home

Thursday Open Thread

It's a motions day for me. My issue: Is a single instance of weaving within a lane on the interstate without crossing a line a valid reason for a traffic stop under the theory that the driver might be tired and fall asleep and therefore a welfare check is called for?

Here's an open thread for you, all topics welcome.

< Holder Indicates Federal Raids on Marijuana Dispensaries Will Stop | Rocky Mountain News Shuts Down, Final Edition Friday >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Just to prove... (5.00 / 3) (#12)
    by desertswine on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:29:57 PM EST
    that no good deed goes unpunished.

    Good Samaritan ticketed for jaywalking.

    Revenue (none / 0) (#17)
    by squeaky on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:34:48 PM EST
    The old ladies will get their tickets in the mail.

    Parent
    You have to understand, though, (none / 0) (#27)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:51:10 PM EST
    the decision to cross at that place on the road led to some poor person experiencing what it is like to hit someone with their car and the nightmares to follow that he/she may have killed them.

    I sincerely hope I never have to experience that because someone who should have known better took an unsafe/illegal route to get across the street.


    Parent

    Not really "some poor person" (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:23:18 PM EST
    The four people had made it about halfway across Federal, and most of the northbound traffic had slowed to let them go the rest of the way, McDonald said.

    "But one pickup driver got impatient and passed in the left- hand turn lane," McDonald said. "He plowed right into my stepdad - but not before (my stepdad) pushed the old ladies and the other guy out of the way."

    Link

    Having lived in that area once-upon-a-time, I can tell you there is no "safe or legal" place to cross the six lanes of Federal at the bus stop at 62nd. It is especially difficult for the elderly and at-rsik.  


    Parent

    Do you honestly believe (none / 0) (#106)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:21:10 PM EST
    that the impatient person realized that going around the stopped traffic was going to plow down people?

    Might the city now do something to make it safer?

    Parent

    What I believe... (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 04:16:05 PM EST
    ...is that this impatient, self-centered, stupid horse's behind put the safety and lives of others behind his own selfish needs.

    The bus driver that got hit was, without a doubt, doing the right thing.  He treated these ladies the way people in a civilized society should all act towards one another.  To suggest that pick-up truck driver was doing the same is wrong.

    As to correcting the situation, who knows.  There's no "city" as this is unincorporated Adams County.  Federal is a State highway (hence the Troopers giving out the ticket).  I'm sure the enities will fight about who's responsibility it is in these days of no funds.  

    Sadly, it will probably take a fatality for a crossing light to go in.

    Parent

    ...in a frikking snowstorm! (none / 0) (#38)
    by Fabian on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:03:36 PM EST
    When I rode my bicycle to work, I hated riding in the rain.  Not because I would get wet and grimy, but because visibility decreases for everyone.  When you ride your bike in traffic, you are counting on drivers to see you and avoid hitting you.  The lower the visibility, the greater the risk I would be hit.

    Now a snowstorm is even worse than rain.  Visibility is even worse and depending on conditions, almost nil.  Stopping distances increase greatly as well.  The risk of getting hit shoots up.

    I admire the goodwill that led the two men to help the women across the road, but they should have done it at an intersection with a crosswalk if they really wanted to do the women a favor.

    I spend a lot of effort teaching my children how to be safe.  When they are older and less prone to nightmares, I'll tell them the true story about the man and the industrial sized wood chipper.  No good samaritan in that tale, just a horrified witness.

    Parent

    Last night we had one! (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by oldpro on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:23:11 PM EST
    "A frikking snowstorm" that is.

    Now the sun is shining and melting the evidence but it was surreal to drive home to the peninsula from Seattle last night through a hailstorm which segued into a blizzard.

    Wierd.

    Gives support to the local saying:  "Don't like our weather?  Wait 10 minutes!"

    Change you can believe in.

    Parent

    I have lots and lots of seedlings starting (5.00 / 3) (#32)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:56:16 PM EST
    this year and a new shipment of different annual fruiting seeds from all over the globe that will grow easily and well in my zone.  I wonder if I'm wierd, but I worry about people getting the foods they need in the future.  I'll probably be able to start setting things out next week.  I even have a flowering edible bean vine for the speed limit sign in front of our house.

    You're not weird, MT. (5.00 / 5) (#63)
    by caseyOR on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:16:13 PM EST
    I'm redesigning the garden to increase arable land. (That sounds like I have actual acreage, doesn't it? I have a bit of space in the landlord's backyard.) Anyway, I hope to make space for a winter garden, too. And I am reading up on drying and storing seeds.

    Obviously, the food situation in the USA is not as dire as in some other countries. And if we really set our minds to it, we could feed all of our people. I don't think the nation will make that commitment, though. So, in addition to raising food for myself and a couple of friends who don't have garden space, I plan to set some rows aside for the Oregon Food Bank's "Grow-a-Row" program. This is a program that encourages local gardeners to plant an extra row or so and donate that produce to the food bank. It is a good way to get some fresh fruit and vegies into the hands of folks who really need it. And it helps to foster the idea that we're all part of a community, and it's good to watch out for each other.

    Parent

    What kinds of seedlings? (none / 0) (#44)
    by vml68 on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:20:04 PM EST
    I would kill to have a garden. Right now I have to limit myself to houseplants and whatever I can grow in containers out on the balcony in the summer.

    Parent
    I've got some Robusta coffee seedlings (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:01:16 PM EST
    that make terrific houseplants because they have a really shallow root system, some pawpaw trees that will grow very well here and they have a high quality fruit, there are a couple of very different vines from South America that grow different sorts of fruits some of which are really large.  Have quite a few beans, peas, and peppers so far.......also some morning glory but I don't want anyone eating that :) I'll probably purchase my tomato plants.  I use some grow boxes and even made most of my own.  Do you have a porch or deck that gets sun?  If so you might try some grow boxes.  It is amazing how much they can produce.

    Parent
    Oh yeah, and some goji berry plants (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:15:33 PM EST
    not because I think they are a magic cure, but they do have amazing nutritional value.  Also  something called Kangaroo Apple from Australia.

    Parent
    Pawpaw trees.... (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by vml68 on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:16:39 PM EST
    is that the US pawpaw or are you talking about papayas?
    What are the South American vines/fruits called?

    I do not have a porch or deck just a balcony.. :-(

    Parent

    The pawpaw are the American (none / 0) (#179)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Feb 27, 2009 at 02:38:30 PM EST
    version, but a propagated version that is supposed to have a high quality of fruit.  The SA vines are Cassabanana.

    Parent
    I think we'd all be served... (none / 0) (#46)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:25:39 PM EST
    by growing food and starting gardens...can't hurt, and it could save or prolong your life if sh*t really gets ugly.

    Unfortunately I have the blackest of black thumbs...so I'm hoarding cans of Chef Boyardee instead.  Tracy, if the sh*t hits the fan think I could trade some cans for something fresh out the garden?  I got Beefaroni, Mini Ravioli, Spaghetti-O's...you name it:)

    Parent

    No offense to you Kdog or anyone else (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by vml68 on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:30:25 PM EST
    who shares your palate....but living on Beefaroni, Mini Ravioli and Spaghetti-O's would make me hurl!

    Parent
    Once in awhile... (none / 0) (#49)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:39:42 PM EST
    as a fast midnight snack its good, but Chef Boyardee everyday would make me hurl too.

    Gotta be better than the pigeon meat my great uncle ate as a kid during the depression though.

    Strictly a worse case scenario until I sharpen my hunter/gatherer chops:)

    Parent

    I have it on good authority (my dad!) (5.00 / 2) (#56)
    by vml68 on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:04:16 PM EST
    that pigeon meat is very tasty. My father used to shoot pigeons to eat when I was a kid. I was going through a 10-year vegetarian phase and so I never tried it. I also absolutely hated the fact that he used to shoot the birds.

    Then we got a dog who just happened to have a crazy love for birds and everytime my father picked up the gun to shoot the pigeons this boy would bark non-stop till my father put the gun down. At first we thought he was just barking at the gun but once we found a little baby chick and brought it home and this dog fussed over it like a mother hen. If he found a dead bird he would just sit by its side and howl and we could not make him budge unless we "buried" (we used to toss a pile of leaves or mulch to cover it) the bird. It was bizarre and heartwarming.

    Parent

    My great-uncle... (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:13:47 PM EST
    said pigeon stew is not something he ever wants to eat again...but I seem to like any and all flesh, so maybe I would find pigeon tasty.  Pretty much anything breaded and fried tastes good:)

    Parent
    Stew (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by squeaky on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:37:19 PM EST
    Sounds like mystery meat. I don't blame him. But wood pigeon can be really delicious. Most likely city pigeon too as long as you don't know that it was eating garbage out of the gutter.

