home

Tuesday Morning Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Tue May 19, 2009 at 09:55:29 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Your turn.

This is an Open Thread.

< Obama Administration: Right Of Confrontation "Not An American Value" | Appeals Court Rules No Disclosure of Bush White House E-Mails >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Tuesday Morning Open Thread | 121 comments (121 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Things are tough all over... (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by kdog on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:06:40 AM EST
    Canada ain't giving back 40 million worth of bogus traffic fines they collected with their tyranny-cameras for speeding in a phantom work zone, where there were no workers or work being being performed...seemingly in defiance of a judge's ruling.  Link  Shame on you Canada.

    "Got no liberty,
    got no privacy.
    The 20th century people,
    took it all away from me."

    - The Kinks

    Darwin 1/Magnetic Fish 0 (5.00 / 4) (#8)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:10:16 AM EST
    Scientists Unveil Missing Link

    Scientists have unveiled a 47-million-year-old fossilised skeleton of a monkey hailed as the missing link in human evolution.
    The search for a direct connection between humans and the rest of the animal kingdom has taken 200 years - but it was presented to the world today at a special news conference in New York.
    The discovery of the 95%-complete 'lemur monkey' - dubbed Ida - is described by experts as the "eighth wonder of the world".
    They say its impact on the world of palaeontology will be "somewhat like an asteroid falling down to Earth".
    Researchers say proof of this transitional species finally confirms Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, and the then radical, outlandish ideas he came up with during his time aboard the Beagle.

    Torturers Are US (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by jawbone on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:16:43 AM EST
    David Ignatius was on Charlie Rose last night to discuss his new novel, but they got into Iraq, Af/Pak, and torture.

    Well, said the Very Serious Person, torture must work; why else would it have been used over the centuries? Then he added that torture had elicited plans for follow on attacks after 9/11. Yes, he did! Did Cheney tell him so?

    I clicked off.

    Disgusting. And Charlie Rose was so understanding, so concerned, so, well, at ease with the idea of torture.... Of course, we see such strong leadership from our new administration, such firm statements about not torturing and rule of law....

    The video and transcript aren't up yet, but will be soon at the Charlie Rose site.

    And no support for, or fighting on (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Anne on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:32:57 AM EST
    behalf of, the Dawn Johnsen nomination to head OLC.  Was hers just a throwaway nomination?  Another head fake, soon to be followed with, "well, we couldn't get her confirmed, so I'm nominating someone else who can be," and it will be someone with a little less interest in the rule of law - but eminently acceptable to the GOP.

    It's all making me very fearful of this impending SC nomination.  More and more I think Ginsburg and Stevens are holding onto their reliably liberal seats until they see how this shakes out - and that is not a good sign.

    Parent

    David Ignatius torture comments on Charlie Rose: (none / 0) (#111)
    by jawbone on Tue May 19, 2009 at 05:28:40 PM EST
    BTW, a commenter at another site said Lindsey Graham was making the same argument, that torture must work since, if it poses a moral dilemma, why would it be around for ages otherwise?

    From the Charlie Rose site transcript (bless him for providing a transcript!)--

    DAVID IGNATIUS:  I have a feeling that the use of these enhanced interrogation techniques did produce some results.  I think in a sense, why would it be a moral dilemma if it didn't work, if you didn't get anything out of it, why would anybody ever think abut using it?  

    CHARLIE ROSE:  On the other hand, you see these reports from people who were involved say it wasn't those techniques at all that got the best information.  It was a very different kind of thing, those agents and those analysts, those interrogators who knew how to get close to the people.

    DAVID IGNATIUS:  As I read the record to the extent we have it on Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who was the key person, who was the operational planner of 9/11, it does seem clear to me from what the CIA has released that the enhanced interrogation techniques did provide crucial intelligence.  

    CHARLIE ROSE:  And what was that intelligence?  

    DAVID IGNATIUS:It was intelligence about follow-on plots..  It was about the next wave that was coming at us.  To that extent, reading the record that's been released, it does seem to me that the Cheney argument about the efficacy of this, in the brutalest sense, has merit.  

    It seems to me that people -- if you want to make the argument that we should not torture, you have to make that argument in the understanding that we may not get the intelligence that we would get otherwise.  How would it be a moral position otherwise?  If you weren't -- knowing that there were risks involved, and you take the risks because it's a moral decision.  I mean, the British during World War II, Churchill during World War II, when the very existence of Britain was at stake, said we will not torture these Nazis.  And that.

    CHARLIE ROSE:  And he said that because it was a moral question?  

    DAVID IGNATIUS:  There were all kinds of reasons.  The British had their own people who were prisoners.  The British had their own elaborate intelligence operations and deception, so they already knew so much.  The likelihood that from a low-level person you captured, you could get more than you're going to get from having broken the Nazi codes was unlikely.  

    But again, so I think we have to understand that we may give up some intelligence.  

    Obama has made clear in the conversations he's had with his top aides about the new policy that there could be situations that would arise where we believe that somebody we're holding knows about a radiological device that's planned in New York, to take the ultimate nightmare situation, in which the president having issued this executive order saying thou shall not torture would issue another executive order that would say thou shall use the following techniques to try to get more out of this person.  It's my understanding that's the administration's view, that having written the executive order, you can revise it if circumstances absolutely demanded it.  

