were the photographer's idea, showing Amanda's sisters near the house where Amanda lived," Mellas told NEWSWEEK. "No disrespect to Meredith or her family was ever meant."
The photos have caused yet another uproar here in Italy, where everything Knox and her supporters have done for the past 20 months has been closely scrutinized. And the jury in Perugia, like the rest of this country, is paying attention. During court breaks, jurists have lunch and coffee at the same cafés as lawyers and journalists. In fact, while jurors cannot be quoted in the press, they are still allowed to discuss the case and follow the press coverage.
They're probably horrified by what's happened in the courtroom, too. Two weeks ago, Ashley Knox defied the prohibition on minors attending sex-related hearings and had to be removed from the proceedings. Then Deanna Knox showed up in a red, white, and blue ensemble, complete with hotpants, on July 4. "The jury pays attention to much more than the testimony," says Alessandra Batassa, a Rome-based criminal lawyer who has defended a number of murder suspects. Ideally, "the lawyers should take control of the client's complete image--including who attends court with her--not just the client's personal behavior."
Image is important in this trial, something at which neither the prosecution nor the defense has excelled. The prosecution took five months to make its case, which relied heavily on circumstantial evidence, including Knox's lack of alibi, her behavior after the murder, and contradictory statements she and her co-defendant, Rafaelle Sollecito, made during questioning. The prosecution's forensic evidence cites locations in the house the girls shared where Kercher's blood was found intermingled with Knox's DNA. Prosecutors also offered a knife that has Knox's DNA on the handle and, they claim, Kercher's on the blade. Still, says Batassa, Italian courts have handed down guilty verdicts on less evidence than this.
It is not uncommon in Italy to give equal weight to circumstantial evidence, especially in cases where the defendants have been caught making false statements. Knox, during an interrogation days after the murder, admitted to being in the house when Kercher was killed, and then accused Patrick Lumumba, her former boss, of the murder (he was later cleared). Sollecito at first said he didn't remember if Knox was with him that night and then said he was at home downloading cartoons, even though his computer and Internet records said otherwise. Confronted with records showing that the cell phones of both suspects were turned off at the same moment the night before the murder and then turned on again the next morning about 6--Knox and Sollecito told police that they slept until after 10 a.m.--the two changed their story. They also said that Sollecito called the police the morning after the murder, though phone records show the call was made after the police had already arrived at the at the scene of the murder. "Lies can discredit the suspects as much as hard evidence," said a Perugian judge who preferred to remain unnamed.
Although this is a stupid comment:
It is not uncommon in Italy to give equal weight to circumstantial evidence..
The fact is, no one here or in the media really know. The jury listened to the witnesses and weighed ALL the evidence presented, and found both defendants guilty. We should know within 90 days of their reasoning, because under Italian law, the jury's reasoning is released. Keep in mind, too, that an Italian jury does not have to be unanimous to convict - just has to be a majority (which would be 5 of the 8 jurors).
But for people to say emphatically that she was convicted of something she didn't do is just silly. Parent
A leading Republican strategist and one-time aide to former Vice President Cheney said Sunday that President Obama's recently announced decision to send an additional 30, 000 troops to Afghanistan is "a reassertion of the Bush doctrine." "The [Bush] doctrine is no safe havens [for terrorists intent on harming the United States] and we go after those that provide a harbor [for such terrorists]. That's the doctrine," Republican strategist Mary Matalin explained Sunday on CNN's State of the Union. Obama's decision to surge additional troops into Afghanistan is "solid policy,' in Matalin's view and "a reassertion of the Bush doctrine." "Every strategic element is from the Bush doctrine. The tactics are from the Bush surge [in Iraq]," she said.
"The [Bush] doctrine is no safe havens [for terrorists intent on harming the United States] and we go after those that provide a harbor [for such terrorists]. That's the doctrine," Republican strategist Mary Matalin explained Sunday on CNN's State of the Union.
Obama's decision to surge additional troops into Afghanistan is "solid policy,' in Matalin's view and "a reassertion of the Bush doctrine."
"Every strategic element is from the Bush doctrine. The tactics are from the Bush surge [in Iraq]," she said.
If the surge was part of the Bush Doctrine, I wonder whether Matalin would also consider the premature reassignment of troops, resources, and attention away from Afganistan during the lead up to the Iraq invasion to be part of the Bush Doctrine as well. Parent