    I knew a guy that used to go upstate and shoot pigeons for the guys in china town restaurants. It was what they liked to cook and eat after hours. He eventually got taken over by drink and stopped going upstate to get his pigeons. The chinese guys never knew.

    Parent

    Too funny.... (none / 0) (#88)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:52:20 PM EST
    Yeah, I only know city pigeon aka flying rats...last game I'd look too for food.

    Parent
    pigeon/snake (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by jharp on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 04:38:12 PM EST
    Had some pigeon in China once and didn't much care for it. But. Any new food takes a while to acquire a taste for.

    The snake soup, on the other hand, was delicious.

    Kind of between chickeny and a white flaky fish.

    Parent

    You know some very interesting people (none / 0) (#89)
    by sj on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:52:43 PM EST
    My acquaintances seem boring by comparison.

    Parent
    Artists (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by squeaky on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:17:43 PM EST
    And general NYC have quite a variety, keep things interesting. Seems to me that there are quite a few characters here at TL too..

    Parent
    Some of the best characters... (5.00 / 2) (#107)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:31:07 PM EST
    its wild how I feel like I know so many of you and you could be sitting across from me on a bus and I'd never know it.

    We need to hold a TL commenter convention...any chance for a stimulus grant to fund it?  

    Parent

    TL Militia? (none / 0) (#112)
    by squeaky on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:42:46 PM EST
    Bet we can get funding for that, no?

    Parent
    War on drugs. Grant applic. (none / 0) (#113)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:46:18 PM EST
    will highlight need to do an intervention as to kdog.

    Parent
    LOL.... (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:52:42 PM EST
    Look at the former prosecutin' diehard Padre fan talking about defrauding the taxpayer through funding lost causes.  

    Talk about a bridge to nowhere!...:)

    Parent

    J has a really, really long (none / 0) (#119)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 04:07:40 PM EST
    memory.  You too. But the grant applic. would stress treatment, not prosecution/punishment.

    Parent
    Can we change it to... (none / 0) (#122)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 04:25:46 PM EST
    an open and frank discussion of treatment mandates under health care coverage?  What conditions are covered, nature, duration and frequency of treatments for what conditions--that sort of thing?

    That way I can deduct it and get CE credits.  :)

    Parent

    Certainly. And I need some (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 04:40:24 PM EST
    tried-and-true language to make sure the grant includes travel and accommodations (three star ot above) in Manhattan.

    Parent
    So... (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 04:49:50 PM EST
    ...crashing on the floor at kdog's pad isn't going to cut it?  

    Parent
    hmmm (5.00 / 2) (#132)
    by CST on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 04:54:37 PM EST
    Could his floor fit everyone from TL?

    Last I heard, he's already got at least one crasher.

    Although with the number of NYers here, something could probably be worked out.

    I know I would have a place to stay.  But I might need my $30 roundtrip chinatown bus fare reimbursed :)

    Parent

    Happy to report... (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:27:36 PM EST
    our couchguest has found a gig and is working on some living arrangements.

    My roomies might have issues with anything over a dozen for more than one night of good natured debauchery:)

    I wouldn't put you in danger oculus, just keep that former prosecutor stuff on the dl:)  Trust me, we give no one no reason to bust down these doors.  Not that the long arm needs a reason.  Never more contraband than I could eat either. We're regular sweethearts:)

    Though I was thinking Vegas myself...or AC.

    Parent

    I could accommodate your overflow (none / 0) (#161)
    by nycstray on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 06:23:26 PM EST
    as long as they don't mind a Dalmatian, cats, a ban on processed foods and a few other odd habits I have  ;) The long arm here only tends to look out for me when I'm dog walking in the wee hours of the morn . . . otherwise, we don't mix.

    BTW, instead of hoarding canned goods, have you thoght of joining a CSA? Gets you off Big AG products and you can preserve for the future. Info here If you are interested, do it sooner than later. They sell out.

    Parent

    Nice to hear from you Nycstray. (none / 0) (#163)
    by vml68 on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 06:29:41 PM EST
    Was wondering what happened to you.

    P.S.- When I read Teresa's comment on keeping a lookout for news about a woman and her dalmation, I had to laugh 'cos the same thought had crossed my mind!

    Parent

    Thanks :) (none / 0) (#165)
    by nycstray on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 06:41:15 PM EST
    News would prob not be about me missing, but about said spotty one protecting me  ;) She has a good eye and instinct, as do a few of my felines, lol!~

    I've just been towing the overwork line while it's available. Crazy, but worth it. One more deadline tonight before the next round hits . . . .

    Parent

    So far I've never been arrested and/or (5.00 / 2) (#136)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:04:42 PM EST
    at a place where a search warrant was being executed.  Like to keep it that way if possible!

    Parent
    In NY (none / 0) (#139)
    by CST on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:07:48 PM EST
    possesion is decriminalized unless you are smoking in public.

    kdog's pad isn't public.

    So unless he has other "dealings" going on, no search warrant could be issued for a private residence.

    Parent

    Padres may be a lost cause. (none / 0) (#129)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 04:42:01 PM EST
    On the block, for sale.  Didn't renew season tickets.

    Parent
    I gave up my season tix... (none / 0) (#131)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 04:54:01 PM EST
    ...years and years ago.  Knew it was time when you couldn't even give away Rockies tickets.

    I am excited about Opening Day.  Last year was the first one I've missed.  However, that's more of a ritual/celebration of Spring thing than a baseball thing.

    Parent

    Well, I am going to spring training and (none / 0) (#135)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:03:02 PM EST
    World Baseball Classic (San Diego game).  

    Parent
    Ya gotta believe... (none / 0) (#133)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 04:58:20 PM EST
    sometimes the kids catch fire, ya gotta like Eckstein, and if my boy Cliffy Floyd stays healthy he can hit with the best of them.

    I so wanna boycott the stadium that shall not be named...but they got me, I'll try to hold out till May.  If it wasn't for Madoff we'd have Manny goddamnit...they're saying maybe the Dodgers after all.

    Parent

    Peavy sd. he's really glad he is (none / 0) (#134)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:01:58 PM EST
    still a Padre.  I'll bet.  

    Parent
    I have faith... (none / 0) (#138)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:07:16 PM EST
    ...that one day my O's will get an owner who cares about winning and lead us back to the glory days of old.  

    The Rockies, on the other hand, will always be 3rd in my heart behind the O's and the Cubs.  Maybe even 4rd, depending on how the Mariners are doing any given year.

    Parent

    Road runner sports headline opined (none / 0) (#141)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:08:31 PM EST
    this might be the Cubs' year.

    Parent
    Why should this year... (none / 0) (#147)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:19:31 PM EST
    ...be any different?  Raise the hopes and then crush them in the most heartbreaking way.  

    That's the Cubbie way.

    Parent

    Every year is the Cub's year, (none / 0) (#155)
    by caseyOR on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 06:02:15 PM EST
    until it isn't. : ). I've been waiting my whole life for the Cubs to even get to the Series, much less win it.

    But I am a Cubs fan, so hope springs eternal. Maybe this year.

    Parent

    Mariners ARE BRINGING BACK GRIFFEY JR (none / 0) (#146)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:17:41 PM EST
    this season!

    For the life of me, I can't imagine why. He was so awful during the last years here. Out on injuries more than he played, and constantly bad-mouthing Seattle and his fellow team members.

    I know there are people who wouldn't agree, but he was never a team player and morale was so much better when he was benched with a cast on his wrist.


    Parent

    Ummm (none / 0) (#158)
    by CoralGables on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 06:11:27 PM EST

    and if my boy Cliffy Floyd stays healthy

    "Cliff Floyd staying healthy" is nearly synonymous with "if pigs had wings".

    Parent

    Not Quite What I Had in Mind (none / 0) (#114)
    by squeaky on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:52:39 PM EST
    I was thinking more along the lines of a milita to defend against drug warriors et al.  

    Parent
    I imagine pigeon tastes a lot like dove, (none / 0) (#67)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:17:57 PM EST
    which is hunted and eaten all the time (just ask Cheney).

    I've hunted dove but have never eaten any so I can't say for sure but I'll bet it tastes pretty good.

    Parent

    Squab Too (none / 0) (#83)
    by squeaky on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:38:06 PM EST
    Well I have it on good authority (5.00 / 2) (#95)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:03:15 PM EST
    from one of my moving men when we moved in here that I haven't eaten until I've had coon and sweet taters.

