home

Tuesday Night Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 09:10:58 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Our earlier open thread is full. While I catch up the day's news, here's another one, all topics welcome.

< Obama Pushes Congress to Avoid Shutdown | What's Affected If There Is a Government Shutdown? >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Tuesday Night Open Thread | 196 comments (196 topical)
    Steeplechase (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by Harry Saxon on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 11:31:27 PM EST
    like you've never seen it before:

    When Regina Mayer's parents dashed her hopes of getting a horse, the resourceful 15-year-old didn't sit in her room and sulk. Instead, she turned to a cow called Luna to make her riding dreams come true.

    Hours of training, and tons of treats, cajoling and caresses later, the results are impressive: not only do the two regularly go on long rides through the southern German countryside, they do jumps over a makeshift hurdle of beer crates and painted logs.


    Click or Steeplechase Me

    That's awesome (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by sj on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:47:57 AM EST
    My Dad usually kept a couple of cows.  We often had fresh clotted cream (yum) that my Dad would prepare.  Oh and a sweet kind of cheese that looked kind of like a brick of cottage cheese.  And then, of course, there's the beef eventually.

    We never thought of riding them, though.

    I miss my Daddy.  I can't believe we never got those recipes from him.  What were we thinking?  

    Parent

    My dad rode the older bull calves (none / 0) (#38)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:32:29 AM EST
    when he was kid and his parents had to go town for something.  Not in a good way either in my grandfather's opinion.  He and his friends used to get in big trouble for it, they were doing rodeo practice I guess.  It would seem that a cow must be broke to ride just like a horse.  They do use bucking straps at the rodeos to encourage the mature bulls to buck.  If they didn't, I guess maybe some of them wouldn't buck?

    Parent
    That's so cool (none / 0) (#37)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:26:14 AM EST
    Can we finally get her a horse now?  A thing that surprised me a couple of years ago too is that Rottweillers were bred to be carting dogs.  I guess we don't need the service now, so the knowledge and the deed died off.  But some people who raise them in Macon GA decided to give it a try with theirs.  And when you go to the shows in Perry GA if you are going to be there for a weekend you usually rent a golf cart to cover the distances because it is a very big facility, unless you have carting Rottweilers.  Then you drive your Rottweiler around.

    Parent
    I wanna... (none / 0) (#114)
    by sj on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:23:32 PM EST
    ... drive a Rottweiler!

    Parent
    I need (none / 0) (#40)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:37:21 AM EST
    video

    Parent
    Here you go (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by Zorba on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 10:22:01 AM EST
    Link

    Parent
    that was very (5.00 / 2) (#63)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 10:36:26 AM EST
    moooooooving

    Parent
    LOL! (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by Zorba on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 11:29:34 AM EST
    Bad pun, Captain, bad pun!  Go to your room!   ;-)

    Parent
    Do not be cowed (5.00 / 2) (#161)
    by Peter G on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:36:03 PM EST
    by an order to go to your room.  And no, I am not trying to milk this any more than necessary.

    Parent
    You guys are really cheesy (5.00 / 2) (#175)
    by vicndabx on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:58:06 PM EST


    Parent
    On a day of good news (5.00 / 1) (#187)
    by CoralGables on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:16:14 PM EST
    from the land of the cheeseheads, cheesy is good.

    Parent
    Does this mean you are (none / 0) (#180)
    by Anne on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:02:58 PM EST
    lactose-intolerant?

    Parent
    Just another reason why I miss (5.00 / 3) (#193)
    by Peter G on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:38:54 PM EST
    Cream City so much.

    Parent
    I miss Cream City, too. : (. (5.00 / 2) (#196)
    by caseyOR on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:49:23 PM EST
    If you still read the comments here, CC, I'm thinking of you, fighting the good fight up in Wisconsin.

    Parent
    Me, three... :-( (5.00 / 2) (#198)
    by Anne on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:58:47 PM EST
    we could really use her insights these days - and not just on Wisconsin.

    If you're reading, Cream, hope you and your family are well.

    <3

    Parent

    And she should have (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by Zorba on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:18:55 PM EST
    used an Angus cow (if they're available in Germany).  They're stellar jumpers- don't ask me how I know.  ;-)

    Parent
    NCAA Hoops Finals: (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by brodie on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 10:39:27 AM EST
    This year, the women played far more exciting championship games than did the men.  Back and forth, both teams about equally matched, both with one star player and a good supporting cast.  For Notre Dame, I thought their outstanding guard, Skylar Diggins, not only had a cool name but a cool game.  Alas, the TX A&M defense was so feisty that they forced Diggins into a crunch time turnover which doomed the Irish chances.

    The women:  more fun to watch, but as with the men, the defenses are ahead of the offense.  The women need to develop their ball-handling and passing skills, and quickness, to keep pace with the increasingly sophisticated and determined defenses.

    The men:  obviously in need of better shooters.  That or the huge arena they played in for the final four threw off their depth perception as they lined up outside shots.  Or a little of both. Whatever, the championship game was a bore and almost an embarrassment for the sport.  Lowest combined score for a final since 1949 and the presidency of Harold Truman.

    WOW. (Unofficial) Wisconsin tally (5.00 / 3) (#151)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:22:48 PM EST
    is a difference of only 114 votes -- as of about 3 p.m. Eastern time, with the last precinct reported at last.  This is the Associated Press count, though, and not the official state election commission count.  Plus AP keeps rechecking its tallies, with its final-if-unofficial count to come late this afternoon.  Then the media will declare a winner, which looks to be Kloppenburg.  But until the state declares a winner, and then declares the need for the automatic recount with such a margin and/or until the official loser requests it -- well, this will unravel for messy months ahead.

    114 votes.  Amazing.  That's about one-tenth of one percent, I think.  Thank heavens that it was "Democratic weather" in Wisconsin in early April!

    thats a heckuva lot better (5.00 / 3) (#156)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:26:16 PM EST
    than losing by 114 votes

    Parent
    If Sunday's weather had waited 48 hours (none / 0) (#162)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:36:51 PM EST
    imagine the impact on turnout.  The photos of those hailstorms in Milwaukee and Madison were amazing, too -- and as it was, the damage done to a lot of homes without roofs and cars in the shop now may have cut back on turnout a bit.

    I was quite surprised to read of the weather there in Wisconsin on Sunday, since we had such a wonderful warm day in the Chicago area.  Did you get out for a walk Sunday night, too, when it still was in the 70s?  While it was almost down to freezing just a bit to the north of us in Wisconsin?  Weird.  But that's "spring" here.

    Parent

    "Spring" around here too (none / 0) (#168)
    by CST on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:41:49 PM EST
    a couple days ago we had snow.  Before that it was 70.  It will be 70 again in a few days.  Honestly for all the handwringing in the media about an April snow storm, they aren't that infrequent.  I remember a few years back when it snowed in VT on Memorial day, and that's only a few hours north.

    Course 70 in April is also not weird.  There is very little weather-wise that would qualify as weird around here.  IMO, it's better than the alternative of no/boring/always hot weather.  I think the smell alone in the spring and fall make up for it.  But then I don't have allergies :)

    Parent

    I am getting used to it (none / 0) (#169)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:42:02 PM EST
    it has been frigid here all week and it is supposed to be 80 this weekend.
    but no, I had no idea about the bad weather until you were talking about it.

    Parent
    Obama (3.00 / 3) (#77)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 11:45:41 AM EST
    Made appointed the first female leader of a major political party.  And then followed up by making the temporary party leader (to facilitate the transition) a woman as well.

    That guy just hates women.

    #stillangryatpumas

    Thanks (5.00 / 2) (#87)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:10:40 PM EST
    for proving how fact free your posts are. Obama has a problem with women because of what he has done and appointing DWS is not going to change that. The reason Obama is polling so poorly with women is because of his policy decisions like Stupak.

    Parent
    I don't know that I would use "hate," (5.00 / 2) (#94)
    by Anne on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:28:11 PM EST
    but I do think he has a problem with strong and independent women, which is why he tends to compartmentalize and co-opt them with high-level appointments, bringing them to the inside, so they won't make any trouble for him on the outside.

    Are these accomplished women?  Of course.  And their accomplishments will serve him well, but let's face it: he's making moves to shore up his problems with the female vote.

    If it weren't for the kinds of things women tend not to forget - like his hedged support for reproductive freedom (we need to make decisions with the help of the men in our lives), and using us as bargaining chips in the health whatever kabuki, the DWS appointment might help.

