home

Thursday Morning Open Thread

My assignment file is full, both in terms of my professional work and my blogging avocation.

I am currently working on the following topics bloggingwise - completing my series of posts on the torture issue, spurred by my public and private exchanges with Stuart Taylor, Jr. In addition, informed in a tangential way by the newly nascent secessionist movement, I am preparing a post (now weeks overdue) on the preemption doctrine. I hope to complete all of these posts by next Wednesday.

I'll also borrow an Ezra Klein device of asking if there are any other subjects you think I should cover (remember I don't do criminal law, that is J and TChris' bailiwick, other than torture and civil liberties issues.).

This is an Open Thread.

< President Obama's Press Conference | ABC-WaPo Poll: Increased Support for Legalizing Pot, and Social Justice >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Specter not to be trusted IMO (5.00 / 4) (#1)
    by Saul on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 08:09:25 AM EST

    There was lots of celebration on this blog when Sen. Specter switched parties the other day.  I guess if you want to just look at his action as adding one more democrats to congress so as to have a filibuster proof majority well that's your prerogative.  

    I saw it differently.   Yeah the democrats got him but look at the way they got him.
    I don't trust Specter.  I think he is just an opportunist who will sell his grandma just so he can get elected.  

    The only reason this guy switched was his fear of not winning in Philadelphia in the Republican primary.  Had this not been the issue he would have never switched.  

    Something's wrong when a guy spends all those years believing in Republican policies then makes a 180 degree on a dime when it's politically expedient.  

    Nope I have no respect for the character.  

    Remember it could have been just the other way.  He could have been a Democrat who switched to the Republican party for the very same reasons he switched from Republican to Democrat.   How many would have been praising him on this blog had he done that.


    Cutting the line too (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by ruffian on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:02:36 AM EST
    This from The Hill. Reid made a deal with Specter regarding his committee seniority - he gets to jump ahead of Dems such as Mikulski and Feinstien for chairmanships.

    Sorry, whatever I think about the Dems in question, that is just wrong.

    Parent

    There is precedent in the senate (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by oldpro on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:46:43 AM EST
    on both sides of the aisle for the turncoats who kept their seniority and chair status after trading loyalties.

    No point, tho, in getting all upset about this because...wait for it...first, he has to get through a Democratic primary and then get reelected.

    Might not be all that easy, even with the support of Reid, Obama and Rendell.  I hope the Dems come up with a whopping-good primary candidate and knock him out of the box.

    No one would or should trust Specter now on any level.  Don't I remember reading just yesterday that BTD actually expects him to change back?  It wouldn't surprise me either.  He's no Wayne Morse.

    Parent

    I'd be very surprised if (none / 0) (#73)
    by brodie on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 12:10:42 PM EST
    Specter didn't carefully calculate politically with his votes as he's always done, but this time tilting slightly more in favor of the D side of things, especially if Sestak does go for a strong primary challenge.

    And since PA has already elected an anti-choice senator and does seem to be just Philly on one side and Pittsburgh on the other, with Alabama in between, I remain pessimistic that a Sestak challenge could upset the Obama-/Rendell-backed candidate.

    As for trusting Specter, I haven't since I read yrs ago about his authorship of the MBT, and his difficulty, when questioned by at least one honest well-prepared journalist, to adequately defend same.  And not since I read that he then went back to Philly using his "fame" from the commission work to run against his old DA boss, switching parties to do so.  (afaik, the only WC staffer to immediately use that stint to seek political office)

    As for changing back, he can't since he'd lose in the re-elect.  Perhaps the BTD meant Specter might change back on EFCA?

    Parent

    Point taken. Now that I reread (none / 0) (#88)
    by oldpro on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 01:21:20 PM EST
    BTD's comment re expecting Specter "switch back" it appears he may well have been referring to EFCA.

    Specter could, actually, switch back AFTER the election if he won.  That's what I meant.  Switching parties again before the election would be beyond dumb...and pointless.

    Parent

    I just can't believe (none / 0) (#50)
    by brodie on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:15:02 AM EST
    senior Dems who've toiled for yrs waiting to move up the food chain are going to sit back and accept this complete giveaway that Reid offered Specter.

    Reid will meet serious resistance from many in the Dem caucus I would guess.  And this is a guy who likes his job and supposedly wants to remain for another term as ML.  I see a compromise being worked out down the line.  Hard to imagine a DINO like Specter being allowed the chair either Appropriations or (gasp) Judiciary.

    Parent

    It might be good in the short run... (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by magster on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:35:55 AM EST
    ...and to me the short run is the most important in terms of meaningful climate change and public option health care reform.  But Specter's press conference was a total buzzkill, compounded by his keeping seniority over loyal Democrats and his "no" vote last night.  He better get in line, or he'll be primaried despite the DSCC.

