home

Sunday Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 07:18:00 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Who is looking forward to the Oscars?
To Oscar Pistorius' Trial?
To the next story on Chapo Guzman and our failed war on drugs?

If those don't entice you, please pick a topic that interests you. This is an open thread.

< Alternative Theories of Chapo Guzman's Arrest | Trial to Begin for Osama Bin Laden's Son in Law >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Sunday Open Thread | 203 comments (203 topical)
    International law.... (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by lentinel on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 06:46:51 AM EST
    International law... whatever that is.

    Obama is calling Russia's actions in the Ukraine a violation of it. He warned that Russia that,"there will be costs" if it "violated Ukraine's sovereignty",

    It seems that Russia was made somewhat nervous by the events in the Crimean peninsula.

    Putin went to his Parliament for authority to use force. Not surprisingly, it gave it to him.

    Obama is, for appearances' sake anyway, all aflutter.
    A breach of international law sayeth he.

    Now... where have I seen this scenario before?

    Oh yes...
    Mr GW Bush did the same thing - running amok - with the blessing of the US Congress - violating international law and stomping on national sovereignty in an orgy of arrogance.

    Some dared refer to our actions at that time as a violation of international law - and of course, Bush, the democratic party, the republican party and the media - none gave a hang.

    Nobody, no major politician, has seriously taken Bush to task for his actions. I'm not even talking about Afghanistan. Look what he did to Iraq and its people. Hundreds of thousands killed and even more displaced.

    Obama, and the country, say - well... let's move on.

    I'm not even mentioning the merit or lack thereof of the intervention by Russia. Whether it is just baldly self-serving - or a move against fascism and instability. Just that we have long since abandoned our cloak of morality - and our ability to be taken seriously regarding pronouncements about observing international law.

    In short - Obama can say whatever he likes about violations of international law, but since the template for these violations was cast by us in the not very distant past, we haven't a moral leg to stand on - and everyone knows it.

    Moral authority is a myth, but still... (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Dadler on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 11:11:15 AM EST
    ...had America a marginally original political thought in its "head," we might be able to do something. But we've allowed our country to become controlled by financial junkies. And they care about nothing but filling their "veins" with money to compensate for their unfathomably tiny dicks.

    Always the same story.

    Men suck.

    Parent

    It IS a myth (none / 0) (#17)
    by shoephone on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 01:09:06 PM EST
    because it mutates, depending on whomever resides in the White House at the time. Bush cooked our goose with the illegal invasion of Iraq, but Obama not holding him and Cheney accountable is a stain on his presidency.

    That being said, Putin is a chauvinistic, criminal POS who is, undoubtedly, flouting international law, and provoking mayhem. And the "international community" has few options in holding him accountable.

    Parent

    when has the USA ever (5.00 / 1) (#203)
    by ZtoA on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 12:47:30 PM EST
    conducted foreign policy from moral authority? It seems the USA has acted out of self interest backed by power- military. economic, cultural.

    Parent
    Ukraine considers Russia's actions (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by christinep on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 12:30:33 PM EST
    a breach of international law ... and, said further action would be an act of war.  

    This isn't the past and Bush or anyone else (at least at the outset.)  The conflict is about Ukraine and Russia, for openers, lentinel.

    Of course, international law means lots of things.  See Morgenthau.

    Parent

    What (5.00 / 4) (#48)
    by lentinel on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 09:51:03 AM EST
    I am saying is that when America, which under Bush did exactly those things - and worse - tries to lecture the rest of the world about observing international law, it is laughable.

    To that extent, what Bush did, with the active approval of a democratic congress - is relevant. The fact that he has yet to be brought to task for his crimes, makes them still current.

    It makes Obama look like a fool - saying things - pontificating - while standing on the thinnest of ice.

    Unfortunate.

    Parent

    Were you really not struck by the irony (5.00 / 5) (#53)
    by Anne on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 12:19:00 PM EST
    of this comment by John Kerry?

    "You just don't in the 21st century behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pre-text," Kerry told the CBS program "Face the Nation."

    Isn't that exactly what we did with respect to Iraq?  Didn't Bush and his minions spend several years manufacturing evidence to justify an invasion?

    Maybe you have the ability to see everything as a snapshot, but I think you do yourself and your credibility a disservice by pretending there is no big picture here where our country's credibility is concerned.  Many of us said at the time that we believed our going to war in Iraq on a false pretext was someday going to come back to haunt us - I don't know how you can hear or read Kerry's comments and not be struck by the hypocrisy contained in them.

    Parent

    Stretch (5.00 / 2) (#54)
    by squeaky on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 12:58:46 PM EST
    What a load of crap.  First off, what is happening between Russia and the Ukraine bears no comparison between US Iraq war. Second, Obama is not Bush, although most of the Klatch, can't tell the difference, and Obama is not responsible for Bush's Iraq debacle.

    Regarding Moral authority, WTF is that straw. Obama has condemned the Russian invasion of Crimea. Does the Klatch support Putin's invasion???

    Should the US sit back and say nothing?  If Hillary was the PResident would it then be OK for her to condemn the acts of Russia, or would she also be blasted for the Iraq war...  

    Your contempt for Obama is truly irrational, absurd, and predictable.

    Parent

    If I thought you could actually (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by Anne on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 01:20:44 PM EST
    follow a conversation, read the actual words people (the ones you don't like, that is) are writing, I'd try to help you out, but we both know that this isn't about you wanting a dialogue, it's about you seeing another opportunity to get out that stick you love to stir the sh!t with, and play your  petty little games.

    Not worth even the time it took for me to write this; not wasting one more minute on you.

    Have a splendidly irritating day!

    Parent

    BS (2.00 / 1) (#56)
    by squeaky on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 01:43:03 PM EST
    Klatch #1
    It makes Obama look like a fool - saying things - pontificating - while standing on the thinnest of ice.

    Klatch #2

    Isn't that exactly what we did with respect to Iraq?  Didn't Bush and his minions spend several years manufacturing evidence to justify an invasion?...

    Kerry could say the same about Bush, although it could be disputed whether or not Bush did believe that Sadaam had WMD's..   Not sure what this has to do with Russia and Ukraine. Do you believe that the US should quit the UN and all international discussions because of the War in Iraq? Or does if go back to stealing Native American land? Civil war? Got other quotes that prove that the US should never say anything about what other countries are doing?

    I think you do yourself and your credibility a disservice by pretending there is no big picture here where our country's credibility is concerned.

    Big Picture? Haha...  a big picture fashioned around your agenda to condemn everything Obama does. He must pay for his sins during the election campaign as well as failed campaign promises.  

    Many of us said at the time that we believed our going to war in Iraq on a false pretext was someday going to come back to haunt us

    Coming back to bite us?  Why just because you have contrived Kerry's quote as something you can use against Obama. How is Kerry responsible for Bush's war?  Seems like your big picture is very selective.

    The America you live in must be horribly impoverished because of what Bush did and what Obama is doing. Maybe you should go and live in the Crimea.

    Parent

    I'm with you squeaky (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 01:46:37 PM EST
    This President was not responsible for the Iraq War.  And the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.  I suppose that starts with not saying anything

    Parent
    Who said anything about not speaking out? (5.00 / 4) (#58)
    by Anne on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 02:32:10 PM EST
    My comment had to do with the rather hypocritical comments of one John Kerry, and the rather obvious credibility problem created by the actions of the Bush administration - with plenty of help from willing politicians - that took us to war in Iraq.  

    No, Obama isn't Bush, and he didn't take us to war in Iraq - I get that.  But I think the last thing Obama needs is John Kerry out there saying such incredibly stupid things that only serve to remind people of the illegal war we waged with Iraq, to the tune of thousands of lives lost and forever damaged, not to mention the trillions of dollars that could have been better spent.

    That's not "saying nothing," it's pointing out "saying stupid."  I mean, what was Kerry thinking?

    If anything, the actions of his predecessor have made it harder for Obama - harder with the international community, and harder with the American public.  That's the scenery that gets cropped out of the picture that apparently John Kerry thinks we won't remember seeing.

    Parent

    What could Pres. Obama or his (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by oculus on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 02:37:17 PM EST
    current Secretary of State say re Russia's military invasion of Ukraine that, in your opinion, would be acceptable?

    Parent
    Concern Troll? (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by squeaky on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 03:00:12 PM EST
    But I think the last thing Obama needs is John Kerry out there saying such incredibly stupid things that only serve to remind people of the illegal war we waged with Iraq, to the tune of thousands of lives lost and forever damaged, not to mention the trillions of dollars that could have been better spent.

    I get it, you are concerned about the world view of the US. Well most of the world was in favor of the US invading Iraq, and most of the US population was gung-ho on the US Invasion.

    It seems to me that you are preaching to your Klatch who looks for any opportunity to make Obama and his administration look bad.

    This attempt is particularly weak, IMO.

    Here is the real world view:

    Kerry's comments came amid a chorus of condemnation from Washington and its allies. (Reuters, no mention of Iraq)

    "The last thing anybody wants is a military option," Kerry said. "We want a peaceful resolution through the normal processes of international relations." (WaPo, no mention of Iraq)

    "There could be certainly a disruption of any of the normal trade routine. There could be business drawback on investment in the country. The ruble is already going down and feeling the impact of this." (NYT, no mention of Iraq)

    Not even Faux news slammed Kerry for his quote..  Really poor to stretch the Ukraine situation into something about US lacking any moral authority..  fodder for the haters.. that is about all.

    Parent

    Why would anyone at Fox slam (5.00 / 4) (#71)
    by Anne on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 03:43:59 PM EST
    Kerry for what he said - Fox News was cheerleading for the Iraq war, were they not?  Why would anyone there see any hypocrisy in Kerry's remarks?