    But too many of us know political manipulation when we see it to think it will be enough.

    [and, by the way - #stillangryatpumas?  gosh, we'd never have figured that out without the tag line]

    Parent

    Well if he has a problem (none / 0) (#97)
    by brodie on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:46:09 PM EST
    with strong and independent women, he's probably not unlike a lot of modern men, particularly of his generation, in that respect.  

    But he also seems not to have too much of a problem with them since he married one -- Michelle also being his former assigned mentor (or was it boss?) at his first law firm job.  Now that's really bringing them to the inside ...

    Parent

    Yeah (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:04:39 PM EST
    but Michelle really defers to him or so it seems. I'm not condemning her for that just to let you know. That's her choice and her life. I mean anybody who says "if you can't run your own house you can't run the White House" is someone who is not an independent woman. That is something that would come out of a conservative's mouth.

    He does seem to have a problem with non-deferring women though. He does not come across as very "woman friendly" and apparently a lot of women are picking up on that.

    Parent

    I really don't like (none / 0) (#110)
    by CST on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:12:28 PM EST
    these kinds of blanket statements:

    anyone who says "...." is not an independent woman.

    Unless that blank is filled in with something like "women should not be independent"

    Was it an nice thing to say?  No. Petty ans judgemental?  Yes.  Dependent?  Not really.  In fact, in a way it's almost putting too much power/blame on the woman.  As if everything should be and is within our control.

    And there are independent conservative women, they're not mutually exclusive ideas.

    Parent

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:30:13 PM EST
    the "control" of the house is mainly a conservative idea because that's where they think a woman belongs.

    Parent
    well (none / 0) (#127)
    by CST on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:36:56 PM EST
    I think it's pretty clear she doesn't think a woman belongs only in her house.

    Parent
    Really? (none / 0) (#130)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:42:34 PM EST
    I'm not sure about that. Maybe she worked because she had to and would rather not have? That statement wouldn't be made by any independent woman that I know of.  

    Parent
    The reality of the situation (none / 0) (#148)
    by CST on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:19:24 PM EST
    doesn't really support this opinion.  She continued working after he started making a bunch of money on his books.  And her mom didn't work, but her family was pretty broke, and they managed to make it work obviously as she went on to do quite well - so if she really felt that way she would have had a pretty strong role model for that type of thing.

    In any event, I'm just uncomfortable with judging a woman's "independence" based on something that flimsy.  I think everyone has something in their life you could hold up and say that about.  But when you look at the big picture it doesn't really support that.

    Parent

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:39:27 PM EST
    to hear her talk back in '08, she said things that implied they didn't have any money because they had school loans and other things etc.  She made it sound like they were financially struggling.

    Parent
    If I recall correctly (none / 0) (#172)
    by CST on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:52:43 PM EST
    I thought that was "until a few years ago" we were still paying our student loans, etc...  And not that they didn't have any money, just that they weren't rolling in it.

    The Obama's were comfortably middle class, which no-doubt in this day and age can include student loan woes, especially with two post-grad degrees.  Speaking as someone who is squarely in that demographic, complete with the debt axe hanging over head.

    But that's another good example.  If she secretly wanted to be a stay at home mom all this time (which i feel like should be mentioned - is a valid option as well) why get the graduate degree at all?  Why take on that debt?  It doesn't make any sense.  Without that debt it's a lot easier to live on 1 income.

    But Obama was a very successfull/popular author.  And after he got famous his books started raking in some serious dough.  And she continued working after that.

    Parent

    There's (none / 0) (#174)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:57:51 PM EST
    a lot of women who do get graduate degrees and stay at home. Michelle Bachmann has two or three degrees I think and she talks incessantly about her foster children and home schooling her children so getting the degrees really doesn't mean that much in the scheme of things.

    Actually, I think Michelle was the breadwinner until Obama won the presidency. I read where she made $300,000 a year at the hospital starting in 2004 or 2005.

    Parent

    If your only reason (none / 0) (#183)
    by CST on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:08:59 PM EST
    for not staying at home is finances, you don't get the degree.

    I agree there are stay at home moms with graduate degrees.  But I don't think there are many women who sit around thinking "gee if only I had more money I would be a stay at home mom" and then go out and get a masters degree.

    I know she was the breadwinner early on.  But in the later years, that number was dwarfed by the amount from book sales.

    "In 2004, before Mr. Obama was elected to the Senate, the Obamas reported $207,647 in taxable income. That compared with an overall taxable income of $1.6 million in 2005 and $983,826 in 2006, with the increase due to an advance and royalties from his books, "Dreams From My Father" and "The Audacity of Hope.""

    Link

    She was still working full time in 05 and 06, switched to part time in '07 for the campaign (but she still worked part time while her husband was running for president and they had a few million dollars - I think that tells you all you need to know).

    Parent

    Speaking of work...am I the only one (5.00 / 2) (#192)
    by Anne on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:33:30 PM EST
    who remembers that she had Obama go with her to meet Valerie Jarrett, when Michelle was being recruited by Valerie for a job with the city?

    Katie Couric: You first met the Obamas when you tried to hire Michelle.

    Valerie Jarrett: I did.

    Katie Couric: for a job.

    Valerie Jarrett: I was trying to recruit her into city government when I was Mayor Daley's deputy chief of staff. And I was successful.

    Katie Couric: And before she took the job, she wanted you to meet her fiance?

    Valerie Jarrett: She did. In fact the three of us had dinner - she had some serious reservations about whether she's going to leave the practice of law and leap into the mayor's office in a political environment. And the two of them said 'How about we have dinner and go out and talk this through.' And I knew that unless this conversation ended well, probably the two of them were gonna go home and say, "Well, not so much. Maybe that's not the right move." So at the end of the dinner I did say 'well, did I pass the test?' And we laughed and she of course she did come and join us, and made a huge difference.

    It's been spun in many directions, but there was quite a bit of hoo-hah over that when it first came out, as I recall.

    Parent

    That (5.00 / 2) (#195)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:42:01 PM EST
    was weird. Who takes their husband to a job interview?

    Parent
    Fiance, not husband (5.00 / 1) (#197)
    by sj on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:53:36 PM EST
    He wasn't even her husband yet.  He was her husband-to-be.  Very weird.

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#185)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:13:56 PM EST
    Michelle got all those degrees before she even married Obama so that's really a moot point.

    Parent
    and couple million he made in '05 and '06 (none / 0) (#186)
    by CST on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:15:24 PM EST
    Also moot?

    Parent
    She (none / 0) (#188)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:19:47 PM EST
    cut back her hours did she not? There was no reason for her to cut back in 2007. Which is fine by the way.

    Parent
    she was campaigning (none / 0) (#190)
    by CST on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:23:36 PM EST
    pretty hard in 2007.  I'd say that's a pretty good reason.  Maybe spouses shouldn't be invloved in presidential campaigns but that's not the reality of the situation.  Bill Clinton cut back his hours on non-campaign stuff too but I don't see anyone accusing him of wanting to stay home.  

    And by then, there was no financial reason to keep any hours.

    Parent

    Michelle was always the bread-winner (5.00 / 1) (#179)
    by caseyOR on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:01:14 PM EST
    in the family. Obama's salaries as a part-time state senator and part-time law school lecturer amounted to not very much money. Michelle, who was a top-level executive with the University of Chicago hospital system, earned in the mid-six figures.

    Obama didn't start to make big money from his books until he ran for president. And Michelle kept her job, although she took a leave of absence to campaign, until Obama won.

    Since I am not privy to the details of their marriage, I have no idea if Michelle is a subservient partner or not. I do know that a working woman can be the "lesser" person in the marriage, and a stay-at-home wife can be the dominant one.

    Parent

    agree 100% with your last paragraph (none / 0) (#184)
    by CST on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:12:02 PM EST
    I took issue with the assumption that she thinks a woman's place is "in the home".  Which subservient or not (who the hell knows), is not the role she has etched out for herself.

    Parent
    I don't think Michelle's comment (5.00 / 2) (#189)
    by caseyOR on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:23:33 PM EST
    about "if you can't run your own house. . ." was anything more than a particularly snotty remark meant to remind voters, as if we are ever going to be allowed to forget, of the Lewinsky matter.