    And in the long run, this was a disaster, because a real Dem would have beat Toomey in 2010, and now we'll likely be stuck with a Republican with a D next to his name baldly in this to preserve his own power.

    The Senate is really a disgusting collection of narcissisti personalities on both sides of the aisle (with a few exceptions of course).

    Parent

    That's what gets me (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 06:29:45 PM EST
    If they just let things take their course, Specter would have lost to Toomey, who would have lost to Any Democrat, and we'd have an actual Dem. in the Senate.

    Specter really had no choice, either, about switching parties or being out of a job after the election.  They could have driven a hard bargain with him and made him eat it-- half his seniority, say, and no voting with the GOP on cloture.  He's eaten far worse from his Republican buddies over the years.

    Parent

    who with any amount of power (none / 0) (#66)
    by lilburro on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:42:15 AM EST
    isn't a disgusting narcissist.  Take the financial sector.

    Parent
    Exactly! n/t (none / 0) (#111)
    by NYShooter on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 06:13:01 PM EST
    Wouldn't it (none / 0) (#75)
    by KeysDan on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 12:25:42 PM EST
    be a nice redemptive step if Arlen walked back his enthusiastic support of Jay Bybee's nomination to the 9th Circuit in 2002 and 2003?  It would be a great media-attention grabber and might rekindle the dying impeachment embers.  But, then there were too many Democratic yes votes for Bybee's confirmation for that to go anywhere.

    Parent
    Specter was a Democrat before (none / 0) (#2)
    by oldpro on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 08:18:36 AM EST
    he was a Republican.  This is his second tack in an attempt to 'run before the wind.'  The last time it was Reagan to whom he tied his political future.  That played out.  Now, here we are.  Full circle for Arlen.

    Obama's statement was a bit much, I'd say.  "Thrilled?"  Ummmm, no.  No Democrat I know is thrilled.

    The politics of his Democratic primary should be fascinating with Ed Rendell and Obama lining up for Arlen.  I doubt the grassroots Dems will.

    BTD?  Your thoughts on this are of interest...and what about what's happening with unions as a political force...or not...these days?  There's a subject you might weigh in on if it interests you at all.

    Parent

    Yes! Definitely talk about unions (none / 0) (#34)
    by sj on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 10:31:11 AM EST
    As a political and social force.

    Parent
    A purely Rovian move. (none / 0) (#7)
    by Fabian on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:01:37 AM EST
    My definition of Rovian is pure selfish pragmatism, without a hint of principles.  Specter switched so he could win re-election as a Politician.  

    Parent
    Correct (none / 0) (#112)
    by NYShooter on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 06:17:01 PM EST
    You've just described the 100 growths that occupy the U.S. Senate.

    Parent
    I agree that Specter (none / 0) (#37)
    by indy in sc on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 10:47:41 AM EST
    is not to be trusted.  He is a moderate Republican and not a moderate Democrat until his votes prove otherwise.

    That said, I do not want the Dem party to become like the Repubs and force out or marginalize its moderate voices.  The Repubs will be in the wilderness for a long time because of that approach and the Dems would be wise not to follow suit.  Every now and again I hear calls for the dems to primary some moderate dems who hold office in more conservative regions.  I think that's a mistake.

    This is why I stay independent--I don't want my issues or future to be necessarily tied to any one party, but seeing as the Dems are on my side of the most of the issues that are important to me, I would like to see them in power for a long time to come.

    Parent

    Little chance of that (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by sj on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 12:09:38 PM EST
    I do not want the Dem party to become like the Repubs and force out or marginalize its moderate voices


    Parent
    The flu is a hot topic in this house (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:08:50 AM EST
    right now along with so much else.  Joshua doesn't have a very efficient respiratory system.  He is likely to be more intelligent than the rest of us because his particular gene mutation changes his collagen slightly.  His brain tissue is denser than mine but his lungs are not as elastic.  And then his scoliosis retards his lung capacity.  A serious flu could be a very serious problem for him.  At this point though the new H1N1 strain doesn't work as efficiently in its new human host but will probably adapt.  What to do?  It would almost behoove us to expose ourselves at this point and gain some immunity.  Vaccine development doesn't sound wholely promising at this point.  Yet if people attempt to expose themselves doesn't that promote the virus evolving effiency in human hosts?


    He sound like a high risk patient (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:14:23 AM EST
    Don't expose him.  He could get extremely ill.....but get thee to a doctor for a prescription for Tamiflu as a standby and good information about when to start taking it.

    (and note, I would never suggest this to everyone, just high risk patients).