    Here are a few liberal/progressive/left-side-of-the-spectrum reactions:

    digby: The fallout from flouting international law

    It's very hard as an American to righteously defend the precepts on International Law with respect to national sovereignty after what we did  just 11 years ago in Iraq. I feel like an idiot saying it out loud to anyone and am embarrassed to see John Kerry shaking his fist and proclaiming the illegality and illegitimacy of Russia's actions when he personally voted for that illegitimate and illegal invasion. From what I gather, this is not a problem for most people so perhaps I'm in a minority, but to me, that misbegotten war has completely shattered any claims we have as a nation to lecture others in this way. It sounds hollow and phony and completely without what the neocons used to call "moral authority."

    I think this matters, particularly for a democratic military super-power that has pretensions to benevolent hegemony. You do something like Iraq and you invite others to do the same.

    Marcy Wheeler: On America's Spent Moral Standing

    I guess someone in the Obama White House believed that if we call Vladimir Putin weak after he's just called our bluff, it will get him to back down, even as Putin knows we have no great options against him.

    But it all shows one of the downsides of having so badly spent our moral standing already this century. Whatever the objective of these statements, whether in other circumstances they might have worked, they just come off as a joke. Especially coming from Kerry.

    Digby and Marcy: the epitome of "concern troll."

    And no, you really don't get what I'm saying at all - you never do.  

    Parent

    He's too busy dismissing opposing viewpoints (5.00 / 4) (#73)
    by shoephone on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 03:50:32 PM EST
    as being part of an imaginary "kaffe klatch." Sexist name calling is apparently easier than considering the merit of the opposing viewpoints. And, of course, the current president must not be held accountable for anything, because that would be heresy.

    Parent
    kdog, is "kaffe klatch" sexist? (none / 0) (#100)
    by oculus on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:24:29 PM EST
    (I do hate cutsey spellings, but that is a different issue.)

    Parent
    Exactly what term would you like us (5.00 / 2) (#135)
    by MO Blue on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 08:01:18 AM EST
    to apply to your little group? Because I'm sure that you are aware of the fact that you have created a "kaffe klatch" of your own.

    Parent
    Well, I drink tea. (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 09:04:45 AM EST


    Parent
    Sweet Tea Here (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by CoralGables on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 09:07:53 AM EST
    but don't believe I have a klatch to call home.

    Parent
    CG is a loner Dottie, a rebel.... (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 09:17:44 AM EST
    a klatch of 1. ;)

    Parent
    Naw, that would never do as (none / 0) (#146)
    by MO Blue on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 09:33:40 AM EST
    a label for you. Just isn't a good fit. kdog's suggestion was slightly better but not quite right IMO.

    Parent
    Margarita Galère would be the first choice (none / 0) (#151)
    by CoralGables on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 09:49:44 AM EST
    but not conducive to clear writing or early morning running.

    Parent
    Yes but a much better label (none / 0) (#154)
    by MO Blue on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 09:53:47 AM EST
    for a clique IMO.

    Parent
    Are you suggesting that (5.00 / 2) (#140)
    by MO Blue on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 09:17:37 AM EST
    you want your little clique to have "Tea Party" as part of your label? We know it can't be the Tea Totalers.

    Parent
    T-Party? (none / 0) (#189)
    by sj on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:55:03 AM EST
    Without the "ea"?
    Are you suggesting that (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by MO Blue on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 08:17:37 AM MDT

    you want your little clique to have "Tea Party" as part of your label? We know it can't be the Tea Totalers.

    Or maybe MT-Party? EmTea Party? Empty Party?

    No. That has no ring to it. And they might be on to something with that alliteration thing...

    Parent

    I'm going with (5.00 / 3) (#193)
    by Anne on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 12:02:28 PM EST
    "The Professor Irwin Corey Fan Club."

    A daily serving of doublespeak, gibberish and nonsense, complete with flying spittle.

    Parent

    I like the idea and think the explanation (5.00 / 1) (#195)
    by MO Blue on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 12:20:07 PM EST
    is right on but somehow don't think the "Fan Club" part is quite right. Should have some relationship with the lack of any legitimate debate and distortion of information.

    Parent
    And here I was thinking your (none / 0) (#143)
    by Anne on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 09:22:29 AM EST
    specialty was probably elderberry wine.

    Parent
    Low blow. Age-ism. (5.00 / 1) (#149)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 09:41:49 AM EST


    Parent
    And here I thought the resident (none / 0) (#164)
    by Anne on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 10:51:09 AM EST
    woman of letters would get the reference; apparently not.

    Parent
    Oh, please. I am still (none / 0) (#165)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 10:57:59 AM EST
    pissed off that terrible song of his was imbedded in Princess Di's funeral service, surrounded by the glories of the British sacred music.

    Parent
    Nope. Not the reference I was (none / 0) (#170)
    by Anne on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:20:44 AM EST
    making.

    Try again... or not.  

    [Say...this being obscure thing is kind of fun.]

    Parent

    When you're being (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by sj on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:28:38 AM EST
    obscure you can change the meaning on a dime and claim credit for thoughts never entertained and references never really made.
    [Say...this being obscure thing is kind of fun.]
    I think you're getting there, Anne, but overall you may be too direct and incisive. You need more levels of indirection.

    Parent
    Too cryptic. (none / 0) (#175)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:23:16 AM EST


    Parent
    2nd try: Joseph Kesselring. (none / 0) (#179)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:33:07 AM EST


    Parent
    There you go... (none / 0) (#183)
    by Anne on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:37:51 AM EST
    that was fun.

    Parent
    And I drink Venti Latte (none / 0) (#159)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 10:39:10 AM EST
    Sometimes two, No sweeteners. You aren't in my Klatch :)  Wuss

    Parent
    I would call it a clique (none / 0) (#107)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:38:18 PM EST
    I will probably be accused of sexism too :)

    Parent
    IMO, No... (none / 0) (#138)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 09:04:58 AM EST
    but you know I ain't the guy to ask! ;)

    Parent
    You are exactly the person to ask if (none / 0) (#142)
    by Anne on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 09:20:16 AM EST
    one is looking for a "no" to that particular question.

    Which is why oculus asked it of you.

    Well, that, and she was hoping to keep the "sexist" element alive for the possibility of more pie fighting.

    Parent

    Here I thought... (none / 0) (#145)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 09:32:23 AM EST
    oculus just wanted my opinion...my reading between the lines between the lines radar must require calibration.

    Parent
    Drawing you in and (none / 0) (#147)
    by MO Blue on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 09:35:28 AM EST
    not allowing you to remain Sweden? Maybe.

    Parent
    Not gonna happen... (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 09:48:51 AM EST
    I'm a Jedi Master of Peace, Love, & Understanding...I love you all and there ain't a god damn thing y'all can do about it.  Besides, I partake of too much sacrament to let what is supposed to be a fun and educational hobby rile me up.

    So suck on that b*tches! Neener-Neener!!! ;)

    Parent

    Don't be so sexist kdog (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by CoralGables on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 09:51:14 AM EST
    So suck on that b*tches!


    Parent
    Makes Sense (none / 0) (#114)
    by squeaky on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:56:42 PM EST
    BushCo invaded Iraq, so Obama now is barred from speaking out when a country like Russia invades its neighbor,

    Makes about as much sense as calling the TL Down with Obama clique a Kaffee Klatch.

    No need to explain, alles is klar

    Parent

    Alles is nicht klar (5.00 / 2) (#129)
    by Yman on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 06:16:54 AM EST
    BushCo invaded Iraq, so Obama now is barred from speaking out when a country like Russia invades its neighbor.

    ... after you get done poking your stick in the mud and stirring.  The original premise (whether you agree or not) was that we lack the moral authority to denounce illegal invasions, since we are unwilling to hold our own leaders accountable when they do the same thing.  It only becomes unclear when you start with your "rephrasing'.

    Parent

    No one - least of all me - is "barring" (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by Anne on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 07:06:18 AM EST
    or seeking to bar, Obama from speaking out about what is happening with Russia and the Crimea.  If you would go back and read my comment, you would note that I said I thought what Kerry was saying was making it harder for Obama - but I never said Obama couldn't or shouldn't speak out.

    I'm pretty astounded that you've been reduced to defending Bush and the actions of his administration because you see it as the only way to defend Obama.  Problem is, I never took Obama to task for what he is doing with respect to Putin.  Maybe others have, but I'm not one of them.  Obama's actions should be allowed to stand on their own, in the context of this particular situation, but I don't think you can deny that Kerry's comments have made that harder.  Oh, what am I saying, of course you will deny that.  You've already managed to so completely twist what I and others have said on the hypocrisy of Kerry's comments, and for what?  So you can once again fashion the argument you feel like having, which is a version of "when did you stop beating your wife?"

    And you wonder why people do not view you as someone interested in honest and genuine debate.

    I was just as astounded that you would defend the war in Iraq by saying that the majority of the country was behind it and supported it, when that support was built on a web of lies; how much weight should we give to support that came about through a concerted campaign of lies and distortions?  

    Finally, I think it's kind of hilarious, all this talk about a "kaffee klatsch," when you, oculus and MT have done little else in the last couple days but giggle and snark and wink at each other.  

    Tee-hee...::rolling eyes::

    Parent

    Klatch (none / 0) (#148)
    by squeaky on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 09:41:25 AM EST
    Considering that you accepted lentinel's comment that started this thread and chimed in to castigate christineip.

    Obama is calling Russia's actions in the Ukraine a violation of it. He warned that Russia that,"there will be costs" if it "violated Ukraine's sovereignty"....

    Obama is, for appearances' sake anyway, all aflutter.
    A breach of international law sayeth he.

    Now... where have I seen this scenario before?

    Oh yes...
    Mr GW Bush did the same thing - running amok - with the blessing of the US Congress - violating international law and stomping on national sovereignty in an orgy of arrogance.

    You didn;'t have to make the case for Obama not having the moral authority to condemn Russia from attacking Ukraine, because your implicit approval of lentinel's comment is abundantly clear:

    but I think you do yourself and your credibility a disservice by pretending there is no big picture here where our country's credibility is concerned.

    It is a pathetic defense to argue that you were not criticizing Obama but Kerry. Do you think that Kerry is speaking for himself? And that Obama agrees with you that the US is lacking moral authority to condemn Russia for invading Ukraine?  