    It was a cheap shot. Elizabeth Edwards made similar snotty comments about the Hillary in regard to the Lewinsky matter. I do not think those remarks meant that either Michelle or Elizabeth, both lawyers and very accomplished women in their own right, harbored secret desires to be stay-at-home wives.

    Parent

    It was a Chicagan talking to Iowans (5.00 / 1) (#191)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:27:58 PM EST
    and was not appreciated by some of them, either, as I remember reading in the Des Moines Register, especially some women lawyers who had hoped to hear a more advanced message from one of their own.  And not only the women working in the towns and cities but also the farmwomen who work at home, and in the barns, and in the fields, etc.  

    Parent
    It was many (5.00 / 1) (#194)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:41:07 PM EST
    people's first exposure to Michelle wherein she did not help herself with that comment.

    Parent
    Let's don't read too much (none / 0) (#113)
    by brodie on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:23:15 PM EST
    into Michelle deferring to him.  After all, he was the one elected, not her.  And they both probably are quite familiar with how FL Hillary was excoriated in the media for being too aggressive in advising on policy as opposed to being more of a traditional FL who is supposed to deal in more traditional FL feminine things that don't intrude on the president's terrain.

    As for judging how public men treat women, usually one indicia is the type of women they surround themselves with.  So, reading Obama bringing in strong-minded women for some negative purpose akin to keeping your enemies closer just seems a very harsh and probably inaccurate reading of the guy's attitude.

    Not that along the way with some of his various cultural influences he didn't pick up some backward and traditional notions of womenhood -- but if so, they don't seem to me to dominate other more enlightened influences he's had.

    Parent

    Actually (none / 0) (#122)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:32:09 PM EST
    I do largely agree with your first paragraph and I could consider it more of a fear of doing something on Michelle's part as much as Obama has the same fears of changing the trajectory on any issue.

    Parent
    I am pleased with the appointment of DWS (none / 0) (#80)
    by lilburro on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 11:49:55 AM EST
    but FYI, she will not be the first woman to hold the position of DNC chair.  

    Parent
    I remember the (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by brodie on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:01:19 PM EST
    first one --Jean Westwood, a McGovern appointee after he'd won the nomination, but who lasted only a few months after McG got blown out in the election.  The party reacted by going hard to its corporatist win for Texan (DINO) Rbt Strauss -- who then helped pave the way for the more centrist Jimmy Carter to win the next election.

    The second woman DNC Chair I don't recall -- the delightful Debra DeLee.  Perhaps that was the year the MSM was screaming about Whitewater and nothing else ...

    Parent

    You beat me to it (none / 0) (#86)
    by Zorba on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:07:46 PM EST
    By 2+ minutes.  I do remember Debra DeLee (as I remember Jean Westwood- you're right, she didn't last long).

    Parent
    I stand corrected (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:21:52 PM EST
    I read it on one of the blogs promoting the story.

    You learn something new everyday.

    Parent

    Regardless (5.00 / 0) (#101)
    by lilburro on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:52:11 PM EST
    of the fact that she's not first, I do think it's a good selection by Obama.  She's pretty fearless.  She's also good at raking in money.  Hopefully she'll have something to offer in terms of strategy.  I still have basically no idea of what if anything Kaine did as chair.

    Parent
    What do you remember (none / 0) (#90)
    by brodie on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:21:45 PM EST
    of Debra DeLee?  Who was she?

    Parent
    I mainly remember (none / 0) (#95)
    by Zorba on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:30:30 PM EST
    that she was touted at the time as being the second female DNC chair, and that she was a Chicago politician.  Oh, and that she was succeeded by Chris Dodd.

    Parent
    Jean Miles Westwood (none / 0) (#84)
    by Zorba on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:03:47 PM EST
    was the first female DNC Chairperson.  Debra DeLee was the second.  

    Parent
    Re: KSM & Gitmo (none / 0) (#1)
    by lilburro on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 09:39:02 PM EST
    Apparently, the Gitmo provisions of the funding bill were only applicable for 9 months.  As signed by Obama.  FDL.  So...until I understand otherwise, the decision to try KSM at Gitmo was not forced.  The question is, why now?  Am I missing something that made that necessary?  Because I doubt it.

    on the nine monts (none / 0) (#7)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 10:15:52 PM EST
    and possible alternative funding, we reported that at the time. And on speculation Obama would issue a signing statement here. In this post, after Obama's statement on the bill, I wrote:

    I was wondering about the possibility of the use of non-governmental or unrestricted funds to move the detainees. Why can't that happen? How much could it cost to fly the remaining detainees to a facility in the U.S. and for related expenses, including the cost of the military personnel who accompany them? Maybe other countries would donate the amount, or some non-profits? Maybe Obama has a discretionary spending fund? Maybe it could come out of the Justice Department or DEA's budget. Could the cost be more than the DEA's excellent African adventures?

    Congress didn't ban federal criminal trials for the detainees, just funds for their transfer to the U.S. It also placed restrictions on transferring them to third countries, but those can be gotten around by bringing them here. Once they are in, say New York, and charges are filed against them, New York's senators would be clamoring in a minute for federal funds for security and trials. Since they were a huge impetus in passing the funding ban, it could be the shortest route to a repeal.

    Obama has to know there are other options. The question is, will he use them? And if not, how can he maintain he's serious about closing Guantanamo and expect us to believe him?



    Parent
    Your reporting on the subject (none / 0) (#11)
    by lilburro on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 10:26:29 PM EST
    has been excellent.  Sadly, I didn't pay much mind to the whole charade because I trusted it was a charade.  Apparently it was not.  In your post more recently you asked why the DoJ hasn't been more imaginative, and those questions still remain.  This was not a forced hand, IMO.  What they are doing is simply sad.  Am I missing why this could not have been delayed for a few more months, beyond political reasons?

    Parent
    The Politics of Paul Ryan's Medicare plan (none / 0) (#2)
    by Politalkix on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 09:48:34 PM EST
    From the NY Times....
    link

    I think what they are missing with the (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by nycstray on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 11:24:27 PM EST
    55 and under is . . . . some of us have been paying in for 25-30yrs already . . . . and they think if they don't p*ss off seniors they're ok?

    The last thing I want is a voucher to help with paying for private insurance that I can't afford . . .

    Parent

    Debbie Wasserman Schultz (none / 0) (#3)
    by Politalkix on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 09:59:11 PM EST
    tapped as DNC chair. Good choice!
    Tim Kaine will run for Senate.

    Now that I can get behind (none / 0) (#9)
    by lilburro on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 10:18:59 PM EST
    She is hardnosed, and great on TV.  I also more or less trust her instincts (more than Kaine's).  I can't recall a single television appearance by Kaine.  I am sure DWS can do better.  Kaine was just...there.  Bleugh.

    Parent
    The problem with DWS (none / 0) (#10)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 10:23:24 PM EST
    is that she's too cozy with her Republican colleagues from Florida. The whole delegation seems to be that way.

    Parent
    In comparison to Kaine (none / 0) (#13)
    by lilburro on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 10:29:44 PM EST
    she seems like an absolute soldier.  At least, she's someone who is willing and familiar with the concept of "fighting."  Kaine seems more or less like Bob Casey to me (pro-life Dem).  I'm not all that familiar with her relationship with colleagues in FL.  It's sad to realize though that Dean as the head of the DNC seems at the moment impossible.

    Parent
    Kaine isn't pro choice (none / 0) (#14)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 10:31:43 PM EST
    but I think he does some sort of contorted dance about how that impacts his politics.

    And given the way he has acted in office, we should be so lucky to have more Bob Caseys and fewer Republicans in the Senate.

    Parent

    Yeah (none / 0) (#17)
    by lilburro on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 10:36:18 PM EST
    but these guys all blend in with the wallpaper.  I have a hard time imagining who takes the torch from Obama in 2016, and part of it is that most Dems being highlighted on the national scene are just lazy/noncommital.

    Parent
    Gillibrand is a very interesting possibility (none / 0) (#20)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 10:38:58 PM EST
    Problem is that I don't think she's ideologically reliable.

    Parent
    She might end up being reliable (none / 0) (#22)
    by nycstray on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 11:18:32 PM EST
    as she's going defined left on issues that weak left is well, weak on. She's creating a 'record' . . .

    I like her a lot. She's got smarts and spunk. And really seems invested in the issues she takes on.