    Parent

    Yes, we have tamiflu standby (none / 0) (#20)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:23:06 AM EST
    coming today.  We were debating whether or not to send him to school today as we have 2 suspected cases in Huntsville that shut down the school district there.  Whenever we stop sending him to school........that's it for him for the rest of the year probably.  What is an over reaction and what is an under reaction?  He hasn't had a major respiratory illness in his lifetime yet but we can't know if the only reason for that is because the family works so damned hard to be proactive where he is concerned.  He isn't allowed around smokers, we have an aircleaning system in our house that serves him as well as me with my asthma difficulties here in Bama. His titanium rib expanded his lung capacity 75%.  He has a very good immune system but with this bug that isn't necessarily a good thing and could work against him.  If this virus is worse next season though and we don't have a good vaccine......next flu season could be even more dangerous for him.

    Parent
    I get annoyed (none / 0) (#43)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:02:46 AM EST
    that they're debating about whether to make a vaccine.  The vaccine needs to be made.  We can spend trillions on wars and bailing out "banksters," we can spend on a swine flu vaccine, even if we won't use it.

    I personally don't think the swine flu is any more dangerous than any other flu -- except that we don't have a vaccine for the high risk groups.

    I don't think you're being too cautious.  In Washington, if a case of flu is found in a school, the school closes.  Hopefully the same policy will be enacted in your neck of the woods.  But it's not a bad thing to keep him out as a precaution.

    Parent

    It has been enacted (none / 0) (#56)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:28:22 AM EST
    This flu has about a seven incubatin though.  When does the infected become infectious?  If this flu is no more dangerous than the yearly flu is.....then why close any schools?  Your logic doesn't make sense.

    Parent
    I din do nahting. (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by desertswine on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 12:11:38 PM EST
    dat's wha dey'll sey (none / 0) (#76)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 12:27:40 PM EST
    My understanding is that (none / 0) (#95)
    by Anne on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 01:53:07 PM EST
    you are contagious before you are symptomatic - which could mean as soon as you start incubating.

    Parent
    Schools in Washington do NOT (none / 0) (#103)
    by Inspector Gadget on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 04:01:16 PM EST
    shut down for one case of the flu.

    One school has just shut down for 5 days because of a confirmed case of swine flu, the boy is in the hospital. Other than that, it takes an out sick rate of at least 30% in Washington to close a school because of the flu.


    Parent

    Sorry (none / 0) (#110)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 05:26:37 PM EST
    Meant swine flu.

    Parent
    I don't think they're debating (none / 0) (#116)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 06:38:36 PM EST
    anymore on this.  WHO was very insistent the other day that the pharm companies need to get cracking right away.

    The problem is that the pharms would have to sideline most of the production of their regular drugs in order to manufacture the tens of millions of doses that would be needed next year if this virus turns really deadly-- which it very well may not, leaving them in a real bind.

    This does seem to me a prime area for the government to step in with funding, much as I hate to see Big Pharma get a dime more from the public.

    Parent

    MT, talk to his doc about it (none / 0) (#115)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 06:35:23 PM EST
    He/she should be able to advise you how far to go in sheltering your boy on this.

    And also find out from him/her now, if possible, how you can make sure he's high on the list for a vaccine if and when it's made.

    Parent

    is it not true (none / 0) (#13)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:12:54 AM EST
    that they were saying that those at most risk seem to be healthy young adults with the healthiest immune systems?
    does that mean that the usual groups at most risk, the very young and the very old, are not at as much risk?
    I am asking.  I have not been following this very closely.

    Parent
    Yes, that's pretty much what it means (none / 0) (#114)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 06:32:48 PM EST
    but a kid with multiple health problems already, especially in the lungs, is always at higher risk.

    Parent
    This LAT article states scientists (none / 0) (#39)
    by oculus on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 10:56:55 AM EST
    don't think this flu is worse than the usual winter flu.

    LAT

    Parent

    The only difference (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:04:55 AM EST
    is that we have a vaccine available for the typical yearly flu.

    Flu is always, every single year, potentially deadly for the very young, very old, immune compromised, lung compromised, etc. This is why we have a vaccine.

    Saying this flu is no worse, just means it's equally dangerous too.

    Parent

    That opinion (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by indy in sc on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:08:13 AM EST
    needs to be fleshed out more by the administration.  I was surprised to learn that 30,000-40,000 americans die each year from the regular seasonal flu virus.  I wish someone would spend some time letting us know how this compares so we can figure out whether to be truly freaked (as Biden would have us) or whether we should just wash our hands more frequently.

    The numbers of dead in Mexico are horrible, but how does it compare to the number of people who die there each year from flu?  It would be helpful to know.

    Parent

    It's also political (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by jbindc on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:30:15 AM EST
    I was talking to my sister (a Hospital Librarian) about the difference between an "epidemic" and a "pandemic" (an epidemic is usually more contained to one region and a pandemic spreads to a large area or multiple locations - like we see here with swine flu).  However, she said it's very subjective and related to expectations.  New diseases will get the classification of epidemic or pandemic much more quickly.  So, a few dozen cases of swine flu in Mexico is an epidemic, but not thousands of cases of malaria in Africa.  And, you almost never hear pandemic used in conjunction with AIDS and HIV.