    And I think that's right.  I think the American people would be reassured to know that the president is not going to be stuck in -- one --
    it looks to me as if we're now with these terror suspects using less aggressive interrogation techniques than would be used in some police squad rooms.  That's not to condone what cops do, but I think people are trying hard to understand that.  So I think there is some flexibility in how this will be applied, and I think that's appropriate.  

    I had clicked off after his first statement condoning torture--I don't think I could have watched it. They were both so cool and...civlized while discussing this issue.

    This nation, it seems to me, has lost something important when this is just another, little, issue in our discourse.

    Parent

    Some good news (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by CST on Tue May 19, 2009 at 03:56:51 PM EST
    for anyone looking for it.

    Taking a big step forward on emission control.

    Also (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by CST on Tue May 19, 2009 at 04:01:33 PM EST
    Ted Kennedy appears to be getting better.  Ah the wonders of modern medicine and money.  Let's hope he keeps working a long time.

    h/t hotair - my right-wing blog trolling is sometimes usefull.

    Parent

    Re: Seat belts (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by DancingOpossum on Tue May 19, 2009 at 04:39:17 PM EST
    My seat belt saved my life in a bad car crash (no airbag, both cars totaled) so I don't object too strenuously to seatbelt laws. I always wore mine before that and now I'm a real pest about it to other people too :)

    Well thank the gods for that... (none / 0) (#108)
    by kdog on Tue May 19, 2009 at 04:53:49 PM EST
    D.O.P....when I had my head-on "I can't believe I walked outta that" wreck I didn't have mine on, and just got a knot on the head, by some miracle...my passenger friend wearing his tore his shoulder up good.

    Ya never know...of course they should be worn and I'm pretty good about, but the fining to death of the people is too much.  

    If the states/counties/cities/etc need more dough, raise income or property taxes like an honest govt., don't go the extortion route...cuz this is all about the Benjamins imo.

    Parent

    If our gov't had never started using the law (none / 0) (#110)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue May 19, 2009 at 05:16:35 PM EST
    as a revenue source, do you think there would be a law on seat belts, or motorcycle helmets, or child car seats, or bike helmets?

    Parent
    Good question... (none / 0) (#112)
    by kdog on Tue May 19, 2009 at 05:33:10 PM EST
    perhaps there would be because most people seem to like these laws and beg for them...but who the hell knows, the state has a love affair with that cash now....seems like every time there is a budget shortfall a new fine on something or other is proposed.

    Parent
    These are the laws that ONLY have (none / 0) (#121)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed May 20, 2009 at 09:31:53 PM EST
    a monetary fine attached. No one goes to jail or gets put on trial. I find it infuriating that our law makers have done this. We have a right to be careless and get hurt...not the smartest thing to do, but I've been driving now for 44 years and having never been in an accident, I could have never buckled a seatbelt and I'd still be unharmed. My guess is the majority of the population could make the same statement about their close calls being rare to none.


    Parent
    The Supreme Court is not going to hear (none / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Tue May 19, 2009 at 09:57:58 AM EST
    Bill Jefferson's appeal.

    I don't have a public link handy, but the District Court and DC Circuit opinions make interesting reading. I know more about the speech or debate clause than I did yesterday.

    In any case, (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by andgarden on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:05:59 AM EST
    here's the DC Circuit on Speech or Debate

    Writes on blackboard: "I must learn to check the date, I must learn to check the date. . ."

    Parent

    Oops, apparently I just read (none / 0) (#3)
    by andgarden on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:03:59 AM EST
    what happened last year. He apparently had something else going on in the 4th Cir.

    Parent
    What the SC refused to review (none / 0) (#6)
    by andgarden on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:09:03 AM EST
    here (PDF).

    Parent
    2012 is not soon enough (none / 0) (#2)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:03:36 AM EST
    consider these two stories:

    "I'm afraid of dying. Don't leave me alone"

    "My daddy ate my eyes."

    I could have gone on in life just fine (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Militarytracy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:41:51 AM EST
    not reading those.....and I didn't do it.  Pass the antidepressants someone.

    Parent
    sorry (none / 0) (#20)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:44:36 AM EST
    they just seemed quintessential reality check stories.
    the first for the gay commiunity the second for everyone else.
     

    Parent
    Captain, (none / 0) (#38)
    by KeysDan on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:00:30 AM EST
    I think the first is for everyone, too.

    Parent
    point taken (none / 0) (#42)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:09:02 AM EST


    Parent
    Passing on this opportunity. (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by oldpro on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:53:06 AM EST
    No thanks.

    Parent
    Good decision! (none / 0) (#41)
    by vml68 on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:02:37 AM EST
    I know I should not shield myself from all the ugliness out there but there are some things I really prefer not to know about.

    Parent
    I don't avoid all of it but (none / 0) (#113)
    by oldpro on Tue May 19, 2009 at 07:08:39 PM EST
    I do have limits.

    Parent
    Those... (none / 0) (#7)
    by kdog on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:09:08 AM EST
    crazed pcp user stories never cease to amaze me...when I smoked that awful substance I could barely move, much less embark on a violent rampage.  Effects everybody differently I guess.

    Parent
    Why? (none / 0) (#9)
    by jbindc on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:11:30 AM EST
    You think someone is going to primary Obama?

    Parent
    No silly... (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by kdog on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:12:15 AM EST
    2012 is the end of the world!

    Parent
    That last one... my God. (none / 0) (#11)
    by tigercourse on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:15:17 AM EST


    Parent
    like Stephen King (none / 0) (#12)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:16:10 AM EST
    at his worst.  or best.