    Parent

    Very interesting Politician (none / 0) (#30)
    by NYShooter on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:14:18 AM EST
    Gillibrand has surprised a lot of folks in the cool way she's handled herself since being appointed, then elected, Senator in Mississippi, oops, I mean upstate NY. While she was (understandably & necessarily) slightly right-of-center as a Rep, she slid leftward effortlessly upon moving to The Big house.

    Also interesting, being a Democrat, and winning in upstate NY, while John Hall, also having done a pretty good job, losing to that phony, creepy, dr. nan hayworth right next door in Dutchess County.

    Gillibrand, certainly one to watch.

    Parent

    "Ideologically Reliable" (none / 0) (#96)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:45:07 PM EST
    Great phrase.  Are you angling for a job in the intelligence community, And?

    Parent
    Not sure that's a fair (none / 0) (#48)
    by CoralGables on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:49:55 AM EST
    opinion. She has stated she won't "campaign against" three South Florida politicians, but only two are still in office. Friendships do at times outweigh politics.

    Parent
    Those kinds of nonaggression pacts (none / 0) (#49)
    by andgarden on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:51:59 AM EST
    are pernicious. Would you be so accepting of the arrangement if they were serving in the Florida state senate?

    Parent
    Accepting (none / 0) (#53)
    by CoralGables on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:55:51 AM EST
    is probably the proper term for me. On the surface I can be totally anti-republican but I do have republican friends. Would I openly campaign against them? Probably not, but that doesn't mean I would vote for them.

    Parent
    Yes (none / 0) (#31)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 07:17:54 AM EST
    this is interesting. She is much, much better than Tim Kaine who I thought was abysmal. Apparently, another reason she was picked was due to her ties with Hillary and the fact that Obama has huge problems with women voters. I don't really think she'll help Obama with women voters but I do think that maybe she'll help with some down ticket races.

    Parent
    I see it as a corralling of potential (none / 0) (#33)
    by Anne on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 08:32:28 AM EST
    troublemakers for the purpose of guaranteeing their cooperation; I expect more of these kinds of moves in the next six months.

    And, given the Sunday news shows' general aversion to strong women, I'm pretty sure they will find ways to leave Wasserman Schultz out of the lineup as much as they can; they will see nothing wrong with getting someone not even in a DNC leadership role to come on and discuss these things.

    Parent

    Local news reports (none / 0) (#4)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 10:13:37 PM EST
    that little league volunteers are being fingerprinted in order to qualify for some kind of grant.

    I'm still waiting for dugout magnetometers. Think of the children!

    Ugh. . . (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 10:31:58 PM EST


    Parent
    Given the number of convicted child (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by oculus on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 11:49:16 PM EST
    molesters who volunteer for such organizations, as well as scouts, etc., this is an excellent idea.  The non-profit organization which runs the tutoring for which I volunteer requires all employees and volunteer to be fingerprinted.  My suggestion.

    Parent
    I suppose there must be more such people (none / 0) (#27)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 11:52:07 PM EST
    than terrorists, but it still seem strange to me.

    Parent
    Honestly (none / 0) (#28)
    by nycstray on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:03:29 AM EST
    this is the one area where I would give up my no drug testing, no background check etc stance (for me personally).

    I've worked in kid programs and if I chose to do so again, it's one place where I would bow to certain tests/backgrounds that I would never do for an employer/etc. But that would be my personal choice, and I would check them out as to what and how they were going to use/do with the info. And how protected it is.

    Parent

    My brother... (none / 0) (#52)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:54:08 AM EST
    is a major pothead like myself...and the best Little League coach in all of his town's little league...they were even begging him to run the league when my nephew got too old to play LL.

    Drug testing is even more wrongheaded than fingerprinting...and thats saying something.

    If parents are that worried, they need to get off their arse and go to all the practices and games and watch their kids...not make the volunteer suffer background check nation idiginities.

    Parent

    Kdog, the background checks (none / 0) (#61)
    by Zorba on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 10:25:40 AM EST
    and fingerprinting are everywhere now, even for volunteers.  I have a friend who had to get both to be a volunteer Church School teacher.  If you work with kids anywhere, even as a volunteer, you're going to be told you need to be fingerprinted and get a background check.

    Parent
    The ship has sailed I guess... (none / 0) (#66)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 10:39:15 AM EST
    we're all suspect...what a way to live.

    Sh*t to become an authorized service agent for some of the manufacturers I work with ya gotta get printed.  Might need to provide elementary school transcripts too:)  Coming soon...eye scans and sperm samples!

    Ya know where this broken record stands...we've lost our collective minds around here...for real.

    Parent

    We're closer (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Zorba on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 11:26:36 AM EST
    to the movie Minority Report than I ever thought possible.  We will (sooner probably rather than later) have national ID's that will carry biometric information- things like fingerprints and retinal scans, and eventually our DNA fingerprints.  Heck, why don't they just implant us with microchips when we're born?  (Maybe I shouldn't give them any ideas.)  I'm sure that law enforcement agencies absolutely love the idea of having more and more fingerprints available in their data bases.  All of this is being done/will be done in the name of protecting the children and fighting terrorism.  The Bill of Rights is shriveling up and the Founding Fathers are weeping in their graves.  (Sorry I'm so negative today- maybe I woke up on the wrong side of the bed, but I really hate the direction this country is going, in so very many ways.)

    Parent
    How could ya not be negative... (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 11:42:05 AM EST
    with these troubling trends...I hear ya.  

    But here's a positive thought...despite all of these efforts, the human will can still conquer...remember the little kid who was able to sneak on airplanes more than once?  Even the creepy Salahis crashing the WH party... positive signs, disregarding the righteousness or lack there of in their actions, just what they were able to do in spite of security and background check measures.  

    Like in "Minority Report" or most any other dystopian tale...the hero finds a way around the even the tightest security.  John Anderton gets an eye transplant to beat the scanners. If I get stuck and have to go to JP Morgan Fingerprintin' Chase Bank to cash my check, I can Krazy-Glue my fingertips.

    The human will is a tough nut to crack...so we got that going for us Z:)

    Parent

    The future is now, Kdog! (none / 0) (#98)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:46:57 PM EST
    Guilty until proven innocent.

    Parent
    Looking for a job... (none / 0) (#142)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:07:17 PM EST
    is one thing...ya gotta eat so some indignity will need to be suffered.  It ain't right but ya gotta eat.

    Looking to volunteer?  One must suffer indignity to volunteer to serve their community gratis?  I'd be like "f8ck you fingerprint taker-man and the community that brung ya!"

    Parent

    Given the number... (none / 0) (#41)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:37:35 AM EST
    of stand up individuals who volunteer massively outnumber the bad apples, and suffering the indignity of fingerprinting could cause a decrease in willing volunteers, I think its a terrible idea.

    Would Buttermaker even pass the screening? :)

    Not to mention I would imagine most of the sickos looking to use little league as their stomping grounds are most likely of the unconvicted variety.

    Little League and similar volunteers put in a lot of time, work, effort for the kids on top of full time jobs and normal responsibilities...and put up with a lot of headaches from uncooth parents.  Now people wanna add the central booking treatment to that plate?  Allrighty then...way to give somebody incentive to teach your little brat to hit the cutoff man!

    Parent

    It would have been (none / 0) (#92)
    by Zorba on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:24:21 PM EST
    nice if The Candie's Foundation used that $262,500 to help out a few poor unwed mothers instead.  Help them with baby food and diapers, help them finish their education, help them with rent.  You know, stuff like that.

    Parent
    Oh, and WI-SC is crazy close (none / 0) (#6)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 10:14:25 PM EST
    I think this one is going to be within 20,000 votes.

    Also, lovely karma for Rep. Paul Ryan (5.00 / 0) (#104)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:56:31 PM EST
    on the day that Wisconsin's Eddie Munster lookalike got to debut the Republicans' awful budget proposal.

    His district went very strongly Democratic yesterday (well, it went against Prosser in the "nonpartisan" race, anyway).  Mr. Ryan has some 'splaining to do to the folks back home, huh?

    Parent

    More karma is coming in the recount (5.00 / 0) (#178)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:00:56 PM EST
    of the high court race, as I just was reading about the process that starts soon -- and of course, who will be handling the recounts in every town and village and city and county all across the state?

    Public employees!

    Too bad that the recount will have to be slowed down by their continuing furloughs at the state level and in some of the larger cities, as they wait to see if even worse hits to their paychecks are ahead -- in part depending, of course, on who ends up on the state high court.  