    And, because I just wanted to check her facts out...

    About 1,300 cases of malaria are diagnosed in the United States each year. The vast majority of cases in the United States are in travelers and immigrants returning from malaria-risk areas, many from sub-Saharan Africa and South Aisa.

    The World Health Organization estimates that each year 300-500 million cases of malaria occur and more than 1 million people die of malaria, especially in developing countries. Most deaths occur in young children. For example, in Africa, a child dies from malaria every 30 seconds.

    About 1 million people in the US have been diagnosed with HIV/AIDS since the beginning of the epidemic through 2007.

    So, while we need to worry about this swine flu, and we need to exercise caution, it's too early to be panicked.

    Parent

    Most of those who die from yearly flu (none / 0) (#52)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:20:39 AM EST
    usually have compromising health issues......the very young or our elderly.

    Parent
    With this virus (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:25:12 AM EST
    it appears that the quick action of a very healthy immune system can work against the infected and lead to an over collecting of fluid in the lungs.  This is a brand new virus to our bodies unlike the yearly flu which is new mutation of the old flu, so healthy immune systems are responding to something they have never experienced before.  Those with immune systems that respond more slowly don't seem to have the same risk of an immune system response that contributes to death.

    Parent
    Thank you!! (none / 0) (#55)
    by indy in sc on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:27:29 AM EST
    I know you have been following this closely and it's nice to have useful information like you have just provided.  Can you get onto Secretary Napolitano's staff?

    Parent
    I think they know the same things (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:34:37 AM EST
    yet as one virologist I read yesterday put it....when you've seen one pandemic you've seen one pandemic.  Since we haven't experienced much mortality at this point it seems best to not rush to making judgements that may evolve into something else tomorrow since a virus is so damned volatile.  What if it does begin attacking our elderly suddenly and they need to reverse a past statement made?

    Parent
    Well, if true about how this new flu (none / 0) (#65)
    by brodie on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:40:45 AM EST
    affects the immune-strong among us, then that would seem to be an argument against doing all those things we're supposed to be doing to strengthen our body's natural defenses.  And that is definitely not the position I would want to take -- absent some very serious, specific and virtually beyond a reasonable doubt evidence to back it.

    Meanwhile, to confuse things even more, I heard last night that the first, and only so far, US death was in fact from the ranks of the very young -- a two yr old child in TX -- while dozens of others in this country (presumably kids and adults in a range of ages) have gotten infected with the new flu but not died from it.

    Bottom line is that we're going to stick with the program that's brought us some cold and flu-free yrs in recent times -- vegetarian/alkaline-reacting diet largely, daily exercise, sleep, and the 2.5 oz of red wine nightly ...

    Parent

    I don't know if it is an argument (none / 0) (#67)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:44:33 AM EST
    for weakening your system somehow.  I would think that immune system response also has some genetic components to it as well.

    Parent
    The child who died (none / 0) (#117)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 06:42:09 PM EST
    had unspecified multiple preexisting health problems.

    Parent
    So this flu only will double deaths (none / 0) (#49)
    by Cream City on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:14:00 AM EST
    to 72,000 this year from flu, since the usual fatality rate from winter flu is 36,000?

    Oh, I think that ought to be taken seriously.

    Parent

    Caution (none / 0) (#58)
    by jbindc on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:33:24 AM EST
    The CDC says:

    The number of influenza-associated (i.e., flu-related) deaths varies from year to year because flu seasons often fluctuate in length and severity. CDC estimated that about 36,000 people died of flu-related causes each year, on average, during the 1990s in the United States. This figure includes people dying from complications of flu.

    SNIP

    What are flu-related deaths?

    Flu-related deaths are deaths that occur in people for whom influenza infection was likely a contributor to the cause of death, but not necessarily the primary cause of death.

    SNIP

    CDC does not know exactly how many people die from flu each year. There are several reasons for this: First, states are not required to report individual flu cases or deaths of people older than 18 years of age to CDC. Second, influenza is infrequently listed on death certificates of people who die from flu-related complications [12]. Third, many flu-related deaths occur one or two weeks after a person's initial infection, either because the person may develop a secondary bacterial co-infection (such as a staph infection) [1,8,11] or because influenza can aggravate an existing chronic illness (such as congestive heart failure or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) [3]. Also, most people who die from flu-related complications are not tested for flu, or they seek medical care later in their illness when influenza can no longer be detected from respiratory samples. Influenza tests are only likely to detect influenza if performed within a week after onset of illness. For these reasons, many flu-related deaths may not be recorded on death certificates. These are some of the reasons that CDC and other public health agencies in the United States and other countries use statistical models to estimate the annual number of flu-related deaths


    Parent
    Sure. Alcoholism is rarely the cause listed (none / 0) (#92)
    by Cream City on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 01:32:16 PM EST
    for deaths, too, that are due to alcoholism.  The immediate cause, like liver disease, is listed.