    That is hilarious. But I imagine that you believe that the three plus years of Obama bashing has finally paid off and now Obama agrees with your POV that he is the same as Bush, and de facto responsible for all BushCo's misdeeds.

    Parent

    Do you work at being this (5.00 / 2) (#162)
    by Anne on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 10:47:31 AM EST
    dense or does it come naturally?  Or are you just so consumed with hatred for me and others here that you are functionally unable to read the words on the page and accurately comprehend their meaning?  I'm not inclined to be oblique about my opinions; I don't trade in obscure and opaque one-liners that no one knows quite how to take.  I don't floridly garble comments that make everything about me.  Perhaps those are traits with which you are most comfortable, but group conversations must be like a meeting of the Professor Irwin Corey Fan Club.

    I specifically stated that I thought Kerry was making Obama's job harder; in what universe is that a criticism of Obama?  It is because Kerry is seen as Obama's face that I found the remarks especially troubling, and damaging.  If you're telling me that Obama sent Kerry out to the Sunday shows with a script and charged him with making the remarks that he did, then I'm going to say that I think that was a mistake.  Note, however, that I am not saying that Obama's measured approach to the situation is a mistake.  I'm going to say that again, so you can't claim I said otherwise: I am not saying that Obama's measured approach to the situation is a mistake.

    My criticism can be accurately summed up, here:

    The US can say that what we did has no bearing on what is happening today in Russia today so let's not bring up that old news. But we made a gigantic moral and strategic error and there is a price to pay for that. It looks preposterous when we wave around international norms and international laws that we violated with impunity in very recent memory. A little humility here would probably be more effective than the holier-than-thou lecturing we see coming from the usual suspects today.

    And I can also state that I agree with this, from that same link:

    To be honest, this is a moment I'm glad we have President Obama in office right now. He's shown admirable restraint in these matters in recent months and I'm hopeful he will prove to be a cooler head than most of Washington seems to be this week-end. At least he doesn't sound like an amnesiac when he wrings his hands over national sovereignty being violated. His hands are clean on that one.

    Now, you go ahead and try to make the case that I am "Obama-bashing;" I'm sure, with your ability to twist and manipulate and misrepresent what I write, that you will undoubtedly find a way.  


    Parent

    Kerry Went Rogue? (none / 0) (#174)
    by squeaky on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:23:04 AM EST
    (Reuters) - President Barack Obama said on Monday that Russia violated international law with its military intervention in Ukraine and warned that the U.S. government would look at a series of economic and diplomatic sanctions to isolate Moscow....

    The president called on lawmakers to unite behind an aid package for the embattled eastern European country.

    "When it comes to preserving the principle that no country has the right to send in troops to another country unprovoked, we should be able to come up with a unified position," he said.

    Oh right this is the narrative about Kerry not being to be able to keep his mouth shut, and getting Obama into a difficult spot...

    wait I thought that was the narrative about Biden.

    Really Anne, given the opening thread comment which was all over Obama, I did not hear you ever saying anything to set the record straight that your pals were criticizing the wrong guy.

    But that would have been more embarrassing for you because it turns out that Kerry did not go rogue, as you suggest, but this all came from the top...  bigger picture?  

    hahaha

    Parent

    See, that's where you went sideways... (5.00 / 1) (#180)
    by Anne on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:33:30 AM EST
    with the opening comment.

    If you can't get that right, nothing that flows from your incorrect interpretation works.

    Love the way you set this up, though: damned for what you decided I said, and damned in advance if I had said what you wanted me to say.

    And down the rabbit hole we go...hahahahahaha.

    Parent

    No Rabbit Hole (5.00 / 1) (#187)
    by squeaky on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:54:10 AM EST
    Although convenient metaphor for complicating the issue.

    but I think you do yourself and your credibility a disservice by pretending there is no big picture here where our country's credibility is concerned.

    It is quite obvious, given the context, that irony you are pointing to, is delivered by the figure of speech known as a synecdoche. Kerry stands for Obama and the entire country as you point out. To make believe that you are only referring to Kerry is patently dishonest.

    Curiouser and curiouser... Pinocchio

    Parent

    I bet when you hear someone say (none / 0) (#190)
    by Anne on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:58:02 AM EST
    "huh?" you always think they are talking to you.

    Parent
    Heathers? (none / 0) (#194)
    by squeaky on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 12:13:40 PM EST
    Is that the Kaffee Klatch frame of reference?


    Parent
    LOL and Ouch! (none / 0) (#186)
    by vml68 on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:50:06 AM EST
    like a meeting of the Professor Irwin Corey Fan Club.


    Parent
    OK (none / 0) (#96)
    by squeaky on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 09:56:44 PM EST
    At least I know where you are getting your lines from. And as far as Fox dissing Kerry or Obama they, like you take every opportunity to whether or not it is rational or 180º shift from positions that they supported under BushCo.

    Parent
    Russia Backing Off (none / 0) (#155)
    by squeaky on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 10:18:30 AM EST
    But I think the last thing Obama needs is John Kerry out there saying such incredibly stupid things that only serve to remind people of the illegal war we waged with Iraq, to the tune of thousands of lives lost and forever damaged, not to mention the trillions of dollars that could have been better spent.

    Well looks like Russia did not tell Kerry (Obama) that they have no moral authority because Bush Invaded Iraq, and Obama did not prosecute him.

    It appeared on Tuesday that Russia was backing away from extreme action, with President Vladimir V. Putin calling an end to the surprise military exercise he ordered last week. Mr. Putin said in a televised news conference on Tuesday that he saw no need to use force at the moment, but he warned that Russia was ready to use "all options" in the conflict.

    NYT: Markets Rebound...

    But maybe you can write Putin a letter urging him that you and your pals would love to see him include talking points about how ridiculous Kerry is, and oh the irony as the US is a joke when it comes to moral authority...  

    Parent

    I'm glad (none / 0) (#157)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 10:25:45 AM EST
    Not entirely over, but military momentum halted.  Now people will argue until they find some sort of agreement, always better than bullets

    Parent
    Sen. Kerry voted for the pre-Iraq (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by oculus on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 02:40:02 PM EST
    AUMF.

    Parent
    He serves as Secretary of State though (none / 0) (#94)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 06:52:39 PM EST
    At the pleasure of President Obama.  He isn't elected to that position serving a constituency, he is appointed to that position serving President Obama, and is thereby his voice in matters of state.

    And you know this, you just wanted to make me type this :)

    Parent

    Ah but that is not the case (5.00 / 5) (#63)
    by MO Blue on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 02:49:58 PM EST
    the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

    In Aug. 2013, the Obama administration did do something.

    In court papers filed today, the United States Department of Justice requested that George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice and Paul Wolfowitz be granted procedural immunity in a case alleging that they planned and waged the Iraq War in violation of international law.

    Plaintiff Sundus Shaker Saleh, an Iraqi single mother and refugee now living in Jordan, filed a complaint in March 2013 in San Francisco federal court alleging that the planning and waging of the war constituted a "crime of aggression" against Iraq, a legal theory that was used by the Nuremberg Tribunal to convict Nazi war criminals after World War II.


    ...
    However, the Obama administration would like to shield the ex-President and his officials from such prosecution, arguing that everything done was performed within the scope of their various governmental roles. DKos



    Parent
    Do you ever wonder what sort (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 05:22:00 PM EST
    of chaos and even rioting would occur in this county if Obama did hang Bush and company?  This country is incredibly polarized now and was then too, and enough people supported that administration and voted for that administration that they easily stole one election and won another election fair and square.

    Once again though Obama is just such a son-of-a-bitch on this blog because he didn't burn the whole country down for YOU.  Several of you moan and wail that others around here only think of themselves, but obviously it is actually you who only thinks of themselves and precious little else.

    Parent

    Do you think that the Russians (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by MO Blue on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 05:45:54 PM EST
    will violate international law if they invade the Ukraine?

    Do you think that the U.S. violated international law by invading Iraq?

    If you do not think that the Iraq invasion violated international law, how did that invasion differ from what the Russians are doing?

    Do you believe that Bush set a precedent by invading a country that did not threaten the U.S.? Do you think that Obama may have strengthened that precedent by defending that policy in court and stating that it was perfectly legal because the invasion was performed within the scope of their various governmental roles?

    Parent

    President Obama is not (5.00 / 2) (#80)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 05:52:28 PM EST
    Responsible for what President Bush did.

    Parent
    Obama is responsible for defending (5.00 / 2) (#81)
    by MO Blue on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 06:02:14 PM EST
    Bush's actions in court using the argument that the invasion was perfectly legal because the invasion was performed within the scope of Bush and his administrations various governmental roles.

    Do you think that the U.S. violated international law by invading Iraq?

    Do you believe that Bush set a precedent by invading a country that did not threaten the U.S.? Do you think that Obama may have strengthened that precedent by defending that policy in court and stating that it was perfectly legal because the invasion was performed within the scope of their various governmental roles?

    You could focus on the actual issue by answering the questions and debating the subject.


    Parent

    No, President Obama should not (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 06:21:43 PM EST
    Up end our nation and cause rioting in the streets trying to string Bush up.

    If you ever read any of Armando's diaries you would also know that what Bush did was not illegal after he got the AUMF.

    So you want us to waste tax dollars and burn the country to the ground every day because you want someone charged, when they can't even be charged and it would be a waste of time and money and social sanity, and political capital too.

    This is where I am so glad you aren't President and Obama is, your decisions and where it would have lead us all is dreadful.  I had already lived through enough dreadful, I don't need more.  Your solutions don't really lead to solutions.

    Parent

    Legal by what standard (5.00 / 3) (#97)
    by MO Blue on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 09:57:21 PM EST
    Did the invasion become legal under international law?

    If that is the case, then by the same standard, if Putkin gets an o.k. from his legislative body to invade the Ukraine it is perfectly legal. Do you really believe that?