    Parent

    Follow (none / 0) (#8)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 10:17:24 PM EST
    here if you want something to do. We want Kloppenburg.

    Parent
    Milwaukee is voting oddly (none / 0) (#21)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 10:40:04 PM EST
    If it reverted to partisan form, we'd be well-ahead.

    Parent
    Almost everything is in (none / 0) (#23)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 11:20:27 PM EST
    and Kloppenburg has a ~4k vote lead out of a little more than 1.3M cast. ARGH!

    Parent
    Less than 150 ahead Wednesday morning (none / 0) (#47)
    by Peter G on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:48:40 AM EST
    with ten precincts not counted!

    Parent
    TMJ has newer numbers now (none / 0) (#51)
    by andgarden on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:53:14 AM EST
    K ahead by more than 300 votes.

    Parent
    Up (none / 0) (#55)
    by CoralGables on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 10:04:59 AM EST
    447

    Parent
    recount? (none / 0) (#56)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 10:10:46 AM EST
    up by over a thousand now

    Parent
    oops (none / 0) (#57)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 10:11:38 AM EST
    553

    Parent
    yikes (none / 0) (#65)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 10:37:37 AM EST
    4 to go and we are just over 200 ahead

    Parent
    Milwaukee vote not odd at all (none / 0) (#64)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 10:36:59 AM EST
    according to relatives there.  You're seeing the county vote.  The city of Milwaukee is Democratic, but the suburbs are Republican and outnumber the city by far.  Plus, I'm told that no one remembers Kloppenburg ever coming to campaign in Milwaukee, and her campaign didn't even have signs available there, so people pooled with friends to print their own signs.  The campaign missed a lot of votes there, including on the campuses there and at UW-Madison, which was reported as having only half the student turnout compared to elections just last fall.  The state Democrats are dismal and simply were not prepared to push against Prosser, who won something like 99 percent-plus of the vote in his (only) campaign last time.  Kloppenburg was a sacrificial lamb until Walker made this a race.

    Parent
    I was wondering how she (none / 0) (#68)
    by brodie on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 10:44:32 AM EST
    would do with the Dem minority voters in the cities.  We can't win usually unless they turn out.  And those student voter reports are depressing but not surprising.  Getting that age group to turn out in significant numbers for anything but a presidential race is usually a tough task.

    But a win's a win, even if by only a few hundred votes -- assuming it holds up on recount.  And I can't imagine Prosser being allowed to vote himself on the recount's validity -- clear conflict of interest.

    Parent

    Student turnout always very good (none / 0) (#69)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 11:05:07 AM EST
    in Wisconsin in comparison with the rest of the country -- often second-highest in the country, I saw.  And with huge campuses in the main Dem cities of Milwaukee and Madison, as well as dozens more campuses both public and private around the state, there are at least 100,000 students there. The thing is that GOTV is required every year and even every semester on campuses.  Still, it would seem that GOTV on the huge UW-Milwaukee and Madison campuses, with a total of about 75,000 students, would be worthwhile.  But reports from relatives there, including students, are discouraging about Dem efforts.  The young Republicans on the campuses, though, apparently always are active.

    Parent
    John Nichols (none / 0) (#83)
    by brodie on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:03:23 PM EST
    (Capitol Times) on the radio just now said that if the K lead holds up, he's optimistic, given the recount machinery of WI, that it will eventually stand and she will prevail.  One more precinct still out apparently, Prosser territory.  But I like hearing Nichols' optimism.

    Parent
    I'm optimistic, too, but (none / 0) (#99)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:47:26 PM EST
    it's going to be a long and ugly recount battle, with all of the problems caused by the head of the state election commission being the only person in the state who did not expect unusually high turnout.  So there were many xeroxed ballots in the last hours at many polling places, and watch for the challenges to those as well as to procedures for counting.  That's the reason for the remaining precinct still out, which admits to problems last night.  Also, AP counts -- the only ones available -- are not official counts and commonly are fraught with problems (as occurred last night with some misreporting or poor tallying, incorrect by 10,000 at one point, I saw, because somebody's input was off by one important digit).

    AP plans to report its recheck of its tally later today, I read, and then a winner may be declared by media.  But I would think that until the state has its official count, a winner cannot be declared for the loser to then request the recount.  So this still will take quite a while.

    Parent

    Good things can happen, Towanda! (none / 0) (#89)
    by christinep on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:21:25 PM EST
    This is a true "who'd a thought"...and a positive one at that.  
    I just looked at the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, and read the 11:44(CDT) update with J. Kloppenburg ahead by 250ish with 3 precincts out.
    For people like me, we love the power-of-the-vote stories.  From reading the JS, it appears that only 5 state SCt justices ever lost as incumbents since the Court was estab in 1851 (and, one of those five had been appointed & never won statewide elecion.) I note for two reasons: (1) Given the long history, etc. and the challenger's unknown status coming in, the party's initial response of "oh well" was the norm anywhere, and (2) It is yet another example of how "every vote counts" has meaning (apparently, the turn out statewide was almost twice as much as had been projected based on previous spring elections and, apparently, the turnout in Madison & Milwaukee may have been exceptionally high.) Here's hoping that this longtime state employee (and environmental manager), JoAnne Kloppenburg holds on to win....  Question: Have absentee vote counts already been incorporated (or mostly incorporated) into the reported Wednesday morning count???

    Also: The Milwaukee County Executive race seemed to show an impressive result for the Democrat Chris Abele...with a 20& margin! I certainly don't know the dynamics of such a race usually, but it is reported that the Walker issue played a key role? (And, didn't the almost-humiliated Walker himself have that position at one time?)

    If things continue on this line, Wednesday is a good day.  

    An aside: 'Wonder how Boehner factors in this message with his not-looking-like-a-national-Walker imperative in shutting down the government?  Again, if it holds, the message for national Republicans is big, clear, and an
    unmistakeable warning about the blowback in Wisconsin and beyond.

    Parent

    Cf . History of incumbent judge retention. (none / 0) (#93)
    by christinep on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:26:37 PM EST


    Parent
    The BTD mantra about primarying (none / 0) (#81)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 11:51:07 AM EST
    every incumbent, no matter the party, sure has proved correct in Wisconsin -- but even better would have been for the state Democrats to pick a better candidate or really get behind Kloppenburg, once the popular uprising against Walker's agenda turned this into a race, after all.  I get the sense that the state party, and for that matter the Milwaukee county party, are too slow-moving to respond swiftly to opportunities like this one.

    Parent
    To even be close (5.00 / 2) (#85)
    by CoralGables on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:07:17 PM EST
    to unseating an incumbent of the judiciary in a "non-partisan" election is quite rare from my experience. To do it without the current judge being in legal hot water is damn near impossible.

    Parent
    Only five times in that state (none / 0) (#100)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:49:28 PM EST
    has an incumbent lost, in more than a century and a half, I read.  Unfortunately, the most recent instance was the horrible, racist campaign against the first African American justice there, just a few years ago.  That former justice now has been taken off the list for another judicial appointment by the Obama administration, and inexplicably so.

    Parent
    this is more like (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by sj on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:23:03 PM EST
    Howard Dean's 50 state strategy.  Always field a candidate.  No matter what.  And the state party should always be ready and able to provide resources to local organizations no matter how much R's outnumber D's.  

    Otherwise there is only ::crickets:: when an opportunity like this comes around.  At the local level this really breathed life into the party.

    So naturally it went away when O and Kaine took over.  And the national party staff support team was let go.  You know if the infrastructure he put in place was still there that WI GOTV would be in much better shape.

    As for this:

    but even better would have been for the state Democrats to pick a better candidate ...

    I have a huge issue with this attitude.  Or at least I did when I was still a Democrat and active in precinct and district politics.  We got seriously tired of having a grass-roots candidate -- who was just ignored and unsupported by the state party when the candidacy looked pretty hopeless -- be pushed aside as soon as opportunity knocked.  With whatever infrastructure and support the candidate had amassed basically just co-opted so that some one "electible" could be put in place.

    I saw too many of those wishy-washy, corporate-owned "electible" so-called Dems replace true Dems.  The compromising started at the state level.  Same thing happened with the state and national parties interfering with the primary process.

    I have to admit that on paper, it makes perfect sense.  But here we are, aren't we?  With absolutely no-one holding fast to the traditional Dem platform.