    Parent
    LOL, So are you planning to try that (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by vml68 on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:07:42 PM EST
    sometime?

    Parent
    Heard That Too (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by squeaky on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:20:43 PM EST
    Inexpensive and delicious. I recently read this from McClatchy.

    Sounds good enough to eat..

    Parent
    and possum :) (5.00 / 2) (#166)
    by Amiss on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 06:56:49 PM EST
    They used to have a possum and sweet tater dinner in Dothan every year. Not sure what time of year tho. I love me some sweet taters, but will forego both possum and coon.

    Parent
    Aw (none / 0) (#58)
    by squeaky on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:06:20 PM EST
    What a sweet dog.

    Pigeon meat is super tasty, although I think that the variety kdog is referring to is city pigeon, not wood pigeon.

    Big difference, imo.

    Parent

    I was talking about city pigeons... :-)! (none / 0) (#66)
    by vml68 on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:17:21 PM EST
    We were living in a city at the time. Not in the US though or I am sure my father would have been arrested.

    Parent
    Yummy (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by squeaky on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:32:41 PM EST
    I have eaten delicious pigeon at a country pub in dorset england along the lines of this dish:
    Wood Pigeon wrapped in bacon and cabbage, fresh foie gras, onions, walnut and golden raisin elderberry jus

    link

    Parent

    General question re cats: (none / 0) (#137)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:06:33 PM EST
    recently a hummingbird flew into closed window and dropped dead on the ground.  Neighborhood cats totally ignored it.  Is that usual?

    Parent
    Yes (none / 0) (#142)
    by squeaky on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:08:56 PM EST
    They like their meat alive. Carrion is not their thing, unless they kill it and store it.

    Parent
    Or drop it at your feet... (5.00 / 2) (#145)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:12:51 PM EST
    ... or the doorstep to show what great and mighty hunters they are.

    Parent
    I'll swap ya some fresh for some chef :) (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:01:52 PM EST
    Community based solutions.... (5.00 / 2) (#97)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:05:37 PM EST
    I love it!

    Parent
    Have you figured out... (none / 0) (#153)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:39:19 PM EST
    ...your post-societial breakdown community?  Who's going to provide medical services, who's going to grow the food and whatnot?  

    Obviously you'd be Minister of Canned Goods, but you might want a fall-back skill.  

    Although, so far my skill set in the post-modern world is limited to fermenting beverages...

    Parent

    Thats a good skill... (none / 0) (#157)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 06:02:56 PM EST
    don't sell yourself short...the day the beer and booze trucks stop making deliveries, your services will be in high demand.

    I'm an excellent treeclimber...community look-out/scout?  Not afraid to get my hands dirty either...like Jamestown, I assume everyone who can work will work...we could take some joy in watching the Thurston Howell the III's among us help dig a ditch:)

    Parent

    I'm hoping to supplement... (none / 0) (#160)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 06:20:40 PM EST
    ...that with my skills at beating on things in a semi-musical manner.  And probably keeping the kitchen/tending the fire.  

    Plenty of physical labor to be done and the shovel and the hoe ain't going to care what you did before or how much money you had.  

    Parent

    I believe Stephanie Tubbs-Jones (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Fabian on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:12:05 PM EST
    was spotted when her car behaved erratically.

    She was sent to Huron Hospital Tuesday night after a police officer in Cleveland Heights saw her swerving in her car. When the officer tried to pull her over, her car started to roll across the lanes of oncoming traffic.


    Bizarro world (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by lentinel on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:20:28 PM EST
    Somebody help me with this:

    It seems, reading the Times today, that Obama is going to sell permits to companies that pollute. Presumably, they will then be free to continue to pollute since they have purchased the pollution permit.

    It is then expected that the companies that pollute will pass the cost of the permits on the consumers - us. But that will be OK because the government will give tax relief to the consumers.

    So - to sum up: Companies will be able to continue to pollute. They will pay the government. They will then pass the permit charges on to us and the government will give the money that they got from the polluters to the consumer.

    That would seem to add up to companies being able to continue to exceed pollution emission caps. The rest of the equation is simply taking money from one of our pockets and putting it in the other (maybe).

    Here is an actual quote from the Times:
    "The president will also propose, in the 10-year budget he is to release Thursday, to use revenues from the centerpiece of his environmental policy -- a plan under which companies must buy permits to exceed pollution emission caps -- to pay for an extension of a two-year tax credit that benefits low-wage and middle-income people."

    Run for cover.

    Sounds like a license... (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:34:10 PM EST
    to legally poison with Uncle Sam's blessing to me, as long as Uncle Sam gets a slice of the action.

    Parent
    Clean air act (none / 0) (#74)
    by CST on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:24:30 PM EST
    Would still remain.

    As it is, they currently have the right to poison as much as they want within that act.  This would just make them have to pay for it.  But they still can't pollute beyond the clean air act.

    Parent

    Hm (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by Steve M on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:40:56 PM EST
    Well, "pollution" is a loaded word.  Companies emit all sorts of things into the atmosphere, many of them not too pleasant.  But unless we want to return to the zero-emissions world of centuries past, we know there's going to be some amount of "pollution."  We can't just outlaw it.

    The idea, quite simply, is to make companies pay the cost of the pollution they create, rather than letting them inflict it cost-free on their neighbors.  Now, you can argue that they'll simply pass the costs on to their customers, but for one thing that sounds an awful lot like the standard Republican argument for why it's pointless to ever raise corporate taxes.  For another thing, companies who pollute less won't have as many costs to pass on to their customers, and they'll do better in the marketplace.  If you pollute to your heart's content, either you have to eat the cost or else no one will want to buy your overpriced goods.

    I think it seems like a pretty economically sensible proposal.

    Parent

    In other words... (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by Polkan on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:32:54 PM EST
    let's ignore a perfectly reasonable question because it sounds vaguely Republican.

    I like your point about competitive marketplace emerging on non-polluting and cheaper cars (so, dual selling point), but I'm still puzzled about all this talk going around lately about the carbon trading market collapsing.

    Perhaps the question can be rephrased thusly: for all this money changing hands, do we even know if this can work?

    Parent

    carbon market collapsing (none / 0) (#87)
    by CST on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:49:23 PM EST
    Just like every other market is collapsing and for the same reasons.

    No one is producing enough "pollution" right now to want to buy one of the permits.  This is because no one is producing much of anything right now.  So demand goes down and prices fall.  Just like any other market.

    The devil is in the details.  If the credits are too cheap, they won't curb pollution.  And if the credits are too expensive they could curb growth.  I think you are asking the wrong question though.  It's not "do we know if this can work?"  The questions I have are "why not?" and "work at what?"  They certainly provide funds for the government, and they force pollution producers to pay for the excess pollution.  As for whether they change consumer or producer choices, I think the jury is still out.  But you won't know unless you try, and the downside is pretty minimal.

    Parent

    Really? (none / 0) (#109)
    by Steve M on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:32:19 PM EST
    is that all you got out of my comment?  something sounds vaguely Republican?

    My point was simply that if people reject the notion in other contexts that we shouldn't bother having corporate taxes because they simply get passed on to consumers, but they find that objection to be salient in this case, they should think about why.

    Parent

    That wasn't what you said. (none / 0) (#171)
    by Samuel on Fri Feb 27, 2009 at 12:15:48 AM EST
    You were dismissive of a good question.  

    Parent
    Hold up... (none / 0) (#149)
    by Samuel on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:23:23 PM EST
    "For another thing, companies who pollute less won't have as many costs to pass on to their customers, and they'll do better in the marketplace." - The polluting companies aren't polluting for fun - they pollute because alternative methods of production are more expensive.  

    The carbon tax therefore has to be larger than any marginal expense for less polluting in the short term.  This will increase the price to the consumer and lower supply. Higher prices and increased scarcity are the trade-off necessary for pollution to be reduced.  In the long term other investors - quite possibly foreign - will attempt to undercut the American market.  Then I guess the US gov will just subsidize the market their carbon taxing...who knows what the plan is...

    Parent

    Right (5.00 / 2) (#156)
    by Steve M on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 06:02:42 PM EST
    they pollute because alternative methods of production are more expensive.  This gives them an incentive, which they don't possess when pollution is free, to find more efficient methods of production.

    If they find a better method of production that minimizes pollution, they can make up for the cost of that new method by selling their right to pollute to someone who isn't as efficient.

    The cap-and-trade system is an attempt to use market forces to confront an externality that would be left completely uncontrolled otherwise.  Since I assume you're not in favor of unfettered pollution, please tell me how private contractual arrangements maintain an optimal level of pollution in your libertarian utopia.