    Now you may not object to Obama helping to more firmly establish the precedent that the U.S. has the right to invade a sovereign country that has not attacked us, but I do because it just makes it so much easier the next time around.

    Also please remember that you think that the U.S. has the right to conduct another invasion without provocation the next time a president wants to start another war of choice.


    Parent

    I didn't like reading Armando's diaries (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:33:11 PM EST
    On it any better than anyone else did.  I probably hated reading them slightly more than most. He went to great lengths to investigate it all in depth and write up  the legalities.  I am not a lawyer, he is.  And he is obviously a very good one, and that is why I waste my time reading him.

    I am not interested in standing here fighting like two 2nd graders on a playground, if you truly care about the legality of it ingest his diaries on it.

    No more chanting I am rubber you are glue though for me, and if any of you wonder why Armando doesn't post here anymore....I think he's done babysitting.

    Or you can continue to be your own lawyer, and chase your tail, and live six or eight years ago over and over and over again every single day.

    Parent

    Armando's most recent writings on (5.00 / 3) (#126)
    by MO Blue on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 11:56:01 PM EST
    the U.N. Charter and international law

    Obama seeks to violate UN charter with congressional blessing

    Under the U.N. Charter, it is illegal for member states to attack each other because they claim another state is violating international law unless they are acting in self-defense or unless they are authorized to do so by a Security Council resolution. There is no such resolution with respect to Syria. The whole point of the Charter is to keep (for example) Russia from attacking (for example) Israel because Russia claims that Israel is violating international law.  What goes for Russia attacking Israel also goes for the United States attacking Syria.

    ...
    But that is exactly what is happening.  Obama may say that he is just trying to enforce international norms, but he is doing it by violating article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter.  To invoke a metaphor from another war, he is destroying the village in order to save it.

    The same standards would apply for Iraq. It was illegal by international standards for the U.S. to attack Iraq without authorized to do so by a Security Council resolution. IOW Bush violated the UN charter with congressional blessing.

    ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NOT CONTAINED ARMANDO DIARY

    The UN Charter is clear that wars of aggression are prohibited. Article 2(4) states: "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations."5 This prohibition on the use of force finds an exception in Article 51 of the Charter, which allows for the possibility of self-defense.6

    SECRETARY GENERAL STATEMENT ON LEGALITY OF INVASION

    On September 16, 2004 Secretary-General of the United Nations Kofi Annan, speaking on the invasion, said, "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN Charter. From our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal."

    DANGERS OF PRECEDENT SET

    If allowed to stand unchallenged, the US initiation of war on Iraq and the rationale that permitted it could set an extremely dangerous precedent. Such actions could also undermine the legal and normative system to prevent wars of aggression, centered in the United Nations and enunciated in the Nuremberg Principles, which were the basis for the trials of Axis leaders in the aftermath of World War II. The Nuremberg Principles list "Crimes against peace" as first among the crimes punishable under international law and define Crimes against peace as: "(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances; (ii) Participation of a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i)."



    Parent
    Your hero worship of BTD is endearing (none / 0) (#106)
    by shoephone on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:36:50 PM EST
    But your refusal to respond to MO Blue's questions says it all.

    Parent
    Answer what? (none / 0) (#108)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:46:46 PM EST
    That I'm now some sort of unprincipled war monger based on.....?  I don't even know what that is based on, apparently observing existing law makes me a mass murdering builder of bloody empires now.  Or am I just a simpleton hero worshipper?

    It is so hard keeping up with my latest clique diagnosis around here :)

    Parent

    No, her questions were quite clear (none / 0) (#109)
    by shoephone on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:50:24 PM EST
    Here they are again:

    Did the invasion become legal under international law?

    If that is the case, then by the same standard, if Putin gets an o.k. from his legislative body to invade the Ukraine it is perfectly legal. Do you really believe that?



    Parent
    Read Armando's diaries on it (none / 0) (#110)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:51:32 PM EST
    It is all there

    Parent
    I have no case I can win (none / 0) (#112)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:54:35 PM EST
    You don't either

    Maybe everyone should move on and address the horror in ways that can be productive.  Or we can sit on these notions until hell freezes over because that serves a purpose, to use it all to bash a President we hate with?

    Parent

    Dumbing it down to "Obama hate" (5.00 / 2) (#125)
    by shoephone on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 11:34:48 PM EST
    is the usual convenient derailment, and it proves you haven't understood the discussion at all -- which started with the very first comment at the top. For those who have been paying attention, the discussion is about the U.S.'s lack of moral authority and leverage internationally.

    Having to continually repeat the point has become boring.

    Parent

    According to you we don't (none / 0) (#168)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:12:23 AM EST
    We have completely changed leadership in this country, we elected a President who ran on ending the Iraq War...he also ran on being one lone voice that spoke out against the AUMF in the run up to the Iraq War...and the people voted him in, we have enough moral authority to weigh in on this.

    And we did, and the world is with us too.

    If your Klatch just want to swell up (as my father would say) and pout till doomsday, go ahead.  The world continues to turn, events unfold that require participation.

    Considering how stricken you all are over the illegality of the Iraq War, and how our credibility is completely destroyed forever because of it unless we turn from anyone who touched it in any way, I take it that none of your Klatch will be supporting or voting for Hillary?  Right?  I mean if Obama has no moral authority to speak out about anything going on in the Ukraine at this time, then certainly Hillary Clinton can never be President starting with her AUMF vote and then moving right into her serving as SOS when we were in Iraq and Afghanistan.


    Parent

    You're still not getting it -- intentionally? (5.00 / 1) (#191)
    by shoephone on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 12:00:02 PM EST
    I have not said, and no one has said the U.S. should not be pushing back at Putin -- what alternative is there? -- the point is that we lack the heft to lead on the issue. What I'm hearing and reading is that Angela Merkel is the one who holds that power now. I don't know if that's entirely true (neither do you) and it may be due to the fact that right now Europe, in general, has more sway with Russia than the U.S. does, but that is the current talking point in the press. The fact that Obama is not being heralded as the one with the power is quite telling.

    Regarding Hillary Clinton: I've made my feelings known about her candidacy on more than one occasion. I don't look forward to it. I do not plan to vote for her, for any number of reasons. And her vote for the AUMF is a huge stain on her legacy, as far as I'm concerned. My senator, Patty Murray, who is known for her work in support of veterans, voted against the AUMF, and gave the most thoughtful speech about it of anyone on the Senate floor. Some people have bald ambition, and some people have integrity. I'm proud of Murray's vote. And it has cost her nothing. Last time I looked, she holds the third highest position of any Democrat in the Senate.

    As to your continual use of the word "klatch" as a pejorative, or as some sort of explanation for why your arguments aren't holding water, it isn't having the effect you hope for. It simply makes you look like a snotty, spoiled junior high schooler who's trying to blame other people for the fact she got a "C" on her term paper.  

    Parent

    Yawn. (none / 0) (#113)
    by oculus on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:56:20 PM EST


    Parent
    Where's my flame thrower? (none / 0) (#116)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:58:50 PM EST
    ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED!!!

    Parent
    I am overly entertained. Three (none / 0) (#117)
    by oculus on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 11:02:03 PM EST
    more days of unrelenting culture. Inpatient rehab next.

    Parent
    I was so beat up when I got home (none / 0) (#118)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 11:04:51 PM EST
    I had to take two days to recover, I don't know how you do it.  Must be love endorphins.

    Parent
    Check your email. Jackets en route. (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by oculus on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 11:06:13 PM EST


    Parent
    Thank you friend (none / 0) (#120)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 11:07:19 PM EST


    Parent
    And let me clearer here (none / 0) (#115)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:57:12 PM EST
    I wanted those worthless.....strung up

    And I had to come to Jesus, because I have no case that can be won.

    Parent

    FYI Putin did get the equivalent of our AUMF (5.00 / 2) (#156)
    by MO Blue on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 10:25:01 AM EST
    ...the Russian Parliament granted President Vladimir V. Putin broad authority to use military force in response to the political upheaval in Ukraine that dislodged a Kremlin ally and installed a new, staunchly pro-Western government...

    If as you claim an AUMF makes invading a country legal, are Putin's actions legal as well?

    Obama's DOJ has claimed in court documents that Bush and his minion's actions in Iraq were legal as they were done as part of their government functions. Would you apply Obama's standard to Putin? If not, why would they be different?

    I personally believe both action are in violation of international law but evidently YMMV.


    Parent

    (Dare one [I] mention Hitler's (none / 0) (#82)
    by oculus on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 06:07:04 PM EST
    rationale for invading  Chekoslovakia was the presence there of people of German origin there who, according to Hitler, were being persecuted?)

    Parent
    Isn't that what Putin is using (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 06:25:19 PM EST
    For justification of what he's doing?

    Spouse says he's whack, says the Ukraine can militarily give him a run for his money.  Putin may have bought himself a war that will drive him into the ground if it goes down.

    Parent

    Yep. You catch on quick! (none / 0) (#91)
    by oculus on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 06:26:50 PM EST


    Parent
    You know, Hitler was on Meth :) (none / 0) (#92)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 06:46:12 PM EST
    I think I need a urine sample from Vladimir :)

    Parent
    Wow (none / 0) (#84)
    by sj on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 06:09:55 PM EST
    that sounds a little tentative for you oculus.

    Parent
    My speciality. (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by oculus on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 06:25:25 PM EST


    Parent
    ::grin:: (none / 0) (#95)
    by sj on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 07:39:40 PM EST
    I've never seen you that way. I've always thought of you as direct in your indirection.

    Parent
    Funny, I don't see anyone on this thread (none / 0) (#86)
    by shoephone on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 06:15:28 PM EST
    defending Putin's aggressive actions in Crimea. I do see people questioning whether Obama's tough talk will have any effect on Putin, considering our nation's recent past history of unjustified aggression in a foreign country.

    The comparison being drawn in your comment above really makes me wonder if we are all engaged in the same discussion.

    Parent

    Why do you imagine I put it inside parenthesis? (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by oculus on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 06:24:19 PM EST
    A Shakespearean aside.