    ...or really get behind Kloppenburg

    Wouldn't that be great?  But somehow door number 2 doesn't seem to have a doorknob.

    I'm sure I'm not going to change any minds about how important "electibility" is.  The sanctimony about how such and such a person can't win -- and then making sure that's true by withholding support and by outright dirty campaign sabotage totally sickens me.

    But they can all have the party.  I don't care anymore.  I can't care anymore.  But the Dems no longer get my money or my time.  I'm d@mn tired of having my work co-opted.  And my vote is not guaranteed to go to their candidate.

    Just sayin'.  Be careful what you wish for.

    Parent

    It will be within 200 votes (none / 0) (#102)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:54:15 PM EST
    not 20,000, from expectations of the count going on now in the final precinct yet to report -- from a Republican county but in a town that is less so.

    Parent
    From what I just read, the town that's last (none / 0) (#119)
    by Peter G on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:28:44 PM EST
    to report doesn't have enough registered voters to make a difference.  Kloppenburg wins (by under 250 votes out of 1.5 million + cast) unless there's a recount.

    Parent
    Yes. Well, the town is midsized (none / 0) (#173)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:57:02 PM EST
    but the last precinct had only about 220 voters, as you say.  And good that it was in a good-sized town for that area, as the county is quite rural and quite Republican in those rural areas.  But the town is near enough to Madison to have some state employees who commute to the Capitol.  Ha!

    Parent
    I miss Nancy Pelosi (none / 0) (#16)
    by lilburro on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 10:34:06 PM EST
    she's a capable voice, but not present like she used to be.  Whither the Fighting Dems?  Replace Pelosi with another Reid and I don't know that we would've passed the ACA.  Not fair to Reid necessarily but I think Pelosi bore a lot of that burden.

    Me too (none / 0) (#62)
    by ruffian on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 10:30:02 AM EST
    I was wondering where she has been this week. Maybe just letting Boehner twist in the wind with his tea party.

    Parent
    Aha - here she is taking (none / 0) (#165)
    by ruffian on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:39:49 PM EST
    the lead on the response to Ryan. h/t atrios and yglesias. This will be fun to watch.

    Parent
    Good (none / 0) (#182)
    by lilburro on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:03:35 PM EST
    someone had to step up.  <3 Nancy.

    Parent
    I can't un-see that (none / 0) (#32)
    by jeffinalabama on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 07:25:28 AM EST
    photo. Grrrrr.

    Baby eagle update (none / 0) (#34)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:22:28 AM EST
    From a brief glimpse it looks like the third egg is going to hatch today.

    link to live stream

    Looks like (none / 0) (#54)
    by CoralGables on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 10:04:04 AM EST
    there might be a tiny hole in the shell this morning.

    Parent
    That is what I thought (none / 0) (#59)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 10:22:25 AM EST
    Hope it hatches today.

    I had some trouble with the live stream right after I posted my comment. A couple of times it would come back as the channel being off air. Working O.K. for me now though.

     

    Parent

    Darn, it is coming up as (none / 0) (#60)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 10:25:00 AM EST
    channel off line now.

    Parent
    dems are ahead in WI (none / 0) (#35)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:22:33 AM EST
    the democrat won the former govs spot and the other dem is a couple thousand votes ahead.
    Not in the court race (none / 0) (#39)
    by andgarden on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:37:09 AM EST
    as I check now.

    Parent
    I was just told that (none / 0) (#42)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:38:09 AM EST
    when I stopped to get coffee.  where we at?

    Parent
    Behind by a few hundred votes (none / 0) (#43)
    by andgarden on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:38:55 AM EST


    Parent
    Spoke too soon (none / 0) (#44)
    by andgarden on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:40:33 AM EST
    now ahead by ~100 votes.

    Parent
    I think the fact (none / 0) (#45)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:42:04 AM EST
    that over a million people voted in a court election is a message in itself.


    Parent
    Yeah, well (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by andgarden on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:43:00 AM EST
    a win is a win. I'd rather win.

    Parent
    I think we (none / 0) (#50)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:52:05 AM EST
    will

    Parent
    Hope so but there is cause for worry (none / 0) (#71)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 11:22:32 AM EST
    as there will be a recount, and it will be in the hands of Walker's administration.  And the state elections board already blew it badly by being alone in projecting a standard low spring election turnout, causing ballot shortages all over the state.  That meant long lines of some voters while others gave up and headed home.  And that also meant a lot of the delay even today, because many polling places had to resort to xeroxing ballots that required handcounting.  So a lot of the local counts could be off more than usual -- plus, of course, watch the Republicans challenge a lot of those xeroxed ballots.

    But another question that I'm seeing in discussions there is about absentee ballots that still could be coming in -- as some reports are that absentee ballots in the mail by yesterday still can come in through next Monday to still be counted.  This may be a mini-Franken recount sort of mess ahead.  And if it ends up in the state high court in coming months, with Prosser's term not over until August, he would have to recuse himself, of course.  And then the "nonpartisan" high court would be split right down the middle, too, just like the state.

    Parent

    well (none / 0) (#75)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 11:36:39 AM EST
    if they steal this one the opposition will just be that much more pi$$ed off and motivated for the next round.

    Parent
    This already energizes the recalls (none / 0) (#78)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 11:47:19 AM EST
    even more, I bet -- a couple already have turned in their totals, and the bigger Republicans still to bring down will not benefit from warmer weather for the recall campaigns.  They are hardy folks for being out there for more than a month in this overly long winter already.

    But taking back the high court could be huge, with all of the legal challenges already in the court system and to come against Walker's agenda.

    Parent

    Penny wise and pound (none / 0) (#79)
    by brodie on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 11:48:42 AM EST
    foolish.  There should never be a shortage of ballots when it comes to voting.  The right to vote is too fundamental to democracy.  Yet election after election we hear about shortages or voters having to wait hours in line to vote -- and, surprise surprise!, usually in minority and student stronghold areas.  We really need tough laws to prevent this sort of backdoor effort at voter suppression.  And election boards should always be erring on the side of overestimating turnout -- and the election law should encourage such an approach.

    Re the recount, wouldn't a 3-3 split by the WI Sup Ct result in the official recount total being confirmed?

    Parent

    I will age gracefully and with dignity. (none / 0) (#36)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 09:23:42 AM EST
    wheres the fun in that?  

    seriously,  that guy looks like he is having a good time.

    gracefully - good time

    gracefully - good time

    hmmmmm

    Ya can do both... (5.00 / 2) (#139)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:54:37 PM EST
    keep the drink and the lady...lose the speedo.

    Parent
    Is it nativist of me... (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by sj on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:24:24 PM EST
    ... to wonder if maybe he can't lose the speedo?  That maybe he might be German?

    (with apologies in advance to all non-speedo-loving Germans out there.  If you exist.)

    (Okay, you probably exist.)

    (maybe)

    Parent

    Good call sj... (none / 0) (#171)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:46:49 PM EST
    gotta be a German...I concur:)

    Parent
    but... (none / 0) (#147)
    by CoralGables on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:18:25 PM EST
    it's stylish

    Parent
    plus (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:24:17 PM EST
    I have seen far worse in a speedo.  that doenst mean I would be caught dead in public in one since about 1980 so you can all relax.


    Parent
    Maybe in Europe... (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:33:43 PM EST
    stateside its an eyesore for any age bracket.

    Parent
    And I was so sure (5.00 / 1) (#166)
    by CoralGables on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:40:00 PM EST
    your reply would be
    Not in this country

    Parent
    Seeing the the snow-covered (none / 0) (#70)
    by oculus on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 11:11:41 AM EST
    Wasatch range almost but not quite makes me want to ski again.

    IIRC you are a Harlan Coben fan (none / 0) (#73)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 11:29:02 AM EST
    He has a new Myron Bolitar thriller, "Live Wire," out. I just picked it up at the Library last night. Haven't started it yet but I always enjoy Coben's books.

    Parent
    I wish I cared more (none / 0) (#103)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:54:36 PM EST
    about the Wisconsin judicial race but I just don't.

    Anyone with me on this?

    it has national (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:02:55 PM EST
    implications.  

    Parent
    Are you (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:07:15 PM EST
    suprised? ABG only cares about Obama. Obama is Jesus to him. It should be very obvious that issues matter none to ABG after his posts here.

    Parent
    Geezus (none / 0) (#116)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:25:32 PM EST
    My point is only that, big picture, this will have a negligible impact on national issues and will probably, because of timing, and the WI GOP's ability to re-approve the legislation, not make a difference in the long term outcome of the labor situation.

    If Obama is my Jesus, he's your anti-christ. If people didn't make broad, unsupportable statements about him, I wouldn't have a need to defend his accomplishments. I criticize Obama a fair amount in other forums.  I just don't do it much here because the default position you, and a few others, take seems to be that he's far more conservative the Reagan and the Bushes combined.

    It seems to me that the only issue that matters to you is how much he and the dems are not doing exactly what you want them to do on every issue.

    Parent

    I think (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by CST on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:32:07 PM EST
    that in situations like this the little picture is critical to the big picture.

    All politics are local.  The big picture is just a combination of a whole bunch of little pictures scattered around the country.

    You can tell which way the winds are blowing.  Just look at all the special elections from '09.  They pretty much told us how '10 was going to go.  Not on every level, but you started to get the picture.

    Parent

    That's kind of my point (none / 0) (#129)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:41:37 PM EST
    All of the wisconsin races are skewed to some degree by the labor issue and can't be looked upon as a larger trend. I am thrilled with a dem beating a republican wherever it may occur, but I think that's the limits of how excited I can get about us taking that position.

    Parent
    That's not really a point (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by sj on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:46:50 PM EST
    That's just an opinion.  It shows where your interest lies.  And really, that's fine.  Truly.

    It would be nice though, if your need to express your lack of interest hadn't taken up so much of the thread oxygen.

    Parent

    I think (none / 0) (#132)
    by CST on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:46:24 PM EST
    that one of the Dems best hopes in 2012 is the "skewing of the labor issue"

    I think if they ever decide to take up this cause it will be a winning cause nationally (on an local level - if that makes sense), and help turn out the vote in a lot of places in 2012.

    In '09 the races were skewed by the healthcare issue.  But it was absolutely a larger trend, because healthcare was a large issue.  I think it's the same thing with labor right now.

    Parent

    This (none / 0) (#137)
    by CoralGables on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:53:29 PM EST
    shouldn't be about politics. It should be about who has the best ability to serve as an impartial justice in a non-partisan election. With 2.5 million in special interest dollars spent on this election, it's safe to say the thought of a judicial purity ship, even at the state level, has already sailed down the St Croix River. And that's why I have to reluctantly but totally agree with you on this.

    Parent
    well (none / 0) (#141)
    by lilburro on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:06:17 PM EST
    Prosser is a former GOP lawmaker, and signaled in various ways he would support Walker.  I'm sure BTD would tell you there's no "introducing" politics to the judiciary; it's always political.  Politifact WI has a nice summary of the Walker = Prosser argument.

    Parent
    When the home office (none / 0) (#145)
    by CoralGables on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:17:08 PM EST
    of a group that spends $813,660 on a judicial election has it's address traced to a mail drop box in a UPS packing store you are right, but that doesn't mean I can't continue to wish that the judiciary was non-political.

    Parent
    You can wish that (none / 0) (#154)
    by lilburro on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:24:35 PM EST
    and I do too, but it seems to me it's only going to get worse.

    Parent
    What can help a bit in selecting judiciary (none / 0) (#199)
    by christinep on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 04:08:52 PM EST
    on the state level is a system used by a number of states wherein the individual is first appointed by the governor for a set term, and then stands for retention during the election. There is no direct competitive race (individual v other individual) in states such as Colorado. That doesn't guarantee purity either; but, it changes the money dynamic a bit. And, the recommendations put forward by the local bar assoc. etc. are more prominent. (Most, of course, are retained. But, some of the real problems have been weeded out.)

    Parent
    Didn't make a difference in Wisconsin (none / 0) (#200)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 04:22:41 PM EST
    where Prosser was an appointee first -- as have been many of the justices, including the Chief Justice herself.  But the costs of high court campaigns went out of control there in Wisconsin several elections ago, anyway, and when it still was a clean state.  That made it easy pickings for the outside money to make a mess of judicial elections -- as occurred in this race, when both Prosser and Kloppenburg personally refused outside money and held to low limits on campaign costs, but the big corporate bucks still ran the total up to almost $4 million this time, even higher than in horrendous elections there before this.  

    I read an article on this that used Wisconsin as an example of why even an initially appointive system cannot work as you suggest anymore, because of the decisions by the nation's highest court that also has been bought and sold.

    Parent

    I haven't seen any (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:36:11 PM EST
    "broad unsupportable" statements about him around here from anybody but you. Most of the criticisms are based on his poor policy choices and nothing else despite what you might like to think.

    You are truly clueless as to my issues but if you want to continually apologize for Obama that's certainly your right. I just don't respect wimps and most people don't. Obama is a wimp.

    Parent

    Ga6thDem (none / 0) (#131)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:45:53 PM EST
    Then you haven't been reading.

    The most obvious one in my eyes is the comment you see repeated here regularly that healthcare reform helps no one but the insurance and drug companies and that the real purpose of the legislation was to line the pockets of the wall street types.

    There is just no evidence whatsoever of that intent by Obama or any of the people who crafted the legislation. But it makes for a better attack to assert that it is so.

    I have no idea where you are on every issue.  All I know is that instead of attacking my points, you attack me.

    Anyway, as to your "wimp" point, if Obama wanted to take the wimpy route, the way to go would be to give people like you what you want.

    The route he's taking is the hard one. He gets hell from both sides and his life would be a lot easier if he did everything you wanted.

    Parent

    A couple of points. First of all, (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by observed on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:51:46 PM EST
    there is PLENTY of very convincing evidence that Obama and the Dems crafted the legislation to be friendly to the insurance industry, and ESPECIALLY to Big Pharm.

    And why is it that for Obama to do anything an actual Democrat wants is just out of the question, but any amount of compromise with the  Republicans is A-OK?

    Parent

    There is a difference (none / 0) (#140)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:59:13 PM EST
    between crafting legislation that is palatable to the insurance industry while serving the citizens and crafting legislation whose only real goal is to help the insurance industry.

    I have no doubt that Obama and the dems were trying to find solutions that the insruance industries could live with.

    Parent

    Right. Lobbyists wrote the billl, but (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by observed on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:13:31 PM EST
    you are sure that Obama's intention was actually to help people.
    You know, I think it's possible that the next few days may actually change your opinion of Chamberl.. I mean, Obama.


    Parent
    Please provide (none / 0) (#149)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:20:59 PM EST
    evidence that "lobbyist wrote the bill".

    Parent
    I guess you haven't figured out yet (5.00 / 2) (#176)
    by Anne on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:58:39 PM EST
    that most of the people here don't make the statements they do without having done the research to make sure what they're saying in correct.

    So...start with this; and then this.

    Maybe you'll be encouraged to look into it a little more, but given that it isn't going to support your opinion, I pretty much doubt that'll happen.

    Parent

    Yes (5.00 / 0) (#138)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:54:06 PM EST
    there is evidence. Did you not read about how Baucus had lobbyists helping him write the healthcare bill? I guess you didn't read in the NY Times about how Obama cut a deal with the pharmaceutical companies. You really should bone up on some of your reading instead of just swallowing Obama's faxes whole.

    No, I've been attacking your points but I did actually make a personal attack once in this thread so if you want to hold on to that ONE then go ahead. You can apologize for Obama all you want.

    Why is it being a wimp when you keep campaign promises but not when you give the GOP what they want? Apparently you are a conservative who believes that the GOP is the "party of ideas" just like Obama.

    Well, then if you despise the base as much as Obama does, then don't expect them to actually show up, donate or spend any time on him in '12.

    You obviously don't know what a wimp is if you don't realize that Obama is a huge one.

    Parent

    If you think what is happening in the states (5.00 / 0) (#146)
    by Anne on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:18:07 PM EST
    has a negligible impact on national issues, well, I don't think you've been paying a lot of attention.  

    First of all, these are real people we're talking about.  Real people being affected in real ways by terrible policy.  Which you think we should all turn a blind eye to because it won't make any difference if we get involved or lend support or even, God forbid, discuss it on a blog.  

    What is happening to people in Wisconsin is also happening in other places, in Ohio and Indiana, to name two, and soon, it could be coming to your state or my state.  And apathy is likely to goose it along because you can be sure that those who want to inflict this kind of insanity on people will NEVER run out of energy - so the AngryBlackGuy approach of "eh - what does it matter?" just ensures that bad policy keeps winning.

    The battles that are being fought at both the national and state level are in synergy - they are feeding off each other; success at the state level drives the desire to implement these policies nationally.  Success at the national level drives confidence that it can be brought to bear in the states.

    But all you can see is Obama.  What will help him win.  What political moves he can make that bolster his image.   The people affected by what Obama does and says are merely tools to be manipulated into voting for Obama.

    No one here is requiring Obama or the Dems to do exactly everything we want them to do; you've been told this before, countless times, and yet, it's always your fallback position.  I want good economic policy that works for the least among us - because that means it will also work for those more fortunate.  I want my rights protected and strengthened, not nibbled away at.  I want accountability not stonewalling.  I want to be more important to these people than the corporations who are getting it all.

    I'd be encouraged if there was some progress on these fronts, but there isn't; we're going backwards, not forwards, and that's not progression, it's regression.  I know you will tell me that the ACA was "some" progress, but it really wasn't - and this has been discussed so many times that I'm not going to list all the reasons why.

    If you looked at Obama's policies and actions - not the "list of accomplishments" that just doesn't tell the whole story - and did it without knowing he was responsible for them, you'd wonder which Republican president was.

    And really, as Jeralyn always says, you're not required to participate in discussions that don't interest you, so if Wisconsin politics isn't doing it for you, move on, find something that does.


    Parent

    Anne (2.00 / 0) (#155)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:25:08 PM EST
    Again, you are as focused on bashing obama as I am in supporting him.

    Parent
    I get the impact on the labor (2.00 / 2) (#107)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:05:51 PM EST
    issues, but it seems like we're focused a little too closely on it.

    Parent
    "Focused a little too closely?" (5.00 / 2) (#115)
    by Anne on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:25:17 PM EST
    This from the guy who is focused so closely on Obama that he could probably tell us if he has polyps in his colon...

    Priceless.

    I guess if it's not about Obama, it's just a waste of energy, right?

    Parent

    My focus on Obama's (2.00 / 1) (#117)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:27:45 PM EST
    colon is only surpassed by the focus you have on shoveling every problem you have ever had with the country onto his plate.

    Give obama credit for something this week. I dare you. I double dog dare you.

    Parent

    I wish we could give him credit (5.00 / 2) (#123)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:32:14 PM EST
    for putting on those comfortable shoes, as promised, when collective bargaining rights were attacked in Wisconsin.  Rumor after rumor that he would do so filled the blogs of the hopeful there.  

    Had he done so, the turnout of students in Madison alone would not have been only half of what the turnout was in the primary last fall.  And then the court race already would have been won by the Democrats today, and you can read below what that will or will not mean for Obama in Wisconsin in 2012.

    That the turnout was as good as it was with students and with Dems actually probably is owing a lot to the Rev. Jesse Jackson, who has been putting on his comfortable shoes and coming to Wisconsin again and again for many weeks now, including for a GOTV effort last weekend.

    Parent

    WI is a national issue now (5.00 / 1) (#135)
    by lilburro on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:52:24 PM EST
    since so many people are paying attention to it.  Beyond being important in and of itself, it's a symbol (to me anyway) of collective values and why we have things like Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security.  

    Besides, the media loved the Tea Party.  Maybe if WI voters can make an impact the media will pay more attention to pro-labor, pro-left voices (not likely).  Or it will at least inspire people in Ohio and Michigan to fight back against the draconian measures their governors are proposing.

    Parent

    so you aren't seeing the labor 'issues' (5.00 / 0) (#143)
    by nycstray on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:12:53 PM EST
    playing out around the country right now? It effects every d@mn person in this country one way or the another.

    Parent
    if both the republicans lose (none / 0) (#109)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:12:26 PM EST
    I think it could even possibly effect the budget fight in DC.

    Parent
    How does it effect the budget fight Howdy? (none / 0) (#118)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:28:20 PM EST


    Parent
    for one thing (5.00 / 0) (#124)
    by CST on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:35:07 PM EST
    Paul Ryan's district just went for the Kloppenburg big time.  I bet he noticed.

    It also helps shape the way the media reports these things.  If republican politicians are scared of how they might be received at home, they might be influenced to give a little.

    Parent

    Glad you saw that comment! (5.00 / 0) (#128)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:39:38 PM EST
    and thanks for completing the thought that I did not do -- that loss of Ryan's district will be seen as worrisome for the Republicans in Congress at this crucial point in his career and their plans.  Well put!

    Parent
    what they said (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:52:45 PM EST
    plus
    I think it good for republicans to see that there is a point at which democrats will stop rolling over and biting the pillow.


    Parent
    from first read (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:03:19 PM EST
    If congressional Republicans should have learned any lesson from the budget showdown in Wisconsin, it was this: quit while you're ahead. Despite being offered concession after concession on the budget -- as long as he didn't touch collective-bargaining rights for public employees -- Gov. Scott Walker (R) went big for everything, including the collective bargaining rights. And he's since paid a steep political price, even though the legislation ultimately passed. Walker's poll numbers have plummeted. The legislation is now locked up in the courts. The Democratic opposition remains fired up (see last night's elections in the state; more on them below). And the state appears headed for a slew of recall elections this spring and summer. The political lesson from Wisconsin: If you're offered 70%-80% of what you want and will look like a hero in accepting the deal, take it. But if you go for everything, be prepared for the backlash.  


    Parent
    You want Obama to win Wisconsin? (5.00 / 0) (#111)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:15:32 PM EST
    Perhaps if you realize that winning Wisconsin in 2012 could hinge on this high court election, you could care.  And the Wisconsin battle for months now is not just about local labor issues.  Why do you think that Walker, the Kochs, the Republicans want to destroy the unions -- Republican legislators there have said that is what this is about, but astute minds did not need to be told -- in the leading manufacturing state in the entire country?

    And the composition of the high court could be crucial in the three challenges to Walker already submitted to the justices, which may not be decided until summer, after the conservative now losing the judicial race could be gone.  And so the court also could be quite different in the recall challenges ahead that could change the state Senate to Democratic again.  And that could be crucial in redistricting ahead, which could affect Wisconsin's vote in national elections for the next decade -- if you care about any Dems after Obama wins again.  Or not, if he will need Wisconsin.  And it looks like, as usual, he will need Wisconsin and the rest of the upper Midwest where his approval ratings have been declining due to the economy.

    And now Wisconsites know, from recent media reports, that they got royally screwed in the TARP funding to the states.  Think it all through.

    Parent

    No (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by sj on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 01:35:56 PM EST
    I wish I cared more (none / 0) (#103)
    by AngryBlackGuy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 12:54:36 PM EST

    about the Wisconsin judicial race but I just don't.
    Anyone with me on this?



    Parent
    ABG (5.00 / 1) (#170)
    by Politalkix on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:46:38 PM EST
    It will be insane to not care about the wisconsin judicial contest. I am truly baffled by what you wrote.

    Parent
    You shouldn't (5.00 / 3) (#177)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 03:00:24 PM EST
    be if you've spent anytime reading his posts.

    Parent
    100% Reporting (none / 0) (#150)
    by CoralGables on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:21:53 PM EST
    Kloppenburg up by 204

    I love this (none / 0) (#157)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:28:10 PM EST
    for the loser losing by a hair is really worse than losing by a landslide.

    Parent
    You'd think, right? (none / 0) (#160)
    by sj on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:35:51 PM EST
    But usually what happens is mayhem as the loser convinces himself that he didn't really lose and then recounts are demanded ... and then some ballots are thrown out ... and then some precinct hijinks come out and then...

    I think a resounding defeat is much more soul-crushing overall for the loser.  Hope can be so stimulating, you know?

    And I think I believe that even if the loser in a given election is my guy.

    Yeah, I'm pretty sure I think so.

    Parent

    I dunno (none / 0) (#163)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:39:02 PM EST
    soooooooo close.  we were soooooooo close.  if only we had done ____

    Parent
    I wish (none / 0) (#167)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:41:35 PM EST
    it had been a resounding loss. Though the things that happened in Ryan's district are very heartening.

    I think that the closeness is what the GOP will use as an excuse to continue.

    Parent

    what next? (none / 0) (#159)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 02:34:37 PM EST
    now it raining worms

    Tuesday Night Open Thread | 196 comments (196 topical)