    Parent
    I think the strategy has to be (none / 0) (#14)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:26:56 AM EST
    to lie and say you're a sister-in-law.  I have never had trouble getting into ICU as a SIL.

    Yes, and those poor little kids.  What a horrible way to begin your life.

    Parent

    Fortunately (none / 0) (#54)
    by samtaylor2 on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:45:29 AM EST
    Many states don't have those barbaric laws.  MI for example, even with its disgusting anti-gay amendment, would not obstruct the gay partner.

    Parent
    What happens in 2012 (none / 0) (#94)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue May 19, 2009 at 01:19:59 PM EST
    Is the Green Party going to take over? Not to be a dismissive, but for the next 8 years Obama's the Democratic executive and if you think the GOP is going to run a pro-Gay Marriage canidate that's just crazy, as for the second story I'm not sure I see your point- is their some political party that would instantly stop all child abuse that I'm unaware of?

    Parent
    not about (none / 0) (#98)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 02:29:37 PM EST
    politics.

    just to be clear, I am not stocking up on canned food and shotguns.  but I am not entirely dismissive either.


    Parent

    Tenacious BTD has had ANOTHER (none / 0) (#15)
    by Militarytracy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:28:23 AM EST
    growth spurt.  I wasn't figuring on one this large this late in the growing up game.  He looks like a gazelle right now instead of a dog. I think he's going to be bigger than his daddy.  Next International show I'm going to enter him in enough classes that he can finish his title if I can.  I haven't checked on the rules for finishing young dogs in the International ring, they may not allow it.  He might be young but his conformation has remained rock solid throughout his doggy teens.  He has never had a case of the crazy uglies or gone through what a lot of German Shepherd breeders call "falling apart".  He has experienced gazelle syndrome though a few times, he just turns into a bigger gazelle though.  My younger pup that I'm thinking of naming Atrios, he was uglier than a pile of Cheneys last month.

    Hehe (none / 0) (#24)
    by lilburro on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:47:40 AM EST
    Do you have any pictures of these dogs?  I'd love to see a Gazellan Shepherd.

    Parent
    I was going to put a photo of him up (none / 0) (#35)
    by Militarytracy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:55:22 AM EST
    after he got his International medal but then I thought perhaps I'd wait until he was more mature and full of doggy mojo.  You know....make it good.  I do have to take some photos though of my pups that are coming out of the uglies in the next few days so maybe just one for posterity.  

    Parent
    Just finished playing (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by NYShooter on Tue May 19, 2009 at 01:12:20 PM EST
    with my third Dobie, "Sasha." After a lifetime of owning just about every breed there is, I can't explain the deeply profound love bond that these pups command. Their behavior is exactly the opposite of their public perception.

    For twenty years now, whenever our wide-flung family gets together for picnics, and such, the Dobies stay in the baby's playpens, and with their strategic licking, tell any would-be bad person, "they're mine, you wanna come any closer?" And, after all these years of countless ear yankings, eye pokings, and steak bone removals from their jaws, the most aggressive acts in response have been......more, truly pathetic licks.

    Sorry M.T. hadda get it of my system. I feel better now.


    Parent

    The trained show ring Dobermans (none / 0) (#106)
    by Militarytracy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 04:39:47 PM EST
    are very beautiful when they stack themselves and then stick their chests out in the ring like peacocks.  We had a very nice one take his breed a few weeks back at my club's show in Perry GA.  So many dogs but only one lifetime :)

    Parent
    Yup, sadly, so true (none / 0) (#114)
    by NYShooter on Tue May 19, 2009 at 07:41:02 PM EST
    I've read, and seen, programs where dogs are given to prison inmates, retirement clients, and mentally troubled folks. The changes in these people's attitudes, behavior, and outlooks are nothing short of amazing. The people are given a reason to live by receiving unequivocal love, and having someone to care for. Their tenseness or lethargy, aggression, and/or anti-social behavior all improve immensely.

    I can't understand why that program that does so much good isn't implemented so much more.


    Parent

    Any idea how much it costs to (none / 0) (#115)
    by oculus on Tue May 19, 2009 at 07:55:52 PM EST
    add dogs to state correctional system?

    Parent
    Probably (none / 0) (#116)
    by NYShooter on Tue May 19, 2009 at 08:05:28 PM EST
    less than barbells and riot squads, not to mention recividism.

    But that wasn't a real question.....sorry.

    Parent

    I can't help but imagine the inmates (none / 0) (#117)
    by oculus on Tue May 19, 2009 at 08:07:35 PM EST
    training attack dogs.  I think my imagination strays in this direction due to the dog that killed the woman in the bay area.  The dog belonged to an inmate and was being temporarily cared for by his attorney.

    Parent
    Oh c'mon (none / 0) (#119)
    by NYShooter on Tue May 19, 2009 at 08:34:15 PM EST
    so you give dachshunds to the tough guys.

    Parent
    Wrong place at the right time? (none / 0) (#17)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:39:39 AM EST
    Dogs' water bowl may be cause of fire in Bellevue.

     Link

    Dogs were unharmed.

    A huge glass water bowl (none / 0) (#22)
    by Militarytracy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:46:50 AM EST
    elevated on a wire stand?  Is dinner pate?  My dogs are abused.  I use those half inch thick rubber bowls from the feed store that survive dogs, cows, pigs, horses, hurricanes, plague and avalanche.

    Parent
    You obviously don't (none / 0) (#30)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:51:39 AM EST
    have a dog with plastic allergy like I do.  Take him to a vet about 3 times for jowl exema suddenly caddilac water dishes are really cheap.