    I doubt anything anyone says has the slightest effect on Putin, regardless of our country's past transgressions.

    Parent

    Let's see if I have this straight: (5.00 / 2) (#85)
    by shoephone on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 06:11:00 PM EST
    Commenters concerned with the fact that hundreds of innocent people are still dying in Iraq every month from sectarian violence, a situation that is the result of our illegal invasion of the country = commenters only caring about themselves?

    Commenters concerned with America's loss of leverage around the world, due to our unjustified invasion of a sovereign country that never attacked us = commenters only caring about themselves?

    Commenters concerned with the fact that the men who unjustifiably led this country to invade and attack Iraq have not been held to account, but have instead been given full immunity = commenters only caring about themselves?

    In what universe does any of that make an ounce of logical sense?

    Oh, wait. It doesn't.

    Parent

    I've got the solution! (maybe) (none / 0) (#124)
    by NYShooter on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 11:30:29 PM EST
    The issue of whether the Obama Administration should have pressed legal action vs. the Bush Administration vis-à-vis the Iraq invasion is a truly thorny one. I think both sides have compelling reasons for their beliefs.

    MT is right in that the degree to which our country is currently polarized there is no telling what chaos could have been ignited had Obama, aggressively, prosecuted Bush, and, his people. I'm not saying we should run scared in pursuing justice, but, it wouldn't take much of an imagination to come up with some really horrible potential outcomes. Up till now the Crazies have done mostly symbolic damage to our country: The Filibuster, Debt ceiling, Sequester, etc. But, take a racist plurality, a black President trying to imprison a Republican predecessor, Fox News, Survivalists, and, the 2nd Amendment, and, ooh boy! You've got a volatile, bubbling, brew whose outcome no one could predict.

    On the other hand, and, as Professor John Turley said at the time, President Obama has no choice.  (Paraphrasing) There's nothing to "decide." President Bush violated the law, and, it's President Obama's Constitutional duty, and, responsibility, to prosecute that crime.

    Now, I'm, obviously, not a Constitutional scholar, and, I have no desire to debate the legal merits of each side. But, like with most great issues that have confronted our country, it boils down to politics, not the law. And, Obama, like all Presidents before him, made a political calculation, followed by a political decision.

    So, in wrapping up, my "solution" is really a question. Why didn't Obama consider the outcome from the Nixon, Watergate scandal? He could have "cut the baby in half" and given both sides a little of what they wanted. He could have aired out all the issues in some kind of judicial procedure. In a regular court case it would be a verdict of, "guilty," but the punishment would be, "time served." And, in this case, like in Nixon's, he would also be found, "guilty," but, as an "unindicted co-conspirator."  


    Parent

    Actually my argument was not about (5.00 / 2) (#136)
    by MO Blue on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 08:25:35 AM EST
    Obama taking Bush and his merry men to court. A law suit was brought by an Iraqi.

    Plaintiff Sundus Shaker Saleh, an Iraqi single mother and refugee now living in Jordan, filed a complaint in March 2013 in San Francisco federal court alleging that the planning and waging of the war constituted a "crime of aggression" against Iraq, a legal theory that was used by the Nuremberg Tribunal to convict Nazi war criminals after World War II.

    Obama's DOJ requested that George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice and Paul Wolfowitz be granted procedural immunity in a case arguing that everything done was performed within the scope of their various governmental roles.

    IOW Obama blocked the chance for the issue to be "aired out" in court and labeled it a legal action.

    Whether or not you agree or disagree with that action, that action helped to strengthen the precedent that the U.S. has the legal right to invade countries at will. It also IMO establishes that right for other countries as well. It is my opinion that Obama bears responsibility for supporting the legality of the invasion.

    I do not think that it is legal to violate the U.N. I do not think that it was legal when the U.S. invaded Iraq and I do not think it is legal now that Russia is following the same path.

    Parent

    Oy (none / 0) (#77)
    by sj on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 05:31:53 PM EST
    And watch your language.

    Parent
    I love how you guys can just go (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 05:40:29 PM EST
    To town riding the President into the dirt every single day but when someone calls you all out for it it becomes....ooooooh sexist smearings, and watch your language.

    Your real problem though with this conversation is that you know you are guilty, and wish to shift focus any way you can.

    Parent

    "You know you are guilty" (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by shoephone on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:25:28 PM EST
    Guilty of what?

    Parent
    Not worshipping at the alter of Obama (5.00 / 3) (#158)
    by MO Blue on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 10:26:09 AM EST


    Parent
    Jeebus MT (none / 0) (#83)
    by sj on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 06:07:54 PM EST
    Not everything is about you. I don't give two hoots about what you said. The "no profanity" comes from Jeralyn rule so that the site doesn't get filtered out. You've been here long enough to know that.

    Show a little respect for your hostess.

    Parent

    What's ironic (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by jbindc on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 07:30:39 AM EST
    Is remembering the 2012 debates when Obama tried to chastise Romney by saying:

    "A few months ago when you were asked what's the biggest geopolitical threat facing America, you said Russia...the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because the Cold War's been over for 20 years."

    Hmm...wonder if he'd like to revise his statement to not be so snarky now....

    Parent

    Doubt it (none / 0) (#144)
    by CoralGables on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 09:31:22 AM EST
    Zero deaths since the Russian induced crisis began (to differentiate from the Ukranian political crisis). Russian troops are now pulling back from the Ukranian border (although still have a presence on the peninsula). And stock markets around the world are skyrocketing upward today.

    The only financial exchange to have suffered thus far from the Russian chest puffery is the Micex of Russia...or from Putin's perspective...shooting himself in the foot.

    Parent

    Yes (none / 0) (#152)
    by squeaky on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 09:50:10 AM EST
    I imagine that for you the cold war is still raging. And Germany?..

    didn't Obama also embarrass himself by telling a GoPer that Hitler was dead, or was that Stalin?

    Parent

    Olympic size leap (5.00 / 1) (#198)
    by jbindc on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 12:31:26 PM EST
    once again.

    Parent
    The only template I see ... (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 05:57:15 PM EST
    ... at work here is your own, by which you predictably take whatever the issue du jour happens to be -- in this particular instance, the crisis over the Crimea -- and twist it into a logic pretzel, so you can use it to once again bash your own country's past and present leadership for their perceived moral failings.

    Parent
    "Perceived" moral failings?? (5.00 / 6) (#33)
    by shoephone on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 06:24:45 PM EST
    Please. Our illegal invasion of Iraq is not a "perceived" moral failing. It's a major disaster of the highest order. There are sectarian bombings there nearly everyday now...thousands dying because what we did destabilized that country. Al-Qaida never existed in Iraq until we invaded.

    Our tacit support for the Egyptian military to stage a coup against Morsi's government is not a "perceived" moral failing. Whether we like it or not, the Muslim Brotherhood was voted into office. And we meddled, once again. Supporting military coups has, sadly, been part of America's foreign policy for decades. We supported Mubarak, we supported the the Shah, we looked the other way on South America. America's hands are soaked with blood. That's not a perception, it's a fact.

    You have a personal problem with lentinel's views, so be it. But stop falsely characterizing the U.S.'s recent and past meddling in foreign lands as something to be heralded and congratulated. Our hands our dirty.

    Putin is an authoritarian thug and a criminal, IMO. But there is no denying the truth: the U.S. has little to no moral standing when railing about other regimes meddling where they shouldn't.

    Parent

    If you do not think the invasion of Iraq (5.00 / 5) (#39)
    by MO Blue on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 07:22:06 PM EST
    was a moral failing on the part of the U.S., I would be interested in knowing your definition of a moral failing.

    Do you think Russia invading a sovereign state is against international law? If so, then exactly how would you describe the invasion of Iraq.

    Parent

    You are (5.00 / 3) (#46)
    by lentinel on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 09:45:59 AM EST
    a bit out of the loop if you do not consider the Bush administration to be the model of moral failings.

    Apparently, pre-emptive invasions of countries - with the attendant slaughter of 100s of thousands of civilians, torture, lying - the lot - do not consist of a moral failing if it is done by W.

    That was his view as well.

    That was Nixon's view as well.

    You're in pretty foul company imo, but so be it.

    Parent

    You Forgot the Punch Line (none / 0) (#59)
    by squeaky on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 02:35:13 PM EST
    Apparently, pre-emptive invasions of countries - with the attendant slaughter of 100s of thousands of civilians, torture, lying - the lot

    Is Obama's Fault

    Isn't that the context of your initial condemnation? So if you yammer on about how bad Bush is it magically transfers to Obama because Obama = Bush

    and since Bush = the loss of America's moral Authority then Obama has no moral authority.  

    Neat trick, utter BS though..

    Parent

    I can't follow this thread (none / 0) (#105)
    by Slado on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:36:38 PM EST
    It's Bush' s fault that Obama is a terrible leader and no one in the international community takes him seriously?

    Parent
    This sentence doesn't seem to fit: (none / 0) (#65)
    by oculus on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 03:04:33 PM EST
    That was Nixon's view as well.


    Parent
    That sentence fits (5.00 / 2) (#66)
    by MO Blue on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 03:18:45 PM EST
    if used in the context of a famous Nixon quote:

    "When the President does it, that means it is not illegal." Richard M. Nixon, TV interview with David Frost ...


    Parent
    Same goes for us lackeys over here. (none / 0) (#2)
    by gbrbsb on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 09:16:33 AM EST


    Parent
    I think I am well established (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by ruffian on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 09:58:48 AM EST
    As an Oacar night junkie on this blog. I am excited! It is my Super Bowl Sunday! And yes I know it has about the same amount of real life significance.

    I'll even make some predictions you can (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by ruffian on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 10:08:14 AM EST
    mock me for later:

    Best Picture: 12 Years a Slave
    Best director: David O Russell  
    Yes, I know that does not make sense.

    Leading Actress: Cate Blanchett
    Leading Actor: Matthew McConaughey
    Supporting Actress: Lupita Nyong'o
    Supporting Actor: Jared Leto

    Parent

    Will Cate say anything about Allen though (none / 0) (#7)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 10:58:41 AM EST
    Given that Dylan Farrow called her out for it the last time?

