home

Thursday Night Open Thread

I'm still setting up my new computer. I'm just about ready to turn it on for the first time.

Our last open thread is full, here's a new one. All topics welcome.

< Wednesday Night Open Thread | Obama's New Racial Profiling Rules >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Tamir (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 09:27:24 PM EST
    The Tamir Rice case becomes more unbelievable with each new bit of information.   I think someone linked to some of this before but I was amazed to learn that not only was the shooter carrying a huge load of baggage-

    (CNN) -- Nearly two years before he shot and killed a 12-year-oldwho had an air gun, Cleveland Police Officer Timothy Loehmann resigned from another police job after a supervisor described him as "distracted and weepy" and "emotionally immature."
    "Ptl. Loehmann's inability to perform basic functions as instructed, and his inability to emotionally function because of a personal situation at home with an on and off again girlfriend leads one to believe that he would not be able to substantially cope, or make good decisions, during or resulting from any other stressful situation," Polok wrote.
    Another memo from a sergeant who worked with Loehmann at a shooting range described the officer as "distracted," "not fit to return" after an emotional outburst and someone who was "not following simple instructions."

    LINK

    Now we find out, or at least I find out, that the driver of the car who came swooping in like the Green Hornet has some issues too-

    CLEVELAND, Ohio --  Cleveland paid out $100,000 earlier this year to a city resident to settle an excessive force lawsuit brought against an officer involved in the Tamir Rice shooting.

    LINK

    Just one final thought.  Ohio is an open carry state.

    More on Cleveland Police Departmen (5.00 / 4) (#8)
    by MO Blue on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 09:46:58 PM EST
    Justice Dept.: Cleveland police has pattern of excessive force

    (CNN) -- A sign you'd expect to see in a war zone, hanging at a police station. Two unarmed civilians shot more than 20 times after a high-speed chase. A man in the middle of a medical emergency, jolted with a Taser while strapped to a gurney.

    These are alarming examples, federal investigators say, that show police in Cleveland have been using unnecessary and unreasonable force at a "significant rate," employing "dangerous tactics" that put the community at risk.

    A report released Thursday details a nearly two-year Justice Department investigation which found that Cleveland police use guns, Tasers, pepper spray and their fists excessively, unnecessarily or in retaliation. Officers also have used excessive force on those "who are mentally ill or in crisis," the Justice Department said.



    Parent
    Reading about the stuff that (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 09:52:38 PM EST
    led to this is absolutely jaw dropping.  It's almost literally unbelievable.

    Parent
    And more excessive response... (5.00 / 4) (#30)
    by gbrbsb on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:13:37 AM EST
    ... according to the post on St Louis County Police FB page expected until it was summarily deleted.

    It seems a "rogue" St Louis cop tweeted posted a letter titled, "Kids will be kids?", advising kids (and their parents) on how to avoid being shot by the police while playing with toy guns!

    Two gems:

    "Your children should have rules for "toy" guns that mirror the rules of a real weapon."

    and:

    The police may get called to respond to "a child with a gun", "maybe a toy gun", it is important to know how officers are trained to respond. If the type of gun is in question by the witness, the Police will respond as though it is a real gun until it can be confirmed one way or the other. Remember if an Airsoft pistol is tucked in your pants like a holster then obviously the orange tip is no longer visible. The police will respond lights and sirens and come to a screeching halt in the area where your child is playing with the gun. Here are some tips to help your child respond appropriately. Do not run away. They need to no longer have the gun in their hands, throw it away from them. They need to comply with officers instructions. They may be ordered to lie down on the ground."

    Not surprisingly the victim blaming approach didn't go down well and the chief found out and had the post removed posting an apology in its place. The gem from here:

    The post conveyed the message that my officers respond to calls involving a child with a gun with indiscretion and little regard for life. I want to emphasize that my officers respond to calls with discernment, and have the highest regard for human life. We train officers to take all facts and circumstances into consideration when making decisions about using force.

    Not sure that only the offending post conveyed that message!

    Parent

    I agree (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by Jack203 on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 10:04:13 PM EST
    The actions of the Cleveland cop was atrocious and unforgivable.  He will pay and so will Cleveland (I hope monetarily and not by violence).

    Is it possible to take each case individually without being accused of wearing a white hood on this site?  It should be between reasonable people.

    Parent

    I respect and appreciate (5.00 / 3) (#13)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 10:13:24 PM EST
    your position on this.

    Concerning the Garner case respectfully suggest to you that when you have outrage that absolutely spans the political spectrum, from me to Glen Beck, from almost literally everyone except apparently Meghan Kelly and Rudy Giuliani, you might consider taking a few more looks at that video.

    Parent

    and the background of the cop in question (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 10:20:20 PM EST
    NEW YORK -- The white New York City police officer whose choke hold led to the death of an unarmed black man has been sued three times for allegedly violating the constitutional rights of other blacks he and fellow cops arrested.

    LINK

    Parent

    More on Staten Island Police (5.00 / 3) (#32)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:31:19 AM EST
    Staten Island, borough where Eric Garner died, has highest number of most-sued NYPD officers

    Seven of the city's top 10 most-sued officers -- and 14 of the city's top 50 most-sued officers -- are assigned to a Staten Island narcotics unit working in the territory of the 120th Precinct, a Daily News review has found. The unit has racked up a staggering amount of lawsuits despite being the smallest narcotics bureau in the city.

    Look at the number of times individual officers have been sued and the amount of payout in the millions.

    Parent

    For part of my time in NY (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 08:05:57 AM EST
    i lived on Staten Island.  It is a very strange place.  Not at all like the rest of NY.  there seemed to be almost as many hicks and racists there as there is here in north Arkansas.   But with lots more brown people.  Which makes for an interesting - and not in a good way - dynamic.  

    There were things I loved about it.  It was like being out of the city.  And things I hated about it.  It was like being out of the city.

    Parent

    Sorry to hear... (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:49:40 AM EST
    you used to reside on Staten F*ckin' Island, the red headed stepchild of NYC boroughs.

    We used to dump our garbage there...in a way I guess we still do, our garbage cops & district attorneys & congressional representatives.

    Parent

    I took the ferry over one afternoon (none / 0) (#90)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:55:12 AM EST
    Took a lovely long walk and thought, wow, this is nice and since my work did not require me to commute on anything like regular hours so I could take the ferry at off hours, and since at the time I had a car which is much easier to deal with there, I thought I'll try this.

    It lasted about three months.

    Parent

    It is Unbeleivable... (5.00 / 4) (#106)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:35:44 AM EST
    ...Cleveland never sought his record, yet there is record of other departments requesting the information.  I found this on Page 60 of your link:
    After reviewing the documents of this situation and discussing the events with the HR department, I decided to meet with Ptl Locemann to advise him I was beginning the disciplinary process of separation.

    On 12/03/12 Ptl Loehmann, Sgt Tinnirello, Mr Lubin, and I met.  I advised him of my intent and reasons for it, and Ptl. Loehmann decided to resign instead for personal reasons.  I accepted his written resignation.

    They were going to fire him, and he resigned, and later told people it was because he wanted to work where there was more action, even though he was unfit for service in a suburban police department.

    It makes one wonder how many of these unqualified and unfit officers are 'protecting' the communities in which they serve.  This guy was a simply waiting for a situation in which he was going to make a major mistake.  More of a question as 'when', then a question of 'if'.

    But fear not, the taxpayers in Cleveland will pay the tab for their departments grave errors in judgement when hiring Loehmann.  That kid did not stand a chance, he was dead long before shots were fired.

    The good news is there are responsible police departments who not only rid themselves of emotionally unfit officers, but that actually check the service records of applicants and not hire ones that are unfit for duty.  

    Cleveland didn't care enough about their citizens to ensure an unfit cop wasn't on their force, and that should result in more than one resignation from above.

    Parent

    Yes (5.00 / 2) (#107)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:41:45 AM EST
    the bad news is there is always a place willing to hire the rejects.  Like my nephew.  Rejected twice by the state police on psyche grounds he has been given a badge a gun and a license to kill by the county.

    Parent
    Aside (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:45:26 AM EST
    im told that the reason he was initially rejected is that he said in the interview that he, he was an EMT first, when asked if the grim nature of the EMT job bothered him said, "oh no, I like seeing mangled bodies.  It gives me an adrenalin rush!"

    Or words to that effect.

    Parent

    Same problem in the NYPD... (5.00 / 2) (#112)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:48:12 AM EST
    see the recent killing of Akai Gurley...police not even trying to justify this one, a scared kid who should never have been given a badge and a gun.

    But the officer did do one thing by the book in this tragic case...as your shooting victim lies there dying, make sure you text your union rep before you do anything else.

    Parent

    that's the more common (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by Reconstructionist on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:50:22 AM EST
     path that I have observed.

      I mean I've seen movement from from larger (or better paying or "more prestigious") agencies to  less desirable ones. It's pretty common for a "bad cop" to be allowed to resign for some misconduct or display of incompetence but keep  his certification so he can seek subsequent employment in law enforcement. (In fairness, this happens in other fields where "bad" actors can cause significant harm too-- law, medicine, etc)

    Usually though they then move down the food chain not up. (Less affluent municipalities and counties often pay cops pretty poorly and "take what they can get" and also due to resources and lack of management professionalism don't perform the due diligence one would expect from a large agency.)

    Parent

    honest question (none / 0) (#111)
    by CST on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:47:32 AM EST
    Is this a money problem?

    Do we have so many $hitty cops because it's a $hitty job with $hitty pay that no one would want to do unless they a) really wanted to be a cop, b) really want the power of being a cop, or c) couldn't find a better job.

    My initial thought was not that Cleveland dropped the ball, although they clearly did, it was - how desperate must Cleveland be for police that they hire this @sshole?

    Parent

    The pittance some departments... (none / 0) (#114)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:50:59 AM EST
    pay cops is certainly a factor...you get what you pay for.

    And it's usually the most dangerous beats that pay the least...NYPD rookies qualify for public assistance, meanwhile out here in the NYC 'burbs the cops make stupid bank to write speeding tickets.  Go figure.

    Parent

    Yes (none / 0) (#117)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:55:45 AM EST
    i think it is part of the problem.  I think he makes about 25,000.

    But I also, just MO, think there is a problem that most people don't want to do the job.  Like an EMT it takes a special kind of person to be able to do it.   Jobs for cops and EMTs are one of the most common job opportunities in this part of the land.

    Parent

    Agreed... (5.00 / 2) (#120)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:00:00 AM EST
    much like the profession of politician...those who would be the best at it are smart enough to want no part of it...and those who really want to do that work should make us all nervous.

    Parent
    But let's not forget the overtime pay factor. (none / 0) (#135)
    by Anne on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:43:14 AM EST
    With overtime, sometimes their meager base pay bears no relation to what they're actually taking home.

    Parent
    True... (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:02:28 PM EST
    But I don't think rookies are scoring much overtime, not if the officers with seniority have anything to say about it.

    Out by me overtime knocks the cops into 6 figures...which makes it especially annoying when they pull a power trip attitude with ya at a traffic stop or the like.  I'm helping to pay this mother*cker 6 figures and he's giving me sh*t?  The least ya can do is show some gratitude for your 6 figure cake job and treat your employers with some respect.

    Parent

    In rural areas (none / 0) (#150)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:14:44 PM EST
    there is little if any overtime

    Parent
    OT seem to be limited to (none / 0) (#156)
    by jbindc on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:30:21 PM EST
    mostly big cities, and not necessarily applied to all cops, but certain (and usually very small) groups of cops within those police forces. Most of it seems to be legitimate (double pay for holiday shifts, for example), but like in every profession, there are the cheaters.

    New Orleans

    Chicago

    California

    Here's what an NYPD cop makes.

    And, St. Louis

    Parent

    If California on Your List... (none / 0) (#161)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:51:13 PM EST
    ...is LA, than the list would be my list of most corrupt and most brutal police departments in the land.

    Is that list mean anything, like highest paid, or did you just grab large ones ?

    Regardless of why, those cops are making a good living, and does not support the comment above about the police getting paid a next to nothing.  One can raise a family on those wages, even in NY and CA.  They should have the finest officers available when approaching six figures IMO.

    Parent

    Remember when... (5.00 / 1) (#170)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:15:40 PM EST
    the NYPD cop was cleaning his gun at home in the dark because he couldn't pay his electric bill, and he accidentally shot a baby?

    Here's the story from 2008.

    He was only making 34k after almost 2 years on the job.  Ya can't live on that in NYC.

    Parent

    I just googled (none / 0) (#167)
    by jbindc on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:06:39 PM EST
    "OT pay and police" and pulled up those links - no small towns or rural areas even popped up discussing OT for police.  In just quickly looking around, a cop (or anyone) in NY making $50,000 would have a hard time living there (especially in Manhattan), could possibly even qualify for public assistance if only one spouse worked and there were two kids.