    We don't use glass, but we definitely use good quality stainless.

    Parent

    I have a couple of dogs allergic to corn (none / 0) (#37)
    by Militarytracy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:58:48 AM EST
    It seems that corn and dogs often don't mix but try running out of what I get at the feed store and going to the grocery store in a pinch.....every single food at the grocery store is full of yellow corn.  Lots of my friends use stainless steel buckets that they clip onto chainlink so it isn't on the ground.  Works in their crates too when they are traveling better than those bitty snap on water dishes.

    Parent
    yes (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:34:05 PM EST
    My allergy dog is allergic to corn too, so my younger dog has never had corn dogfood in her life, so I don't know if she's allergic to dogfood grade corn.

    We feed Pinnacle duck and potato....call it ducky-ducky food!  and the dogs come running.

    BTW, neither of my dogs have a problem with HUMAN grade corn.  I suspect they use Starlink Corn in dogfood.  It's a GMO corn (and I have nothing agains GMO per se) but Starlink GMO corn has a protein added to it that is particularly allergenic so it was disallowed for human consumption...but it can still be used in dogfood.

    Parent

    Thanks for explaining the corn thing to me (none / 0) (#90)
    by Militarytracy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 01:06:00 PM EST
    and the protein additive.  I'm going to look it up and share what I can find with the professional breeding and show email lists. The corn allergy problem seems to be becoming what I would classify epidemic in dog world.  Another thing that puzzles me when I'm reading the dog food labels is where what I would consider actual proteins are being listed on the ingredient labels, long after the corn.  Do you know if the corn is being used as a primary protein?  Whenever I feed any of this food (such as IAMS), and it has corn listed as a first or second ingredient, all of my dogs just flat out seem to feel and look crappy too?

    Parent
    Corn is a relatively (none / 0) (#100)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue May 19, 2009 at 03:30:38 PM EST
    low protein, high carb food, so no I don't think it's a major protein source in dogfood....The starlink gene codes for BT, which is a toxin/protein created by a bacteria to ward off certain pests.  Insert the starlink gene into corn and its product wards off the same pests from corn plants.  You can imagine how a toxin might be very allergenic  even if it's not technically a toxin in humans or animals, it has irritative tendencies that activate the immune system, thus activate allergy.  It's more complicated than that, but you get the idea.  

    ....Corn is generally a low-grade, bulky food, and dogfoods that are corn based are likely generally poor quality otherwise, which may be why the dogs look bad.

    Parent

    Also starlink (none / 0) (#101)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue May 19, 2009 at 03:33:17 PM EST
    is not actually a protein additive, it's a gene inserted into the genome of the corn plant itself....The plant makes low levels of the starlink protein from the gene, just as it makes low levels of other proteins for its own physiological functions.

    Parent
    Crystal bowls and vases (none / 0) (#92)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue May 19, 2009 at 01:13:19 PM EST
    have been a known risk to starting house fires when placed where they can act as a prism with sunlight for decades. The glass dog bowl seems close enough to be quite believable.

    Parent
    I have not been around a lot (none / 0) (#19)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:42:49 AM EST
    so maybe I missed it but I have been surprised that Pelosi and her allegations have not been more discussed here.
    it seems like a pretty big development.  the speaker of the house has accused the CIA of lying to congress.  they have denied it.
    thats pretty freakin serious.  where does it lead?
    it seems to me that it almost assures some kind of investigation or truth commission.
    no?

    Mary McCarthy (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by lilburro on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:52:20 AM EST
    had the same suspicions.

    In addition to CIA misrepresentations at the session last summer, McCarthy told the friends, a senior agency official failed to provide a full account of the CIA's detainee-treatment policy at a closed hearing of the House intelligence committee in February 2005, under questioning by Rep. Jane Harman (Calif.), the senior Democrat.

    There is absolutely no reason to believe that the CIA as an official institution is telling the truth about anything.

    Parent

    And then there's this: (none / 0) (#68)
    by Anne on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:22:45 PM EST
    From Marcy Wheeler this morning:

    According to House Appropriations Chair David Obey, the CIA interrogation list records a Democratic Appropriations staffer attending a September 19, 2006 torture briefing, when all the staffer did was walk John Murtha and Bill Young to the briefing, but was turned away at the briefing.

    In light of current controversy about CIA briefing practices, I was surprised to learn that the agency erroneously listed an appropriations staffer as being in a key briefing on September 19, 2006, when in fact he was not.  The list the agency released entitled "Member Briefings on Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (EITs)", shows that House Appropriations Committee defense appropriations staffer Paul Juola was in that briefing on that date.  In fact, Mr. Juola recollects that he walked members to the briefing room, met General Hayden and  Mr.Walker, who were the briefers, and was told that he could not attend the briefing.   We request that you immediately correct this record.  

    This is particularly significant given that Murtha, according to the CIA list, did not stay for the part of the briefing on torture. Obey's complaint is also interesting given that this is one of a number of briefings for which CIA claimed details on the briefing--such as who attended--were "not available."

    But don't worry. I'm sure Pete Hoekstra will be out today claiming that it's John Murtha's fault that Dick Cheney ordered CIA to torture.

    And yet, there are still many who insist that it is the CIA and the Republican members of these gangs and committees who are telling the truth, and people like Pelosi who are lyings sacks of cr@p.