    It doesn't alter the causal factors for, in this case, pneumonia and other complications of flu.

    Parent

    Because of Josh (none / 0) (#51)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:18:22 AM EST
    I've been reading virologists blogs and comments.  Well that, and I always was a science geek.  Granted that there is no such thing as a predictable pandemic, this version of H1N1 just made the human to human jump.  Many scientists feel that we could experience something similar to the 1918 flu that also made a brief appearance in the spring of 1917.  When it emerged the next "flu season" it had adapted much better to achieving its survival in the human host and graduated from mild to what decimated many.  We have no way of knowing if that is what is in store for us with this new virus.  Virologists are agreeing that this flu is complex and good vaccines in our near future could be difficult.  Those persons becoming infected early on in this pandemic could very easily end up luckier than the rest of us as they will have some immunity and the rest of us could face a much more virulent virus.  If we ended up housebound sick with flu and taking Tamiflu I wouldn't cry at this point as long as we can all recover.

    Parent
    for the record (5.00 / 2) (#54)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:26:02 AM EST
    I do not believe there has only been one death in the US.  I was reading about some deaths in CA (on tuesday I think) which has since disappeared from the news.
    with the death of investigative journalism we are left with the web.
    Obama was very clear on the point that the government will "do whatever is necessary" to contain the threat.
    I totally believe managing the news is part of that.

    Parent
    I think they are restricting making (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:39:55 AM EST
    claims of H1N1 deaths only to deaths after autopsy where the virus is the cause of death and not just a contributing factor that enabled a bacterial infection say in the lungs to finish the host off.  That's why Mexico's figure of deaths due to the virus and the WHO's figure are so completely different.

    Parent
    LA officials rule out two deaths (none / 0) (#77)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 12:36:56 PM EST
    LA officials rule out two deaths as related to swine flu  

    Special Report:  World Tackles Swine Flu

        LOS ANGELES, April 29 -- The Los Angeles County coroner's office said on Wednesday that two deaths suspected of stemming from swine flu were ruled out as being related to the virus.



    Parent
    ah (none / 0) (#83)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 01:03:07 PM EST
    I was out of touch yesterday.
    still, I dont believe there has only been one.


    Parent
    'tis your prerogative. (none / 0) (#87)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 01:16:27 PM EST
    Gonna' party like it's (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by SOS on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:15:22 AM EST
    476

    Climate change? (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by nellre on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:19:44 AM EST
    There is an industry conspiracy to misinform the world. Do they have any legal culpability?

    It's like Gore is trying to yell fire in the theater, but a bunch of thugs throttle him. Only there really is a fire.

    I'll believe it is a crisis (1.50 / 2) (#40)
    by Wile ECoyote on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 10:59:51 AM EST
    when the people saying it is a crisis live like it is a crisis.  Gore is the very picture of excess consumption.

    Parent
    How so? (none / 0) (#41)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:00:33 AM EST
    An example (none / 0) (#82)
    by nellre on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 01:00:48 PM EST
    Industry Ignored Its Scientists on Climate

    I wish I could sue all the folks spewing lies and misinforming their listeners about Climate Change.

    Parent

    why (none / 0) (#45)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:05:29 AM EST
    because he is a few pounds overweight.
    if that is your point, it seems a bit silly.

    Parent
    I think it is more... (5.00 / 5) (#68)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:44:34 AM EST
    ...the "OMG Al Gore has a bigger house than me" cannard that the right likes to throw around.  

    Big house equating to higher energy consumption and therefore hypocracy.

    Everyone knows that Al Gore should be living in cave instead of his fancy liberal mansion.

    Parent

    How about forgoing the (none / 0) (#84)
    by Wile ECoyote on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 01:03:20 PM EST
    carbon wasting private jets to fly to his events, or the 100 ft houseboats?

    Parent
    And you being all knowing... (none / 0) (#89)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 01:23:02 PM EST
    ...have personal insight and knowledge as to what he might be doing to off-set his carbon footprint?  

    Fix yo' strawman!

    Parent

    Ah (none / 0) (#102)
    by Wile ECoyote on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 02:16:20 PM EST
    the mantra.  So he could like spew tens of thousands of tons more carbon, then offset them (by buying carbon credits from himself.  That'll fix it.) and then tell us how to live with a clear conscience.  