    Parent
    I Was Looking at the High End... (none / 0) (#168)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:10:11 PM EST
    ...in all case, but for NYC that was $90k.  I doubt many cops live in Manhattan.

    Parent
    It's not just Manhattan though (none / 0) (#172)
    by jbindc on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:21:32 PM EST
    Of course, lots of people manage to live in (all of) NYC.  I'm just saying it wouldn't be easy and you certainly aren't going to be a rich fat cat on $90,000 (and again, that's a very small percentage of cops that would make that out of the total number on the force).

    Parent
    Worth mentioning... (5.00 / 1) (#187)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:55:38 PM EST
    most cops only work for 20-25 years, then collect a very nice pension for 25+ years. So it's not nearly the sour deal private sector working class stiffs are getting, who can't even dream of retiring at 50, but that future pension won't help the young cop make his/her rent today.  

    Might partly explain why some are treating the customers, aka we the people, so sh*tty...when you're overworked and underpaid, it's only natural to take it our on the only person besides yourself that you can give sh*t...the customers.

    Parent

    I see the CIA (5.00 / 9) (#3)
    by Repack Rider on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 09:29:08 PM EST
    ...got to edit the Senate Intel Committee's torture report.  The Intel Committee is charged with oversight of the CIA.

    I called Senator Feinstein's office to tell her that if the people being investigated get to edit the report, then the CIA is exercising "oversight," but the committee is the one being overseen.

    I do not think she knows what that word means.

    Oversight = overlooked (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 09:31:33 PM EST
    doesnt it?

    Parent
    Using up 1 of 200 to ask (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by CoralGables on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 09:46:02 PM EST
    Whatever happened to that 200 comment limit?

    CG, what ever happened to the (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by fishcamp on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 05:57:23 AM EST
    baby Jesus stolen from the manger display in Coral Gables?

    Parent
    I heard (5.00 / 6) (#42)
    by CoralGables on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 06:49:53 AM EST
    he tired of the seasonal grind, traded in the swaddling clothes for a Guy Harvey shirt, and was last seen headed south on A1A with a flyrod.

    Parent
    I heard he left town... (5.00 / 3) (#84)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:40:56 AM EST
    when his fathful servant Chef Arnold got locked up in Ft. Lauderdale...Jesus knows where he ain't welcome.

    Parent
    Oh kdog (none / 0) (#102)
    by CoralGables on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:31:38 AM EST
    everyone knows those in Broward shun Miami-Dade and vice versa. Same state, same coast, different counties, different cultures.

    Parent
    I must not have lived in Pompano... (none / 0) (#105)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:35:11 AM EST
    long enough to notice...I thought we were all one big happy Dade/Broward family of Northeast refugees...I thought those knuckleheads up in Palm Beach were the South Florida outliers;)

    Parent
    Here is your breakdown (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by CoralGables on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:46:34 AM EST
    of the southeast FL coast:
    Palm Beach wealthier, Broward yuppier, Dade more integrated. Monroe laid back fisherman, drinkers, and those that drove to the end of the road, and in the winter full of tourists that dream of being fisherman, drinkers, and quitting their jobs further north to drive to the end of the road.

    kdog you should have spent more time in Monroe.


    Parent

    I would not call Pompano Beach... (none / 0) (#118)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:57:18 AM EST
    yuppie...alcoholics, crackheads, homeless (don't you dare feed them!;) and the elderly who couldn't afford the yuppie parts.

    I definitely regret not spending more time down fishcamp way...definitely woulda been more my speed.  But no matter how ghetto a beach community may be, it's always good to wake up, cross the street, and take a morning bath in the Atlantic in February.  

    Parent

    I'll have to tell my (5.00 / 1) (#147)
    by Zorba on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:11:07 PM EST
    fly-fishing husband that one.  :-D
    And think of it this way: Jesus only has to catch one fish, then He can perform a miracle, multiply that fish, and feed the whole community!

    Parent
    Isn't it against the law to feed hungry people now (5.00 / 3) (#155)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:26:16 PM EST
    Jesus would be prohibited from feeding the community and have  to hang out with Chef Arnold in jail.

    Parent
    LOL! (none / 0) (#157)
    by Zorba on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:30:51 PM EST
    Unfortunately, too true in many areas.

    Parent
    And PS (none / 0) (#194)
    by Zorba on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:17:34 PM EST
    I think Jesus would be perfectly able to walk out of that jail any time, if He so desired.   ;-)


    Parent
    The Limit Isn't Hard... (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 08:33:27 AM EST
    ...you can always comment at the end/bottom and if someone gives it a rating, good or bad, it moves up and appears to have been posted in the middle.

    That limit needs to be extended as open posts are filing up very quickly and comments keep coming over from the last post, which of course ensures the current post is maxed out that much quicker.

    Parent

    And also, (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by Zorba on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:15:06 PM EST
    I believe that if you keep a window open, without refreshing it, on a not quite full thread, you can still respond to another commenter on that thread, even if it would be full if you refreshed the page.

    Parent
    Yes... (none / 0) (#163)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:52:42 PM EST
    ...which happens to me a lot as I start something them get distracted with my actual job, and end up posting hours later.

    Parent
    Another one (5.00 / 5) (#15)
    by ruffian on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 10:32:19 PM EST
    Police kill burglary suspect sitting in his car with a gun visible, because of the "perceived threat" there is nothing in this story that says he was acting threatening in an way other than having a gun visible.

    So, someone help me out here...whether I like it or not, it is legal to sit in a car with a gun in your own driveway. If I personally view that alone as a threat, I doubt I get to kill the kill the guy. But the police do.

    I just...cant deal with this crap.

    Also, they put a local middle school on lockdown over this, no doubt scaring hundreds of parents, when the only danger and shooting was by the police.

    And another one... (5.00 / 2) (#74)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:21:08 AM EST
    in Phoenix...man allegedly armed with a little oxy winds up shot dead.  Similar to Cleveland, the ball gets rolling by an informant. Victim has a record, so the killer cop shouldn't have any worries...victim blaming can commence forthwith!

    If we can't indict cops who kill, maybe we can indict the informants who set the wheels in motion as accessories to manslaughter or something???  People have been indicted as accessories for much less.  That might work as a deterrent to save some lives.  Only half kidding.

    Parent

    Need to rewrite laws to confirm (5.00 / 4) (#83)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:40:29 AM EST
    with reality. New law needs to state that any crime or perceived crime committed by an African American is punishable by death.

    I know tons of sweet old white ladies who agree with the basic premise right now. But of course it is not about race, it is just because these lazy, stupid people who are a drain on society deserve what they get. But it is not about race.

    Parent

    So young, to be (none / 0) (#152)
    by Zorba on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:17:34 PM EST
    so cynical.  (Well, you're younger than I am, I believe.)
    It's sad, but it's true.  I know people who think that way, too.
    :-(

    Parent
    Walked out of a luncheon with (5.00 / 3) (#160)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:47:00 PM EST
    these sweet old ladies yesterday when this subject was discussed. My comment is a true reflection of what was said.  

    Eric Garner was big and had been arrested before so the policeman had every right to use a choke hold on him. He caused his own death. On the subject of they Ferguson protesters who are walking to Jeff City: if black people don't like it here, they should be rounded up and sent to Afghanistan (too PC to suggest they be sent back to Africa?). Those people are just lazy bums who refuse to work and only believe that this is racial because Al Sharpton told them it was racial.  Everyone knows it is not racial and only those stupid, lazy people would think it is racial. Small, small sample of what I hear everyday when I'm around people in my area.

    BTW, don't put money on which one of us is the eldest.

    Parent

    In Other Words... (5.00 / 1) (#165)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:04:03 PM EST
    ...their ancestors were complete idiots for enslaving 'lazy bums who refuse to work'.  If only they had enslaved people who worked hard we wouldn't have all these pesky racial issues.

    Yeah, good one.  I hear some version of that, not all the time, but enough to make me want to vomit about once a month.

    But try to find a self proclaimed racist and there isn't one in the entire south.

    Parent

    I wish I could say that I hear (5.00 / 1) (#174)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:27:17 PM EST
    these  remarks just some of the time. This is often the main topic of conversation when white people get together. I would like to say that the views are mixed but they really aren't.

    People here have said they can't understand how a member of the NY Grand Jury could view the video and still return a no bill. The GJ needed 12 to indict. 14 members were white. If my neighbors were on GJ, all 14 would have voted not to indict because everyone knows he deserved it regardless what the video showed. And BTW, did you see how big Garner was. He was arrested before so of course he deserved what happened. Just another big black demon or thug dead - no big deal. And what right do those people have to complain anyway.

    I originally was shocked at how wide spread this is. Now I'm just sick.

    I see white people at the protests so I know that not everyone agrees with my neighbors but I've yet to hear anyone in my immediate vicinity who doesn't share the views that I've mentioned.


    Parent

    When was this grand jury seated? (5.00 / 1) (#180)
    by jbindc on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:41:23 PM EST
    Do you know?  Since I haven't been following this case until the last couple of days, I hadn't heard - was this a special grand jury seated for just this case?

    (I ask, because one of the memes about the Ferguson Grand Jury was that because it was made up of six white men, three white women, two black women and one black man, so of course there would be no indictment.  What gets lost, of course, is the fact that the grand jury in Ferguson had been seated for a few months even before Michael Brown was killed.)

    Parent

    This according to one report (5.00 / 1) (#195)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:18:30 PM EST
    In early September, the Staten Island district attorney, Daniel M. Donovan Jr., impaneled the grand jury to weigh evidence; it heard testimony from the officers involved and 22 civilian witnesses. All of the officers, with the exception of Officer Pantaleo, were granted immunity
    .

    From another source:

    Of the 23 members of the Garner grand jury, 14 are white, nine are non-white and at least five are black, according to two people familiar with the grand jury's racial makeup.

    Not sure the fact that they had been seated for months would change the preconceived ideas or prejudices of panel if they existed. They are very much apparent here and that would not have changed.

    Parent

    Thanks for the info (5.00 / 2) (#197)
    by jbindc on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:22:09 PM EST
    But you also can't assume that the people who voted not to indict are all white people.

    Parent
    You are right I can't assume that (5.00 / 1) (#207)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:55:20 PM EST
    everyone who voted not to indict was white. Which is why I never made that statement.

    My statement death with the premise that the preconceived ideas or prejudices of the panel are not eliminated because it convened at an earlier date. The rhetoric presented to both Grand Juries was much the same and was tailored to play off the fears of huge black men. That rhetoric is bought hook, line and sinker by those around me and I can see how it was bought by the Garner GJ.

    Parent

    You live in a very different world (none / 0) (#176)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:34:26 PM EST
    than I have ever lived in.

    Often the main topic of conversation?

    Either you or I must live in a bubble, I'm hoping it's not me...

    Parent

    I'm hearing similar sh*t... (5.00 / 1) (#182)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:43:59 PM EST
    around the water cooler..."why did Garner resist?" "He shouldn't have broken the law." "What do "they" want, a lawless society?"  "The cops should just go on strike"

    I have to bite my tongue so hard it bleeds...everybody in their own little bubble to some extent, but I would hope everybody would at least consider the view from other bubbles.  I know I'm prejudiced and "out there" but I like to think I at least try to consider alternative views and weigh my prejudice.  For some, that alone is some kinda treason.

    Parent

    Sure, obviously Rodney King (none / 0) (#185)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:50:43 PM EST
    was big here "around the water cooler" during his time, but for Mo Blue it sounds like "racial" talk is pretty much all the time.

    Parent
    The racial talk... (5.00 / 1) (#192)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:09:14 PM EST
    is more much veiled here, amongst the non-AARP set anyway.

    My bigoted Great Uncle who I've talked about before otoh, we got into it over Thanksgiving a little bit...I asked him if he watched the parade, he said yes, I asked if he saw any protesting on the tv (mea culpa, my mistake!;).  "Ya mean the n*ggers?" he says.  I said, "No Unc, the police...they're protesting against the police for killing n*ggers". My moms almost choked on her cheese and crackers, then I wised up and switched the discussion to the Lions.

    Parent

    I live in a suburb that (5.00 / 3) (#189)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:02:02 PM EST
    Is just miles away from Ferguson. It is viewed as very personal here where it might not be so in other areas of the country. So yes, the latest happenings are discussed all the time. Our local news is also still focused on the subject as well. The police and the politicians are generally fueling the fires too.

    To be somewhat fair, the events and the notoriety surrounding Ferguson will impact people in North County for years to come. Mainly lower middle class area where homes are often the only real source of even modest wealth. From slightly younger folks, I hear I'll never be able to retire now or sell my house. Older folks are receiving even more pressure to move to whiter neighborhoods at a time when their houses would sit on the market forever or be sold for a fraction of their worth.  Yes, a whole lot more personal.