    Even with the admission of a Fox News commentator that the GOP is using Pelosi to shift the discussion away from torture, the favored response from some is still "Nancy lied!" or "She should have done something!"

    I'm sure the GOP is very happy to see that.

    Parent

    Yeah (none / 0) (#93)
    by lilburro on Tue May 19, 2009 at 01:17:59 PM EST
    before everyone decided to freak out over Nancy Pelosi, there were already numerous questions raised about the CIA's honesty in briefing Congress.  For example, from the WSJ, about the videotape destruction:

    Lawmakers were initially told only of the existence of a single tape showing Mr. Zubaydah, said California Rep. Jane Harman, who was the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee in 2003, when she warned the CIA not to destroy that tape. A committee spokeswoman said it was told in the past year that there were 92 tapes, after Rep. Harman departed the committee.

    "My jaw fell through the floor," Rep. Harman said. "My impression was that this was a videotape. I never imagined it would be 92 videotapes." The CIA misled her, she said, and "it may also be a violation of law."

    Who, upon reading this, would think, gee, I'm certain the CIA briefed Pelosi fully on waterboarding?  The CIA has left a long and lengthening trail of lies behind it over the past 8 years.  And what purpose was served by deceiving Congress about the # of tapes?

    Parent

    Exactly (none / 0) (#71)
    by Joe Steel on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:25:01 PM EST
    There is absolutely no reason to believe that the CIA as an official institution is telling the truth about anything.

    I always assume they're lying about everything.  Deception is an integral part of their work practices.  Unfortunately, they can't seem to distinguish their internal goals with those of the country.

    Parent

    You must have missed it (none / 0) (#23)
    by jbindc on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:47:30 AM EST
    The general feeling here is that it is a sideshow put on by the Republicans and is meant to distract since Nance didn't acutally make any decisions as to whether or not to torture.

    Never mind the fact that she had an absolute duty to try and stop it and speak out against it, but that's neither here nor there.

    Not only did the CIA deny it and show she was actually briefed on this topic, she was smacked down by the head of the CIA, an Obama-appointee who, like Pelosi, was a Democratic Congress-critter from California, and not some Bush-apologist.

    Parent

    still (none / 0) (#27)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:49:55 AM EST
    she is the speaker of the house and has not retracted the allegations of lying to congress.

    if Tip ONeil had made these allegations there would have been an investigation.

    Parent

    Hey I agree with you (none / 0) (#74)
    by jbindc on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:27:05 PM EST
    But apparently Panetta has no cred around here, the CIA lied (even though Nancy's own aide sides with them), and Nancy is telling the 100% truth.

    Parent
    Can anyone tell me about Corpus Christi, TX? (none / 0) (#21)
    by jeffinalabama on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:44:37 AM EST
    I joined the ranks of the laid off last friday, and there appears to be a good position that I fit...

    Otherwise, anyone need a statistician? MT, anything down at Rucker?

    Hey, it's an open thread, after all...

    It's pretty nice (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by jbindc on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:49:31 AM EST
    Very hot and humid, but since you're in Alabama, you should be used to it.LOTS of tourists, especially spring breakers (North Padre Island is across a bridge).

    Like any city, I think it has its ups and downs.

    Would this job be at Texas A&M-CC?

    Parent

    community college there. (none / 0) (#31)
    by jeffinalabama on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:51:44 AM EST
    hope I am at least in the finals after they get my CV.

    Parent
    Good luck! (none / 0) (#70)
    by jbindc on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:24:35 PM EST
    Fingers crossed for you!

    Parent
    make that very VERY hot. (none / 0) (#89)
    by Fabian on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:56:08 PM EST
    One fine day a couple months ago, someone posted that they were breaking eighty degrees.  I pulled up weather.com and the ONLY place in the continental USofA that was hitting anywhere close to that temp was Corpus Christi.  Not Cali, not NM, not Nevada, not Florida, not even the rest of TX or NOLA was that hot.

    That's only one data point, but to me that's a helluva indication that region is a great place for a pool, a solar oven and a subterranean home.

    Parent

    We have stuff (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by Militarytracy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:50:22 AM EST
    We have a friend retiring soon and he says we have a bit of civilian stuff available to the strange and over degreed.  He has an MBA.  My email's liberalbarking@yahoo.com.  My husband has to put some class grades in and then the day is his, I will ask him to snoop around.  P.S. I love the weather and sunshine of Corpus Christi TX.

    Parent
    You said (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:54:11 AM EST
    Hey, it's an open thread, after all...

    Heyyyy, in this economy, you use every angle you can find.

    Good luck with the job search, and I hope it brings you better things than you had before.

    Parent

    Sorry to hear about the layoff. (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by vml68 on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:55:51 AM EST
    Re: statistician....are you in the academic field?

    Do you have any interest in being an actuary? I know a couple of firms in the NY?NJ area that are looking for actuaries or actuarial assistants.

    Parent

    I'm interested in (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by jeffinalabama on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:00:56 AM EST
    any sort of job... I'm a sociologist by training, but have enough graduate hours in statistics to have earned a masters' had I desired. So... yes, I am interested! Let me find a working email-- professional courtesy at my former university concerning email access extended through the weekend to about noon yesterday.

    I didn't even get to finish answering questions from students, or finish writing rec letters, either. Contract expired, position eliminated, and then access followed quickly.

    I'm not upset about the contract, or the position elimination, but professional courtesy used to mean something.