    Parent

    I never described (5.00 / 1) (#172)
    by Samuel on Fri Feb 27, 2009 at 12:28:28 AM EST
    libertarian society as a Utopia, not once - I described it as a world in which the ideals of others are not imposed on those who do not consent -we live in a world of scarce resources, I understand that and would never reference any political philosophy as capable of bringing about Utopia.

    It's a fact that a cap and trade system will result in higher costs - this is because the highest productive means will be penalized.  It's not a question of the environment - it's an economic fact.  Either the increased cost will be within the good itself, in the form of a tax or billed to posterity.  You cannot employ less productive methods and not have an increase in prices and a drop in supply.  

    You argued that "If they find a better method of production that minimizes pollution, they can make up for the cost of that new method by selling their right to pollute to someone who isn't as efficient." - They will have already purchased these at auction, selling them back even at a slight profit will still result in an overall increase in prices.

    I get that the government is trying to funnel development into green tech.  The effectiveness of that: the time it will take vs the increased costs in goods, taxes or debt is the debate.  

    Parent

    Also (none / 0) (#173)
    by Samuel on Fri Feb 27, 2009 at 12:53:56 AM EST
    since you brought it up - a libertarian society would not provide funds for major polluters like the military.  Whether it's CO2 emissions, depleted uranium or some awful chemical we don't even know about.

    I'm not saying that pollution would be eradicated - but citing pollution control as necessitating government while governments are the largest polluters isn't a strong argument.

    Only because you asked - I wouldn't just up and say that otherwise.

    Parent

    And finally.... (none / 0) (#178)
    by Samuel on Fri Feb 27, 2009 at 09:55:25 AM EST
    "Steven Chu, President Barack Obama's new Secretary of Energy, told The New York Times earlier this month that reaching agreement on emissions trading legislation would be difficult in the present recession because any scheme to regulate greenhouse gas emissions would probably cause energy prices to rise and drive manufacturing jobs to countries where energy was cheaper."

    Parent
    It's a good system (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by Democratic Cat on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:04:35 PM EST
    I haven't read all the details, but cap and trade, if that's what it is, ensures that those that can easily and with least cost reduce their emmissions do so -- because they can then sell the permits to other companies for which emissions are more costly to control.  You can over time reduce the amount of permits out there, if you want.  So it puts a ceiling on what people can put into the environment now, encourages efficiency in reducing pollution, and you can cut back over time.

    Pollution control is costly. The consumer pays for it one way or another. Cap and trade is a way to make sure that it be done in the most cost efficient way possible. If a company needs to buy permits to exceed the cap, they can pass that on to consumers, sure, but some consumers will therefore consume less and that will shift demand away from the dirty producers towards the cleaner producers.

    I know these kinds of policies don't make sense to a lot of people, but economists like policies like cap and trade because rather than employ regulatory limits or moral suasion, they use companies' own greedy natures to achieve the desired outcome: less pollution.

    Parent

    That's Al Gore's cap and trade system. (none / 0) (#51)
    by inclusiveheart on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:41:50 PM EST
    I don't really know what to think about it.  Generally, I don't think making polluting more expensive does anything other than make whatever they are making in the process of polluting expensive - in this country at least.  In others they do stuff like regulate polluting industries in addition to charging them for exceeding their limits which tends to prevent companies from just passing along the expense to customers.

    Parent
    Not new (none / 0) (#68)
    by CST on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:18:30 PM EST
    They have already implemented this system in many countries in Europe.  Ironically, I think they have a problem on their hands now, where due to the economic downturn, the companies with permits (issued when things were good) don't need them anymore because they are producing less, but no one wants to buy them because they also don't need them.

    So the key I think is determining the number and cost of the permits, and how much "pollution" they are worth.

    Parent

    Geez, Jeralyn... (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:11:52 PM EST
    ...with the strong Chinook winds we've had all this Winter, I can't remember the last time I haven't fought to keep my truck in its lane while driving I-25.  When those gusts hit you broadside, its darn near impossible to drive in a completely straight line.  

    Not only do I have to worry about the speed traps, but now I can get pulled over for acts of nature too?  Just peachy--like I need to be any more paranoid.  

    A tragic accident... (none / 0) (#103)
    by Fabian on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:19:48 PM EST
    ..or just stupidity.

    Bouts of high wind appear to now be a regular feature in Ohio.  In the past twelve months, we've had at least four instances of 30 mph winds with gusts up to 50 mph or 60 mph.  Only one of those instances was Tropical Storm Ike.  The rest were completely unrelated to hurricanes.

    Trees downed or snapped off, old privacy fences knocked flat - there are many hazards during high winds.  I rather expected rigs with empty trailers to stay off the roads.  One poor man was killed because he was beside a trailer when the wind pushed it over onto his vehicle.  Not a side swipe, it literally toppled over.  How the heck was the driver keeping his rig on the road if the wind was that strong?

    Parent

    We've had more days... (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:51:13 PM EST
    ...of 40 mph winds with gusts up to 90 this Winter than I can count.  A marked increased in frequency from a typical season.  Don't know if its an aberration or a trend.

    Bad for driving or even being out walking--doubly so when strong winds are a migraine trigger.  

    And soon it will be hail/tornado season!

    Parent

    [cough]climate change[cough] (none / 0) (#175)
    by Fabian on Fri Feb 27, 2009 at 03:37:21 AM EST
    We won't know until long after, of course.  You have to collect data before you can analyze it but I know for a fact that these high wind events aren't remotely normal for Ohio.  I've lived in Ohio since I was born and I'm something of a naturalist.

    What will be the "new normal" in your state?

    Parent

    Today Is My Birthday!!!! (5.00 / 3) (#90)
    by shoulin4 on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:53:33 PM EST
    Wooooooot!!

    Ok, I'm done :)

    Happy Birthday.... (5.00 / 2) (#99)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:09:25 PM EST
    to a woman with good taste!

    You're aces in my book after your last comment:)

    Parent

    LOL! (none / 0) (#105)
    by shoulin4 on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:20:55 PM EST
    that's nice to know ;)

    Parent
    Happy B'day! (none / 0) (#92)
    by vml68 on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:59:13 PM EST
    And you know that notion (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by SOS on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 04:38:28 PM EST
    just crossed my mind

    I say no.... (none / 0) (#1)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:18:39 PM EST
    the cop should have to witness you leaving your lane...that's a hazard.  A little weave within the lines is not.

    But we know it's not about safety, it's about extorting revenue...or making up reasons to stop a person the man don't like the look of.

     

    One thing for sure... (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:19:37 PM EST
    with so many states and localities pushing bankruptcy expect more stops and tickets in the near future.

    Parent
    I concur (none / 0) (#8)
    by scribe on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:25:23 PM EST
    If the driver is travelling inside the lines, there is no reason to stop him.  The law (probably) does not require the driver to drive perfectly straight inside the lines, just plain old inside the lines.

    That having been said, having driven while asleep for some distance and having been pulled over for it (back in the day, when I was working construction sunup to sundown and had an hour commute each way), when cops worrying about drivers' welfare is the real reason, as opposed to the post hoc pretext to justify the arrest for dope or whatever, I would say the same thing I said to those cops back then:  "thanks."

    Parent

    totally agree (none / 0) (#77)
    by txpublicdefender on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:30:06 PM EST
    Weaving "within the lane" of traffic is a joke and not reason for a stop.  The idea that it was for a welfare check is ludicrous on its face.

    Parent
    Net out of stimulus (none / 0) (#2)
    by Jlvngstn on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:19:34 PM EST
    even worse (none / 0) (#104)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 10:58:59 AM EST
    threatening depression if we do not provide liquidity.  What is worse is that we are getting half the story.  
    Where are all the finance experts on this site?  I have seen you here before and have asked for predictions and of course you run and hide when you are actually asked to tell us how something you support is going to affect us.  Tell us please what to expect after the bailout.
    1.    A healed market?
    2.    More borrowing for small and large businesses?
    3.    Stabilization of the housing market?
    4.    Job creation?
    5.    Foreclosures more or less
    6.    Retail and auto, will the banks have capital to lend to help them ride out the storm?  Or will the banks thank Mohammed for their good fortune and hold on to the money except at 8-9%?
    This bailout will not loosen lending constraints, will not help a majority of homeowners, will not help create employment and will not allow the US to address the impending problem of a severely stagnant economy.

    which is exactly (none / 0) (#163)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 01:30:46 PM EST
    why you have a "diverse portfolio" of solutions.  It does more harm than good for the following reasons:
    1.    Too much capital into the market with little or no return (short term definitely and long term most probable)
    2.    It does not address the most historically consistent recession killer which is jobs creation.  If you have 700 billion to throw at bad paper, you can certainly split that into immediate distribution for infrastructure.
    3.    The banks can shovel as much of their garbage to the fed, and still not resume lending at any sufficient level.
    4.    The fed and int'l banks have pumped in 330 billion into the market to maintain liquidity and just a few days later they are asking for 700 billion.  700 billion is not going to fix anything.
    5.    Small businesses, which employ nearly a third of all americans will suffer the greatest in the down turn of the economy pushing orders up the chain to bigger companies who will increase employee productivity without hiring those displaced at small businesses.  Small businesses notoriously are under-collateralized and  historically have much more difficulty securing credit in unstable economies.
    6.    There is an inequitable distribution of loss at the expense of the taxpayer.  The taxpayer is now stuck with incredible debt, high unemployment and strict lending guidelines. which leads to foreclosure and bankruptcy and after this bailout they will receive no sympathy.  Everyone in round two takes the venom and "serves you right" mentality from the general public and are screwed.
    To get and keep the economy moving they MUST address the employment situation.  That money will be circulated quite quickly via job distribution and a smaller bailout tides the banks over while the american worker does what they have done for decades:  take another job and pay down their bills....


    I Got Stopped for that ... (none / 0) (#4)
    by santarita on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:20:08 PM EST
    once.  I wasn't ticketed though.  I was talking to my niece and not keeping my eyes on the road.  

    I also got pulled over once for crossing the gore point when I was try to exit the highway.  I didn't even know what a gore point was.  I didn't get a ticket for that either.  

    That gore point (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:30:05 PM EST
    ticket here in the Seattle area is nearly a $500 fine...every now and then the cops put an airplane in the sky that radios to the plethora of cars lining the highway to ticket the violators.

    Too many driver's really don't grasp the concept of pacing themselves with traffic already on the highway in order to make a safe, smooth entrance (reverse for exiting) AND too many drivers already on the highway are obsessed with not letting anyone enter in front of them, so they speed up to try to beat them to the end of the gore point (I think THOSE are the ones who need the tickets, personally).

    When my kids took their mandatory driver's training classes back in their teens I learned that it is actually a ticketable offense to ignore a turn signal. If someone is signaling to change lanes, they are to be allowed to do so rather than have the cars bunch up tight and refuse to let them in.

    Parent

    Gore point.... (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by vml68 on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:55:57 PM EST
    learnt about that the hard way. I was sitting in traffic for 20 mins right near my exit and decided to cross the gore point, FIVE feet from the dotted line and with absolutely no traffic in the exit lane....it cost me $350 dollars and hours of wasted time imagining the torturous things I would have loved to do to the officer.

    Parent
    I got a ticket once for failing to maintain lane (none / 0) (#9)
    by scribe on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:26:27 PM EST
    but I had been reading the newspaper while driving, too.

    Parent
    Please don't drive where (5.00 / 5) (#11)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:29:21 PM EST
    I'm driving!

    Parent
    Yikes! (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by sj on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:17:14 PM EST
    I was once horrified to see the driver of the car next to me with a book propped against the steering wheel of her car.  

    Did you really not see anything wrong with that?

    Parent

    Those lines are there for a reason (none / 0) (#5)
    by BobTinKY on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:21:14 PM EST
    I am sure the spacing of the lines are not an accident and must be based  on some kind of reasonable driving standard

    They keep getting more narrow, too (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:48:14 PM EST
    Every time the roads get a new lane added all the lanes become a little more narrow. There's not enough room for weaving safely on most roads today.


    Parent
    In CA (state court), there is (none / 0) (#6)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:24:26 PM EST
    published precedent weaving w/i one's own lane is sufficient suspicion to detain drive to check out for possible DUI.  

    I'm visualizing a car (5.00 / 3) (#15)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:32:02 PM EST
    ahead of me that's weaving around within its lane for a mile or two and I'm visualizing me wishing desperately for a cop car when you need one to pull it over and get it off the highway before it does veer out of its lane and kills a few of us, including maybe me.

    Parent
    This is one good use for a cell phone. (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:41:02 PM EST
    Not as effective as you'd think. (none / 0) (#31)
    by lobary on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:56:14 PM EST
    One night I was returning home from a weekend trip to Houston. Halfway home, near a small town in central Texas, we encountered a driver who was weaving all over the road. S/he was either really, really wasted or very tired. Every time I tried to pass the vehicle and get a safe distance ahead, the driver would speed up and match my speed, but if I slowed up the result was the same. I could not get away from this idiot and was quite scared of a collision at 70+ mph. We called the highway patrol to report a drunk driver, but the problem was one of location. I couldn't easily pinpoint where we were, so there was no way to get the cops to pull this fool over. Although there were a few highway patrol cars that appeared up the road, they actually pulled over the wrong vehicle. I had to drive near this person for the next hour and a half. Some good that cell phone did me.

    I'm still waiting on that day when a cop appears right when I need him.

    Parent

    They do try IMO. (none / 0) (#37)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:02:56 PM EST
    My cell has GPX.  Maybe I could forward my location to highway patrol?  

    Parent
    weaving a single time is different (none / 0) (#20)
    by mexboy on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:41:41 PM EST
    than doing it consistently.

    No one wants a drunk driver on the road, but the police's job is to "protect and to serve," here in California. It says so right on the door of the police cars...

    Never-mind, it doesn't say who they are to protect and serve.

    Parent

    Texas (none / 0) (#78)
    by txpublicdefender on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:31:53 PM EST
    In Texas, there is published precedent saying just the opposite.  "Weaving" within one's own lane is insufficient cause for a stop.

    Parent
    Absurd (none / 0) (#7)
    by squeaky on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:25:01 PM EST
    One should be allowed to weave within the lines as much as one wants. Driving can sometimes be boring, so weaving within the lines is a good way to keep driving interesting.

    Unfortunately I do not think that the police see it the same way as I do. Apart from making sure that there is no potential problem, it allows an officer a chance to thoroughly search your car.

    Absurd (5.00 / 4) (#18)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:38:13 PM EST
    If I see someone weaving inside their lane and I am behind them they are a severe distraction and cause me to want to get in front of them rather than deal with them coming into my lane. I would call the cops if they were driving like that for more than a a couple of weaves. They are a distraction and potential hazard to other drivers.

    I also think it is fine to do a welfare check. They could be on the brink of a seizure, falling asleep, reaction to medication, heart attack, diabetic episode, beginning of labor, etc. They might just need an escort to a hospital. In fact, I've heard of people doing things like "safe weaving" to get the attention of the police.


    Parent

    I disagree with you. (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by mexboy on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:56:06 PM EST
    A welfare check sounds good until you're the minority who's welfare is constantly being checked on.

    Parent
    So, let's get this straight (5.00 / 3) (#36)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:02:51 PM EST
    Your mother is driving on the highway, a cop is following a safe distance behind her and she begins to weave. The cop just shrugs his shoulders because she hasn't left her lane yet.

    She is choking on that cough drop she needed for her cough and, as soon as he is far enough ahead of her to not see her, she passes out and sails off the highway, hitting two other cars and 5 people end up in the hospital.

    You'll be just fine that the cop didn't do a simple welfare check.


    Parent

    Poor hypothetical (none / 0) (#42)
    by lobary on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:15:00 PM EST
    A choking driver isn't going to drive under enough control to stay within her lane.

    Parent
    That's an easy one. (none / 0) (#43)
    by mexboy on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:16:53 PM EST
    There is a big difference between constantly weaving and having a momentary distraction.

     I'm also assuming that when you say mother you think of someone who is an elder, not a 22 or 38 year old black/brown/etc healthy man.

    You are talking about someone causing  hazardous driving conditions for others and herself. She doesn't need a welfare check she needs a sobriety test.

    She is choking on that cough drop she needed for her cough and, as soon as he is far enough ahead of her to not see her, she passes out and sails off the highway, hitting two other cars and 5 people end up in the hospital.

    If you had said she hits 3 cars and 6 people end up in the hospital instead of she hits two cars and 5 people end up in the hospital,  I would be okay with it.  


    Parent

    Amen.... (none / 0) (#35)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:02:00 PM EST
    the last person on earth I want concerned with my welfare is a police officer.

    Parent
    Wow. (none / 0) (#85)
    by oldpro on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:46:23 PM EST
    I wouldn't want to live where some of you do.

    I not a police officer, who WOULD you risk trusting in an emergency?