    Parent
    Why would she? (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 06:08:00 PM EST
    Ms. Blanchett doesn't have to answer to the Farrows. Her prior response to Dylan's bait was classy, succinct and to the point: "It's obviously been a long and painful situation for the family, and I hope they find some sort of resolution and peace."

    Parent
    In a word, NO (none / 0) (#8)
    by Dadler on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 11:08:57 AM EST
    Nobody who is a real "player" in Hollywood will make any real waves about anything.

    Never.

    High school with a lot of cocaine. That is Hollywood.

    Parent

    It's baffled like a big cruise ship :)? (none / 0) (#25)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 02:55:39 PM EST


    Parent
    As an Oscar junkie, (none / 0) (#10)
    by MO Blue on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 11:54:26 AM EST
    I wonder if you saw Chris Hayes' program discussing the demographic of the nomination and the views of 3 critics.

    Part 1

    Part 2

    I found the information about the demographics and the discussion of lack of 2nd. chances for women and AA directors interesting .

    Parent

    Yes, that was interesting (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by ruffian on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 07:54:51 PM EST
    It really is  eye opening to think of how much our dominant means of storytelling is  controlled by one demographic - white males. I guess it is good for us that some of them have some imagination. As a woman I have realized for a long time that stories by and about men are considered the norm, and anything else is a 'chick flick'.  Women happily go to movies about men all the time, but how many men suggest going to a movie primarily about women? And don't get me going on the comic book action flick young demographic  takeover....

    Oh well. I am going to enjoy my glamour-fest now....

    Parent

    My man does (none / 0) (#43)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 07:57:58 PM EST
    Really, he does. And I think there are a lot of men out there happily going to movies and enjoying movies that other men not comfortable in their masculinity call "chick flicks".

    Parent
    I wonder if these folks will get attention tonight (none / 0) (#35)
    by EL seattle on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 06:49:03 PM EST
    Protesting in the streets doesn't always get noticed these days, but a really well done video can get the word out. If people watch, anyway.

    Parent
    Winter seems determined not to go (5.00 / 3) (#15)
    by Anne on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 12:56:05 PM EST
    out quietly...looking to get around a foot of snow through tomorrow afternoon...and something else on tap for Thursday/Friday.

    Sunday is a cooking day for me.  Made a big pot of Mexican soup - great for lunches during the week and at least one dinner.  Am going to roast a chicken for dinner tonight, and am trying a brussels sprouts recipe I got from Pinterest (you want to talk about a place to find good food and recipes, check out Pinterest): split, browned in the pan, with lemon juice, garlic and Gruyere cheese at the end.  I don't normally like cooked brussels sprouts, but this recipe comes recommended by others who also felt that way about them, so we'll see.  Maybe they will taste like spring?

    I wouldn't normally buy brussels sprouts, but I work in a building with concierge services, and they've been offering something new: a CSA that delivers a box of produce every week - and the best part is that you get the list of what's in the box ahead of time, so you can decide if you want it that week or not.  Small box, large box, organic box, and some weeks, tropical.  This week's box had beautiful lettuce, grape tomatoes, Bosc pears, avocados, brussels sprouts, grapefruit - I'm forgetting something, I think - for $20.

    So, happy cooking to all who are doing that today, and hope all in the path of this latest blast of winter will be safe!
     

    About those brussels sprouts: (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by caseyOR on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 02:10:09 PM EST
    I confess, even as a child I liked brussels sprouts. According to my mother lima beans were the only vegetables I refused to eat. So, I have a number of recipes using the sprouts.

    A favorite is to saute the sprouts with garlic and shallots and our good friend bacon.  It is easy to do.

    First mince as much garlic as you like. Chop one or two shallots (depending on size of shallot and your preference). Rinse sprouts (approx.  1 lb.) and cut into halves and quarters so that they are all approx. the same size. Cut 4 slices of bacon into one inch pieces.

    When all the chopping is done pour a glug of olive oil into a heavy skillet (I use cast iron) big enough that the sprouts will fit in one layer. Heat it up, then add the bacon and fry until crispy. Remove the bacon to a plate and let drain. Into the olive oil/bacon fat add the shallots and garlic and a bit of red pepper flakes if you like them. Stir and cook until they soften, but do not let them brown. You just want to cook out the rawness.

    Now toss in the sprouts and form them into one layer. Let them cook, stirring some, until they brown on the bottom. Do not let them burn unless you like that flavor. Flip them over so that the other side browns. Turn down the heat a bit, keep stirring and remove when the spouts reach your desired level of softness. Keep an eye on the garlic and shallots so they don't burn.

    If you want to speed things along, after both sides are browned pour 1/4 cup of water in the skillet, cover and let steam.

    Dish them up and sprinkle the cooked bacon on top.

    Yum!

    Parent

    My sister and I were dining at a local cafe a (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by Angel on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 02:50:25 PM EST
    few years back.  Asked the waitress about the daily veggie plate, she listed several items then said Brussels sprouts.  My sister and I excitedly said "Yum!!  Brussels sprouts."  The waitress looked at us like we were crazy.  That story still causes us to laugh.  

    Parent
    Winter is definitely not going out (none / 0) (#20)
    by MO Blue on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 01:52:44 PM EST
    quietly. We were originally scheduled to get freezing rain, sleet and snow throughout the night and all day today. Forecast was for slick, icy conditions with an accumulation of 4 - 10 inches of snow and warnings to stay home and off the streets today and tomorrow. The stores are also completely out of Ice Melt, Rock Salt etc.

    The forecast was so bad that they called last night and canceled church for today.

    I and several of my friends were looking forward to attending the Celtic Nights* today. It was also cancelled yesterday.

    *From the creators of Gaelforce Dance, the "unmissable two-hour spectacular (that) has brought audiences to their feet all around the world" (The Guardian, England), comes a brand new show in celebration of song. Celtic Nights expertly weaves together the lilting melodies and plaintive lyrics of the rich Celtic heritage to tell the story of a people. In this stirring tale of the Celtic experience, the audience is invited to travel along on a journey of hope, transported in time through traditional ballads, vivid choreography and the story of a people struggling to find their place in a changing world.

    Celtic Nights is a unique show which features both the finest male and the finest female voices of the Celtic world, showcased against a thundering backdrop of expert dancing and musicianship. In this glittering production, six of Ireland's most prominent vocal talents are complimented by six of its most accomplished step dancers, creating an exhilarating picture of a proud people who dared to dream and doggedly carved out a home in the New World. In Celtic Nights, their story is told, through the power and majesty of music and the hypnotic fury of dancing feet.

    "A perfect mix of traditional and contemporary Irish pieces... takes the audience right to the edge of this ancient art form."
    --London Times

    So far, the most extreme elements contained in the forecast have not occurred in my neighborhood. Woke up this morning with a light dusting of snow on the streets and sidewalk. Although I'm told that it did sleet for a short time during the night it doesn't appear to have turned the streets and sidewalks into a sheet of ice. I have stayed in today so appearances may be deceiving. We have not experienced any additional accumulation since this morning but they are still forecasting more snow beginning about 5:00 p.m and throughout the night. If I had my druthers, that could pass us by as well.

    Hopefully things will be milder in your area too.

    Parent

    Hey Anne (none / 0) (#41)
    by MO Blue on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 07:39:00 PM EST
    See Casey's comment #31

    I may be mistaken but I thought you once said you dealt with some of these issues as a part of your job. If so, maybe you could provide her with some idea of what resources might be available to help her.

    Parent

    Not always a fan of Bill Maher (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by MO Blue on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 02:11:25 PM EST
    but sometimes he is right on target with the "New Rules" segment of his show.

    Bill Maher Floats Notion of 'Maximum Wage' During 'New Rules' Segment

    Spotlighted over at Crooks and Liars which also posted a link to Bruinkid over at KOS on the same subject. IMO the video and write up by Bruinkid is somewhat better but for those who wish to stay away from the big orange, I have linked to both. Quote from program I found interesting.

    Did you know that during World War II, FDR actually proposed a cap on income that in today's dollars would mean that no person could ever take home more than about $300,000? OK, that is a little low. (audience laughter) But wouldn't it be great if there were Democrats out there like that now, who would say to billionaires, "Oh, you're crying? We'll give you something to cry about. You don't want a minimum wage? How about we not only have a minimum wage, we have a maximum wage?" [...]

    That is not a new idea. James Madison, who wrote our Constitution, said, "Government should prevent an immoderate accumulation of riches." Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, they all agreed that too much money in the hands of too few would destroy democracy.
    Maher is such stooge (none / 0) (#45)
    by Mikado Cat on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 12:33:53 AM EST
    I wonder if Maher realizes that would eliminate about half of the tax the government collects?

    Parent
    Speaking of (5.00 / 4) (#47)
    by Yman on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 09:49:17 AM EST
    I wonder if Maher realizes that would eliminate about half of the tax the government collects?

    That's quite a claim.  Who came up with it?

    Moe, Larry or Curly?

    Parent

    Classic Yman (none / 0) (#104)
    by Slado on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:34:34 PM EST
    Attack the commenter while ignoring their point.

    How about this fact?

    All income tax revenue comes form the top 40%.

    The problem with these little quips by Maher is they're not based in any type of reality.  They're as stupid as some of the things that come out of the crazy right wingers mouths that Bill has so much fun with.

    Parent

    Classic Slado (5.00 / 1) (#132)
    by Yman on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 06:21:21 AM EST
    Post some irrelevant fact that has nothing to do with the original claim, when it's obvious the original claim can't be supported by actual evidence.

    BTW - Maher wasn't proposing a maximum wage of $300,000, but even if he was, that represents the top 1%, not the top 40%.

    But I understand why you'd try to conflate them.

    Parent

    Wonder if Maher (none / 0) (#49)
    by jbindc on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 11:01:56 AM EST
    Would agree to do his job for no more than $300,000?