    Parent

    Ouch (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by andgarden on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:09:03 AM EST


    Parent
    You're a sociologist by training? (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by Militarytracy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:18:15 AM EST
    I will ask my son's friend's daddy if you are interested in the "shrink" department at Rucker?  

    Parent
    yep, and a vet, (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by jeffinalabama on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:21:25 AM EST
    so I know some of the issues faced by the returning vets, too.

    Parent
    veteran, not (none / 0) (#47)
    by jeffinalabama on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:21:49 AM EST
    veterinarian...

    Parent
    Heh....I did pause (none / 0) (#49)
    by Militarytracy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:25:57 AM EST
    We have a vet clinic too.  I will phone right now.

    Parent
    Jeff.... (none / 0) (#64)
    by vml68 on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:14:30 PM EST
    I don't know what your salary requirements are or your work experience but if you are looking to get into the actuarial profession look into some of the major insurance companies (e.g. Nationwide Insurance-not the most exciting company to work for but according to friends who work there,they treat their employees well and have good benefits) actuarial programs.
    This way you can work and have them pay for all the exams you will need to take to become an actuary. Most of these companies bump up your salary for every exam you pass and with your history of graduate level statistics courses most of the exams should be a piece of cake.

    In the NY/NJ area your best bet would be to go through a recruiter like DWSimpson.

    Parent

    working email below (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by jeffinalabama on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:20:37 AM EST
    jwa0001@ymail.com

    brand new, if anyone cares to email... thanks for the adivce from all, and any leads, also!

    If it works out, I'll make about 20 pounds of bbq ribs, the same in pork, chicken and brisket, and mail out thank you packages.

    Or if you're a vegetarian, marinated, grilled squash, bell peppers, eggplant, zucchini and onions...

    Parent

    give up on that email... too many problems (none / 0) (#95)
    by jeffinalabama on Tue May 19, 2009 at 01:39:07 PM EST
    try bobodix@yahoo.com, or pointerlover@yahoo.com

    new emails that I can't log into... these are oldies.
    and yes, I love english pointers, although Ihave none now, just a pit bull terrier who's the smartest mixed breed i ever wanted. Did you know thy used to call pit buls "nanny dogs?"


    Parent

    I read a few weeks back too (none / 0) (#40)
    by Militarytracy on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:01:10 AM EST
    that actuary work is supposedly stable and growing in our current and our future economy.

    Parent
    I had a case there once (none / 0) (#25)
    by Jeralyn on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:47:49 AM EST
    I really liked it. Great for walking and all the restaurants had terrific bread pudding. The U.S. Attorney was pleasant (as compared to some in that neck of the woods like Jeff Sessions when he was USA in Mobile, AL.  I'd say check it out.

    Parent
    Thanks, Jeralyn (none / 0) (#29)
    by jeffinalabama on Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:50:27 AM EST
    It seems like a nice small city, and I'm bilingual, so I can hope...

    Parent
    They passed (none / 0) (#48)
    by eric on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:24:37 AM EST
    a seat belt law here yesterday.  Looks like seat belt violations will now be a "primary" offense, meaning the cops will be able to pull you over for not wearing one.  Previously, it was only an add-on offense if you were pulled over for something else.

    At this point, I don't think anyone will ever be able to challenge a police stop successfully in this state again.  "Why did you pull Mr. Smith over?"   Cop:  "I didn't think he had his seat belt on...".

    Bah.

    I pity the motorists... (none / 0) (#55)
    by kdog on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:49:39 AM EST
    of Minnesota.

    Sometime in the future, we will look back fondly on the days when you could challenge a police stop.

    Parent

    I looked into this (none / 0) (#58)
    by eric on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:05:06 PM EST
    a little more.  It looks like 30 or so states already have these primary seat belt laws.  LINK

    The only state with no seat belt law whatsoever?  Not surprising, New Hampshire.

    Parent

    "live free die young" (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by itscookin on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:11:24 PM EST


    Parent
    Live free or die... (none / 0) (#65)
    by kdog on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:15:26 PM EST
    even if it is young...still beats living in a nanny state till your 108 everytime and twice on Sunday:)

    Parent
    You'll love this (none / 0) (#118)
    by NYShooter on Tue May 19, 2009 at 08:18:40 PM EST
    I have a lot of friends in New Hampshire, and I love to kid them when I go up there on business, or just to visit. They have signs when you enter NH, "New Hampshire Welcomes Courteous Drivers." So I say to them, "what's with the signs? You folks drive like maniacs, and don't obey a single traffic rule; how come?" Without a moment's hesitation, or slightest bit of irony, they answer back, "cause they tell us we have to."


    Parent
    Alabama (none / 0) (#60)
    by jeffinalabama on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:08:31 PM EST
    has the click it or tiket going on. Got a 10 buck ticket, consider it a good reminder, I suppose.

    Parent
    Only 10 bucks? (none / 0) (#63)
    by kdog on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:14:19 PM EST
    I'm scared to look at what they jack you for in NY.

    Good luck btw jeff...sometimes losing a job is the best thing that can happen to a person, and I hope that is the case for you.

    Parent

    $50 in New York (none / 0) (#66)
    by eric on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:18:55 PM EST
    according to my info.  The fine in MN is going to be $25.  The law is set to go into effect on June 9, so I have a few weeks of freedom left.

    Parent
    Less and less all the time... (none / 0) (#69)
    by kdog on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:23:04 PM EST
    enjoy it while you can my friend...then enjoy it on the dodge...what choice do you have eh?  