    Parent

    IF not.....IF. (none / 0) (#86)
    by oldpro on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:47:05 PM EST
    Sheesh...

    Parent
    I'll take a random civilian... (none / 0) (#91)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:53:59 PM EST
    everyday of the week.

    Parent
    Not me. (5.00 / 2) (#108)
    by Fabian on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:31:28 PM EST
    I've seen random civilians in emergency situations.  You need a handful of random civilians in order to make sure someone in the group can be counted on to act as opposed to react.  People are great at reacting, emoting or gawking.  Doing the right things, right away - not so much.  In fact, the one thing you can count on in a crowd is that you'll need at least one person to tell the gawkers to leave.

    Parent
    A random citizen was very helpful to me... (none / 0) (#110)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:40:22 PM EST
    when I had a bad car wreck...helped me out of the car, gave me a cigarette, calmed me down...even asked if I had anything to get rid of before the cops arrived.

    I guess it's hit or miss, same as whether you get the good cop or the wanna-be tyrant.

    Parent

    You know what instantly came to mind.... (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 04:08:00 PM EST
    To you that random citizen was helpful, but to read your story led me straight to the thought the nice random citizen was hoping you had something to share.

    Parent
    Perhaps... (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 04:35:19 PM EST
    but the vibe I got was random act of kindness..and he offered me one of his smokes, not the action of an opportunist looking to take advantage of the situation.  Hung around till the cops and towtruck showed up and everything.

    One of those trying moments that leads to a restored faith in the human race.

    Parent

    I'm certain your reading of his kindness (5.00 / 2) (#148)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:20:04 PM EST
    is far more accurate than mine :)

    He probably knew someone, or was someone, who experienced a similar situation once and you were his opportunity to pay it forward.

    Parent

    Question: (none / 0) (#10)
    by jbindc on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:28:58 PM EST
    What is a "single instance" of weaving?  Is it one drift to the left and then a correction, or is it a full weave - one drift to the left, then one to the right, then a correction?

    =======

    Anyway, what I really am interested in is people's opinion about this measure before Congress right now about DC representation in Congress.  While in theory, I believe DC residents should get full representation, I think the side that says DC is not a "state" and as such, is not entitled to representation, based on the wording in the Constitution that says "The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states."

    Putting aside the constitutional argument for a moment, if you give DC representation like a state, then doesn't it follow that the way it's set up and run should be like a state, and not dependent on Congress for its financing?

    I don't buy the "cede the land back to Maryland and they'll have representation" argument  - this would have to take another constitutional amendment since Article I, Sec. 8 specifically provides for a federal district for the nation's capital, separate from any one state.

    I was thinking about this since I work in DC and after reading this article this morning.

    Thoughts?

    Since the district is heavily minority (none / 0) (#14)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:31:31 PM EST
    and Democratic, does it matter what we think?  Don't Specter, Collins, and Nelson (D-Neb.) control the fate of those living in D.C.?

    Parent
    And those living in the rest of the country too! (none / 0) (#25)
    by Democratic Cat on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:48:40 PM EST
    My understanding is Congress pays the district (none / 0) (#23)
    by Democratic Cat on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:47:09 PM EST
    for the fact that the US government, as well as international organizations and other non-profit organizations occupy so much office space (and there is a large set-aside of park area in the city).  These entities do not pay taxes like businesses do. That's not to say that DC would be a thriving business town if the government were not here, but the government is here so the district needs compensation for the use of its land. We're dependent on the Feds to an extent unlike that of any real state.  It seems like a pretty special situation to me.

    However, if you want to give me a Congressperson and two senators and let us assess taxes on the federal government, I'm willing to go that way and become the 51st state of Columbia!

    Parent

    If you enjoy a good non-violent... (none / 0) (#16)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:34:17 PM EST
    ingenius bank robbery as much as I do, did you happen to hear about the chimney bandits?

    Good grief, kdog (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:45:19 PM EST
    The things people put in safety deposit boxes are typically very valuable to them. Much of what these people took they probably can't even fence and will simply destroy them (like Wills).

    Sorry, nope, never entertained by any kind of enormous infringement on other people's property no matter how ingenious the criminals were in causing it.


    Parent

    Fair enough... (none / 0) (#34)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:58:39 PM EST
    I do have some sympathy for the owners of the boxes...though I've long been of the opinion that if something is valuable to you why in hell would you trust it to a bank?

    Parent
    Here's my favorite heist movie... (none / 0) (#75)
    by desertswine on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:25:07 PM EST
    Rififi

    It's not a bank, though, it's worth the rental.

    Parent

    Mortgage banking lobbyists (none / 0) (#21)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:42:48 PM EST
    wearing down House Dems. on bankruptcy cram down:

    AP

    Admirable (5.00 / 3) (#33)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:58:21 PM EST
    The banking industry has lobbied hard against the measure, mounting a successful multimillion-dollar effort last year to kill it.

    But, they are the same people who are of the absolute belief that the taxpayer should bail them out of the trouble they got themselves into.

    Parent

    The democrats who support (none / 0) (#39)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:06:35 PM EST
    the bailout, the stimulus and mortgage lenders on this topic need to be removed next election.

    Parent
    Oh god (none / 0) (#26)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:49:48 PM EST
    I complained about cram down because it's so inadequate to handle what we are all going to go through.  No cram down though?  Look out, they're once again doing everything they can to burn the house down around them.  I give up

    Parent
    A question for the law minds (none / 0) (#28)
    by lilburro on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 12:53:49 PM EST
    Bearing in mind that Obama has maintained Bush's position regarding the status of detainees at Bagram, would you say that Obama has upheld (at least temporarily) the category of "unlawful enemy combatant"?

    I believe the answer is yes.  And that is certainly contradictory with the spirit, at least, of his executive orders on detainee issues.

    Not A Law Mind (5.00 / 2) (#76)
    by daring grace on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:25:16 PM EST
    But I found this news intriguing:

    SNIP:

    "Federal prosecutors are preparing to charge Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri with providing material support to al-Qaeda terrorists in a groundbreaking move that would put the alleged sleeper agent under the jurisdiction of the U.S. court system, according to sources familiar with the issue.

    "Marri is the last remaining "enemy combatant" in the United States and has spent 5 1/2 years in a military brig in South Carolina. The criminal charges, which sources said also could include conspiracy, will be among the most early and critical signals about the Obama administration's approach to handling alleged terrorism suspects."

    SNIP

    "In one of his first steps since taking office last month, President Obama explicitly directed government lawyers to review the status of Marri's case...

    SNIP

    "The move, which could be announced publicly as early as the end of the week, also could avert a Supreme Court hearing in April at which Marri's human rights lawyers had planned to use his case to seek a precedent that could bind not only Marri but also scores of prisoners subjected to indefinite detention at Guantanamo. They are likely to press the court to go ahead with the hearing even in the face of expected Justice Department arguments that new criminal charges against Marri make the dispute moot.

    "Since 2003, he has been housed in a South Carolina brig where at points he was subjected to painful stress positions, extreme sensory deprivation and violent threats while he was denied access to lawyers, according to court filings by his legal team. Recent press accounts confirmed by his attorneys suggest that Marri's treatment by authorities has improved over time."

    On the other hand...a lawyer who represents prisoners at Gitmo says abuse there has increased since  Obama was elected because (he opines) "guards were just basically trying to get their kicks in right now for fear that they won't be able to later,"

    Parent

    both excellent and intriguing articles. (none / 0) (#117)
    by lilburro on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:57:31 PM EST
    thanks!

    So Binyam was getting beaten, as were others...I hope the sicko guards at GITMO get what is coming to them under criminal law.  They are more demonstrably criminal than the inmates.  Sad.

    Parent

    Thank you for linking to Greenwald's (none / 0) (#52)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:47:45 PM EST
    interviews.  He is a very well-informed interviewer--seems to be "up" on the subject and asks excellent questions.  ACLUS representative did a better job of giving focused responses than the lawyer re Bagram detainees.

    I would like to know specifics of the circumstances surrounding detention of the people the U.S. subsequently moved into Afghanistan at Bagram.  

    Parent

    I am trying to figure out (none / 0) (#59)
    by lilburro on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:10:53 PM EST
    the ramifications of their decision on Bagram here at mi casa.

    See David Mizner at DKOS:  "UPDATE: In comments people are claiming that these prisoners are protected by the Geneva Conventions, but those apply to POWs. These prisoners are enemy combatants--a status embraced by Bush precisely to avoid international law. In upholding Bush's position, Bush [I believe he means to write Obama here] is reaffirming that these prisoners are enemy (or unlawful) combatants."