    Parent
    you are correct about living in a cave (none / 0) (#85)
    by Wile ECoyote on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 01:04:34 PM EST
    He is a progressive.  Listen to what I say, not watch how I behave.  A Mantra.

    Parent
    for the record (none / 0) (#86)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 01:07:03 PM EST
    I too am a bit overweight and I own a houseboat.  though not a 100 ft one I have absolutely no intention of getting rid of it to please purists.


    Parent
    Good for (none / 0) (#97)
    by Wile ECoyote on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 02:06:42 PM EST
    you.  I guess we will not be hearing about carbon footprints, or recycling from you.  
    I take it you did see the article about fat people causing global warming.  

    Parent
    'cause no winger... (none / 0) (#90)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 01:29:38 PM EST
    ...would ever have that "mantra", right?  Certainly not Rush or Vitter or Gingrich or any number of the IOKIYAR's...

    Parent
    Certainly (none / 0) (#99)
    by Wile ECoyote on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 02:07:45 PM EST
    any number of idiots can have the same mantra.  

    Parent
    Managing the news? (none / 0) (#62)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:36:41 AM EST
    That is an awful thought.

    Parent
    indeed (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:44:53 AM EST
    a rather Bushian thought isnt it?
    still, I think Obama would be willing to "manage the news" probably almost a quickly as Bush.
    Im sorry to say.


    Parent
    btw BTD (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:29:16 AM EST
    I agree with the other commenter.  Health Care.
    based on Obamas, um, rather vague comments in recent days that cause is going to need strong voices.


    "Tort reform" is code for (5.00 / 5) (#33)
    by oculus on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 10:25:18 AM EST
    limit plaintiff's causes of action.

    It is a shame that you (none / 0) (#3)
    by MO Blue on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 08:28:20 AM EST
    don't do Health CARE. If you ever became interested in the issue, you would be a strong voice on the subject.

    Joshua gave Obama an A (none / 0) (#4)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 08:46:04 AM EST
    on Foreign Policy and a C+ on the economy.  I have no idea where he gets these notions :)

    well (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Jen M on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 08:48:49 AM EST
    the economy isn't FIXED yet, is it?

    Parent
    The auto industry fallout (5.00 / 0) (#9)
    by Fabian on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:04:51 AM EST
    hasn't hit yet.  We might have stabilized temporarily, but I'm not optimistic that the economy is done contracting yet.

    Parent
    I'm always baggin on Obama (none / 0) (#12)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:10:56 AM EST
    around here on his economic approach.

    Parent
    Economy still a D- (none / 0) (#21)
    by Cream City on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:25:08 AM EST
    and in danger of failing more for an F.

    As noted above, the impact of the debacle in the auto industry -- and its many peripheral industries, significant in my state -- still has not hit.

    Nor has the hit to the tourism industry, the number-one industry in my state, hit yet -- that won't come until the height of tourism season this summer.  

    Unemployment already is near 10 percent in my state, officially, so it is worse than that.  And it is especially worse in my state's major city.  Both will be at a 15 to 20 percent jobless rate, officially, once the tourism season starts -- and that doesn't count all the "seasonal employees," the students and teachers and others who count on that few months of summer work in tourism but will not find it this year.  So the impact of that may not be felt until fall, when they would have spent that summer money earned on tuition, back-to-school stuff for kids, etc.

    Even if the few signs of a recovery are for real, it will be an extremely slow recovery owing in part to the timing of it now.

    Parent

    Open Thread? (none / 0) (#6)
    by tokin librul on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 08:57:11 AM EST
    Then I cannot go off-tread by announcing the celebration of a "bloggi-versary", can I?

    Chrysler (none / 0) (#8)
    by CoralGables on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:01:51 AM EST
    to file for bankruptcy today.

    according to AP unnamed sources (none / 0) (#27)
    by byteb on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:41:51 AM EST
    at least that's what I heard/read

    Parent
    Yup (none / 0) (#46)
    by ruffian on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:06:15 AM EST
    They couldn't make a deal with the hedge funds. Shocking.

    Parent
    Cerberus (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by waldenpond on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 01:30:35 PM EST
    Cerberus owns nearly 80% of Chrysler.  They decided to remake the auto industry by purchasing Chrysler, parts makers, car rentals, etc then installed Nardelli who did such a wonderful job at Home Depot.  Bailing out Chrysler is bailing out the hedge fund Cerberus.

    Parent
    Obama really ripped them (none / 0) (#64)
    by magster on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:40:00 AM EST
    Maybe Obama is finally losing patience with the Wall Streeters.  I wish Obama had named names though -- hopefully some intreped reporter will dig out some names.

    Parent
    9.5 on the WTFitude scale (none / 0) (#11)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:10:03 AM EST
    FEMA's "Scary Thing"
    Agency's web site yanks coloring book depicting 9/11 terror attack

    APRIL 29--The Federal Emergency Management Agency has removed a children's coloring book from its web site following criticism over its inclusion of drawings of the September 11 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center. The coloring book, titled "A Scary Thing Happened," is geared towards helping kids "cope with disasters,"

    . . . the coloring book's cover montage includes a drawing of one of the Twin Towers on fire as a plane approaches the second building. A similar image, which children could color in, appears on page 12 of the book.

    wtf? (none / 0) (#14)
    by Jen M on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:14:03 AM EST
    maybe they figure it will make kids less afraid???

    Parent
    Goodness (none / 0) (#17)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:15:42 AM EST
    Nothing like indoctrinating specific American trauma.  Where's the Katrina coloring book?  I'm a firm believer though that artistic expression can be an extremely healing experience for children when children are allowed to draw and recreate and share their own experience.

    Parent
    Okay everyone stay home great advise (none / 0) (#18)
    by SOS on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:17:51 AM EST
    Vice president Joe Biden said today he would tell his family members not to use subways in the U.S. and implied schools should be shuttered as the swine flu outbreak spread to 11 states and forced school closures amid confirmation of the first U.S. death.

    "I wouldn't go anywhere in confined places now," Biden said when asked whether he would advise family members to use public transportation.

    Biden made his comments during a brief interview on NBC's "Today" show during an interview with Matt Lauer.

    How shocking (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:49:41 AM EST
    Joe Biden has "loose cannon mouth".  Who would have ever guessed such a thing :)?

    Parent
    Was he in a room (a confined space (none / 0) (#24)
    by coast on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:31:42 AM EST
    by definition) when he was speaking to Matt?  What a loon.

    Parent
    does he still use (none / 0) (#25)
    by Jen M on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:32:54 AM EST
    that cute little tram under the capital?

    Parent
    I wonder if Obama (none / 0) (#26)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:36:41 AM EST
    regrets that particular decision yet?


    Parent
    According to Biden, Obama is (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by oculus on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 10:24:10 AM EST
    consulting w/him on every important decision.  Scary.

    Parent
    but then (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 10:33:09 AM EST
    what would you expect Biden to say?
    sometimes I wonder if he as not picked for comedy relief.

    Parent
    Better to be consulting (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by CST on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 10:40:53 AM EST
    than letting him make the decisions (like Cheney)

    Man how our standards have lowered...

    Parent

    Maybe we can put him on a train (none / 0) (#47)
    by ruffian on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:07:43 AM EST
    with his best buddy Arlen Specter.

    Parent
    I can't help it....I just loved this CNN comment (none / 0) (#78)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 12:43:19 PM EST
    had to grab my laptop and type this in.  CNN says that maybe Joe Biden is a germaphobe.  And if he's a germaphobe that's okay......that's his prerogative :)

    Parent
    Isn't Jill Biden a school teacher? (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by oculus on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 04:40:44 PM EST
    Joe is doomed, doomed, I say.

    Parent
    Yes (none / 0) (#106)
    by jbindc on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 04:43:54 PM EST
    She teaches a couple of classes at a local community college in Alexandria, VA

    Parent
    Ha. That's called covering your (none / 0) (#94)
    by coast on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 01:49:24 PM EST
    politically correct a$%.  Have always prefered the Seinfeld "Not that there is anything wrong with that".  Thanks for the laugh.

    Parent
    random thought (none / 0) (#22)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:26:44 AM EST
    the Obama administration must be  happy that current events have forced the idiotic NYC airforce one "photo op" off the front pages.
    I heard on the Obama network that the person who took responsibility could not be fired because he was hispanic and Obama does not want to PO hispanic voters.  may I just say, I hope to god that is not the reason no one has paid a price for that because that is utter BS.  in MO.

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 10:06:52 AM EST
    has Obama fired anybody? There's been plenty of mess ups and I don't remember anybody being fired. He might be incapable of firing anyone and the hispanic thing is just an excuse.

    Parent
    Hey! (none / 0) (#107)
    by jbindc on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 04:44:30 PM EST
    He fired Samantha Power....before he re-hired her.

    Parent
    LOL! (none / 0) (#118)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 07:40:23 PM EST
    n/t

    Parent
    I vote for Bybee (none / 0) (#30)
    by NMvoiceofreason on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 10:11:39 AM EST
    How do we impeach the judge?

    How do we dis-bar him?

    How do we convict him of the war crimes he aided and abetted?

    Jay Bybee (none / 0) (#81)
    by KeysDan on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 12:58:06 PM EST
    is, I trust, at least a little worried.  He has retained legal counsel--Maureen Mahoney of the high powered DC-based law firm, Latham & Watkins, on a pro bono basis. I assume Bybee will recuse himself from germane cases, but the pro bono part, in and of itself, is a little troubling to me for a sitting federal judge--too much "good will" and sort of indirect income.  Impeachment in the House is a little more promising in outcome than the senate, both in the numbers and in recalling those embarrassing judiciary committee yes votes (two Democrats) and then all those Democratic senate yes votes (74/19, 7 not voting, Senator Clinton did vote no and Obama was a Illinois state senator in 2003).

    Parent
    I've never twitted before either :) (none / 0) (#38)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 10:55:31 AM EST


    Does that mean you are now? (none / 0) (#59)
    by oculus on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:34:09 AM EST
    Nope, I still don't twit (none / 0) (#71)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:46:47 AM EST
    Who is Carson Kressley? (none / 0) (#79)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 12:44:09 PM EST
    Do you have any of his stuff?

    See what happens when you don't watch (none / 0) (#80)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 12:47:17 PM EST
    reality tv.....you don't know who Carson Kressley is.  I just saw an advert for some of his clothes though and sort of liked the look of some of them.

    Parent
    Queer Eye! (none / 0) (#100)
    by jbindc on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 02:10:21 PM EST
    I LOVED that show!  The only reality show I liked!

    Parent
    Did you ever watch (none / 0) (#96)
    by ruffian on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 02:05:48 PM EST
    Queer Eye for The Straight Guy?  He was the fashion advisor on that show. Really funny guy. I loved that show the first season.  Good taste in clothes too - I always liked what he picked out for the guys.

    Parent
    Stylish, but not too trendy (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by ruffian on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 02:07:36 PM EST
    for the average Joe.

    Parent
    Need to zuszh a little. (none / 0) (#101)
    by jbindc on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 02:11:15 PM EST
    (Ok I don't know how to spell "zuszh", but I loved the concept).

    Parent
    I have no idea what this means (none / 0) (#120)
    by Militarytracy on Fri May 01, 2009 at 08:15:14 AM EST
    But I want to know.  I like his new clothing line.  I wish it wasn't sold on QVC.  I don't care for QVC for some reason.  He had a regular television commercial though about his clothing so I looked up who he was and I looked his clothing up on QVC.  I think I am going to order a couple of jackets though for when I'm showing my dogs.  They seem to have a relaxed tailored look and not too heavy for the climate I live in as well.  Also looking at some of the LL Bean bug proof clothes this year.  We had a very cool winter.  I loved it, but the skeeters seem to be really ticked about the whole deal right now.

    Parent
    Manhattan then and now (none / 0) (#93)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 01:44:48 PM EST
    fascinating images:

    the mannahattan project

    NatGeo

    April 23, 2009--Before it was an urban jungle, Manhattan was home to the Lenape Indians, who called the island Mannahatta, or "land of many hills."

    Built up and--thanks to land reclamation--out, downtown Manhattan, circa 2008, towers over the New York City island as it was more than 400 years ago (computer rendering at right), when Europeans first set eyes on it--complete with campfires.

    The images were created for the Wildlife Conservation Society's Mannahatta Project, which launched April 20 and includes a book, museum exhibition, and Web site. The yearlong celebration of Manhattan's natural history aims to recreate the island as it appeared 400 years ago, on the day English explorer Henry Hudson arrived in 1609.


    Obama's cramdowns blocked in Senate (none / 0) (#105)
    by jbindc on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 04:43:14 PM EST
    Vote is here

    Only got 45 votes.  Specter voted "no".

    Yes, and look no further than (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by Anne on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 05:02:06 PM EST
    the Senate Blue Dog Dems - or whatever name they've given themselves - for the answer to the question of what it means to have 60 Democrats in the Senate...exactly nothing.

    Can't get anything done as the minority party, can't get anything done as the majority party.

    Does not bode well for so many of the things we thought having a majority would help us accomplish.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#119)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 07:44:26 PM EST
    the long and short of it when you don't campaign on issues, you don't have anything. Winning by default isn't really worth winning in the long run is it?

    Parent
    Scalia gets comeuppance by law students (none / 0) (#108)
    by jbindc on Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 04:55:15 PM EST
    Last week, we wrote about the Fordham law professor who assigned his information privacy law class to compile a dossier on Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

    The professor had chosen Scalia as the target for privacy invasion because of the Justice's remarks at a January conference organized by the Institute of American and Talmudic Law. Scalia's views on the privacy of personal information online are summed up nicely by this quote:

        "Every single datum about my life is private? That's silly," Scalia [said].

    (And his views are summed up at greater length here by privacy expert and GW Law Professor Dan Solove.)

    Professor Joel Reidenberg and his class now have a 15-page dossier on Scalia, including his home address, the value of his home, his home phone number, the movies he likes, his food preferences, his wife's personal e-mail address, and "photos of his lovely grandchildren."

    Scalia had a lame response.