    Parent
    I think he pretty much answered (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by MO Blue on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 11:44:32 AM EST
    that question in his routine.

    no person could ever take home more than about $300,000? OK, that is a little low.

    OTOH, I don't recall him ever whining that he was being persecuted like the Jews in Nazi Germany even though he has about $7.75 billion less than those who do.

    Parent

    You mean he'd rather (none / 0) (#169)
    by jondee on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:20:28 AM EST
    be a teaching assistant or a sanitation worker on principal than endure the indignity of doing what he does now for 300 k?

    Parent
    Never a fan of Maher (none / 0) (#121)
    by Mikado Cat on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 11:07:53 PM EST
    such a hateful divisive wonk. This current divisive lying media notion that all the woes of the poor are due to exploitation by the rich, instead of failures of government and personal responsibility especially disgust me.

    The rich don't exploit the poor, that is the sole providence of politicians.

    Parent

    You honestly believe there are not rich people (5.00 / 2) (#201)
    by ruffian on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 12:41:57 PM EST
    that got that way by keeping others poor - keeping wages low, here and in other countries,  to name just one thing. Dodging taxes while relying on the government to provide services  that the rest of us have to pay for is another. Not to mention manipulating the mortgage industry so us normals paid more for our houses.  I could go on.

    I am all for people doing as best they can  financially as long as they don't kick others' hands off the ladder on the way up. But in too May cases that is what is happening.

    Parent

    Amen (none / 0) (#127)
    by Slado on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 12:25:54 AM EST
    No society on earth has ever figured out how to avoid poor people.

    What changes is what poverty looks like.

    Parent

    Poverty depends on definition (none / 0) (#128)
    by Mikado Cat on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 02:37:11 AM EST
    My parents grew up during the great depression when poverty meant no food, and farmers in my family packed up their goods and moved from Oklahoma to California to pick fruit and work in manual labor.

    If people are now in the USA going without food and shelter, they must be actively doing so. Poverty now is some percentage of median income, not whether there is food for dinner.

    Poverty in EU, doesn't strike me as poverty. Its less than 60% of the median income.

    We can't raise people up out of poverty with a welfare check, only with a good job. I don't see the level of support as a failure, the failure is the lack of opportunity and entrapment of the poor with the removal of benefits tied to any attempt to break out of poverty.

    Parent

    "All the woes.." (none / 0) (#167)
    by jondee on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:11:54 AM EST
    the only people talking in talk radio-ese abstractions i.e. "the rich don't exploit" (NONE of the rich?), "the poor don't go hungry" (NONE of the poor?) are you and Slado..

    The way to clarify what's going on in this country isn't to respond to wild-swinging demagoguery with more wild-swinging demagoguery.

    Parent

    Many thanks to squeaky for (5.00 / 2) (#62)
    by oculus on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 02:48:49 PM EST
    hosting kdog and me for dinner last night. A wonderful dinner.  Homemade bread w/pork appetizer, improvisational Shepherd's pie, brussel sprouts (on my list of detested vegetables, but these were delicious, slaw w2 types of cabbage, and 3 flavors of homemade ice cream. All this plus the to-die-for tiger mahogany Steinway. Terrific evening.  

    It all sounds quite delicious. I happen to love (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by caseyOR on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 03:24:23 PM EST
    brussels sprouts. How did Squeaky prepare them? I also love shepherd's pie, although I have never before seen one described as "improvisational. " Can you expand on that?

    Parent
    Squeaky is better qualified to explain his (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by oculus on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 03:26:18 PM EST
    creativity!

    Parent
    A French version... (5.00 / 3) (#72)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 03:47:04 PM EST
    of the English/Irish favorite with duck and pork in lieu of lamb or beef.  Squeaky killed it in the kitchen, no joke!  

    Cap'n Casey...don't let the paperwork and bullshit get you down...as you know more than anybody at this time of mourning, it is not even close to what is important.  Easier said than done my friend, but try not to sweat the bullsh*t.  Love ya kid.

    Parent

    Brussels Sprouts (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by squeaky on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:13:42 PM EST
    Split and cooked in the pan that had the pork belly appetizer..  I added a little liquid, covered them and let them blacken a bit.

    The appetizer was pork buns inspired by David Chang..  homemade buns, steamed and then filled with pork belly bits, pickled cucumber slices, caramelized onion sauce and scallions.

    The "shepherds pie" was actually Hatchis Parmentier french version... I used pork and duck as the minced meats, side dish of celeriac slaw, with saffron remoulade...

    homemade caramelized white chocolate, and chocolate ice cream for dessert and ending with a cranberry jalepeno sorbet.  

    Wine and other spices  rounded out the meal..  yummmmmmm...

    Parent

    I may have walked off a third of those cals. (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by oculus on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:19:46 PM EST
    facing into the wind to the Metropolitan Muaeum today.

    Parent
    Yes Bitter Cold (none / 0) (#102)
    by squeaky on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:26:39 PM EST
    Glad to have fortified you for the calorie drain today!

    It was fun and delicious meal!

    Parent

    We all agree on that! (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by oculus on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 10:54:23 PM EST


    Parent
    Oh (5.00 / 2) (#122)
    by ZtoA on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 11:21:38 PM EST
    G - D ! Yummmmmm!

    Parent
    Amen Sister... (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 03:43:09 PM EST
    I was still so full I skipped breakfast this morning...yummy yum yum.

    Thanks and praises to the host with the most Sqeaky, and Oculus for her lovely company.

    Till the next time you crazy kids!

    Parent

    Sh*t... (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 03:58:11 PM EST
    forgot one more round of thanks all around for the musical accompaniment to the wine and gourmet cuisine....squaky and oculus be jammin' on a classical theme y'all.

    Parent
    Kdog, how was Tab Benoit/ Tommy Malone (none / 0) (#75)
    by vml68 on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 05:02:39 PM EST
    show on Friday? I am still bummed that I did not get to see them on Saturday as planned.

    Parent
    Tab's legit... (none / 0) (#130)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 06:17:13 AM EST
    that was some heavy power-trio delta blues. His bass player especially impressed, Mr. Corey Duplechin.  Thunderous and bouncy.  Would definitely repeat.

    I thought Tommy would jam with him, but he just opened with a keyboardist. He's such a character...the stories and quips are almost as entertaining as the music.  Very intimate vibe.

    Good news for shoephone and other Subdudes fans, Tommy announced they're playing some dates this summer.

    Parent

    Huh, Benoit is playing locally in May, (none / 0) (#171)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:21:07 AM EST
    I will add him to my calendar.

    Parent
    You'll dig it... (none / 0) (#182)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:35:19 AM EST
    Mrs. SUO especially, Tab's a good-looking man.  My sister was smitten.

    Parent
    Sounds good. (none / 0) (#185)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:47:19 AM EST
    We saw Lucinda Williams last week and Kenny Wayne Shepherd a few weeks back.

    Parent
    How'd you like Ms. Williams? (none / 0) (#188)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:54:10 AM EST
    Sick right?

    Parent
    Amazing voice, great songwriter. (none / 0) (#199)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 12:31:58 PM EST
    Honestly, kind if an uneven show, in a way, but I really enjoyed it regardless. I always seem to bump into random friends at these shows. Some songs she crushed, some not so much. She had her sheet music on a stand next to her and sometimes she looked at it for the next line before every line in every song. Got lost on one song several times and finally stopped and said eff it during the 3rd try.

    However, when she was comfortable she brought down the house. Doug Pettibone joined the band for some songs and he and Kenneth Bryan traded licks like kids in a candy store.

    Parent

    Whoa! Wait a minute (none / 0) (#93)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 06:47:39 PM EST
    How come you didn't take me to Tab Benoit kdog?

    Parent
    Sh*t kid... (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 06:18:11 AM EST
    you're gonna have to relocate the clan full time if you wanna catch 'em all! ;)

    Parent
    I love Tab Benoit (none / 0) (#163)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 10:50:57 AM EST
    And if oculus doesn't, she just doesn't yet.  She told me she loves blues guitar.  She loves cellist that break their bow hair.  She might throw clothes at Tab Benoit.

    Parent
    Ya know, we don't often agree on much, (none / 0) (#172)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:23:00 AM EST
    but you can turn a phrase.
    She might throw clothes at Tab Benoit.


    Parent
    Say it ain't so Moonbeam! (5.00 / 1) (#160)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 10:41:48 AM EST
    Jerry Brown can't be this stupid...so let's go to the campaign finance ticker-tape for another explanation.

    6 figures from pharmacuetical industry and another 6 figures from the alcohol industry.  'Nuff said!

    He calculates the potheadswon't (none / 0) (#161)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 10:47:18 AM EST
    be voting.

    Parent
    I don't think it has anything to do with (none / 0) (#166)
    by nycstray on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:11:11 AM EST
    campaign finances. Is legalizing pot even an issue in the upcoming elections? I haven't heard anything . . .

    I really doubt the wine industry feels threatened by pot here . . .

    Parent

    Isn't there... (none / 0) (#176)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:27:31 AM EST
    a new Prop on the table after Prop 19 failed?  You'd know better than me, but I thought there was hope of getting it on the CA ballot again in 2014.

    So if it's not the money, are you saying Jerry Brown is that stupid? ;) The man should know the difference between legalization of use and encouragement of use.  

    Parent

    Proponents decided to wait 'til 2016. (none / 0) (#184)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:38:39 AM EST


    Parent
    Same old story (none / 0) (#173)
    by Dadler on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:23:04 AM EST
    Get old, get conservative, get corrupt.

    Now if he can just get lost...

    Parent

    OT. Just wanted to jump in and say (none / 0) (#181)
    by vml68 on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:33:39 AM EST
    thanks for linking to Caravan Palace. I had not heard of them before. I really like their sound. They will be in NYC in April. Planning to go see them.

    Parent
    Here's what our Guv is (none / 0) (#192)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 12:00:09 PM EST
    worried about:

    potential adverse effect of pot smoking on worker productivity

    Parent

    Governor please... (5.00 / 1) (#196)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 12:20:48 PM EST
    I'm working circles around these social drinkers and tee-totalers!