    One person at Bagram is ...Amin Al Bakri, a citizen of Yemen abducted on a business trip to Thailand (see Hilzoy).  I doubt this fellow was uniform-wearing and gun-toting so I am hardpressed to believe he is anything but an "unlawful enemy combatant."  If the Obama DoJ gets their way, he'll be sitting at Bagram for a long time.  The Bush and Obama DoJs think that is appropriate.

    One of the reasons all this jazz matters is that Appendix M of the AFM, widely believed to allow techniques that could amount to torture, only applies to unlawful combatants.  And the AFM per executive order is the interrogation standard.

    Since the MCA is still in effect, and Obama has reaffirmed Bush's position re: unlawful combatant Bagram detainees, it seems to me that the AFM torture appendix could be legally used - the unlawful combatant category still exists.  Even though using it could conflict with the Geneva Conventions.

    It's quite possible my whole argument is wrong.  But this seems like a good window of time to explore these issues, as most everything detainee and intelligence related is under review.  After all, the AFM is a guide as to how to implement the Geneva Conventions effectively.  Who is going to cross-check the AFM against the Geneva Conventions?  Other than the CCR and the crazy civil libertarians.

    Parent

    Britain Admits Complicity in U.S. Rendition (none / 0) (#54)
    by Jacob Freeze on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:59:34 PM EST
    Just a note about what may or may not continue to happen, from IPS.

    http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=45901

    British Defence Secretary John Hutton told Britain's House of Commons that the two individuals were captured by British forces in Iraq, transferred to U.S. detention and later moved to a U.S. detention facility in Afghanistan.

    His admission contradicts the British government's earlier assertions that there were only two cases involving detainee rendition. That statement involved the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia, a British territory, which the government admitted had twice been used by the U.S. as a refueling stop for the secret transfer of terrorism suspects.

    Apologising to lawmakers for the error, Hutton said, "I regret that it is now clear that inaccurate information on this particular issue has been given to the House by my department," Hutton told lawmakers.




    Parent
    Panetta (none / 0) (#60)
    by lilburro on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:11:50 PM EST
    spoke about rendition yesterday...transcript here.

    Parent
    Yeah... (none / 0) (#152)
    by Jacob Freeze on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:29:38 PM EST
    " Please, thank you. (Chuckles.) First of all, on the rendition issue: Obviously, the executive order that was issued by the President sets, you know, the ground rules for dealing with that issue. Number one, we are obligated to follow the Army Field Manual, and we will do that. Secondly, we are closing black sites, and we are doing that. And thirdly, rendition is still permitted, but obviously -- and it's been used in the past to obviously send people to countries where there are jurisdictional issues for purposes of trying individuals. If we render someone, we are obviously going to seek assurances from that country that their human rights are protected and that they are not mistreated."

    I guess it all depends on how much assurance you have about "assurances" from Egypt, for example, about protecting human rights.

    Personally, I wouldn't want to rely on those assurances for myself, and if all that stood between Leon Panetta and torture was assurances from the Egyptian government, he might not have chuckled quite so much when he answered that question.

    Parent

    Gladdening to the heart and soul (none / 0) (#40)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:11:24 PM EST
    of a culture maven:  Stevie Wonder honored at the White House

    Please note attendees included will.i.am and Donna Brazille.

    Gladdening, Indeed (none / 0) (#53)
    by daring grace on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 01:55:59 PM EST
    Martina McBride and Tony Bennett were there as well.

    This is the second Gershwin prize to be awarded. Paul Simon won the first in 2007.

    From the linked article:

    "Although the president is a well-known fan -- Wonder performed at his nominating convention in Denver last summer and at a Lincoln Memorial concert before his January inauguration -- the Library of Congress had decided to honor Wonder before Obama won the election.

    "Wonder's performance will be broadcast Thursday on PBS stations as part of a White House series on the arts."

    -

    Parent

    Puppy gate (none / 0) (#55)
    by CST on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:01:43 PM EST
    This is a re-print from the other open thread.

    Seems like the Obamas have decided on a breed.  The Potuguese water-dog.  Still working on the name though.

    Apparently Michelle was not enamored with "Frank" or "Moose".  Can't say I disagree...


    Rocky Mountain News ceasing publication tomorrow (none / 0) (#64)
    by magster on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:16:49 PM EST
    leaving Denver as a one newspaper town.

    Very sad... (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:43:23 PM EST
    ...as the Rocky's roots go back to the original settlement of Denver.  Our oldest surviving business, IIRC.

    The Westword seems to have shrunk quite a bit of late too--wonder how long they'll hang on.  

    Parent

    There's a Baltimore (none / 0) (#144)
    by sj on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:10:01 PM EST
    "version" of the Westword.  It's called the "City Paper".  Looks very similar.  I haven't picked one up in while to see if it also seems to have shrunk.

    Parent
    Well, the Baltimore Sun has shrunk (none / 0) (#167)
    by Anne on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 07:03:55 PM EST
    to the point where it feels more like the local community newspaper; there is a dearth of local reporting - much of the content is now from wire services or other Tribune papers.  A couple months ago, they reformatted the paper, jumbling up the local news with the national - maybe the thought was to get people to read more of the paper, but to me it just seemed like they canned the layout department and they gave the job to someone with really bad ADD.

    I really like reading a physical newspaper, but it's getting to be not worth the price.

    It's sad.

    Parent

    You beat me (none / 0) (#70)
    by SOS on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:22:02 PM EST
    that was fast

    Parent
    Rocky Mountain News closing (none / 0) (#69)
    by SOS on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:21:38 PM EST
    after Friday edition..

    DENVER - The Rocky Mountain News will publish its last edition Friday.

    Owner E.W. Scripps Co. announced on the newspaper's Web site Thursday that its search for a buyer for the paper was unsuccessful.

    Information wants to (none / 0) (#73)
    by SOS on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 02:23:39 PM EST
    be free.

    Well obviously bills still need to paid even in the new industry.

    Parent

    Rocky Mountain News to close tomorrow (none / 0) (#96)
    by scribe on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:04:45 PM EST
    This is a sad day. (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by desertswine on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:41:35 PM EST
    Staffers were told to come in today to collect personal effects.

    Parent
    Reid wants Coleman to concede (none / 0) (#116)
    by jbindc on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 03:54:44 PM EST
    Link

    More circus antics to come.  Pass the popcorn!

    Senate Democratic leaders said Thursday they were prepared to seat Al Franken as soon as the beginning of April, regardless whether Republican Norm Coleman files legal appeals.

    "We're feeling pretty confident," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said when asked in a news conference if he was prepared to make Franken a senator.

    But Senate Republicans are already threatening to filibuster any attempt to seat Franken, who would represent the 59th Democratic vote in the Senate.

    "Nothing could unify Republicans better than any attempt to try to seat Al Franken," said Sen. John Cornyn, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

    Senate Democratic Conference Vice Chairman Charles Schumer of New York added that, while the party would allow Coleman to appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court, he expected the election dispute to be wrapped up by the beginning of April.

    Then Reid turned the knife.

    "Norm Coleman should have a five-minute conversation with [Nevada Sen.] John Ensign," Reid said.

    Reid explained that, in his 1998 Senate race, Ensign decided to concede defeat to Reid rather than pursue a recount.

    "John Ensign wound up as a real hero in Nevada," Reid said.

    Cornyn also said Republicans have a parliamentary tool to oppose Franken - they could argue against seating him if he doesn't have a certificate of election, which he may not have as long as legal appeals are pending.

    "I don't know why [Democratic leaders] want to turn the Senate into a circus," Cornyn said.



    Balance (none / 0) (#118)
    by squeaky on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 04:05:54 PM EST
    This appointment seems to balance the appointment earlier this week of Dennis Ross

    The Obama administration has notified Congress that Chas Freeman has been appointed chairman of the National Intelligence Council, demonstrating a willingness to rebuff pro-Israel activists and an embrace of a more realist foreign policy line.

    Politico via laura rozen


    Foggo Gets 3 Years + (none / 0) (#123)
    by squeaky on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 04:30:24 PM EST
    Wilkes we are still waiting on. Doubt that he will get the recommended 60 years..

    Trouble ahead, trouble behind (none / 0) (#124)
    by SOS on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 04:32:16 PM EST
    US Banks Post First Quarterly Loss Since 1990; 252 Banks In Trouble.

    Is yours on the list?

    Sealy Postuerpedic Savings... (none / 0) (#140)
    by kdog on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:08:07 PM EST
    as sound as ever my friend...happy to report.

    So your saying the banks have won for 72 consecutive quarters?  That's an impressive run...the envy of any gambler.  It's good to have the game rigged!

    But even the fix is bound to fail once in a very blue moon...B.O. and the Central Planners better cut another check before the shareholders get offended.

    Parent

    Obama fact check (none / 0) (#143)
    by jbindc on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:09:49 PM EST
    I will give credit where and when credit is due.  Obama has been getting cr*p for his "country where the automobile was invented" statement.  However, the Library of Congress (which has been oft cited by news outlets in showing his mistake) actually says the answer is "it depends".

    Link

    A number of news outlets have been focusing on a statement by President Obama in support of the automobile industry in his State of the Union Address: "I believe the nation that invented the automobile cannot walk away from it." (One example is here.)

    A number of them are citing the Library of Congress as having definitively asserted that the car was actually invented in Germany. As is often the case, the truth is sometimes more elusive than what one might think.

    The media's likely source for this Library of Congress factoid is from our "Everyday Mysteries" site, which presents history in an engaging Q&A format.

    While the answer that is given regarding who invented the car is indeed "Karl Benz," it is more accurate to say that "it depends on how you define an automobile."

    The webpage itself has this disclaimer right beneath the given answer: "This question does not have a straightforward answer." It also includes this less-than-definitive statement: "If we had to give credit to one inventor, it would probably be Karl Benz from Germany. Many suggest that he created the first true automobile in 1885/1886." (Emphasis added)

    The page points out that self-propelled road vehicles powered by steam or electricity in France and Scotland predated Benz' invention. It also credits Americans with having invented the first car to combine "an internal combustion engine with a carriage," along with having set up the first company to manufacture and sell automobiles.



    Well, Obama may have been correct (none / 0) (#174)
    by Cream City on Fri Feb 27, 2009 at 02:03:53 AM EST
    because before Benz, quoting the state historical society here:

    July 16, 1878: The first auto race in the country began in Green Bay, traveling 201 miles to Madison on roads that had been built for wagons and ox teams. The winning steam-powered car finished the race in 33 hours while the other broke down. The winner collected $5,000.

    And a Milwaukeean named Gustav Schloemmer built the first gas-powered car in this country, now in the Milwaukee museum, the same year as Benz.  

    The media are getting wrong the info on the first assembly line, too.  It was in Obama's Chicago, at the Armour meatpacking plant.  Ford came there from Detroit to copy the idea for his autos.

    Parent

    Burris's son got a state job from Blago (none / 0) (#150)
    by jbindc on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 05:24:48 PM EST
    The son of embattled Sen. Roland Burris is a federal tax deadbeat who landed a $75,000-a-year state job under former Gov. Rod Blagojevich five months ago, the Chicago Sun-Times has learned.

    Blagojevich's administration hired Roland W. Burris II as a senior counsel for the state's housing authority Sept. 10 -- about six weeks after the Internal Revenue Service slapped a $34,163 tax lien on Burris II and three weeks after a mortgage company filed a foreclosure suit on his South Side house.

    However, Chicago's City Black Caucus is telling the Senate and other local politicians to  "back off" the Burris story and promised retaliation against those who continue.

    Is it just me or did Nancy Pelosi (none / 0) (#159)
    by weltec2 on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 06:19:44 PM EST
    looked frightened and flustered in her Rachel Maddow interview. I had the sense that she was terrified to death of the inevitable scrutiny that is coming into her complicity in Bush/Cheney war and other crimes. I actually felt sorry for her.

    She always looks frightened and flustered (none / 0) (#164)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 06:37:29 PM EST
    it comes with the plastic surgery and the obvious knowledge she's lying through her teeth.

    I thought Rachel's look was consistently one of "that doesn't make an ounce of sense, Nancy". Pelosi is a master at fast talk...she thinks it doesn't allow enough time for the listener to hear the lack of logic.

    Parent

    NPR Afternoon Edition included (none / 0) (#162)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 06:26:59 PM EST
    an interview with none other than Sen. Gregg (R-NH) re the President's budget proposal.  Will spend our children and grandchildren into proverty.  But, Sen. Gregg, when you withdrew from Sec'y of Commerce, you sd. you would carry water for the President?  On what issues?  Answer:  entitlement reform.

    That's a little scary... (none / 0) (#168)
    by Anne on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 07:09:06 PM EST
    maybe more than a little scary.

    Parent
    Assisted Suicide case in Georgia (none / 0) (#169)
    by landjjames on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 08:56:17 PM EST
    Can anyone explain to me why the four members of the Final Exit Network are being charged in Georgia with assisted suicide and not murder?  They are allegedly involved in up to 200 cases of assisted suicide.  Personally, I'm not against assisted suicide.   I voted for Initiative 1000 here in Washington state which allows for  assisted suicide by a medical doctor.  But in the 48 states where it hasn't been legalized, why isn't the charge murder?

    Well (none / 0) (#170)
    by Steve M on Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 09:14:35 PM EST
    I don't know the details of that case, but sometimes it depends on who actually pushes the button.

    Parent
    From what I heard this morning (none / 0) (#177)
    by jbindc on Fri Feb 27, 2009 at 08:29:02 AM EST
    They are alleged to have held bags of helium over the deceaseds' heads.  That sounds like murder to me, whether or not you have permission.

    Parent
    Driving off the road or going the wrong way? (none / 0) (#176)
    by joze46 on Fri Feb 27, 2009 at 08:03:32 AM EST
    Saw your Bio, Jeralyn Merritt; Committed to Defending Constitutional Rights, really pretty good stuff. This happens to be my focus though I am just an ordinary John Doe, White, a veteran, and near retirement. Have no legal training for what ever I learn today are the results from the news that is propagated in the Internet media: now with the Internet, a new type of transparency exists in a timely way the hard copy paper can not compete with to bury the truth.  

    Please, I say this latter part with a giggle and laugh, but try to keep serious with instincts that America is in a period of understanding. We have a partisan economy, a political party that has been beaten, the Republican Neo-Con's, they are imploding. They don't like it. The money game that was played for several decades is over; let's call it the Obama moment, and hope it will last longer than a moment. Some call it spreading the wealth or socialism, from my view it is a simple reapportion, or of that golden rule of proportion that is the aesthetics that likely meets fair play in social evolution.

    Be sure even a lot of Democrats that parade around are on the take with Republicans. It's only my gut feeling that types like Joe Lieberman or John Edwards are falling stars that are sweet on both sides that give the Bush pirate profiteering, what ever it needs, while exclaiming what America needs. Is that a laugh or what?

    Well America is on the highway of change and is exampled by the Mainstream Media not only veering across the line but many times cutting off American's for political and economic reasons. Including abusing the Constitutional right of free speech, which morphed into public propaganda transforming into public media prosecution heavily dosed with professional contextual sword fighting, bait and switch. I would suggest including the culture bias by "commercial sound bite" that reinforce delivery.

    Rush Limbaugh knows that he is one of the masters at public confusion, a leader in the Neo-Con messaging machine built through the decades that is collapsing. Limbaugh is the spirit of hate radio with his legions of cronies, Hannity or Savage, Levin among them, adds the muster to road rage and maybe even timed for effect.  Limbaugh advocates screwing the school system let alone hoping Obama's plans fail. From my view Limbaugh while driving in the wrong direction causes everyone to get out of his way forcing crack ups all while saying he has more fun than a person should have. Sheesh.

    In closing I salute you for your efforts serving as one of the principal trial lawyers for Timothy McVeigh in the Oklahoma City Bombing Case. From my view he should never have been executed, at least given life. For those in the know terminated this guy to bury secrets that would likely expose huge violations in the Constitution and political pirate profiteering Bush is getting away with.

    For me the same reflection can be made with this Blagojevich Burris thing. Its only an instinct I can not prove but Patrick Fitzgerald is not partisan is a crony for the Neo-Con to the highest degree aiding in a fierce battle for control of the Senate seating. The tip off for me was the grandstanding in the Media Blitz arresting Blagojevich along with the rant of public prosecution over cable political analysis. Blagojevich could have been given the respect to surrender but was not.  

    Now MSNBC is pounding away at relations with Burris, his son getting a job as a lawyer leading to that pay for play stuff. I don't think it fits. For heavens sake the same relation could be made to Andrea Mitchell wife to Federal Reserve Board Chairmen Allen Greenspan privy to trillion dollar deals for last several decades all likely the reason for insider knowledge to the melt down our economy is in. For this is irony at its best the major factor in America's economic rupture is a political commentator on MSNBC, when perhaps Andrea and Allen should be in indictments and convictions before Congress. The whole thing is a real whack job.