    Parent
    Thanks... (none / 0) (#80)
    by kdog on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:36:42 PM EST
    I woulda guessed higher than 50...luckily I had it on or got in on quick when I've been pulled over.

    Note to self...it can always get worse:)

    Parent

    The tickets (none / 0) (#73)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:26:59 PM EST
    in WA are around $100, I believe.

    In Idaho, it's a $10 ticket.  

    I don't recall for certain, but I think the click it or ticket laws are required in states that want certain federal funding, which is why states like Alabama and Idaho have such laws with only $10 ticket enforcement.

    Parent

    Credit Card Issuers' Response to... (none / 0) (#50)
    by santarita on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:37:17 AM EST
    pending federal legislation is interesting.  According to the NYTimes, credit card issuers will start sticking it to their strongest customers by charging annual fees, reducing rewards and charging interest on purchases when made.  I give that plan about a year before one of the banks figures out that it can dominate the market by offering better terms.

    I had assumed (none / 0) (#51)
    by Steve M on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:41:04 AM EST
    that the banks dropped annual fees due to competition, not out of the goodness of their hearts.  Not sure what has changed.

    Parent
    That's Right... (none / 0) (#59)
    by santarita on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:07:26 PM EST
    they'll make a lot of noise but at the end of the day they'll each do whatever will give them a competitive advantage.   Making the conditions for use equally  disadvantageous for stronger and weaker borrowers is self-defeating.  The stronger borrowers will have other options and will migrate towards more advantageous deals.

    Parent
    Yeah, that's hilarious (none / 0) (#53)
    by andgarden on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:44:01 AM EST
    If the card companies start doing this, their good customers will just switch to debit cards. Though interestingly, Amex still charges for its charge cards.

    Oh, and the idea that they'd get rid of "the float" for customers who pay in full. . . that's going to have to be met with legislation too. I would propose an amendment to the bill requiring that "the float" be maintained by all issuers.

    Parent

    There's a shorter and shorter period (none / 0) (#72)
    by imhotep on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:26:20 PM EST
    between the time you get the statement and the due date. I have about 14 days to get my payment to them.
    However, my department store card gives me almost 4 weeks.

    Parent
    Costco (none / 0) (#79)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:36:16 PM EST
    Amex doesn't charge an annual fee.

    Parent
    But that's probably a credit card (none / 0) (#83)
    by andgarden on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:43:04 PM EST
    I'm talking about the traditional charge cards (green, gold, platinum, etc.).

    Parent
    I read that this morning... (none / 0) (#56)
    by vml68 on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:52:45 AM EST
    apparently the reasoning is that the "strongest" customers will have to help subsidize the losses from the "weaker" customers.

    I use my credit cards for the rewards and always pay my balance in full every month. If I have to start paying annual fees and interest immediately, I for one will be using only my debit cards or cash.

    Parent

    Always room on the cash and carry... (none / 0) (#57)
    by kdog on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:57:04 AM EST
    train vml...greed will kill these leeches if we only let it...hear that Uncle Sam?  No TARP for them!  Please!

    Parent
    Good to hear from you kdog.... (none / 0) (#77)
    by vml68 on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:31:38 PM EST
    Honestly speaking, I am hoping I don't have to give up on the CC, it is muy convenient. I hate carrying cash so if you see a little asian(or latina...according to everyone I meet) woman paying for a $1 purchase with a CC, it's moi!!

    How was the cruise? I have been busy so haven't been keeping up with the TL posts. Did you bet on Rachel A on saturday? I meant to and completely forgot so was kicking myself most of the day. Oh well, I gamble enough with the market so holding on to my cash is never a bad thing.... :-)

    Parent

    I'm well... (none / 0) (#85)
    by kdog on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:47:15 PM EST
    good to see ya around young lady..you were missed.

    Here's the vacation recap you missed...it was the bomb-diggity:)

    If there is anything I can do to convince you to cash and carry let me know....me and my people need numbers to ensure the tyrannical dream of a cashless society doesn't come to fruition.  I'm the only oddball left at my office without direct deposit, and the bossman is kinda on my case about it.  I said you'll have to fire me, cuz I will never sign up for that sh&t, but I will galdly accept cash in lieu of a check:)

    I picked the filly but didn't bet her, the odds were too short for my liking, I skipped it.  If she is in the Belmont at better odds I'll make a wager...I hope she is entered, she would be worth a trip out to see it live.

    Parent

    Another reason why I live vicariously (none / 0) (#96)
    by vml68 on Tue May 19, 2009 at 01:54:10 PM EST
    through your posts!
    No week long torrid love affairs and sunrise spliffs for me....that darn strict Catholic upbringing must have had some effect on me even though I fought it all the way... :-)

    I remember my non-direct deposit days. My boss absolutely hated it because I never cashed my checks on time and lost quite a few of them. (Full disclosure: someone's dad used to indulge her quite a bit so she was not very responsible with money!) The company had to reissue my checks on a frequent basis, some two to three years out of date. They finally threatened to charge me a substantial fee for each reissue or not reissue checks until I got direct deposit. I finally caved in.

    Parent

    Never too late... (none / 0) (#97)
    by kdog on Tue May 19, 2009 at 02:00:37 PM EST
    to throw off the shackles of a strict catholic upbringing my friend...kinda like a reverse born-again:)

    Parent
    The Joke Will Be On Them... (none / 0) (#61)
    by santarita on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:10:31 PM EST
    when they realize that the stronger customers have gone elsewhere.  