    Not all potheads are lazy, if anything lazy people might take to pot to combat the boredom caused by their inherent laziness.  Correlation is not causation.

    Besides...when did worker productuivity become the be all end all?  I thought the role of government was to preserve and protect individual liberty and property via the rule of law, not preserve and protect worker productivity via tyranny.  

    Parent

    And another "if anything"! (5.00 / 3) (#197)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 12:23:51 PM EST
    If anything, my love of the sacrament motivates me to go to work and be "productive", so I can keep buying pot.  

    Parent
    Jerry Brown's always been an ascetic (5.00 / 1) (#200)
    by shoephone on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 12:33:18 PM EST
    His latest comments about pot don't really surprise me. But I sometimes wish he would keep his trap shut and quit making a total fool of himself.

    Parent
    The difference between rights and reality (5.00 / 1) (#202)
    by MO Blue on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 12:42:15 PM EST
    digby has a post about a "citizen who politely stood up for his constitutional rights when some police officers took it upon themselves to search his car without probable cause and he took the time to challenge it in court."

    Here is what Todd Greenwood the City attorney of Electra, Texas where the incident took place told that citizen.

    Todd Greenwood then compared rural Texas to the movie Deliverance, and warned me "What's written down in the Constitution is one thing, and the real practice is another."

     

    Parent

    Has anyone else had trouble with (none / 0) (#3)
    by MO Blue on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 09:24:59 AM EST
    the site taking forever to load or getting hung up before loading completely?

    I have been having trouble here all morning. Not having any trouble on any other site that I've accessed.

    At the moment it seems (none / 0) (#11)
    by MO Blue on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 11:56:18 AM EST
    to be working fine.

    Parent
    AN AXE LENGTH AWAY, vol. 290 (none / 0) (#4)
    by Dadler on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 09:36:55 AM EST
    His mug is filled to the brim with wretchedness. (link)

    And the rest of last week's comics, in case you missed any.

    v. 289
    v. 288
    v. 287
    v. 286
    v. 285
    v. 284

    Peace out, my friends.

    Handbook for Homophobes (none / 0) (#13)
    by MO Blue on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 12:33:46 PM EST
    courtesy of digby

    A feel good moment for Sunday (none / 0) (#14)
    by MO Blue on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 12:39:26 PM EST
    courtesy of digby.

    The nice curmudgeon

    And here's something that (5.00 / 3) (#16)
    by Anne on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 12:59:16 PM EST
    cracks me up every time I watch it:

    We're getting a kitten?

    Enjoy!

    Parent

    Thanks (none / 0) (#19)
    by MO Blue on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 01:23:58 PM EST
    That is funny. He did a great job putting that together.

    Will send it to a couple of my animal loving friends.

    Parent

    Enjoyed, made my day ! (none / 0) (#24)
    by gbrbsb on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 02:50:31 PM EST


    Parent
    Too cute (none / 0) (#26)
    by shoephone on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 04:01:50 PM EST
    Sending it to everyone I know...

    Parent
    That was a great way... (none / 0) (#52)
    by sj on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 11:53:56 AM EST
    ...to start a Monday. Thanks!

    Parent
    Here's just a cool picture... (none / 0) (#18)
    by desertswine on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 01:12:41 PM EST
    Obama, Tyson, and Nye

    Anyone here using OpenOffice software on a Mac? (none / 0) (#27)
    by caseyOR on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 04:21:57 PM EST
    I hate Pages and Numbers. The changes have made Pages useless to me. And  I have never been fond of Microsoft Word. I did like WordPerfect, but nobody uses that anymore.

    I have read some reviews of OpenOffice v4.0 for Mavericks (mac OSX). It sounds like it could be just the ticket. So, have any of you used it on your Macs laptop or desktop?

    If you have, well, do you like it?

    So sorry Casey Or (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by ZtoA on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 11:25:14 PM EST
    for all you are going thru. I was in Illinois taking care of my parents twice so far this winter. 22 below. If you would like any references to lawyers or others in the area pls just email me directly. Have lots. Best wishes and my deepest wishes for you and yours.

    Parent
    I tend to run from anything (none / 0) (#28)
    by nycstray on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 05:25:11 PM EST
    that relates to 'office' ;) I was curious about it though as I do need to do 'office' stuff on occasion. Will be interested to see if anyone is using it.

    How are you?

    Parent

    Well, still in the midwest where the town I am in (5.00 / 5) (#31)
    by caseyOR on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 06:12:02 PM EST
    broke its winter snowfall record with last night's snowfall. Now more freezing temps are on the way. With the windchill we are expected to hit 25 below.

    I am buried in paperwork, everything from taxes to finances to closing accounts to removing my sister from bank accounts and adding me to geez, there is just a lot of paper. And so many decisions that will have longterm consequences have to be made in the all too immediate aftermath of my sister's death, the exact time I am least able to think clearly and take in complicated information.I am terrified I will make a wrong decision.

    Dealing with the will and probate has me going in circles. These are not my areas of knowledge. Plus, I am far from home and do not have the contacts, the network here that I have at home.

    And I am so tired of telling people that my sister died. Sometimes it seems that is all I have done for the past month.

    Sorry for the kind of whiny answer to your "how are you" question.I am overwhelmed at being the responsible person for all the remaining family members. That was a task my sister and I shared and the sharing made it easier.

    I miss her so much.

    Parent

    That's not whiny at all. It's stress (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by shoephone on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 06:35:23 PM EST
    and grief, and it sounds as though you've taken on more than one person should be expected to handle. Even though you don't have contacts out there, can your contacts in Oregon possibly advise or recommend pros in the Midwest to help you out? A probate attorney? An accountant? Is there anyone outside the family you would trust enough to give you some assistance?

    I really feel for you, Casey. It reminds me of what my stepdad went through when my mom died. Dealing with the grief of loss, while also trying to pay off her debts, figure out what to do with her belongings, and deal with selling their home, etc. etc. etc. But he had some family and family friends to fill in on the stuff that was too difficult for him to do on his own.

    Maybe you're taking it all on alone because you feel like you don't want to be a burden to anyone else... but this is the time to ask for help, if you can. You still have to be good to yourself and take care of your own health.

    Parent

    Casey I did not read of your sister's passing (5.00 / 3) (#37)
    by ruffian on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 07:18:50 PM EST
    until now. I am so sorry. I can appreciate how swamped and stressed you are. It seems the aftermath is always so full of practical considerations it is hard to do anything else, but maybe that is good in a way.

    Peace  to you and your family.

    Parent

    Not whiny at all (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by nycstray on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 07:20:04 PM EST
    Honest, which is why I asked. I do hope things start falling into place and get better for you!

    Keep your sister close in your heart and don't forget to talk to her. It may help you sort some things . . .

    You coming back out west anytime soon?

    Parent

    Not whiny at all (5.00 / 4) (#40)
    by MO Blue on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 07:32:14 PM EST
    What you are going through would be overwhelming for anyone especially someone who is away from their normal support system.

    The issues you are dealing with are complex even for someone who is not dealing with the grief of losing a loved one.

    Be kind to yourself and try and seek out people who can help you through this time.

    I will keep you in my prayers.

    Parent

    casey, it's hard enough dealing with the (5.00 / 5) (#44)
    by Anne on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 08:15:41 PM EST
    emotions of such a great loss - it can take weeks just to catch up to yourself - but having to try to set that aside to deal with the post-death "business" adds a level of exhaustion that can make you feel like crawling into bed and pulling the covers over your head.

    So, please, don't feel like you're whining, or that you're not entitled to feel overwhelmed - you are.

    I've been working in the area of probate, estates/trusts for more years than I care to count, so I'd be happy to help however I can - Zorba has my e-mail and has my permission to give it to you.

    If you're contemplating getting a lawyer, please find one who has a specialty in estates and probate; there are a lot of decisions that can't be easily undone, and it's important to take the time to make sure you're making the right ones.  The local bar association can be of some help there if you're at a loss as to where to start. Check out ACTEC, too.

    When my dad died, it was like a family earthquake: no one knew what their role in the family was supposed to be in his absence, and it took a long time for us all to figure that out as a family, and as individuals.  Maybe it's time to share some of the responsibility, just to give yourself a break, and so you don't feel so alone in it.

    Hang in there, casey; it does get better.

    Parent

    Thank you everyone for your kind words of (5.00 / 4) (#69)
    by caseyOR on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 03:28:32 PM EST
    support. It is funny, isn't it, how we have formed a community here at TL even though most of us, recent NYC visitors and residents excepted, have never met in person. For the most part, we do not even know each other's real names.

    We have managed to connect with each other in spite of, or maybe because of, the impersonal nature of the internet. Or maybe we just made it personal.

    I am kind of rambling, but I bet you know what I mean.

    Thank you, all of you.

    Parent

    Here is a link for the OpenOffice (none / 0) (#32)
    by caseyOR on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 06:17:15 PM EST
    website. Just click here..

    Parent
    I did use it for a while (none / 0) (#36)
    by ruffian on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 07:15:22 PM EST
    It worked fine for me.  Definitely worth a try . I would not call myself a power user by any stretch, so I don't know how complete the feature set is, but it certainly does the basics easily and reliably. Have used it on both Mac and Linux.


    Parent
    AN AXE LENGTH AWAY, vol. 291 (none / 0) (#50)
    by Dadler on Mon Mar 03, 2014 at 11:41:18 AM EST
    The might be able to use some of the larger knitting needles. Ouch. (link)

    v. 290
    v. 289

    Happy Monday, my friends. Peace out.

    AN AXE LENGTH AWAY, vol. 292 (none / 0) (#178)
    by Dadler on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 11:32:15 AM EST
    They could just as easily call it Ravishing. (link)

    v. 291
    v. 290

    Get your Tuesdays on, people. Three it up.

    Peace.

    Sunday Open Thread | 203 comments (203 topical)