    Parent

    OK, thanks. That explains better. (none / 0) (#198)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:24:36 PM EST
    Oh, ugh. (none / 0) (#169)
    by Zorba on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:10:42 PM EST
    I would have been tempted to slip some poison in their lunches.
    Well, not really, but still.......
    Are you on Medicare yet?  If so, you're as old or older than I am.   ;-)

    Parent
    Yes I am a thankful (none / 0) (#178)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:38:49 PM EST
    Medicare card holder. I hate to be the oldest but I think I am.

    No poison. Just after trying to mention a few facts that they did not know or did not want to know, mid lunch, I got up said I can't listen to anymore of this and went  got my bill and left. Needless to say I will not be going to lunch with that group again.

    I'm going to a dance this Saturday. I enjoy dancing and hope I don't spend the time grinding my teeth or leaving before I tell people what I think about their "it's not racial comments."

    Parent

    You may be (5.00 / 1) (#193)
    by Zorba on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:14:43 PM EST
    In which case, I congratulate you for still dancing.  You go, girl!
    Yes, I, too, have walked out in mid-lunch, mid-get togethers, and such because of the idiots and their comments.  
    I don't really consider that I have lost friends this way, because they weren't really friends.

    Parent
    Kere's one for the record books. One (5.00 / 1) (#179)
    by oculus on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:40:33 PM EST
    lucky guy:

    stranded

    Parent

    That's too bad you're half-serious. (none / 0) (#175)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:34:12 PM EST
    There are already laws on the books prohibiting both the filing of a false report, and lying to authorities during the course of an investigation. Not everyone who calls the authorities to report something they've seen has an ulterior motive for doing so. Prosecuting people for being mistaken about or misjudging what they saw and reported could only further drive a wedge between public safety personnel and the people they serve.

    Let's please not even joke about something like that, lest some moron overhears us, thinks that what's being proposed in jest is actually a good idea and then acts on it. I'm going to tell you a story that's personally embarrassing for me from a professional standpoint, but one which underscores my point.

    In Dec. 1998, I went out one evening after work for a few drinks with a few co-workers and state legislators who were my age, one of whom was the state representative from Waikiki, who I'll call "Rep. Numbnutz" -- a nice guy, but not exactly the brightest bulb in the chandelier. But hey, he was elected, and it was my job to work with whomever the electorate chooses to send to the State Capitol.

    So, over the course of several cocktails, we were talking shop and the discussion got around to the then-proliferation of working girls in our resort communities, which at the time was becoming a real nuisance problem for local residents in those areas.

    Now, it has always been my position that if you really want to control prostitution, then you need to legalize and regulate it, just as you would any other profession. Suffice to say that there are others who don't agree with that. Anyway, Rep. Numbnutz was one of them and he took issue, and he started whining about all the complaints he had been receiving from his constituents about the ladies struttin' their wares, giving head to customers in residents' garages and driveways, etc. (Like I said, it was a problem.)

    So just to bust Rep. Numbnutz's balls, I said quite sarcastically to him, hey, if you really want to look to your constituents like you're doing something about it, then why don't you introduce a bill to declare your entire district a prostitution-free zone, with enhanced felony penalties for those who engage in their trade within the prohibited area? We'll just lock 'em all up!

    When he looked up at me with this huge Schitt-eating grin on his face, I immediately knew he had experienced an "Aha!" moment and that I had gone too far. So I hastened to add that I was only joking, of course, further noting that such a bill would likely constitute a violation of the U.S. Constitution's equal protection clause because you can't convict a prostitute for a felony in Waikiki, when elsewhere in the state that same violation would still be a misdemeanor offense. I thought that would be the end of it.

    But unfortunately, Rep. Numbnutz still actually believed that what I had been joking about was a really great idea. So, lo and behold, a bill came across my desk not two weeks later for a referral to the appropriate House committee, which declared the Waikiki district a prostitution-free zone under penalty of felony conviction, duly signed by my drinking buddy from that night. And since it had already been introduced and passed First Reading, I was therefore obligated to refer it to the Judiciary Committee for its consideration.

    To my subsequent surprise and deep chagrin, the Judiciary chair then scheduled the bill for a public hearing. And in the meantime, Rep. Numbnutz was busy working it himself. He quickly managed to get scores of residents to offer testimony in support of this draconian proposal, along with the usual moralizing Christianista crowd who will always hasten to support any measure which has something to do with restricting someone else's sexual proclivities and activities. Then they called a press conference in the Capitol rotunda.

    So, the hearing was held, the media was all over the story, and over three hundred people showed up to support the bill, spilling out into the hall. The ACLU testified that the measure was unconstitutional, but their argument fell on deaf ears. The measure was passed out of committee unanimously that afternoon by members, all too eager to please / pacify the public and demonstrate that they were doing more than harrumphing about the problem on television.

    To make the rest of a long story short, what I had initially joked about in Dec. 1998 turned into a legislative avalanche that was signed into law by the governor in June 1999. Initially, all it accomplished was to compel working girls (and boys) to move to the other side of the district boundary near Diamond Head and across the Ala Wai Canal, where getting charged for plying your vocation was still only a misdemeanor.

    But within a few months, some poor hooker who didn't get the memo was arrested, charged with a felony and convicted. The ACLU took up her case on appeal, and voila! The law was declared by the State Supreme Court in Nov. 2001 to be a violation of the Constitution's equal protection clause and therefore unconstitutional, just as I had self-prophesied back in Dec. 1998. Nevertheless, in the intervening period, I had created some seriously unnecessary grief for some members of the public with my big mouth.

    So, like I said, let's not joke about some things. We really don't know who else reads this blog. And I would hate to see some state legislator read your half-in-jest idea, and the 25-watt bulb inside his thick skull suddenly turns on, and he submits the idea for drafting as a bill to be introduced in January.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Opps...I messed up the link. (none / 0) (#16)
    by ruffian on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 10:33:09 PM EST
    As in Ohio (none / 0) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 10:36:02 PM EST
    In Florida, you can legally open carry a loaded firearm while engaged in, or going to and from, Fishing, Hunting, and Camping. With some planning and preparation, a law abiding person can open carry a firearm in public and stay in compliance with the law.


    Parent
    Unless a cop gets scared, in which case (5.00 / 5) (#18)
    by ruffian on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 10:39:15 PM EST
    you will be summarily executed.

    Parent
    Or you can carry real guns (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 10:40:45 PM EST
    but not plastic ones.

    Parent
    The ironic thing is.... (5.00 / 3) (#22)
    by ruffian on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 10:46:45 PM EST
    Isn't the 2nd Amendment to protect us from strong-arm government? How's that working out?

    Parent
    That all depends... (5.00 / 1) (#199)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:25:46 PM EST
    cattle ranchers in Nevada and militia fanboys have had some success...The Black Panthers not so much.

    Parent
    Howdy, in Florida you can carry (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by fishcamp on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 06:04:57 AM EST
    a weapon, in your car, without a concealed carry permit, as long as it is holstered, or in the glove box, or not easily accessible.  You don't have to be going hunting, or camping.

    Parent
    When I saw her comment (none / 0) (#52)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 08:11:14 AM EST
    I just wanted to know if it was open carry so I googled.  That was the first paragraph that popped up.

    I think it adds a level of amazement to these cases that in states where people are supposed to be able to openly carry a gun, people are being gunned down for holding a gun.   Often a plastic one.

    Parent

    Why amazing? (none / 0) (#59)
    by CoralGables on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 08:48:27 AM EST
    Shouldn't that be expected?


    Parent
    Why on earth would it be expected (none / 0) (#60)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 08:52:10 AM EST
    if the point is making it legal to carry a gun.  Please explain.

    Parent
    Sounds very logical to me (none / 0) (#66)
    by CoralGables on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:03:09 AM EST
    Someone carrying a gun comes off as far more threatening and potentially dangerous than someone that isn't, making someone carrying far more likely to be shot.

    Parent
    So then shouldn't the laws (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:05:39 AM EST
    be called Open Carry At Your Own Risk?

    Honestly that makes no sense to me.  Open carry if you are white? Open carry if you are lucky, the point is it's legal to carry a gun.

    Parent

    OTOH (none / 0) (#77)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:30:19 AM EST
    i can see a twisted logic.  Here where I live everyone is white the police are white and folks can strap their guns on to go to church and no one cares.  While in urban areas cops have a whole new set of "justifications" to kill brown people.

    Everybody's happy.  Well except brown people.
    So yeah.  I guess I get it.

    Parent

    Bingo, give that man a cookie (none / 0) (#181)
    by ruffian on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:42:55 PM EST
    According to your link (none / 0) (#26)
    by MO Blue on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 11:10:28 PM EST
    Alejandro Cordero-Rivera was a convicted felon. Doubt that just sitting in your driveway with a gun by itself justied being shot but it was probably illegal for  Cordero-Rivera to own a gun in FL.

    While Florida's gun regulations are generally more liberal than those those found in other states, it virtually outlaws any form of gun ownership by convicted felons. According to the 2009 Florida Statutes, any person convicted of a felony in Florida courts, or sentenced to at least one year of punishment for a felony offense in another state, may not own or possess a firearm of any kind. In addition, the statutes prohibit convicted felons from owning or possessing any type of ammunition, even in the absence of a firearm capable of firing that ammunition. In addition, Florida statutes prohibit convicted felons from owning or possessing any type of electric or chemical weapon.
    link


    Parent
    Even if the gun was illegal... (5.00 / 1) (#183)
    by ruffian on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:44:02 PM EST
    a death sentence was a little harsh.

    Parent
    That's a whole shoot em up article (none / 0) (#28)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 11:54:25 PM EST
    The economy (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Politalkix on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 07:54:17 AM EST
    link

    Despite the deep economic frustration many Americans feel, evident in everything from public opinion surveys to water cooler chats to last month's Congressional elections, the American economy has made significant progress this year.

    So why the persistent gloom, not to mention anger?

    Part of the problem is that even though employment is back above pre-recession levels -- the eight million jobs lost between 2008 and 2010 have been more than made up since then -- millions of new workers have joined the work force over that period.

    What's more, wage gains for the vast majority of Americans who kept their jobs throughout the downturn and then the recovery been very modest. The 2 percent wage increase over the last year is barely enough to keep up with inflation or rising costs for many services, like education, insurance and health care.

    For wages to show meaningful gains over a sustained period of time, as was the case in the 1990s, the unemployment rate would likely have to drop below 5 percent, said Diane Swonk, chief economist at Mesirow Financial in Chicago.

    For some highly skilled workers in sectors like technology and finance, wages have been rising sharply, as have stock holdings and 401(k) portfolios.

    But unlike in the 1990s, the gains for the broad mass of middle-skilled and low-skilled workers have been scant, Ms. Swonk said.

    "Some boats were lifted up more than others in the 1990s, but all boats did go up some back then," she said. "That hasn't been the case lately."


    So what you're saying is (5.00 / 3) (#68)
    by jbindc on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:08:43 AM EST
    We've recovered a lot of jobs since Obama took office - problem is, they are mostly lower wage jobs that are replacing the higher wage jobs that are now gone.  Add to that, prices are still going up, so that's why regular people aren't feeling the benefit of an "improved" economy.

    Parent
    Structural changes in the economy (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by Politalkix on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:47:30 AM EST
    Automation and increased competition from globalized labor are slowing or curbing wage increases of American workers that lack specialized skills.

    Nevertheless, the jobs growth story is a remarkable achievement during the BHO presidency after the GOP crashed the economy in 2008 and continuously sabotaged it since that time by opposing any infrastructure spending.

    Many good things have happened during the BHO presidency that will help America retain its technological edge in a world where competition from nations has become fiercer. NASA launched the Orion spacecraft today (most ambitious US space mission in decades)today, rapid strides have ocured in commercialization of electric cars and Obamacare will make Americans look back longingly to the BHO presidency after the seeds of prosperity sowed by his administration have germinated.

    Parent

    On the economy (none / 0) (#154)
    by christinep on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:22:25 PM EST
    With the 320,000 jobs added last month and the unemployment rate holding at 5.8%, we may be close to that tipping-point where more people will begin to feel the positive effect at home.  Consider the following: The arc of job creation, as you have indicated has not only shown steady growth for many months but certain segments are noticeably benefitted now as well.  Highlighted in recent months are the Healthcare sector, the Retail sector, and (perhaps, surprisingly) Oil & Gas.

     With that background, people are seeing & feeling the result as they fill-up at the gas pumps each week ... a nice sight for many that keeps money in the pocketbook to spend on other consumables. As the highest pace of growth in the economy in 11 years has been reported since spring, more production jobs are on the horizon (and starting to show up in quarterly reports.) And, of course, Healthcare costs are reported as below-double-digit in almost all areas for the first time in over a decade (with many metro areas reporting decreases) ... the Healthcare sector, while complex, is growing jobs under any definition.

    The economic story is starting to change...as the numbers on all fronts are positive and even more promising.  (And that, my friend, is darn good economic news ... so good that it will be a challenge for the scripted media to find new phrasings and synonyms for "good" and "upbeat.")

    Parent

    It's finally improving across the board (5.00 / 2) (#101)
    by CST on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:31:08 AM EST
    Usa Today:

    "Labor market conditions are improving at breakneck speed," Ashworth said.

    Equally impressive is that nearly every major industry is ramping up hiring. "Everybody seems to be on the hiring bandwagon," says economist Joel Naroff of Naroff Economic Advisors.

    Last month, professional and business services added 86,000 jobs. Retailers added 50,000; health care, 37,000; and leisure and hospitality, 32,000.

    Middle-wage sectors are also growing solidly. Manufacturers added 28,000 jobs and construction, 20,000."

    Honestly, I can't speak to what's happening elsewhere, but Boston is definitely in the middle of a boom right now.  And it's not just cr@ppy jobs.  I started getting phone calls/emails in the spring from all sorts of people.  Including jobs I applied for 10 years ago back in Pittsburgh.  So maybe this is all completely anecdotal, but it feels as though the economy is actually improving.  Since my job sector is tied highly to real estate development, I'm thinking it's not just me.  My father (who is almost 65) and multiple friends/associates also recently got new, higher paying jobs in the health care, service, and tech industries.

    Parent

    I think (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:05:31 AM EST
    it largely depends on what part of the country you live in. The south has been left behind with regards to jobs but in all honesty until the citizens down here start demanding better and quit accepting high unemployment and excuses from the GOP it's going to be the way it is.

    Parent
    Don't blame Obama (none / 0) (#123)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:12:44 AM EST
    blame "Right To Work"

    Parent
    Well (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:21:26 AM EST
    that's part of it but in all honesty the people here are willing to accept low wages and poor living conditions. It gets back again to the fact that they won't stand up for themselves. I'm not talking about Obama. He wasn't on the ballot last month but Nathan Deal was and he has the worst economic record of any governor in the country and they voted for him. So apparently for all the whining about the job situation here in GA it's just that---whining. Apparently the majority of Georgians are willing to accept high unemployment, poor working conditions and low wages.

    Parent
    Check out (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:25:15 AM EST
    this "right to work" map

    Unless and until people understand that "right to work" actually means "right to take it up the bum with no lube" nothing will change.

    Parent

    Southern Democrats are a lost cause (none / 0) (#200)
    by Politalkix on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:27:30 PM EST
    link
    People in the south seem more interested in voting their culture, not their economics.

    Parent
    Not true (5.00 / 3) (#141)
    by sj on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:59:54 AM EST
    For some highly skilled workers in sectors like technology and finance, wages have been rising sharply...
    As a highly skilled worker the technology sector who knows many, many other highly skilled workers in the technology sector I can say definitively:

    Wages have been stagnant for nearly a decade.

    In fact, the "little up.. a little down" fluctuation has resulted in a net loss since about 2006. And that doesn't even take inflation into consideration. Don't get me wrong, I am far from minimum wage territory, but "rising sharply"? Not even.

    I can't speak to the finance sector, but who really believes that they have gotten their gains ethically? Even if some have done so, they are tainted by the corruption in their industry.

    Parent

    I was about to say the same... (none / 0) (#184)
    by ruffian on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:49:28 PM EST
    the operative word is some...

    Maybe at my age, my cohort has pretty much maxed out, but my friends and I have not seen more than 1-2% raises in a long time. Maybe the young highly sought folks that end up at Google and Apple are different.

    Parent

    FWIW (none / 0) (#201)
    by CST on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:28:41 PM EST
    another anecdote, but around here it is true in many different fields for younger people at least that wages have been going up significantly in just the past few months.  I have seen it, I went to a conference last week and all of my peers had seen it as well.  I'm in tech but not high tech by any means.  I'm even seeing it in my line-cook friends from my time waiting tables the last few years.  And those are the people that need it the most.  This is a very recent thing though - like the last 6 months.

    It's a lot easier to give someone a big raise who isn't making very much to begin with than it is for people who are already at the top of their field.

    Young people as a whole are so broke it's not even funny.  But I have seen since the spring that around here it's finally starting to get better.  I doubt it will ever make up for the lost years though.

    Parent

    Sony is in trouble (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:13:15 AM EST
    SONY HACK

    The breach at Sony Pictures is no longer just an IT issue

    Think about it - any plans that were on the network for new business, existing business, staffing, talent, etc. Sony has to assume those are all compromised, and if they were business critical, they'll need to be altered immediately.

    How do you recover from something like this? I mean, truly recover? Is it even possible?

    My FB newsfeed has been consumed by this.  It's now metastasized to Deloitte-

    Sony Hackers Expose Rogen's Pay Along With Deloitte Salaries

    Btw
    It doesn't seem to be the Koreans.  It seems to be the Guardians of Peace.

    Turns out... (5.00 / 2) (#80)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:36:23 AM EST
    there was an indictment in the Garner case after all.  The guy who shot the video, Ramsey Orta, claims the cops set him up on a gun charges 3 weeks after Garner's untimely death was indicted.  The gun had no prints.

    It's not Staten Island, it's Shady Island!  

    Ever spend much time there? (none / 0) (#88)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:47:37 AM EST
    that ferry is like a time machine.

    Parent
    See my reply above... (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:56:36 AM EST
    but no, not much...just drive through on Atlantic City trips.  Did go to a rave there once back in my High School days, that was f*ckin' surreal.  Raving Guido & Guidette Central...and the X was bunk.

    It's not all bad...Staten Island did give us the Wu-Tang Clan, so they got that going for them.  

    Parent

    Oregon Ducks vs Arizona Wildcats (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by fishcamp on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:36:32 AM EST
    tonight, for the Pac 12 championships.  It's on Fox Ch 7 at 9:00 eastern time.   GO DUCKS...

    As a U of A grad, I say GO CATS! (none / 0) (#143)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:00:56 PM EST
    Bear Down.

    Parent
    Ferguson Case is Almost Forgotten (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by RickyJim on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:24:03 AM EST
    Nothing about it on this thread and little elsewhere.  There are two reasons:

    1. For those in a complaining mood, there are a few even more egregious examples of excessive police force in the news.

    2. Bob McCulloch, the district attorney handling the case brilliantly disposed of it by having a review of the evidence (really a non adversarial trial) done by a citizen's panel, which decided for him that the case was not worth pursuing, and then had a complete record of the proceedings released.  After a brief period of huffing and puffing and nitpicking at that record, those who might benefit from a long drawn out case, have wisely shut up.


    In a complaining mood? (5.00 / 6) (#103)
    by CST on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:32:47 AM EST
    Ferguson has not gone away, it's now in a larger, angrier context.

    That specific fight might be over, but this fight has always been bigger than one case.

    Parent

    I see your analytical skills have not (5.00 / 5) (#133)
    by Anne on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:38:18 AM EST
    progressed beyond the superficial; I'd thank you for playing, but I'm not really feeling grateful for more of the same glib and oblivious-to-reality comments from you.

    Before I comment on your mistaken impression that Ferguson has been almost forgotten, I would like to address your comment about Bob McCulloch.

    First, you seem to be making the case that McCulloch's "brilliance" was directed at making sure the grand jury would not return an indictment.  Now, that may have been the outcome you wanted to see, but I don't see it as the best use of his office.  

    Second, this was not a trial.  The level of scrutiny that trials bring to determining the guilt or confirming the innocence of an individual, the rules of evidence that determine what the jury gets to see and hear, the ability to challenge/impeach witnesses - this is not applied to the grand jury process.

    Now, you will argue - as others have - that if the mountain of testimony and evidentiary material was insufficient to establish probable cause, then a trial would be a waste of time.  But I would argue that a trial is the better place to resolve conflicts in testimony and evidence, and there was enough of it for a finding of probable cause.  Further, a "no-bill" is not the same as a finding of "not guilty," and the unprecedented way in which this case has been handled has made it all too easy for people to conflate the two.

    Finally, your ability to trivialize the reactions of members of the local community as well as that of people around the country, to ignore the ongoing protests and fail to see the larger effects this is having is not just deplorable on a basic human level, it is emblematic of why we keep having these kinds of problems.

    And a problem we certainly do have.  We've allowed the balance of power to shift from the people to the authorities, and it's time - long past time, actually - for that to change.  I believe that the accumulation of incidents such as what happened in Ferguson, in Cleveland and New York - to name just three - will work to make changes in the people's favor; it's time for law enforcement to be put in its place.

    I'm sure this is all sailing right over your head, and we can expect another superficial response.  Maybe you should just go have some cookies and milk, instead.

    Parent

    We might see a civil case (none / 0) (#132)
    by McBain on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:36:49 AM EST
    It doesn't look like there will be a federal case against Wilson.  I doubt Wilson has much money and I doubt the Brown family could win a case against him but we shall see.

    Interesting how there was never a civil case against Zimmerman.  

    Parent

    "Run From The Cops 5K"... (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:43:39 PM EST
    ...has been postponed in Tempe because of civil unrest around the country.  I am still trying to figure out why they didn't rename it to something more appropriate.

    Only the police would find that name even remotely appropriate, even before Michael Brown, Eric Garner, John Crawford III, Tamir Rice, and now Rumain Brisbon.

    Meanwhile, over at Meet the Press:

    In the latest Make the Case, Tim Lynch, Director of Cato Institute Project on Criminal Justice, and Eugene O'Donnell, a professor at John Jay School of Criminal Justice, debate the use of military equipment by local police departments.

    Yes give them the good stuff, they are not killing enough innocent people with lousy guns, and please let NBC's Algonquin Table weigh in on arming the supposedly broke police departments with military grade gear.  

    Brutality problem solved.

    Too much... (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:54:02 PM EST
    shoulda called it the "Target Practice 5k".

    Speaking of tone deaf & tasteless police...NYPD is on Twitter again with hashtag #WeHearYou.  

    Yeah right Coppers, unless we're saying "I Can't Breathe"...that falls on deaf ears.

    Parent

    #WeHereYou... (none / 0) (#166)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:06:15 PM EST
    ...taking your last breathe and don't give a damn.

    #Next

    Parent

    And on a completely different note, (5.00 / 1) (#173)
    by Zorba on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:26:53 PM EST
    I am cooking kakavia for dinner.  It's a Greek seafood  soup/stew.
    Think of it as the Greek version of bouillabaisse, although we Greeks like to refer to bouillabaisse as the French version of kakavia.  ;-)
    Who knows who came up with the idea first?  I think a lot of the Mediterranean people had some version or other of this, given the abundance of seafood there.

    Thanks, MO and CG for telling the truth (5.00 / 1) (#216)
    by fishcamp on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 04:13:19 PM EST
    about the fish I catch down here.  You forgot the elusive Bonefish.  Actually we do call Dolphin, Mahimahi, but it must be spelled the Hawaiian way.  We also call them Dorado, which, of course, is Spanish. Great photo of Lazy Days CG.  I was busy scanning 48 Hells Angels still photos into my computer, with a new Canon scanner, printer, copier, fax, that didn't seem to understand me.  Mordy, I do still eat salmon, if it's the wild Alaskan version.  I caught my first salmon when I was five years old, and still love them.  BTW Leftover Salmon is a rock group that still plays in Aspen.  Didn't mean to upset you with my comment, well, maybe I did a little bit.  Peace through the Holidays,  I'm going out for fresh steamed Florida clams, that are ok to eat, if there is the letter "R" in the month. :-)  btw, nobody eats Tarpon, they're prehistoric, and the meat is brown.

    Reconstructionist (5.00 / 1) (#221)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 05:02:54 PM EST
    Don't know if you're aware that the largest geothermal generation project in the world is located in California, and has been producing power for an awfully long time:

    Geothermal development

    The Geysers is the world's largest geothermal field[4] spanning an area of around 30 square miles (78 km2) in Sonoma, Lake and Mendocino counties in California. Power from The Geysers provides electricity to Sonoma, Lake, Mendocino, Marin, and Napa counties. It is estimated that the development meets 60% of the power demand for the coastal region between the Golden Gate Bridge and the Oregon state line.[5] Unlike most geothermal resources, the Geysers is a dry steam field which mainly produces superheated steam.[4]

    Steam used at The Geysers is produced from a greywacke sandstone reservoir, capped by a heterogeneous mix of low permeability rocks and underlaid by a silicic intrusion.[2][6] Gravity and seismic studies suggest that the source of heat for the steam reservoir is a large magma chamber over 4 miles (6.4 km) beneath the surface, and greater than 8 miles (13 km) in diameter.[7]

    The first geothermal wells drilled in Geyser Canyon were the first in the Western Hemisphere.[1] The first power plant at the Geysers was privately developed by the owner of The Geysers Resort[1] and opened in 1921, producing 250 kilowatts of energy to light the resort.[2] In 1960, Pacific Gas and Electric began operation of their 11-megawatt plant at the Geysers.[8] The original turbine lasted for more than 30 years and produced 11 MW net power.[9]

    By 1999 the steam to power extraction had begun to deplete the Geysers steam field and production began to drop.[2] However, since October 16, 1997, the Geysers steam field has been recharged by injection of treated sewage effluent, producing approximately 77 megawatts of capacity in 2004.[10] The effluent is piped up to 50 miles (80 km) from its source at the Lake County Sanitation waste water treatment plants and added to the Geysers steam field via geothermal injection.[10] In 2004, 85% of the effluent produced by four waste-water treatment plants serving 10 Lake County communities was diverted to the Geysers steam field.[10] Injecting treated water into the Geysers field increases the amount of power that can be generated.[10]

    The injection of wastewater to the Geysers protects local waterways and Clear Lake by diverting effluent which used to be put into surface waters,[10] and has produced electricity without releasing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.[2]

    So, the burden here is to generate the other 40% presumably not now derived from renewable energy., at least for that part of the state.

    My bro-in-law got a Grammy nomination! (5.00 / 6) (#225)
    by Dadler on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 05:35:11 PM EST
    Congrats to my sweet sista's talented husband, Scott Mayo, and to Sergio Mendes of course. Mendes' album MAGIC was nominated for Best World Music album. Scott not only played on the platter but composed and arranged some songs, as well. Big thrill for him, and all of us. As the single most positive cat I have ever met, he more than deserves it. Word.

    I can't decide what I thing is more amazing (5.00 / 3) (#229)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Dec 06, 2014 at 12:26:15 PM EST
    that congress just passed a law banning Nazi war criminals from getting Social Security or that millions had already been paid to them.

    In some cases after they had left the country.

    But God forbid someone gets an extra food stamp.

    Hit and run again Jim? (5.00 / 1) (#231)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 at 02:50:06 PM EST

    The whole paragraph proves that what the writer is doing is trying to justify "consensus."

    Let everyone here read the whole thing and come to their own conclusions, instead of squawking the word "consensus"  like a parrot with a bipolar disorder.

    Consensus is the attempt to make sense of recent historical changes in the climate that are evident from numerous studies that have been peer-reviewed before publication in the scientific literature.

    Nice evasive tactic, BTW.  9/10.  ☺️

    Hi guys, game over, had lots of fun (2.00 / 4) (#29)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 11:54:36 PM EST
    and this comment by Mordiggian just added
    cream to the strawberries.

    Falsifiability would be explaining how glacial melt isn't a sign of AGW.  If that isn't the cause, why are they melting?

    Honestly, Mordiggian you haven't the least idea, what "Falsifiability" means. That comment is so wrong it astounds me, and that's hard to do.

    Please, use Google.

    lol

    In the meantime:

    Following rapid warming in the late 20th century, this century has so far seen surprisingly little increase in the average temperature at the Earth's surface. At first this was a blip, then a trend, then a puzzle for the climate science community.

    snip

    Subsurface ocean warming explains why global average air temperatures have flatlined since 1999, despite greenhouse gases trapping more solar heat at the Earth's surface.

    University of Washington

    Please stop trying to (5.00 / 5) (#31)
    by ZtoA on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:14:02 AM EST
    hog all the threads with your stupid comments. Please. And please try to ignore all the bad flu season because of the changing climate patterns which will affect the young and the old. You are good at ignoring current science and current news. Please do not get a flu shot this year.

    Parent
    In my opinion, if other commenters (4.43 / 7) (#33)
    by oculus on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:55:47 AM EST
    would stop trying to educate those who will never change their minds, this blog would be way more interesting.

    Parent
    I agree with your (5.00 / 2) (#139)
    by sj on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:53:43 AM EST
    In my opinion, if other commenters  (4.00 / 4) (#33)
    by oculus on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 11:55:47 PM MDT

    would stop trying to educate those who will never change their minds, this blog would be way more interesting.


    apparent preference for not feeding the trolls but I almost understand why it happens. Otherwise the unrefuted nonsense and/or hateful and/or [insert pseudonym for "stupid" here] statements appear to be accepted -- to a more casual reader, anyway.

    It's that the cr@p takes up half of the open threads.

    Parent

    I can't understand why (none / 0) (#50)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 08:00:18 AM EST
    this is so hard to inderstand

    Parent
    You got a one from one of his straight men (none / 0) (#53)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 08:16:09 AM EST
    surprise.  Without straight men what's he going to do post the same thing over and over?  No he need a straight man to do that.
    Please, think about it.
    :-)

    Parent
    We do need pearl clutters here (none / 0) (#57)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 08:43:00 AM EST
    So please do your part as well.  😂

    Parent
    Here's an idea (none / 0) (#62)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 08:53:19 AM EST
    instead of giving oculus a 1, give him a 1 and get on with your life.

    Parent
    Here's another suggestion (none / 0) (#73)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:20:32 AM EST
    Oculus is a grown adult who doesn't need you to run interference for her.

    Parent
    I am agreeing with her (none / 0) (#75)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:24:55 AM EST
    But clearly this is as pointless as your prattling with ppj.

    So please, carry on.

    Parent

    Who appointed you the Hall Monitor here. (none / 0) (#79)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:32:17 AM EST
    Overused comment, Mordy... (5.00 / 3) (#92)
    by fishcamp on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:04:40 AM EST
    Thanks for the feedback (none / 0) (#93)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:07:15 AM EST
    And try the salmon,folks, fishcamp is going to be here all week.

    Parent
    If you knew fish (5.00 / 3) (#99)
    by CoralGables on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:27:15 AM EST
    you'd know it would be grouper or dolphin.

    Parent
    What no (5.00 / 2) (#109)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:46:19 AM EST
    tarpon or permit?

    BTW, CG is not talking about Flipper but dolphinfish
    a completely different creature all together.

    Parent

    Whew (none / 0) (#115)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:51:33 AM EST
    we mammals were worried.

    Parent
    Well we did get a lesson (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:57:35 AM EST
    on the difference between dolphins and dolphinfish several weeks ago. IIRC some people kinda freaked thinking the discussion was about Flipper. Thought I'd head that discussion off at the pass so to speak.

    Parent
    Very happy to hear it (none / 0) (#121)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:03:03 AM EST
    now excuse me while I eat my burger.

    Parent
    I prefer fish (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:17:13 AM EST
    to burgers but to each his own. ;o)

    Parent
    Mo (none / 0) (#116)
    by CoralGables on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:53:51 AM EST
    no eating tarpon and permit are more of an elusive ghost with a bag limit of one per day so not on the menu. I would have said mahi but no self respecting Floridian would call it mahi, except a restaurant that is afraid of the flipper crowd reaction.

    Parent
    Somewhat confused (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:14:08 AM EST
    Are you talking about what fish are offered at restaurants or what a fisherman would try and catch for themselves in the Keys? Maybe you were talking about fish in general rather than fish that fishcamp catches.

    I am pretty sure that fishcamp has said that he fishes for tarpon and permit.

    Don't even pretend to be a fisherman, just going from what I've read here or at other places, but aren't tarpon and permit pretty big?  Wouldn't there be a lot of fish to go around even with a one per day limit?

    Parent

    MO (5.00 / 4) (#129)
    by CoralGables on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:29:06 AM EST
    it started in reply to this comment by  Mordiggian:

    And try the salmon,folks, fishcamp is going to be here all week.

    No way fishcamp would entertain today in a place where salmon was on the menu. He's probably holding court at Lazy Days this afternoon enjoying his grouper or yellowtail sandwich.

    Parent

    And if any of you want to be jealous (5.00 / 2) (#131)
    by CoralGables on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:36:46 AM EST
    Wow (5.00 / 3) (#137)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:48:36 AM EST
    I think wow covers it all.

    Parent
    Salmon for us West Coast types (none / 0) (#136)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:44:08 AM EST
    unlike you Least Coasters.  😳

    Parent
    I had no idea that (2.00 / 3) (#34)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:07:48 AM EST
    a. One comment out of 200 was hogging

    b. You are now Table Captain.

    c. In spite of my proof that MMGW doesn't meet the requirements of a Scientific Theory and my continued remarks that consensus is not science I see that you haven't grasped that elegantly simple fact. I leave you with one of the more famous examples of one man's correct comment regarding consensus by  an hierarchy:

    We say, pronounce, sentence, and declare that you, the said Galileo, by reason of the matters adduced in trial, and by you confessed as above, have rendered yourself in the judgment of this Holy Office vehemently suspected of heresy, namely, of having believed and held the doctrine--which is false and contrary to the sacred and divine Scriptures--that the Sun is the center of the world and does not move from east to west and that the Earth moves and is not the center of the world; and that an opinion may be held and defended as probably after it has been declared....
    snip

    Early in 1633, Galileo was summoned from his sickbed to defend his life's work. Galileo was told to renounce his heresies in exchange for leniency. Galileo obliged. His book was burned and the sentence read in every university.

    According to legend, as Galileo left the Inquisition hall after recanting his views, he supposedly muttered,

    E pur se muove. ("Nevertheless, it moves.")

    While living out his sentence under house arrest, Galileo continued to write before going blind in 1638 and finally dying in 1642.

    The Catholic Church officially denied Copernican Theory until 1922.

    Link

    Have a super day!

    Parent

    You're continuing the same ... (5.00 / 3) (#38)
    by Yman on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 06:14:02 AM EST
    ... tired, denialist talking points that you clogged the other threads with, with the same, tired links to wingnut blogs as your "evidence", while denying the thousands of actual scientific studies from actual experts.

    Yeah ... clogging.

    BTW - Did the Catholic Church have thousands of scientific studies with millions of data points to to support their position?

    Didn't think so.

    Parent

    Yes, you are "continuing the (5.00 / 1) (#159)
    by oculus on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:46:25 PM EST
    same."

    Parent
    So, you're comparing yourself (5.00 / 3) (#171)
    by Zorba on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:19:51 PM EST
    to Galileo now???
    Thanks for my laugh of the day, Jim.
    BTW, your link is not a link, although I think most of us are familiar with Galileo.  
    As you often say, lol.
    You have a nice day, too.


    Parent
    Sorry, but falsifiabilty (none / 0) (#40)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 06:45:09 AM EST
    As applied to AGW has been examined.  Read the following perhaps you can learn something new this time around

    There are indeed a great many aspects of the Theory of Global Warming that are falsifiable without waiting for the next century's climate to come upon us. There are, to start, all the laboratory tests of basic physics, such as the infrared absorption properties of CO2 and water vapor. There are also field tests of the predictions of these basic physical theories, as is done when one measure water vapor and temperature in the atmosphere, and compares the predictions of radiative transfer theory with observed infrared radiation measured at the top of the atmosphere by satellite, or at the surface by radiation sensors. One can check the evaporation formulae used in climate models against the measured evaporation at buoys in the ocean, or the predictions of cloud models against observed cloud reflectivity. Going up the scale in complexity, one can compare the predictions of the theory against observations of recent climates, and of climates of the more distant past. General circulation models encapsulate the assumptions of the theory, and provide the tool necessary for testing hypotheses in such a complex system.

    A further point regarding the positivist criterion is the the Theory of Global Warming is productive. The implied influence of CO2 (or methane) on climate can be, and has been, applied to the understanding of the Last Glacial Maximum, to Snowball Earth, to the Faint Young Sun, and to Cretaceous warmth. Variants apply also to Venus, Mars (present and past) and Titan. It is fair to say that this theory plays as central a role in the theory of planetary climate as the Theory of Evolution plays in biology. A relatied point is that the theory can be and has been challenged by data, and forced to adapt accordingly. This was the case in the precursor to the theory, when Tyndall discovered that minor constituents (CO2 and water vapor) dominated the greenhouse effect; the resulting adaptation of Fourier's theory opened the way for Arrhenius to conclude that human influences on the atmosphere could change the climate. A more recent adaptation was the incorporation of aerosol effects in the late 1980's which was forced upon the theory by the inability to explain the pattern of 20th century climate change with greenhouse gas increases alone. Contrary to the assertion in Mr. Williams' letter to the Chicago Tribune, revisions to the theory have not led to any systematic downward revision of the appraisal of the magnitude of the thread caused by doubling CO2. Indeed, some discoveries, notably the prevalance of abrupt climate change in the past record, have raised concerns that the current understanding may underpredict the magnitude of the response.

    You invoke Galileo, I will invoke Carl Sagan:

    But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
    Carl Sagan

    Thanks for the laughs in your latest response.


    Parent

    Farther down in the link (none / 0) (#65)
    by Reconstructionist on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 08:59:54 AM EST
     is a passage that pretty well illustrates the point I made in a past thread about the distinction between the reliability of the "science" insofar as describing what has occurred and (in part)why and the much less reliable and to a large extent "non-scientific" nature of attempts at predictive models:

    [Response: A fair enough point. I focused on the worst vs. the most likely case because most economic analysis and indeed most policy analysis tends to gravitate toward the mid-range of the predictions. I loosely called this the "most likely" case, though I don't actually believe we have any sensible way to assign probabilities to the different forecasts. We know what is possible, but not really what is likely. Judge Posner, in his book on Catastrophe, make an argument for paying the most attention to extreme cases with very severe consequences, even if their probability is small or poorly quantified. His book advocates this for global warming in particular, as well as a number of other potential catastrophes. -raypierre]

       Then, where he cites Posner's argument for planning and action based on the most severe predictions despite what he in so many words concedes is the lack of a valid scientific basis for those predictions, he basically ignores the "other half" of a sensible equation.

      Were there no "downside" in acting as if the most severe "possible" consequence will occur in the absence of extreme action, then, obviously, taking extreme action would be the sensible thing to do. That's not the reality though. Extreme action to curtail emissions will necessarily have a strong depressing effect on the world economy. Making energy much more expensive will necessarily make virtually everything cost more money for everyone, and most people would become relatively poorer as a result. This also is a "fact" and should be part of any sensible action plan.

       The other problem with basing policy on the most extreme positions, is that some of them actually posit that we have "passed a tipping point" and that extreme warming with very adverse consequences is going to occur regardless of what we do in the future. That, to those so inclined, begs the question: then, what's the point of doing something drastic to curtail emissions if the warming will occur regardless?

       I very much believe man made global warming has occurred and will continue to occur. I also find. I do however, recognize the very limited reliability of the predictive models and a  lack of appreciation for the "other half of the equation" prevalent among a significant segment of the activist community. I also believe that the most extreme of the activists  do ill serve us by promoting forecasts as "scientific fact" when they are not.

      This kind of  alarmism feeds people like Jim with ammunition to discredit the whole community with the argument that: "well they predicted 2x and then we observed 0.5X, so they're all lying."

      That works to a large degree because MANY people do not pay enough attention or understand that the descriptive theory and the predictive models are not some unitary construct and that the profound limitations on our ability to predict do not mean the same limitations exist on our ability to understand what has happened to date and why.

     

    Parent

    Actually the use of renewable sources (none / 0) (#72)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:17:58 AM EST
    Has few downsides, unless you're a Koch brother.

    Anyway, extrapolation of existing trends is a completely scientific activity, but you're right, fear-monger isn't preferable to educating the public and acknowledging the limited reliability of any forecast on a long-term basis.

    Parent

    that's simply not true (none / 0) (#78)
    by Reconstructionist on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:31:08 AM EST
     and stating it as if it is severely undermines credibility.

    Parent
    Here's a link to the Union of Concerned Scientists (none / 0) (#82)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:39:49 AM EST
    About the advantages of renewable energy.  

    If you have any refutation to make of any of the points, this is the time to put up or shut up.

    Parent

    How about (none / 0) (#94)
    by Reconstructionist on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:09:54 AM EST
      the obvious and  undeniable fact we cannot wave a magic wand and  replace the power and fuel currently derived from plentiful available  resources by  relatively simple processes utilizing existing infrastructure. Huge amounts of capital would be required to manufacture, transport and install the necessary infrastructure on a global scale. Saying the sun will shine and the wind will blow so we can have energy as cheaply as we do now if we just have the will is below silly.

       Price is a function of supply and demand but it has a floor at cost. If price is below cost then the product cannot be produced without some subsidy which is in reality just a transfer of a portion of the price from the direct consumer to someone else.

      No one who can be taken seriously argues we can supply the current demand -- let alone the future growing demand--  for power and fuel from renewable resources given current technology and infrastructure. Maybe 100 years from now the world will be able to do that, but for the forseeable future eliminating or even drastically reducing the use of fossil fuels will make energy more costly, reduce supply and limit  geographic availability of that reduced supply. Because the cost of virtually every good and commodity on the planet includes the cost of energy required for production and transportation to market of  everything, everything would become more expensive.

      This would obviously affect virtually everyone because if everything costs more the same income can purchase less. It would also almost certainly affect those who are already poor most severely.

      Pretending that this is not true will not  

     

    Parent

    Haven't been studied these days:

    In 2013, new investment into renewable power sources totaled $214 billion worldwide. This is up from $40 billion in 2004. At the start of the renewables push, the question for policymakers was how to spur spending on renewable energy expansion. Now, policymakers rather consider how to best achieve the larger goals of energy affordability, supply security and sustainability.

    Broadly speaking, the most prominent regulatory support for alternative energy generations fits into one of three categories: Renewable Portfolio Standards are quota systems that require power companies or customers to provide or use a quota of renewable energy sources or to buy certificates to meet that obligation; Feed-In-Tariffs guarantee payments to power providers even if market prices collapse; Market Premia, like Feed-In-Tariffs, guarantee payments to providers but are market based to provide a premium to spot prices. One hundred thirty-eight countries, states and provinces use one or all of these programs to support renewable energy development.

    The researchers tested each program for efficacy and robustness against uncertain regulatory and economic environments. They found that all of them have succeeded in increasing renewable power supply and reducing carbon emissions. Tariffs and premium payments are often the lowest cost solutions but quotas tend to generate more predictable long term results both in terms of renewable energy adoption and long-term investment. Because, to varying degrees, tariffs and premium payments distort markets by ignoring prevailing prices, the potential for over- and under-investment is great over longer periods of time.

    Taken together, the two papers offer policymakers a framework for decision-making by identifying the short and long term tradeoffs implicit in each arrangement and by suggesting that a system of Renewable Portfolio Standards might provide the most robust long-term supply of renewable energy sources, even in a changing economic and regulatory environment.



    Parent
    I'm not sure (none / 0) (#140)
    by Reconstructionist on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:57:59 AM EST
     how you think your post your post  is relevant to my point, but I will assure you no valid study exists supporting the position that we can eliminate or drastically reduce the use of fossil fuels in the short term without dramatic price increases, lesser supply and limited geographic availability.

    Parent
    Then you haven't kept up (none / 0) (#162)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:52:31 PM EST
    With the latest research in this area:

    Jacobson's study outlines a plan to fulfill all of the Golden State's transportation, electric power, industry, and heating and cooling energy needs with renewable energy by 2050. It calculates the number of new devices and jobs created, land and ocean areas required, and policies needed for infrastructure changes. It also provides new estimates of air pollution mortality and morbidity impacts and costs based on multiple years of air quality data. The plan is analogous to one that Jacobson and other researchers developed for New York state.



    Parent
    At this point, (5.00 / 1) (#208)
    by Reconstructionist on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:56:04 PM EST
     All you are accomplishing now is making Jim sound like Tesla by comparison (no mean feat).

       That a hugely unrealistic plan for one state-- the richest one in the richest country on Earth-- that conveniently glosses over a fairly important detail with:

      "The study concludes that, while a wind, water and sunlight conversion may result in initial capital cost increases, such as the cost of building renewable energy power plants, these costs would be more than made up for over time by the elimination of fuel costs."

      Beyond the laughable dishonesty in using "may" he offers no numbers in roughly estimating what those initial costs would total, how that capital could be raised, or how much "time" it would take for these costs to be "more than made up." Perhaps that's because it's trillions of dollars (just for California) with many many decades to break even.

      This, if you read the article closely, would provide 56% of what California currently consumes in  electric power. He apparently believes magic will result in a 44% decrease in demand  without any corresponding decline in productivity.

       In addition to the power generating facilities he lists (without estimating construction and operating costs) he also somewhat in passing mentions , oh and by the way,  we would need to use almost 4% of California's land surface.

     California is over 100,000,000 acres, so we're talking an amount of land close to the size of New Jersey. I've also heard that land in California is not free, so in addition to the obvious practical problems in acquiring that much land, even if we valued the land at the absurdly low amount of only $2500 an acre that's 250 billion dollars just for siting facilities capable of producing 56% of California's current power consumption.

    Furthermore because these facilities would be scattered hither and yon in his plan, huge amounts more would be needed to acquire right of ways for transmission lines (and the lines themselves  also cost money for which he failed to account) between these far flung facilities and the places using the power.

      I could ramble on, but suffice it to say ythat the old adage about things that sound too good to be true rarely fails.

    Parent

    Yes, the wild forecasts do (none / 0) (#86)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:45:30 AM EST
    give those of us who do not believe ... and let me make this clear in MAN MADE global warming... some significant points in refuting the wild claims and desire of politicians do spend money and hurt the world's economy.... although China has refused to join in the suicide pact. (Don't believe  what they have said they will do. Obama bought the lie because it gave him some badly needed luster after the mid term shellacking.

    I think we are not in radical disagreement. Indeed I have supported, in the past, the EPA's efforts. But the slippery slope has brought the camel into the tent. We're spending $23 billion this year on smoke and mirrors when we could be spending on real research. "Clean energy" isn't the answer.

    I'll close with Crichton:

    Next, the isolation of those scientists who won't get with the program, and the characterization of those scientists as outsiders and "skeptics" in quotation marks-suspect individuals with suspect motives, industry flunkies, reactionaries, or simply anti-environmental nut-cases.

    In short order, debate ends, even though prominent scientists are uncomfortable about how things are being done. When did "skeptic" become a dirty word in science? When did a skeptic require quotation marks around it?

    Read the article

    You only have to read the almost viscous attacks here to see how too many of us today demand 100% conformity to the political discourse.

    Parent

    No, we don't agree (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by Reconstructionist on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:17:04 AM EST
      I do accept the premise that man's burning of fossil fuels has caused at least some of the warming that has occurred.

      I also believe "clean energy" is the answer, just not a short-term and painless answer.

    Parent

    Correct (none / 0) (#145)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:08:53 PM EST
    we past simple answers quite a while ago.  At this point any solutions, real solutions, are going to be painful.   And every day makes them more painful.

    I have become very fatalistic about it.  I think we are going to have to hit bottom.  And once we to that it will take decades if not centuries to fix.

    One of the very few reasons I am glad I have already had 63 good years.

    Parent

    Mordiggian, ou still do not grasp the fact (none / 0) (#76)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:27:04 AM EST
    There are indeed a great many aspects of the Theory of Global Warming that are falsifiable without waiting for the next century's climate to come upon us.

    But that all it takes is one time for  any Scientific Theory to be proved wrong and and the THEORY is now just a theory.

    Sagan was a supreme futurist and made a great deal of money and fame speculating. He's one of my favorites. "Billions of billions of stars..." was one of his best.

    I also enjoy Michael Crichton, another very smart man who made a lot of money writing and speculating about the future. In this lecture he takes on Drake, and the pseudo science that Sagan, and others, were starting to promote.

    In 1960, Drake organizes the first SETI conference, and came up with the now-famous Drake equation: N=N*fp ne fl fi fc fL
    [where N is the number of stars in the Milky Way galaxy; fp is the fraction with planets; ne is the number of planets per star capable of supporting life; fl is the fraction of planets where life evolves; fi is the fraction where intelligent life evolves; and fc is the fraction that communicates; and fL is the fraction of the planet's life during which the communicating civilizations live.]

    This serious-looking equation gave SETI a serious footing as a legitimate intellectual inquiry. The problem, of course, is that none of the terms can be known, and most cannot even be estimated. The only way to work the equation is to fill in with guesses. And guesses-just so we're clear-are merely expressions of prejudice.

    Nor can there be "informed guesses." If you need to state how many planets with life choose to communicate, there is simply no way to make an informed guess. It's simply prejudice.

    And he added.

    I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.

    Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world.

    In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.


    Link

    Parent
    That the late writer (none / 0) (#85)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:42:57 AM EST
    May have had some points about the Drake Equation doesn't mean he had any insight about AGW.

    You still haven't done anything but arm-wave again.

    Parent

    Crichgton's point is not about MMGW (none / 0) (#100)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:31:01 AM EST
    it is about:

    I expected science to be, in Carl Sagan's memorable phrase, "a candle in a demon haunted world." And here, I am not so pleased with the impact of science. Rather than serving as a cleansing force, science has in some instances been seduced by the more ancient lures of politics and publicity.

    Science is science is science. You cannot claim that Crichton is correct about the Drake Theory and ignore his point about politics.

    If, for example, the Left was pushing for some modest money spent on research about climate change I would have no problem. In fact, I would agree. But, to make public policy... bad public policy... on guesses and studies that have repeatedly been proven wrong is harmful and will lead to a disaster for the country.
     

    Parent

    The difference between the Drake Equatiom (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:32:22 AM EST
    And MMGW is that there is tons of data( or, in layman terms, hard facts) supporting the latter, and the Drake Equation is hopelessly outdated in terms of what we know of planetary science now, even what we knew when the writer wrote his little screed.

    As they put it recently at  Ars Technia, which as a techie you should be familiar with:

    One of the many unfortunate aspects of arguments over climate change is that it's where many people come across the idea of a scientific consensus. Just as unfortunately, their first exposure tends to be in the form of shouted sound bites: "But there's a consensus!" "Consensus has no place in science!"

    Lost in the shouting is the fact that consensus plays several key roles in the process of science. In light of all the consensus choruses, it's probably time to step back and examine its importance and why it's a central part of the scientific process. And only after that is it possible to take a look at consensus and climate change.

    Standards of evidence

    Fiction author Michael Crichton probably started the backlash against the idea of consensus in science. Crichton was rather notable for doubting the conclusions of climate scientists--he wrote an entire book in which they were the villains--so it's fair to say he wasn't thrilled when the field reached a consensus. Still, it's worth looking at what he said, if only because it's so painfully misguided:

    Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results.

    Reproducible results are absolutely relevant. What Crichton is missing is how we decide that those results are significant and how one investigator goes about convincing everyone that he or she happens to be right. This comes down to what the scientific community as a whole accepts as evidence.

    In an earlier discussion of science's standards for statistical significance, we wrote, "Nobody's ever found a stone tablet etched with a value for scientific certainty." Different fields use different values of what they think constitutes significance. In biology, where "facts" are usually built from a large collection of consistent findings, scientists are willing to accept findings that are only two standard deviations away from random noise as evidence. In physics, where particles either exist or don't, five standard deviations are required.

    While that makes the standards of evidence sound completely rational, they're also deeply empirical. Physicists found that signals that were three standard deviations from the expected value came and went all the time, which is why they increased their standard. Biologists haven't had such problems, but other problems have popped up as new technology enabled them to do tests that covered tens of thousands of genes instead of only a handful. Suddenly, spurious results were cropping up at a staggering pace. For these experiments, biologists agreed to a different standard of evidence.

    It's not like they got together and had a formal vote on it. Instead, there were a few editorials that highlighted the problem, and those pieces started to sway the opinions of not only scientists but journal editors and the people who fund grants. In other words, the field reached a consensus.

    That sort of thing is easiest to see in terms of statistical significance, but it pervades the process of science. If two closely related species share a feature, then we conclude it was present in their common ancestor. The scientific community decided to establish 15 percent ice coverage as the standard for when a region of the ocean contains ice. It required that every potential planet imaged by the Kepler probe must have its presence confirmed by an independent method before being called a planet. There's no objective standard that defines any one of these test as the truth; it's just that the people in the field have reached a consensus about what constitutes evidence.

    Consensus is not just for standards

    Just as fields reach a consensus about what constitutes evidence, they reach a consensus about what that evidence has demonstrated. Confusion about the potential causes of AIDS dominated the early years of the epidemic, but it took researchers only two years after the formal description of the disorder to identify a virus that infected the right cells. In less than a decade, enough evidence piled up to allow the biomedical research community to form a consensus: HIV was the causal agent of AIDS.

    That doesn't mean that every single person in the field had been convinced; there are holdouts, including a Nobel Prize winner, who continue to argue that the evidence is insufficient. Those in the field-and humanity in general--simply don't find their arguments persuasive. We've since oriented public policy around what the vast majority of experts consider a fact.

    In most fields, however, the stakes aren't quite so high. You get informal consensuses forming around things that the public isn't ever aware of: the existence of morphogens in patterning embryonic tissues, the source of the radiation in the jets of quasars, and so on. If you asked a large group of scientists, their consensus would be that consensus is a normal part of the scientific process. Contrary to Crichton's writings, the consensus forms precisely because reproducible evidence is generated.

    Consensus matters

    On its own, the existence of a consensus seems trivial; researchers conclude some things based on the state of the evidence without that evidence ever rising to the level of formal proof. But consensus plays a critical role in the day-to-day functioning of science as well.

    In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas Kuhn discussed the idea of paradigms: big intellectual frameworks that organize a field's research. Paradigms help identify problems that need solving, areas that still have anomalous results--all while giving researchers ways of interpreting any results they get. Generally, they tell scientists what to do and how to think of their results. Although not as important or over-arching as a paradigm, a consensus functions the same way, just at a smaller scale.

    For example, researchers will necessarily interpret their results based on what the consensus in their field is. So odd cosmic observations will be considered in terms of the existence of dark matter particles, given that there's a consensus that the particles exist. It doesn't matter whether the researchers--or their results--agree with the consensus. The existence of a consensus simply shapes the discussion. In the same way, research goals and grants are set based on areas where the consensus opinion seems a bit weak or has unanswered questions.

    At first glance, this may seem like it can stifle the appearance of ideas that run counter to the consensus. But any idea in science carries the seeds of its own destruction. By directing research to the areas where there are outstanding questions, a consensus makes it more likely that we'll generate data that directly contradicts it. It may take a little while to get recognized for what it is, but eventually the data will win out.



    Parent
    BTW - Your link ... (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by Yman on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 06:21:53 AM EST
    ... to the UW newspaper article is about a study which shows that the warming at the earth's surface has temporarily plateaued (as opposed to stopped) because the heat is being absorbed by the oceans.  his has been discussed for years by actual climatologists, and doesn't support your denialist claims.

    Changes in Atlantic Ocean circulation historically meant roughly 30 warmer years followed by 30 cooler years. Now that it is happening on top of global warming, however, the trend looks more like a staircase.

    This explanation implies that the current slowdown in global warming could last for another decade, or longer, and then rapid warming will return. But Tung emphasizes it's hard to predict what will happen next.



    Parent
    Same as with the L..A. Times piece (none / 0) (#43)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 07:01:19 AM EST
    He quoted from?  A misleading excerpt, and no quotes that don't support his POV.

    To quote Tenneessee Williams, I detect the odor of mendacity here.  The real tragedy here is that he thinks he's being honest when he does so.  He fools himself before anybody else.

    Parent

    And what do we have here??? (2.00 / 1) (#104)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:34:59 AM EST
    Another claim that... what.... the pause is "temporary."

    And what actual proof do they have that this is true?? The pause is the pause. Change may become down or up or remain the same.

    No One Knows.

    Parent

    My last attempt (2.00 / 1) (#230)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 06, 2014 at 01:14:01 PM EST
    at trying to help Mordiggian understand.

    Reproducible results are absolutely relevant. What Crichton is missing is how we decide that those results are significant and how one investigator goes about convincing everyone that he or she happens to be right. This comes down to what the scientific community as a whole accepts as evidence.

    The whole paragraph proves that what the writer is doing is trying to justify "consensus."

    Note the "how we decide." That's saying some group, as in Galileo's day, gets to define what is important and what is not. And then "what the scientific community as a whole."

    We have centuries of proof that science doesn't work like that.

    Have a nice day. I'm done.

    McBain (none / 0) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 09:21:37 PM EST
    Melancholia is boring but interesting.

    Antichrist is amazing.

    Interested in the new one.

    Not exactly Lars but the new Terminator movie looks really good

    The orginal Terminator (none / 0) (#7)
    by McBain on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 09:46:14 PM EST
    is one of my favorite sci fi films.... and the others have all bee good.... but I think I have Terminator and time travel fatigue.

    Parent
    I actually think (none / 0) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 09:51:15 PM EST
    because of the people involved the new one may be the best yet.  They are integrating an aged Arnold into the story in a really interesting way.

    Didn't you think the ticks in Antichrist were AWSUM? Come on.   That is one of my favorite movie sequences ever.  

    Parent

    I couldn't get past the genital mutilation (none / 0) (#11)
    by McBain on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 10:02:42 PM EST
    Meh (none / 0) (#20)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 10:44:00 PM EST
    What's a little genital mutilation between friends-

    So, as you might've guessed, Antichrist is one of those love-it-or-hate-it movies. Roger Ebert calls it "the most despairing film I've ever have seen." Jeffrey Wells brands it a "fartbomb." Movieline's David Bourgeois says it's "the most original and thought-provoking work von Trier has done since Breaking the Waves." Variety's Todd McCarthy, who must've been seated in the same row as Wells, says the movie "cuts a big fat art-film fart." Our favorite reaction, though, is from the Times's Manohla "Movie Killer" Dargis, who Ebert says he heard singing "That's Entertainment!" as she left the theater.


    Parent
    It's Like the Matrix... (none / 0) (#61)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 08:53:03 AM EST
    ...once the cat is out of the bag it's pretty hard to recreate the originality of the original.  Time travel is only good if it's done really well.

    Love the original Terminator and the original Total Recall.

    Safety Not Guaranteed, while not technically a time travel movie, it is about someone claiming to have a time machine.

    Three magazine journalists set out to investigate this ad:

    WANTED Someone to go back in time with me. This is not a joke. You'll get paid when we get back. Must bring your own weapons. Safety not guaranteed. I have only done this once before.


    Parent
    I agree (none / 0) (#63)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 08:55:22 AM EST
    but the approach, the plot and the cast of the new movie bodes well.

    Although I think the terminator franchise has been one of the better series all along.

    Parent

    Yes... (none / 0) (#71)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:14:23 AM EST
    ...and number 2 was especially good because, at the time, the CGI was second to none and for a sci-fi movie, it was long.

    Parent
    Warren Buffett (none / 0) (#5)
    by CoralGables on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 09:41:00 PM EST
    contributed $25,000 to "Ready For Hillary".

    The GOP won't be happy that a 1%er has turned his back on them before they even have a chance to winnow down their raggedy group of guttersnipes for 2016.

    I think (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 08:25:53 AM EST
    the GOP long ago gave up on Buffett and mostly I have seen them attacking him.

    Parent
    Why would the GOP be surprised? (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 08:45:21 AM EST
    This is SOP for Buffet.

    Buffett, 81, is a Democrat who has championed causes like abortion rights and the estate tax through his career, and last year he pressed for tax increases on the wealthy.

    While he shuns political PACs, he has regularly contributed to Democratic candidates, including Obama, over the years.

    Parent

    True (none / 0) (#64)
    by CoralGables on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 08:55:29 AM EST
    but this is his first PAC, giving the impression that he already knows Hillary is running in 2016 while ignoring the field of 30 on the otherside.

    Only slightly off topic:

    Mitt Romney met with the owners of the Miami Dolphins and the New York Jets this week and a person at the meeting is convinced he's running in 2016. Believe he's already on the list of 30.

    Parent

    Has he been known to (none / 0) (#70)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 09:13:26 AM EST
    Contribute money to GOP presidential candidates? As far as support, I would think it is SOP for Buffett to ignore the 30 on the other side.

    Wouldn't be much of a surprise if Romney decides to run again. Might be a little bit more of a surprise if he got the nomination but not much.

    From my standpoint, I would prefer Romney run instead of Bush.

    Parent

    You may be seeing Christie again (none / 0) (#138)
    by Ruby on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 11:49:40 AM EST
    No evidence he was in on "Bridge-gate"

    TRENTON, N.J. (AP) -- New Jersey lawmakers probing politically motivated traffic jams near the George Washington Bridge last year have found no evidence that Gov. Chris Christie was involved in the scheme. They did not rule out the possibility, however, as they have been unable to interview several witnesses.

    Investigators found no conclusive evidence that Christie was aware of the lane closures, but they say that two former Christie aides acted with "perceived impunity" and with little regard for public safety when they ordered the lanes closed, according to a 136-page interim report by a joint legislative panel.

    A report commissioned by Christie previously cleared him of any wrongdoing, and a lawyer for the governor said in a statement Thursday night that the report corroborates that investigation.

    SNIP

    But the report notes that important questions remain unanswered and several critical witnesses have not testified. The report will be supplemented if more information is obtained. An investigation by the U.S. attorney's office continues


    Parent
    We can only hope (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:10:39 PM EST
    He would be a disaster as a candidate.

    Parent
    I like (none / 0) (#98)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:26:07 AM EST
    the guttersnipes as a description. Very apt I would say.

    Parent
    Capt Howdy, tell me you watched Peter Pan Live (none / 0) (#21)
    by ruffian on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 10:44:13 PM EST
    I am trying to find the words.

    I confess I have never seen the whole story...what a bizarre thing it is.

    I don't know what effect Christopher Walken was going for with his Hook, but it was like a campy Johnny Depp doing Shakespeare.

    I watched a little of it... (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by desertswine on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 11:12:30 PM EST
    but I couldn't watch the whole thing. I found Allison Williams....  well, creepy as Peter Pan.

    Parent
    Agreed. (none / 0) (#35)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:58:04 AM EST
    Christopher Walken was channeling Ming the Merciless by way of Jack Sparrow, while I don't know what Allison Williams thought she was doing out there. I lost interest after only 20 minutes and had to change the channel.

    Parent
    I couldn't (none / 0) (#23)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 10:53:08 PM EST
    i just couldn't.  I love Christopher Walken to much.  And I hate they did the Mary Martin thing.  PETER PAN WAS A BOY DAMMIT.

    also this Peter Pan is one of my favorite things that I ever worked on.  And no one saw it.  If you have a boring afternoon I really recommend it.  IMO it is the seminal version so far.

    Parent

    I don't think I can go there again (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by ruffian on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 10:59:57 PM EST
    even for you. But I will keep it in mind.

    I have no idea why they have female actresses play it anymore. I get that Mary Martin was so huge that she was a draw, but there is no reason to continue. The musical does not need any more sick factors. "A boy for every Hook, a hook for every boy"????  What kind of lyrics are those?  I read that they did change the lyrics to some of the songs about 'red indians'.

    Next they are doing The Music Man. I might not watch unless they get Neil Patrick Harris.

    Parent

    Do me a favor and (5.00 / 3) (#25)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 04, 2014 at 11:04:14 PM EST
    watch the trailer.  Some of my shots are in it.  In fact one of the snow shots in that trailer got one of my all time favorite revision instructions from the director in compositing dalies.

    MORE FLAKES -LESS SNOW!!

    That's when you don't change anything, show it again and they love it.

    Parent

    You can't think about the story too much, (none / 0) (#41)
    by Anne on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 06:49:18 AM EST
    and you have to look at it through the lens of a child - it doesn't really have to make sense to them, because what they really enjoy are things like being able to fly, and going to a place where you don't have to grow up to be some boring adult with "responsibilities," and...there are fairies and pirates.  But it's also about being careful what you wish for, isn't it?  Learning that, even as a kid, all that so-called fun isn't as much fun when there're no parents - no mom to tuck you in at night, to read you stories and keep you safe.

    It's not reality TV or cinema verite, and it all makes more sense when you stop trying to make sense of it.  If that makes sense, lol.

    That being said, I don't know why women keep being cast as Peter - is it about the Mary Martin tradition that continued with Cathy Rigby and Sandy Duncan?  I have no idea.  I didn't find Allison Willians compelling or believable in the role - and that may have less to do with her being female and more to do with her not-great acting ability.  And her tendency to forget she was faking a British accent, which got on my nerves a little bit.

    My girls loved Peter Pan - the animated Disney version and the Mary Martin version, which they found hard to believe actually existed when their mother was a kid!  "yes, we did have TV when I was a child."

    Walken was Walken; was he a good Captain Hook?  I felt like Walken's reputation for being a little off and playing so many roles where his character was also a little off may have gotten in the way of the adults watching, but kids?  They may not have noticed, and likely didn't pick up on the same kinds of under- and overtones adults did.

    I'll tell you what I really hated: all the commercials, most especially the unabashed selling of Wal-Mart merchandise.  What - Wal-Mart couldn't afford to sponsor with "limited commercial interruption?"  If it's going to break for three minutes of commercials every 15 minutes, what's the point of doing it live?

    And the timing: most young kids are in bed by 8:30 or so on a school night, and this went until 11:00 pm.  Put it on at 7:00, limit the commercials, and maybe it can be a two-hour show that becomes a special treat to stay up a little later to watch.  Otherwise, it gets recorded, and then, so what if it was done live?  But you can fast forward through the dreck of the commercials, so there's that.

    For all the promo it got, I can't say I was overly impressed.

    Parent

    The casting of women in the main role (none / 0) (#44)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 07:06:32 AM EST
    Goes back to the beginning of the stage production in the early part of the last Century.  Blaming  the casting of Mary Martin as the beginning of this trend is incorrect.

    My first stage performance was in a production of Peter Pan as one of two twins of the Lost Boys, and my mother played the title character.

    Parent

    I'm so sorry I wasn't around in the early (none / 0) (#45)
    by Anne on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 07:15:02 AM EST
    part of the last century...my first Peter Pan experience was the Mary Martin version, so that was my frame of reference.  No "blame" involved.

    That being said, my point was that I don't know why that trend has continued - there really isn't any reason why Peter Pan has to be played by a woman - other than the fact that, if you have to cast an adult in the role of a boy, an adult male is going to have a problem sounding like a boy.  Are there no boy actors who could play the role?

    Parent

    A little history (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by jbindc on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 07:47:21 AM EST
    Schilling once again for "my" version (none / 0) (#49)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 07:54:57 AM EST
    a boy plays Pan.   He's very good and it is not a musical.  The director said his goal was to stay as close to the source material as possible.

    Parent
    I was referring to a commentator (none / 0) (#46)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 07:45:06 AM EST
    above you who did the blaming.

    Are there no boy actors who could play the role?

    Sure, as long as you don't mind re-casting it every few years if you're on tour.

    Parent

    Maybe I should have auditioned... (5.00 / 4) (#95)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 10:11:14 AM EST
    I'm a 37 year old real life Peter Pan with a Y chromo, growing up is for suckers! ;)

    Parent
    Is this version going on tour (none / 0) (#54)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 08:19:10 AM EST
    plaese tell me it's not.

    Parent
    Answer me this (none / 0) (#149)
    by jbindc on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:14:28 PM EST
    I only watched a few minutes of it - where Hook was dancing to tango music with his pirate crew - so....  

    Since there was no live studio audience to applaud the performance, does that mean that Tinkerbell died?

    Parent

    Oh, it was much worse... (none / 0) (#190)
    by ruffian on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:05:37 PM EST
    Alison (Pan) turned to the camera and asked the world to clap.  And it worked!!!

    The previously.tv live blog I was following was pretty funny at that point.

    Parent

    Jump.The.Shark. (none / 0) (#191)
    by jbindc on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:06:55 PM EST
    Haven't been there yet (none / 0) (#203)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:31:38 PM EST
    thanks for reminding me

    Parent
    Implosion of a Washington Institution (none / 0) (#142)
    by jbindc on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:00:19 PM EST
    Link

    Two weeks ago, Washingtonians gathered to celebrate the 100th birthday of The New Republic, the magazine that helped shape Woodrow Wilson's views on democracy and torpedo Bill Clinton's health plan.

    On Thursday, the venerable Washington institution announced it is shifting its headquarters to New York, amid a shakeup that saw the resignation of its highest editors and promised to redefine the identity of a century-old institution that once served as liberalism's leading voice.

    Franklin Foer, the top editor, sent a memo to staff in the afternoon announcing that he would be quitting due to differences of vision with the magazine's owner, Chris Hughes, a 31-year-old Facebook co-founder who bought the magazine in 2012 and now aspires to reposition it as a "digital media company." The move came, sources said, after Foer discovered that Hughes had already hired his replacement, Gabriel Snyder, a Bloomberg Media editor who formerly ran The Atlantic Wire blog.

    In an impromptu address at the magazine's office in Washington, Leon Wieseltier also told staff that he would be quitting after 31 years as literary editor. His time at TNR, he said through tears, was "the best thing I've done in my little life."

    On Friday, the majority of The New Republic's masthead resigned en masse to protest the decision. Nine of the magazine's 12 senior editors submitted letters of resignation to Hughes and chief executive Guy Vidra, as did two executive editors, the digital media editor, the legislative affairs editor, and two arts editors. At least 20 of the magazine's contributing editors also requested that their names be removed from the magazine's masthead.



    Public grand juries? (none / 0) (#148)
    by jpe on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:11:33 PM EST
    One of the reforms that's been floated in the wake of the Garner case is making grand jury hearings public and open to the media. I'd expect that defense attorneys would oppose that, but thought this would be a good place to have that intuition confirmed or corrected.

    If you have a public GJ, and it indicts, (none / 0) (#153)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 12:17:59 PM EST
    how do you then find a non-tainted juror pool for the trial?

    Parent
    I finally found a Kate Winslet movie where (none / 0) (#177)
    by McBain on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:37:07 PM EST
    she doesn't get naked.  Labor Day wasn't a great film but it kept my interest for 2 hours.  Josh Brolin does a good job.

    Wait, what (none / 0) (#202)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:29:53 PM EST
    your handle is McBain which I assume is a hat tip to the Simpsons version Arnold, you like Lars Von Trier, and you get excited about romance movies in which the woman does not get naked.

    ??

    If you say your favorite book, movie and food is Fried Green Tomatoes I am going to laugh out loud.

    Parent

    Rolling Stone backs off from its UVA rape story (none / 0) (#186)
    by McBain on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 01:55:35 PM EST
    I'm not good at the tiny URL thing yet but it's all over the news... I got this from USA Today

    "In the face of new information, there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie's account, and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced," Will Dana, the magazine's managing editor, wrote on its website.

    Apparently, there wasn't actually a party at the fat house the night she claimed to have been raped.

    Blame Shifting (5.00 / 1) (#196)
    by Michael Masinter on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:21:33 PM EST
    Rolling Stone seems to suggest that the fault lies entirely with the student rather than its reporter.  Throwing the student under the bus is hardly good journalism, but then neither was listening and believing without investigating before publishing. Sexual abuse is real enough, and a sufficient number of credible stories can be found for publication that will withstand investigation.

    Parent
    Here's the link (none / 0) (#188)
    by jbindc on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:01:03 PM EST
    For Howdy (none / 0) (#204)
    by McBain on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:43:38 PM EST
    Yes, McBain is a hat tip to the Simpsons.

    I have nothing wrong with a naked Kate Winslet. I actually find her body type a refreshing change from the typical Hollywood untra-slender look.  I was just shocked to see a film where she kept her clothes on.

    Never seen or read Fried Green Tomatoes.  My all time favorite film is Koyaanisqatsi.  Yours?

    Favorite film (none / 0) (#205)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:47:35 PM EST
    fir me is complex. It would almost have to be broken down to categories.  But Koyaanisqatsi would definitely be on the list.

    Did somebody say... (none / 0) (#206)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 02:51:26 PM EST
    Koyaanisqatsi?  Have you cats ever watched it synched with the Pink Floyd compilation album "Works"?  If not do so immediately, it is epic...EPIC!  Way better than the "Wizard of Oz"/"Dark Side Of The Moon" mash-up.

    That's a tough one dog (none / 0) (#209)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 03:01:32 PM EST
    i am a Phillip Glass groupie.  But....
    I do have a lot of free time the DVD, and CD.

    I'm tellin' ya Cap... (none / 0) (#210)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 03:07:35 PM EST
    I made the mistake of my first viewing of the film being mashed up with the Floyd (plus LSD fwiw)...I tried to rewatch and the original score just doesn't do it compared to "Works".  It's such an uncanny mystical fit, and coincidentally (or not?) both the film and album were released in 1983.  

    A merman I should turn to be.

    Ok, well (none / 0) (#211)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 03:10:04 PM EST
    I think my crowded schedule allows for this.

    kdog, I've got it playing right now. (none / 0) (#212)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 03:16:48 PM EST
    "K" muted on hulu, Works on youtube.

    I do have to pause both for phone calls, etc...

    Oh yeah, and no blotter. (none / 0) (#213)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 03:19:03 PM EST


    Enjoy Sarc... (none / 0) (#214)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 03:23:34 PM EST
    if you've got any Scotch in your office desk drawer, sub a little o' that;)

    Ha! No, I know me better than that. (none / 0) (#215)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 03:39:28 PM EST


    Thanks fishcamp for more info on fish (none / 0) (#217)
    by MO Blue on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 04:31:45 PM EST
    What model printer did you get? I'm looking to buy a new printer. Be interested in looking at the one you bought.

    People can eat permit fish, can't they? So tarpon are mainly for sport.  Are tarpon just catch and release fish? Or just to mount on the wall?

    Have you seen Glass live, Howdy? (none / 0) (#218)
    by McBain on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 04:39:20 PM EST
    I usually see him once a year or so. Most recently his epic Music In Twelve Parts.

    I have (none / 0) (#219)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 04:56:54 PM EST
    Not quite once a year but several times

    Where do you live that you manage once a year (none / 0) (#220)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 04:57:33 PM EST


    I'm in the SF Bay Area (none / 0) (#222)
    by McBain on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 05:17:09 PM EST
    I've seen Glass in SF, LA and NY.  Mostly in LA.  Koyaanisqatsi at the Hollywood Bowl was Amazing.  

    Ah (none / 0) (#223)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 05:23:18 PM EST
    i think the best may have been in a cathedral in St. Louis long time ago.  Like 70s I think.

    ruffian (none / 0) (#224)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 05:32:51 PM EST
    i know you are a Clive Owen fan.  It's been raining here all day so no signal so I watche

    Stupid ipad (sigh) (none / 0) (#226)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 05:35:19 PM EST
    So
    I watched the 2004 King Arthur which I had recorded for just such an occasion.   Not sure why I never saw it but it's really really good.  
    If you have never seen it you should.

    excellent Dadler (none / 0) (#227)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 05, 2014 at 05:36:29 PM EST


    NYPD pay (none / 0) (#228)
    by Jack203 on Sat Dec 06, 2014 at 09:27:51 AM EST
    is a lot with overtime.  A cop I know was  approaching 6 figures by his 2nd year once you took into account "overtime".  Once he made sergeant after 4 or 5 years, he actually took a (slight) pay cut because he was making almost 140-150k with overtime before.

    I understand some rookie cops in departments may start out low, but in general, police salary easily puts them in the upper middle class.