    Parent
    I'm one of those (none / 0) (#81)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:37:53 PM EST
    who uses credit cards for the rewards (but pay in full every month).  I noticed that Discover now requires that you acquire $50 in rewards before you have your rewards debited back to your account.  The amt. used to be $20.

    Parent
    Lot's of Village buzz (none / 0) (#52)
    by KeysDan on Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:42:33 AM EST
    about Jennifer Granholm as a nominee to the Supreme Court.  The Michigan governor is ostensibly in town for car talk, but the visit is too juicy for them to let go.  I would guess that the real nominee would visit disguised as a walker for Bo.  From my point of view, it would be refreshing to have an Associate Justice who had broader experience and was not plucked from an appeals court, for a change. While the governor does seem well-qualified on many fronts, a little more denominational (or non-denominational) diversity is desirable. Six Catholics out of nine Justices is not reflective of all Americans.

    Hardin MT has offered to take 100 Gitmo (none / 0) (#67)
    by imhotep on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:22:18 PM EST
    detainees as reported in TP.
    http://thinkprogress.org/2009/05/18/hardin-montana-guantanamo/

    Let's give their economic development director a vote of support and at the same time let Dick Cheney know that his terrorists don't scare the good citizens of Hardin.

    Query re Glen Greenwald: (none / 0) (#75)
    by oculus on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:29:57 PM EST
    Boehlert, in Bloggers on the Bus, states during the primaries Greenwald was "agnostic."  See exceprt from Boehlert book in Greenwald's column today.  (Salon.com)  Is this accurate?

    Mine That Bird... (none / 0) (#76)
    by kdog on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:30:53 PM EST
    is this gelding the Rodney Dangerfield of racing or what?  Derby win, strong place in the Preakness, and now Mike Smith is jumping ship for a mount out in Cali.

    No respect I tell ya...no respect.  If the super-filly don't run, Borel might be back on...unless the Mine That Bird braintrust are holding a grudge.  With his closing prowess, the mile and a half might be his best distance if he's got something left in the tank after the first two legs.

    If the filly runs, I'm sticking with her...the class of the 3 year olds of any gender.

    My money (none / 0) (#84)
    by eric on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:44:41 PM EST
    is on Mine That Bird.  The only reason he didn't win the Preakness was that he ran out of track.  I doubt they will run Rachel Alexandra, anyway.

    Parent
    He should like the mile and a half..... (none / 0) (#88)
    by kdog on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:50:54 PM EST
    but Rachel is the class of the bunch...if she is in, hard to go against her.

    Parent
    Dems cave on Gitmo (none / 0) (#82)
    by jbindc on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:39:38 PM EST
    n a setback for President Barack Obama, Senate Democrats said Tuesday they will strip out $80 million in new funding in a wartime spending bill to begin the process of closing the Guantanamo detention facility.

    The action comes as Senate Republicans have warned that they will offer an amendment to the same $91.3 billion measure barring the administration from relocating any of the detainees to American soil.

    With the blessing of his party leaders, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) is expected to offer the language as an amendment to a $91.3 billion wartime spending bill that could come before the Senate as early as Tuesday.

    As reported from the Senate Appropriations Committee last week, the Senate bill provides the full $80 million sought by the Defense and Justice Departments to begin to carry out Obama's executive order that Guantanamo be closed by early next year.

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22677.html#ixzz0FyX85UOb&B
    Come on... (none / 0) (#86)
    by NJDem on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:48:16 PM EST
    Seriously? "Barack Obama 'breaks four aid pledges for Africa'"  The ONE good thing Bush did FP-wise!

    And in case anyone was wondering why Hait, link

    That would be Haiti (none / 0) (#87)
    by NJDem on Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:50:32 PM EST
    Sorry about your news Jeff--and that's ridiculous about your email account. I have a friend who has family down there, I'll ask him for any advice, etc.   Good luck in the meantime! :)

    Parent
    More broken promises (none / 0) (#99)
    by DancingOpossum on Tue May 19, 2009 at 02:33:16 PM EST
    for all those environmentalists who voted for him:

    CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- The Obama administration has cleared more than three-dozen new mountaintop removal permits for issuance by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, drawing quick criticism from environmental groups who had hoped the new president would halt the controversial practice.

    In a surprise announcement Friday, Rep. Nick J. Rahall said 42 of the 48 permits already examined by the U.S. Environmental Protection had been approved by EPA for issuance by the corps.

    I guess this is what West Virginia gets for going McCain.

    http://wvgazette.com/News/200905150759?page=1&build=cache

    (h/t to Peg at the Confluence)

    Emission control (none / 0) (#104)
    by DancingOpossum on Tue May 19, 2009 at 04:37:36 PM EST
    is part of Obama's larger plan for a cap-and-trade policy, which has proven a disaster wherever it's been been tried.

    Obama admininstration (none / 0) (#107)
    by oculus on Tue May 19, 2009 at 04:53:36 PM EST
    gets high approval rating for how it deals w/national security:

    link

    That just shows how... (none / 0) (#109)
    by kdog on Tue May 19, 2009 at 04:57:30 PM EST
    lame polls are...what the hell has changed except the face?

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#120)
    by DancingOpossum on Wed May 20, 2009 at 08:59:41 AM EST
    If cowering from TERRARISTS and slaughtering children and torturing Muslims keeps us safe when George Bush does it, then by golly it will keep us safe when Barack Obama does it! Thank the good Lord our new president has not brought that much "change!"

    Tuesday Morning Open Thread | 121 comments (121 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment