home

Tuesday Night Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Tue Jul 29, 2014 at 10:29:20 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Our last open thread is full. Here's another one, all topics welcome.

< Imprisoned Drug and Paramilitary Leader Claims His Brother Killed Pablo Escobar | ISIS Mass Massacre in Tikrit: "Down By the River" >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Tuesday Night Open Thread | 183 comments (183 topical)
    Another unpopular (5.00 / 4) (#4)
    by lentinel on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 06:36:56 AM EST
    opinion here, I'm sure, but I think that what Israel is doing to Gaza and to its people is absolutely horrendous and unconscionable.

    The relative silence by our administration, contrasted with the righteous bellowing aimed at Putin, is deafening.

    I have some emotional attachment, irrational though it be, to the State of Israel, but what they have become is so morally blank as to challenge the pitifully low standard set recently by the Bush administration. Of course Bush had Johnson as a role model when it comes to lying and slaughtering civilians, but he sure went with it and gave it his own twist, flourish, and brand - "shock and awe".

    Even assuming what the Israeli government is true - that the terrists are hiding in a school or a hospital - you do not bomb the school or the hospital. It is gutless and heartless and, I have to feel, cowardly.

    I wish I could feel otherwise, because I have distant family in Israel, and my family here and friends have a strong attachment to the State of Israel borne out of the suffering endured in WW2.

    But there it is.

    I am losing my natural (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by MKS on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 08:39:51 AM EST
    affinity for the State of Israel.  The reason to like Israel was they were the good guys, and the underdog.   They are clearly not the latter any more. And the former is increasingly in doubt.

    Parent
    I think that's an opinion that is gradually (5.00 / 6) (#10)
    by Anne on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 08:41:34 AM EST
    taking more hold, in spite of the efforts of the media to continue to find reasons why it's okay to blow up schools and hospitals; apparently, it doesn't matter if you're 5 months old, 5 years old or 50 years old, if you are Palestinian, you are complicit in the Hamas-controlled government and deserve to die.

    I get that things between Israel and the Palestinians may not be simple, but it's hard for me to find reasons to support what is looking more and more like the wholesale slaughter of people, most of whom probably just want to live in peace and have someplace to call home.  And it's even harder to grasp given the history of Jews being targeted for elimination from the face of the earth not all that long ago.

    Parent

    Here's something worth considering: (5.00 / 3) (#12)
    by Anne on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 09:08:22 AM EST
    In American media discourse, when Palestinians overwhelmingly kill soldiers (95% of the Israeli death toll) who are part of an army that is blockading, occupying, invading, and indiscriminately bombing them and killing their children by the hundreds, that is "terrorism"; when Israelis use massive, brutal force against a trapped civilian population, overwhelmingly killing innocent men, women and children (at least 75% of the Palestinian death toll), with clear intentions to kill civilians (see point 3), that is noble "self-defense." That demonstrates how skewed U.S. discourse is in favor of Israel, as well as the purely manipulative, propagandistic nature of the term "terrorists."

    Link

    Parent

    It's worth mentioning (none / 0) (#23)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:23:31 AM EST
    That 85-95% of the public supports what the Israeli  military is doing and opposes a cease fire until the job is done.

    They are not all right wing militants.

    Parent

    Which public - the American public? (none / 0) (#25)
    by Anne on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:42:12 AM EST
    Where did those approval numbers come from and how recent are they?

    Or are you talking about the Israeli public?

    And what does "getting the job done" mean?  

    Parent

    The numbers are EVERWHERE (none / 0) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:49:47 AM EST
    This is from the Washington post-

    A poll this week for Israel's Channel 10 news, conducted by the Sarid Institute, found that 87 percent of Jewish Israelis support continuing the Gaza operation. A survey by the Israel Democracy Institute found that 95 percent of Israeli Jews think the operation in Gaza is just, and 4 of 5 oppose a unilateral withdrawal. Just 4 percent said the Israeli military has used excessive force.

    And in another survey this week, by the University of Haifa, 85 percent of Jewish Israelis said they are "very satisfied" or "satisfied" with Netanyahu's leadership.

    "Israel has never been this hard-line, maybe not since the 1967 war" against Egypt and other Arab states, said Amotz Asa-El, a fellow at the Shalom Hartman Institute, a Jewish think tank in Jerusalem. "A sweeping majority of Israelis want a protracted, systemic, thorough uprooting of Hamas and its military capabilities."

    `A national consensus'

    Getting the job done means cleaning out and closing the tunnels at least.

    Google is your friend

    Parent

    for the record (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:56:10 AM EST
    Recognizing reality is not an endorsement of it.

    Parent
    That statistic (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by MKS on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:47:00 PM EST
    makes supporting Israel even harder.  

    They are losing their way.  Why should we support that?   Time to reconsider military aid to Israel.  

    Parent

    NYT Perspective (none / 0) (#29)
    by squeaky on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:57:11 AM EST
    Here is a current NYT piece putting the unique American support of Israel in perspective with how the rest of the world looks on in horror at Israeli actions.


    Parent
    I think so too (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 11:05:49 AM EST
    I can understand that from their perspective it is easier and less risky for their troops to do these bombing attacks than to go in on the ground and root out the rocket launchers and tunnels. But it just seems like they are careless of innocent lives in the attempt to protect their own. I know they blame Hamas for that, but they are going to find that the worlds shares the blame and it is not helping them in the long run.

    Parent
    If Putin did this,... (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 11:08:10 AM EST


    Parent
    Please (none / 0) (#33)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 11:13:10 AM EST
    Russians are not living under constant threat of rocket attack.

    Parent
    What you fail to mention (5.00 / 4) (#43)
    by Chuck0 on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 12:25:31 PM EST
    is the 7 year blockade of Gaza. The Palestinians in Gaza essentially live in prison. I for one, completely understand the rocket attacks. If the Commonwealth of PA erected a wall around my town and said I couldn't leave for no other reason than they don't like who we elected for mayor (remember, they had democratic elections in Gaza and geez, no liked the outcome of that), I would be pretty cranky after 7 years. Probably would start lobbing rockets or whatever else I could find over that wall.

    Parent
    To me, it is obvious the capt's (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 05:58:54 PM EST
    comment is ironic, i.e., not to be taken at face value.

    Parent
    I'm sorry (none / 0) (#74)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 07:28:35 PM EST
    It was not ironic.  Face value please.  And

    what you fail to mention is the 7 year blockade of Gaza. The Palestinians in Gaza essentially live in prison.

    I did not fail to mention it.  I in fact mentioned it a half hour earlier which is I believe the next comment below this one.

    The Russians are not living with the constant threat of attack.   Israelis are.  
    Does that mean I approve of what the are going.  Read the comments.   Not going to repeat myself.

    Parent

    So, my comment re Putin was too cryptic. (none / 0) (#114)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 10:43:35 AM EST
    To expand, Putin provides high teach weapons and training to the pro-Russian rebels in the Ukraine.  How does the U.S. react?  Economic sanctions, saber-rattling by the usual suspects.

    Israel bombs the be-jesus out the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. How does the U.S. React?

    Parent

    No leg to stand on Oc... (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 12:02:12 PM EST
    those are our weapons slaughtering the Palestinians.

    And if it is proven it was a Russian missile that shot down the plane, we don't have a leg to stand on vilifying Putin.  How many US weapons have been used by bad people to slaughter people throughout the 20th and 21st Centuries? We are Putin, Putin is us.

    The weapons we give to Iraq to combat ISIS...where are they gonna end up in 10 years, who will they kill?  

    Sh*t Osama used CIA money to get Al Qaida off the ground.

    Parent

    Did you see the NYTimes (none / 0) (#123)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 11:50:37 AM EST
    Piece about how all the other Arab countries are reacting to this?

    As far as conflating it with Ukraine I couldn't respond to that in a comment box. Or maybe I could but I'm not up to it.

    Parent

    Rocket attack (none / 0) (#84)
    by MKS on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:48:32 PM EST
    was not in quotes.....

    What rocket attack.  From most accounts, these "rocket" attacks have as much punch as a Fourth of July fireworks show....

    Parent

    I agree (none / 0) (#32)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 11:12:00 AM EST
    I can not imagine what it means to be afraid my house is going to be hit by a rocket.  Just worrying about tornados stresses me out.  
    On the other hand I understand completely something I read that a Palestinian said about preferring to die rather than live in an open air prison.

    History is filled with such impasses.  Or so we hope.


    Parent

    Statistically Speaking (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by squeaky on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 11:22:33 AM EST
    You would have a better chance of getting hit by lightning than by a Hamas Rocket.  But, perspective flies out the window in these emotional times.

    Parent
    Sure about that? (none / 0) (#35)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 11:25:55 AM EST
    It's a pretty small place -

    WASHINGTON -- Despite three weeks of relentless attacks by Israeli forces to destroy Hamas' arsenal of weapons, militants in Gaza may still have nearly 5,000 rockets, enough to keep firing at Israeli cities for weeks.

    The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said Hamas started the conflict on July 8 with about 10,000 rockets. Since then, the militants have fired more than 2,600 rockets and mortars toward Israel and Israeli forces have destroyed about 3,000, estimated Lt. Col. Peter Lerner, IDF's spokesman.

    Israel has struggled to destroy Hamas' arsenal because Hamas had built an extensive underground network of tunnels and bunkers designed to conceal weapons caches and firing positions.



    Parent
    Oops (none / 0) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 11:29:48 AM EST
    usatoday

    Parent
    Quite Telling (none / 0) (#39)
    by squeaky on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 11:42:43 AM EST
    The USAToday article you linked goes on about the abundance of Hamas Rockets and the attempts by Israel to destroy them.

    Nothing about the Damage caused by the rockets, no less the deaths..

    Lightning on the other hand...

    Parent

    Oh my (none / 0) (#86)
    by MKS on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 11:13:35 PM EST
    I think our local municipality has a lot of rockets too--leftover from the Fourth of July.

    How many Israelis have been killed or injured from the Hamas rocket fire since the beginning of this latest offensive?  Try none.  Maybe one or two.

    Hamas fires 2,600 and no Israelis die?  I think the numbers are high enough we can draw conclusions about the relative danger the rockets pose.

    Parent

    Let's please dispense with the notion ... (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 04:13:00 PM EST
    MKS: "I think our local municipality has a lot of rockets too--leftover from the Fourth of July."

    ... that the rockets being wielded by Hamas are the equivalent of 4th of July community entertainment. Rather, they have the caliber and effect of heavy artillery. These rockets are small and unguided medium range mini-missiles and further, their operation is highly mobile, in that one does not need fixed guideways or ramps in place to facilitate their launch.

    The most common rocket used by Hamas is the Qassam-3, which is primarily a battlefield weapon of limited range (12 km, or 8 miles) with a 15-kg warhead (33 lbs.) that was originally designed for deployment against an enemy's armored columns. But in the case of the M-302 rocket, which constitutes the heaviest weapon in the Hamas arsenal, it has a maximum range of 160 km (99 miles) and carries a 90-kg (317 lb.) warhead.

    These are hardly fireworks, and in fact they do give Hamas the potential to strike the city of Haifa in northern Israel from positions in Gaza. That said, while these rockets are indeed very deadly weapons, they are certainly not "smart bombs" by any means. Such weaponry contains no internal guidance system, and can only be launched at random in the general direction of a large and undefined target area, in the vague hope that it will somehow find paydirt.

    Further, the counter-deployment of Israel's "Iron Dome" missile defense system effectively neutralizes the threat posed by the Hamas rockets. A few rockets have gotten through to populated areas, but 90-95% of them have been intercepted en route and destroyed in mid-air.

    The tactical deployment of rockets by Hamas is not unlike that of the old V-1 "Buzz Bomb," which was deployed by Germany in the later stages of the Second World War. As such, they are nuisance weapons of little strategic importance and consequence, and their primary purpose and effect is to undermine civilian morale on the opposing side.

    (The V-1 proved a very early prototype of our own cruise missile, and was launched at constant intervals in the general direction of London, starting one week after the Allied D-Day landings in Normandy. But of the nearly 14,000 V-1s shot by the Germans at the British capital between June 1944 and March 1945, only about 2,400 ever reached their primary target. Hamas' success rate at striking Israeli population centers is but only a fraction of that.)

    I generally stand by Israel's right to defend itself, but that support is not unequivocal. The IDF's current ferocious reaction to Hamas' petty provocations has clearly been grossly disproportionate to the perceived threat offered by its adversary, and unnecessarily places the one million-plus noncombatant residents of Gaza at grave risk. This wanton assault on Gaza has to stop.

    It is also pretty obvious that the United States is no longer perceived as an honest broker in this protracted conflict, and our efforts would instead probably be best directed toward identifying a willing third party who doesn't necessarily have a dog in the hunt, and who could fulfill that particular role and bring the warring parties together to negotiate a lasting settlement to their differences.

    Don't laugh, but The Vatican comes immediately to my mind. The recent visit by Pope Francis to the Holy Land was generally well-received by all sides, and he is certainly someone of considerable vision and stature who could establish the needed rapport and trust with the combatants to not only broker a standing ceasefire, but also a formal agreement to establish a Palestinian state and bring about an end to Israeli occupation.

    It would certainly be worth a try.

    Parent

    Correction: (none / 0) (#156)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 04:32:13 PM EST
    The M-302 rocket actually carries a 144-kg warhead (317 lbs.), and not a 90-kg warhead (198 lbs.) as stated above.

    Rather, it is the Fadjr-5 rocket (aka the M-75) -- the second biggest weapon in Hamas' possession -- that carries a 90-kg warhead. This particular weapon system, which of Iranian design and manufacture, has a maximum range of 75 km (46 miles), which effectively places the southern Israeli cities of Tel Aviv and Be'ersheva with its striking distance.

    Apologies for the confusion.

    Parent

    Thank you (none / 0) (#167)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 07:04:28 PM EST
    I agree with all of that.  


    Parent
    When Israel suffers (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 07:05:55 PM EST
    more than 2 dead from rocket attacks, let me know

    Parent
    2 dead is still 2 dead - and it's 2 too many. (none / 0) (#175)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 08:37:42 PM EST
    Hamas has had no business firing its rockets into Israel, and bears no small amount of responsibility for having provoked the current round of hostilities.

    That said, as I stated above. Israel's response to Hamas provocations has been grossly disproportionate to the threat actually posed by these rockets. Its shameless military assault on Gaza needs to cease and IDF forces need to withdraw, because the people who are actually caught in the crossfire during this incursion are innocent and had no hand in Hamas' own equally shameful decision making. As our mothers always taught us, two wrongs do not make a right.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Honestly the Pope (none / 0) (#168)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 07:05:38 PM EST
    Wouldn't have occurred to me but why not.

    Parent
    The Vatican supposedly (none / 0) (#166)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 06:27:54 PM EST
    brokered the Guatemalan Peace Accords behind the scenes....Or so says well resepected academic and long time Guatemala observer Dr. Susanne Jonas.  

    Parent
    2 Killed by Palestinian Rockets in 2014 (none / 0) (#88)
    by squeaky on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 11:23:43 PM EST
    according to Wikipedia:

    2663 palestinian rockets fired, 33 mortars, 2 killed, 39 injured.

    Israeli retaliation: 1223 killed, 6720 injured.

    Parent

    Yes...it really may be impossible (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 11:33:53 AM EST
    Neither side wants to return to the status quo of a month ago, but there has to be a better alternative than this continuing nightmare.

    Parent
    Good commentary (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 11:27:41 AM EST
    by Josh Marshall on the Dangerous Game Israel is playing in American politics.  I didn't realize Israel's current ambassador to the US, also known as 'Bibi's Brain' used to work for Frank Luntz. Lovely.

    Parent
    I think Israel may see that game... (none / 0) (#54)
    by unitron on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 03:59:59 PM EST
    ...as dangerous for the US, perhaps, but less so for them, and consider us useful but ultimately expendable.

    Parent
    I Have Been Surprised... (5.00 / 3) (#45)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 01:52:49 PM EST
    ...by the amount of media in Gaza.  Not saying it's a lot, but every news program this week has had kids with some version of "Where do we go ?".  Opinion swaying stuff that we haven't seen in the past out of Gaza.

    IMO, backing Israel is costing us a lot diplomacy in the Muslim world, not that we hve much, but right now we give them about $3 billion in military aid, which IMO should give us some leverage in what they are doing, it's not.  So instead of cutting off the aid, like we should, we are going to send $50 million in aid to Gaza.

    I have been off Israel since... not sure if I have ever been with them.  I have zero connections to them and not old enough to remember Vietnam, much less WWII.  My parents aren't even old enough to remember it, so why the blind allegiance from the US ?  

    I don't like that they do whatever they want, even things that are approaching war crimes, like bombing civilians, and we are still giving them military aid.  We are paying for the bombs and the humanitarian needs those bombs are creating, genius.

    Where are the fiscal conservative republicans when it comes to Israel's aid ?  Invisible, it's political suicide not to back Israel and that is GD shame.

    And John Kerry, the guy trying to promote peace says something like "In his 30 years in the Senate, he's voted 100% Israel", yesterday.  How is that helping, he's clearly looking out for one side and stating it publicly.

    I say cut Israel lose and lend a hand if they are attacked, unprovoked.

    Parent

    51 State (none / 0) (#46)
    by squeaky on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 02:09:34 PM EST
    I think that the US sees Israel as a strategic ally, kind of like having a US state with nuclear weapons, military bases etc, in the mid east.

    Parent
    Well, either that.... (none / 0) (#53)
    by unitron on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 03:57:38 PM EST
    ...or US politicians see the domestic Jewish vote as something they don't want to risk alienating.

    Although the "in a hurry for the end times to get here" fundamentalists have somewhat complicated the whole question.

    Parent

    Note that multiple Arab states (none / 0) (#59)
    by Green26 on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 05:40:48 PM EST
    appear to be supporting Israel over Hamas, either with words or by their silence. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and UAE. Egypt's cease proposal was largely in line of Israel's and had none of Hamas'. See today's just posted NY Times article on internet.

    Parent
    I did see that.. (none / 0) (#98)
    by lentinel on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 07:47:09 AM EST
    Considering the nature of the governments of those Arab States, it is not exactly a ringing endorsement of the morality or humanity of the actions of the Israeli government.

    The issue for me remains the total disregard for human life being displayed by the Israeli government in its military conduct.

    Of course it has as its model, the worst of the American example - first by Johnson and then by Bush. Clinton introduced the term "collateral damage" to dehumanize the slaughter upon men women and children that he managed to pursue during his illustrious tenure. I won't comment on Obama's drones for the moment. Yuck.

    We're sure in bed with a bunch of undesirables.

    Parent

    I just (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 08:16:44 AM EST
    got push polled by the Perdue for Senate campaign here in GA. If this is any indication of the campaign he's going to run, he's going to suck wind. He's still stuck on Obamacare and taxes.

    Doesn't seem to have hurt him so far (none / 0) (#13)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 09:11:40 AM EST
    Polls

    Parent
    Let's look at past numbers in Georgia (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 09:47:30 AM EST
    2010 Georgia Senate. Republican wins +19.3%
    2008 Georgia Senate. Republican wins +14.8%
    2004 Georgia Senate. Republican wins +17.9%
    2002 Georgia Senate. Republican wins +6.9%

    I'd say a current RCP average by the Republican of +3.2% in Georgia would certainly be classified as "not good", which would fall somewhere between your "not hurting him" and Ga6thDem's "sucking wind".

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#19)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:18:00 AM EST
    2010 had a Democratic candidate that no one had really heard of (and was an African-American to try and win in Georgia against a popular incumbent), so 20 points isn't surprising.

    Your 2008 figure is based on a win (after a runoff election in December) but if you look at polling before election day, it wasn't a 15 point spread - it was 4-6 points. By a popular incumbent.

    2004 - You had another unknown Democrat who announced that God had told her to run, who had to go through an expensive primary, and running against a popular incumbent (not to mention that Bush was popular at the time).

    2002 was just a horrible campaign - Chambliss v. Cleland.

    I'd say considering it's July and not November (where your numbers are coming from), and considering that Nunn has a familiar name in Georgia politics, and has lots of money pouring in, PLUS this is an open seat, and I'd say no, GA6thDem's claim that the fact he has to push-pull seems to her that he is "sucking wind" does not seem to be an accurate description of what is going on.

    It really does help to give some context to numbers (and use numbers that are comparable).

    Parent

    If I can just squeeze in here... (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by Anne on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:49:22 AM EST
    since the likelihood of you, Georgia and CoralGables EVER agreeing on what numbers mean AT ANY POINT in the election season, in ANY election that involves the South (where, as we know, ONLY bona fide residents of that area are qualified to opine, with the rest of us "just not getting it"), you could probably spare yourself much aggravation, many millimeters of mercury on the blood pressure gauge, and a small handful of painkillers, by not spending one more minute arguing with them.

    I, in turn, will try to heed my own advice when and if ol' squeaky decides he's in the mood to stalk me through the threads.

    Good luck to us both!

    Parent

    Nunn wins (none / 0) (#22)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:19:41 AM EST
    Wanna bet?

    Parent
    Apparently (none / 0) (#24)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:27:23 AM EST
    you haven't actually seen him in action. If he's push polling believe me he's got a problem. A good GOP candidate would be polling a lot better and Nunn turned down a chance to run the last time around.

    Parent
    Because you don't like what the numbers say (none / 0) (#40)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 12:13:56 PM EST
    doesn't mean they aren't comparable.

    You are welcome to make of them what you choose, but no matter how you twist them Perdue isn't comfortably strolling to a Senate seat.  Personally, I think Perdue will win, but his current numbers are extremely weak by any measure of statewide elections for Georgia GOP politics in this century.

    Parent

    Actually, the numbers are fine (none / 0) (#122)
    by jbindc on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 11:45:28 AM EST
    It's the fact that you are comparing apples to oranges that bothers me.

    Election wins really have nothing to do with polling in July.

    Add to the fact that in almost every one of your examples, there was a popular incumbent running, whereas in this case, it is an open seat, which dramatically changes the dynamics.

    But Anne's right - there's no point arguing with people who won't actually listen to reason and they they are the only ones qualified to make comments because of their geography.

    Parent

    See coral (none / 0) (#17)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:14:23 AM EST
    gable's numbers. Plus I don't think Nunn has run any ads with Perdue closing down factories and walking away with millions of dollars for himself nor the class action suit his company lost because they were paying women way less than men. Perdue is a really bad candidate. Also she can show his condescending statement toward Karen Handel much like Obama's "you're likable enough" to Hillary.

    Parent
    Perdue is a bad candidate (none / 0) (#20)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:18:36 AM EST
    And Nunn is a pretty good one

    Parent
    CG's numbers (none / 0) (#21)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:18:39 AM EST
    Are not comparable.  See my post above.

    Parent
    Gotta joke (5.00 / 3) (#44)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 12:27:47 PM EST
    What's the difference between Rick Perry and Texas roadkill? One is an armadillo and the other is an armed d*ldo.

    That's an I left out in the above word.

    I can't tell what you are saying (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by MKS on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:43:58 PM EST
    Are you being deliberately vague, here?

    Just say it plainly....Do you agree with the CIA 1954 coup and the Reagan Era policies in Guatemala?

    He's already made it plain in the past (5.00 / 2) (#97)
    by jondee on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 07:44:27 AM EST
    That he agrees that anyone the CIA called a communist and an enemy of America in the fifties was a communist and an enemy of America. Mossedeq was a communist collaborator, Arbenz was a communist..and of course so were the Iranian and Guatamalan people for electing them. Bomb them and their children back to the Stone Age. In Tebow's name, Amen.

    Parent
    As I think I've mentioned from (5.00 / 4) (#109)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 09:47:48 AM EST
    time to time, I had or have a number of family members who have served in the military, and all of them saw combat:  both of my grandfathers in both WWI and WWII, my dad in WWII, my uncle in WWII, another uncle in Korea, and my husband in Vietnam.

    Not a single one of them, having experienced war, having seen death and destruction, having been in fear for their lives, having seen the toll war takes on the people who live in war's midst and knowing they were part of that, having been injured to varying degrees, has ever - ever - exhibited the callous disregard for human life or eagerness to blow people away in massive numbers as you have, and with such disturbing frequency.

    You talk about killing as if you're sorry you missed out on it; it's big talk from someone who wants people to think that just because he "served 10 years in Naval Aviation" that he has a real understanding of what war actually is.  I don't think you have a clue.

    To be completely honest, I don't have a clue what war actually is.  I've never lived in those conditions - and seeing it on the TV isn't the same.  As a human being, I can use my imagination to the best of my ability to explore how I would feel if my life or the lives of my loved ones was under constant threat, but that's not the same, either.  But - maybe if more people could see through or past  the politics and the religion and the territorial posturing to the basic insanity and cruelty of people killing each other and destroying each other's lives, we could have less of it.  That's why I don't cheer for war, or take comfort in the deaths and injuries and broken lives.

    The comments you have made about Donald's father have come from your antipathy for him, and the zero disregard you have for his and his family's loss is just part and parcel of the not-fooling-anyone charade that you're a tough guy who "served."  This is not meant to disparage your service - I'm sure your government is thankful for whatever it is you did that you don't feel you can describe to even a minimal degree - it's meant to make you aware that we're onto you.

    Please stop telling us about all your progressive positions; they don't make up for or negate the ugliness you express on a regular basis.  And if your primary purpose for being here is just to push people's buttons, that's a pretty sad commentary on what's important to you.

    Ah Anne, I actually knew you (1.00 / 4) (#154)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 04:16:29 PM EST
    and the others, squeaky, jondee, MKS, et al...

    I'll try and answer all of you at one time.

    Go back and read what I have written.

    I say that young men have always fought old men's wars.

    I say that we are, like it or not, in a religious war and it will be less costly in lives to fight it now.

    I say that Gaza has attacked Israel and is using its civilians as human shields for PR purposes.

    I have noted that war is nasty brutish and harmful to all living things.

    Unfortunately the only choice we have in the matter is the same as the young men slaughtered by ISIS (see post) had. Fight or die.

    Several of you screech about war crimes. Do you think that our bombing of Italy, Germany, Japan. Korea, Vietnam were war crimes??

    Sadly, I think some of you do.

    I refer you to history. The Civil War had dragged on for years because the Northern generals wouldn't fight. Finally Lincoln turned it over to Grant.

    He was called a butcher. But he applied maximum force and ended the war as rapidly as possible rather than letting it drag on killing thousands. Had he not done so the South would have, eventually, achieved a political settlement with Lincoln's predecessor with terrible consequences for the country.

    We appear to have forgotten that the only reason to fight a war is to want to win the war. To sacrifice lives for any other reasons is an abomination.

    Now, if the above bothers you, "sorry about that."

    And if you don't want a nasty tossed your way, don't toss one my way.

    And if you will quit telling me I should go serve I will quit reminding you that I already have.

    And sleep well tonight knowing that hard men and women are on guard to keep you safe.

    Bill Whittle says it nicely.

    Parent

    Obama condemns the attack on (5.00 / 3) (#128)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 12:19:51 PM EST
    the UN school in Gaza, but doesn't assign blame for it...and announces more ammunition for Israel.

    Really?

    In a bizarre public denouncement, the Obama Administration condemned the attack on a UN school in Gaza Wednesday without blaming anyone for it.  The odd blameless condemnation comes despite there being little to no doubt that the devastation at the UN school was a result of Israeli shelling. The IDF itself has acknowledged it fired ordinance in the area, allegedly in response to mortar fire. So almost everyone, including Israel to a limited degree, agrees the attack on the UN School was done by Israel.

    Stranger still, the condemnation came as the US agreed to resupply Israel with ammunition to carry out more attacks on Gaza - like the one that occurred at the UN school. Is the Obama Administration aware of how ridiculous it looks?

    Jesus.

    Unbelievable... (5.00 / 5) (#129)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 12:26:43 PM EST
    It's like a child writing all over the couch with permanent marker, and the parent condemning the state of the couch while buying the child a new 12 pc. set of permanent markers.  Does not compute.

    Parent
    Now that it's obvious - even the IDF is (none / 0) (#130)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 12:43:29 PM EST
    acknowledging it was operating in the area - the Obama administration is getting closer to assigning blame for the attack to Israel.  

       In what amounted to the strongest and most explicit condemnation of Israel since the conflict began, US president Barack Obama's press secretary said the attack on the school was "totally unacceptable" and "totally indefensible".

        He also said the administration was "urging" Israel to do more to avoid civilian deaths and said US officials were taking issue with "specific military decisions" by Jerusalem.

        "The shelling of a UN facility, that is housing innocent civilian who are fleeing violence, is totally unacceptable and totally indefensible," Josh Earnest said.

        "It is clear that we need our allies in Israel to do more to live up to the high standards they have set themselves."

        In the aftermath of the shelling of the school, US officials initially declined to apportion blame for the shelling - even though the UN said all of the evidence pointed to Israel.

        On Thursday, after Israel conceded it was operating the area and said it was possible that "stray Israeli fire" hit the school, the White House shifted stance.

        "It does not appear there is a lot of doubt about whose artillery was involved in this incident," Earnest said.

    Was there ever any doubt?

    Parent

    Actions speak louder than words... (5.00 / 2) (#131)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 01:18:11 PM EST
    we can condemn it till the cows come home...money and arms talk, bullsh*t walks.

    Parent
    And Congress... (5.00 / 2) (#137)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 01:56:23 PM EST
    ...is currently debating more funds for Israel:
    It would be tough to find anybody in Congress, from either party, opposed to sending Israel more money for its Iron Dome air defense system, which has been instrumental in protecting the country from rockets fired by Hamas. But the additional $225 million Israel has requested for the anti-rocket system could be held up until September, as the parties spar over how Congress should distribute the money.

    LINK

    I will never understand our foreign policy, especially in terms of arming people and then giving aid to the people those arms are used on.

    Parent

    I've got an idea... (none / 0) (#140)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 02:01:08 PM EST
    we'll trade them 225 million for the Iron Dome, but they have to destroy 225 million worth of missiles and mortars and bullets previously supplied by Uncle "Sugar Daddy" Sam to kill Palestinians.

    Parent
    And Then We Can Party... (none / 0) (#143)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 02:39:38 PM EST
    ...with the $50 million we are sending to Gaza in humanitarian aid for the bombs/missiles we supplied Israel.

    Parent
    Plus what we can get... (none / 0) (#144)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 02:47:16 PM EST
    from the scrap yard for scraping 225 million worth of weapons...maybe another million or two for the Peace Party fund.

    Parent
    "fixated on his death"? (5.00 / 3) (#135)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 01:47:59 PM EST
    Shame on you.

    If you ever really served, you would know better that than.   His father was KIA. Donald was young.

    Your comment is pathetically small.

    Apologize, Jim (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 01:56:52 PM EST
    Now.  Be a man and do the right thing.

    And, don't think that just because you contributed monetarily from the site.  I don't think we would have any trouble making up for what you contribute.

    "just because you contributed monetarily (none / 0) (#139)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 01:57:57 PM EST
    to the site, you are safe with Jeralyn.

    Parent
    "No More!" (5.00 / 2) (#141)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 02:33:23 PM EST
    I found the following very moving:

    Occupation and apartheid are not Jewish values. Collective punishment is not a Jewish value. Racism and colonialism are not Jewish values. Strengthening U.S. imperialism is not a Jewish thing to do. As Jews we say `No More!' to the racist Israelis who take to the streets of Jerusalem chanting `death to Arabs'; we say `No More!' to Netanyahu's calls for revenge; we say `No More!' to the cold-hearted murder of Palestinian youth; we say `No More!' to the Israeli army's home demolitions, raids, mass imprisonment, detention of youth, and murder of Palestinians in the West Bank. We say `No More!' to the brutal shelling of Gaza. We say `No More!' to the crackdown in East Jerusalem. We say `No More!' to the racism, apartheid, and occupation being committed by the Israeli state in our name.

    We stand with Palestinians suffering under Israeli occupation and with everyone else suffering under American imperialism the world over. May people of all faiths, races and creeds unite to build a world of justice and peace.

    Our people did not suffer oppression and exile for centuries so that we could turn around and become the oppressors of another people. Three times a day, throughout our history, religious Jews have turned to face Jerusalem from wherever they are around the world, and have said the Hebrew prayer `May our eyes behold Your return to Zion in compassion'. My grandmother's grandmother did not chant this prayer from her small town of Sharnov in Poland, crying for redemption, so that a settler-colonial nation-state could send the indigenous inhabitants of Palestine into exile, and crush those who remained under a brutal regime of occupation. Israeli apartheid is a shame not only to the world, it is a shame upon the memory of our Jewish ancestors.

    I'm glad someone gets it.

    Enough of the war beat... (5.00 / 5) (#145)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 03:12:44 PM EST
    time for a report from the personal peace beat...3 day weekend comin' up, first stop is one day of The Gathering of the Vibes w/ Trombone Shorty & John Fogerty highlighting the card tomorrow, back to NYC on Saturday for the one and only Dr. John in Central Park (gratis!)...and R&R Sunday at a family birthday BBQ for my youngest darling niece.  

    Our little miracle spent the first months of her life on the operating table and hooked up to machines, being born with CDH...it feels like yesterday we were all huddled around her and her monitors in the hospital having mini-strokes everytime they started beeping.  And now she's turning 10...happy and relatively healthy and sharp as a tack. Only a couple more adjustment surgeries to go for her scoliosis, and then they will fuse the rod in her spine.  

    So here's to her, the toughest human being I know...Happy Birthday Honeybun!

    May you all find your joy this weekend as well, and forget about this f*cked up world for awhile.  Peace!  

    Congenital Diaghramatic Hernia? (5.00 / 1) (#148)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 03:28:10 PM EST
    Glad to hear she's doing well - it's no fun to spend so much time dealing with medical issues, but it sounds like she's getting to a good place where maybe she can get a break.

    Hope you all have a rip-roaring time (does  the kdog clan do it up any other way?), counting the blessings instead of the burdens!

    Cheers and happy birthday to your niece!

    Parent

    Is it incredibly poor reading skills, ... (5.00 / 3) (#165)
    by Yman on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 05:43:29 PM EST
    ... or do you always have to resort to clipped "quotes" to make ridiculous claims?

    And your personal threat, "I'll shoot to kill" is duly noted.

    What Donald actually said -

    Should you deliberately choose to not heed my request, you are henceforth advised and forewarned that rhetorically, I'll shoot to kill.

    But stock up on Depends, if you must.

    No need to change a thing (5.00 / 0) (#197)
    by Yman on Fri Aug 01, 2014 at 06:57:51 PM EST
    Their words - not the clipped quotes or false paraphrases of yours - are perfectly fine and easily understood by anyone with a double-digit IQ.

    But if you have to resort to clipped quotes and lies to make your silly claims, it reveals how weak your silly claims really are.

    Sorry, start your own blog and I (1.50 / 2) (#92)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 06:27:36 AM EST
    promise to never show up.

    But I must tell all my friends that since I support gay marriage, national health care, women's rights, and drug law rationalization I am a right winger.

    Your problem, and many like you, is that you demand that everyone obey and do as you want.

    That is a good working definition of a radical.

    talk talk talk (5.00 / 3) (#124)
    by sj on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 11:56:11 AM EST
    But I must tell all my friends that since I support gay marriage, national health care, women's rights, and drug law rationalization
    Just a lot of yammering when no one you support sits on the same side that you say you do on any of those issues..

    Parent
    Have you ever actually ever (none / 0) (#134)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 01:37:40 PM EST
    voted for people who hold those positions?  Or do you vote for the conservative for "other" reasons?

    Parent
    Jim, (none / 0) (#1)
    by MKS on Tue Jul 29, 2014 at 10:37:20 PM EST
    Since you are such a believer in unbridled use of military force in Gaza, I want to ask you this.

    You think the CIA overthrow of the Iranian government in 1953 was appropriate....Do you agree that the CIA overthrow of the Guatemalan government in 1954 was also a good thing?

    Do you agree with Reagan's policies toward Guatemala in the 1980s?  I have asked you this before.  You did not answer.   Will you answer now?

    I think you already know the answer to that. (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 03:25:22 AM EST
    When you ask a chickenhawk a question, you should expect a chickenhawk response.

    Parent
    Yeah, he advocates (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by MKS on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 09:08:12 AM EST
    no holds barred conduct in war, not realizing he is advoating war crimes, and never having experienced up close and personal what he is advocating....

    Never having experienced war first hand, he sure is quick to be all gung ho for all kinds of killing.

    Parent

    I dunno, Donald (1.00 / 5) (#5)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 07:10:31 AM EST
    This chickenhawk served and you did not.

    Parent
    I served. (5.00 / 7) (#41)
    by Chuck0 on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 12:18:54 PM EST
    US Navy. I grew up in the US Navy. Seventeen years as Navy then joined myself. And your response is pointless. Just because you served in the US military does not mean your selfish belief that other people's children should die in far away lands for you. We made a mess in lots of far away places and I'm ashamed as a US citizen and VETERAN for it. And sending more people to die in those messes is no solution.

    Parent
    Service (none / 0) (#42)
    by squeaky on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 12:21:57 PM EST
    The main thing ppj has served is his ego...  he waves his service around as if he had received the purple heart.

    Of course he would never discuss his service, just the fact that he believes that his service makes him a notch up from others who serve every day, just not in the military.

    Parent

    Oh, really?? (none / 0) (#75)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 08:13:10 PM EST
    Speaking of pointless things. What are you trying to say here?

    Just because you served in the US military does not mean your selfish belief that other people's children should die in far away lands for you.

    When I volunteered the deal was that I did what I was ordered to do.

    I understood that the military existed to defend the country.

    I got lucky and made it through without a scratch.

    Many others did not. A few were my friends.

    So I have every right to note that in my opinion that now is the time to take action in the ME.

    The longer we wait the more costly it will be.

    I wish I was wrong.

    But history proves me right.

    So just as other peoples children died in far away lands in the past defending this country other people's children will die in the future defending this country.

    Parent

    Guilty as charged. (5.00 / 7) (#49)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 03:34:28 PM EST
    jimakaPPJ: "This chickenhawk served and you did not."

    I didn't serve. That said, I lost my father in the Vietnam War, as did my siblings. Further, my mother lost her husband in that war, my grandparents lost their son, and my uncles lost their brother.

    Did you lose a parent, spouse or immediate family in that war? Did you ever serve in combat in ANY war? No, you did not, on either count. As you alluded vaguely yesterday, you instead lost "friends and acquaintances" in Vietnam.

    But even if half the boys in your high school graduating class were subsequently blown away at Khe Sanh fighting off the Viet Cong, my family's sacrifice would still trump whatever loss you may have incurred personally. Because the most basic trajectory of our lives was forever altered as a result of our own very personal loss, while yours remained basically untouched, and you went about your business.

    More to the point, Jim, in this life there are givers, and there are takers. And you, my friend -- and I use that term very loosely here as a figure of speech -- are a taker who tends to suck the air out of a room.

    Like most people on the far-right fringes, you apparently believe that the First Amendment's right to free speech is reserved exclusively for those topics and opinions which meet your personal approval.

    You come barging in here from your parallel universe like some obnoxious drunk at a party, who thinks that everyone has been waiting with baited breath to hear your reality-challenged opinions. And then you proceed to either insult in the most personal of terms those who would dare to disagree with you, or attempt to redefine the then-prevailing parameters of debate to your own liking.

    Judging from your own posts here and elsewhere, you are someone who clearly overvalues the worth and validity of your own personal views and opinions, more often than not to the virtual exclusion of our shared common humanity.

    You repeatedly and nonsensically demean and denigrate the myriad number of contributions of our greater scientific community to our understanding of global warming and climate change, as though the unsubstantiated biases of a handful of corporate shills and whacked-out crackpots are somehow more meaningful than the fact-based finding of 97% of the Ph.Ds in meteorology and chemistry in this world.

    You and your friends on the far-right fringes would almost gleefully deny to others even the most basic primary health care if it meant scoring political points at the Democrats' expense. And you don't give so much as a thought as to how you'd feel, were someone to ever suggest that your Medicare coverage should be voided by the U.S. Supreme Court on a legal technicality.

    But it is with regards to war -- that most extreme and violent instrument of any nation's public policy -- where you repeatedly demonstrate that you clearly haven't the slightest frigging clue.

    Again, judging by your own comments here and elsewhere, I've no doubt that given your oft-shown obsession with gasoline prices, you'd sanction the wholesale killing of other human beings by our country or its allies in the Middle East, Africa or Latin America, if their deaths would somehow enhance your prospect of saving ten dollars at the pump the next time you fuel up.

    Were one to believe in reincarnation, he or she would no doubt be forgiven for believing that in a past life, you were the sort of arrogant and pompous Englishman who urged the Empire to fight vaingloriously for the wealth and riches of South Africa in the Second Anglo-Boer War -- even if it meant to the last Cockney, Canadian and Australian.

    But such mindless and unrepentant jingoism eventually exacts a fearful price upon others, a toll which you apparently can't even be bothered to ever consider. And as I said yesterday and above, you have never experienced first-hand the true horrors of war. Nor do you have any personal knowledge about what it means to a family to lose a parent, spouse or child to war, a death which came at a time and place of someone else's deliberate choosing.

    Thus, yours is a calloused and withered old soul for whom empathy for those less fortunate appears to you as a wholly foreign and incomprehensible concept -- particularly if those less fortunate are not of your race or nationality, and they don't speak English.

    And for that, I truly pity you.

    Parent

    Best comment ever, Donald. (5.00 / 3) (#50)
    by Angel on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 03:38:40 PM EST


    Parent
    Great Comment... (5.00 / 5) (#55)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 04:18:01 PM EST
    ...but you failed to mention how Jim flaunts his service, but refuses to give any details.  Which as someone who served and in a time of war and close enough to combat to get combat pay really rubs me the wrong way.

    He won't divulge, but will use his very unclear 'service' to slam people with it. I don't want to call him a liar, but he clearly has something to hide.  

    I can't even get him to say what branch, always the cloudy and unspecific 'naval aviation' which to a me, who was an active duty sailor who worked on a flight deck, means absolutely nothing.  For all I know he worked in private industry on something to do with the Navy's airwing.

    I am still not convince he was actually in the military as he will not answer that question either.  But GD if he doesn't whip out that he 'served' every chance he gets and that just rubs me the wrong way at a very high level.

    Parent

    Scott, I never mention (1.00 / 2) (#76)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 08:36:20 PM EST
    my service until someone tells me I should serve because I disagree with their positions or some such.

    And I frankly don't care what you believe,

    Parent

    That is a Straight up Lie. (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 08:43:02 AM EST
    Jim, where you in the United States military ?  Yes or No.

    Parent
    Scott, your accusations are (1.00 / 4) (#147)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 03:22:32 PM EST
    amusing. Am I supposed to get all hot and sweaty about be called a liar by such a person as you???

    Another Internet tough guy.

    lol

    But, in a way, you define why I give no details.

    No matter what I wrote you and the Ymans/jondee, etc of the world would pick and snarl and demand more.

    But frankly I am disheartened at the thought that someone who, per your claim, was actually exposed to what the military taught acts in the way you do.

    Sad.

    Parent

    Oh, what a load of nonsense. (5.00 / 2) (#150)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 03:50:55 PM EST
    There hasn't been a person here who, having divulged details of his or her military service, has ever been picked on or snarled at.

    It's obvious to me that you don't provide any details because it would kill your ability to talk about war as if you knew anything about it - it would put you on the same footing with everyone else who's only experienced it through the media.

    "A person such as" Scott has more integrity and honor in his little finger than you've ever exhibited on any subject ever discussed here.

    Just slither on back under the rock you call home, would you?

    Parent

    There are other (none / 0) (#155)
    by NYShooter on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 04:27:38 PM EST
    ways to "serve" than to enlist in the military. The question you want answered, I believe, is, "did you wear "the uniform?"

    The military has many non-uniform contractors. Many of them are highly skilled & educated in specific items & systems used by the military.

    Maybe Jim was something like a technical salesman for naval radar. You remember, doctors used to have "detail men" calling on them from the pharmaceutical companies. That's how many doctors kept up on the rapidly advancing medicines.

    We had such civilian weapons experts help in the training when new systems came onto line. Don't remember any out in the field with us, but, maybe some did.

    From the personal file: towards the end, when most soldiers were getting anxious about not being "the last soldier to die" in Viet Nam, we used to joke that, at this time, the guys escaping the draft by way of Canada, their "service" was more valuable than ours.

    Parent

    We called them tech reps (none / 0) (#164)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 05:35:15 PM EST
    and no they weren't a member.

    Parent
    It Is Sad... (5.00 / 3) (#152)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 04:08:47 PM EST
    That you cannot answer this question:

    Where you in the US Military ?

    You have spend hours, if not days, dancing around the question and continue to do so, yet no problems implying you have.  Using it some sort of a 'better that you' sword to cut down your opponents, including people who have actually served.

    Poor Jim, the perpetual right wing victim of his own making.  You are the only one who can clear air.

    I am happy to prove what I have said, it's a shame that you are embarrassed because those mean bloggers might not give you the props you think you deserve.

    By your own admission you are a coward which is defined as "a person who lacks the courage to do or endure dangerous or unpleasant things"  
    Your words as to why you won't come clean:

    No matter what I wrote you and the Ymans/jondee, etc of the world would pick and snarl and demand more.

    You lack the courage to come clean about your claims, that makes you a coward.

    And for the record, you don't get to set standards that you think people in the military should adhere to, it's questionable that you actually served, but more importantly, you are not the moral authority on the military even if you had.  

    Did your 'service' teach you to be proud of what you did and not run like a coward because some bloggers might say mean things ?

    Parent

    And... (none / 0) (#111)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 10:04:28 AM EST
    did you have sexual relations with that woman?  Yes or No Jim, Yes or No! And remember you are under oath.

    Parent
    My uncle was a longtime deputy IG ... (none / 0) (#157)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 04:52:08 PM EST
    ScottW714: "I can't even get him to say what branch, always the cloudy and unspecific 'naval aviation' which to a me, who was an active duty sailor who worked on a flight deck, means absolutely nothing.  For all I know he worked in private industry on something to do with the Navy's airwing.  I am still not convince he was actually in the military as he will not answer that question either."

    ... in the Dept. of the Navy, which is a civil service position and fully independent of the military chain of command. As such, he enjoyed unfettered access to all U.S. Navy facilities and personnel, because it was his responsibility to conduct financial audits and operational reviews of various Navy programs. When he was on the job, the brass generally had to cooperate with him and answer to him, not vice versa. But he was a civilian employee of the Navy, and never a member of its officer corps or rank-and-file.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    My grandmother was a riveter (5.00 / 1) (#180)
    by fishcamp on Fri Aug 01, 2014 at 08:12:06 AM EST
    at the Oregon shipyards during WWll.  Was she in the service while she made Liberty ships?  BTW the Oregon shipyards were across the Columbia River in Washington state.  Her name was Ida not Rosie.

    Parent
    Yes, you are (1.00 / 5) (#78)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 08:53:50 PM EST
    More to the point, Jim, in this life there are givers, and there are takers. And you, my friend -- and I use that term very loosely here as a figure of speech -- are a taker who tends to suck the air out of a room

    Donald, I am not your friend and the fact you lost family members does not make you special although you seem to want to trade on it. And I don't give a flip what you think of me.

    You repeatedly and nonsensically demean and denigrate the myriad number of contributions of our greater scientific community to our understanding of global warming and climate change, as though the unsubstantiated biases of a handful of corporate shills and whacked-out crackpots are somehow more meaningful than the fact-based findings of 97% of the Ph.Ds in meteorology and chemitry in this world.

    My challenges are fact based and linked. That you are not capable of engaging in technical discussion re MMGW is your fault not mine. And I again note what Jones and Schnedier said.

    Jones: It has happened but I wish it would.

    Schneider: It's okay to lie to push the agenda.

    And you don't give so much as a thought as to how you'd feel, were someone to ever suggest that your Medicare coverage should be voided by the U.S. Supreme Court on a legal technicality

    You again demonstrate that you are uninformed and unaware of my positions. I have repeatedly written that I oppose Obamacare because it does nothing but make money for insurance companies and is designed to cover Obama's, and the Democratic party's base. I have proposed time and time again that Obamacare be replaced with a national healthcare system, single payer, based on the Medicare model and paid for by a national sales tax that will cover EVERYONE.

    That would not only take away my Medicare but would cost me a goodly sum.

    Again, judging by your own comments here and elsewhere, I've no doubt that given your oft-shown obsession with gasoline prices, you'd sanction the wholesale killing of other human beings by our country or its allies in the Middle East, Africa or Latin America, if their deaths would somehow enhance your prospect of saving ten dollars at the pump the next time you fuel up.

    Your lack of understanding of the importance of low energy prices for the world's economy to improve the lot of EVERYONE, including the Third World countries, is typical of Progressives.  You haven't the slightest concern for the poor whose utility bills will double due to Obama's EPA destroying coal fired electricity generation. I know people who have to cut their grocery bills to buy gasoline to go work.

    A very graphic example is the recent closing by Harrah's of its Robinsonville, MS casino, three hotels, golf course, shooting range and RV park. The reason?? The cost of getting their became too high. Over 1300 people lost their jobs.

    The killing in the countries you worry about are all self generated. Muslims killing Muslims in preparation of expanding their religious war to the west.  Try reading bin Ladin and understand that he mean it when he said Muslims not be interfered with in the whole world.

    And he spoke as the leader and philosopher of the terrorists.

    So yes, I am an old soul and a bit withered and calloused after a long life time of some failures and some successes. I see great hope for our country in my belief that, in the end, statists and "progressives" such as you will be consigned to the garbage pile of history.

    So to repeat myself, a trait of us old folks, I am not your friend and I don't care what you think. You have information. Learn to use it and you will have what I have.

    Knowledge.

    Parent

    You've long made that very obvious. (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 03:51:23 AM EST
    jimakaPPJ: "I am not your friend and I don't care what you think."

    Generally, the people I like to hang out with tend to be fairly well-mannered and respectful of others' feelings and opinions. And my elder friends don't go out of their way to pick fights with others, and they certainly don't resort to insulting people in startlingly personal terms when there's a disagreement, as though they've yet to reach puberty -- and then use their advanced age as an excuse for their obnoxious behavior.

    That very nasty personal remark you offered yesterday about my late father in the previous Open Thread, since deleted by Jeralyn after others complained about it, has me finally convinced that you're simply not a very nice person at all. Suffice to say that I find you to be rude and inconsiderate, and I really don't wish to converse with you any more.

    So, please do us both a favor and refrain from either commenting about or responding to my posts in the future, and I promise to do the same with yours. Should you deliberately choose to not heed my request, you are henceforth advised and forewarned that rhetorically, I'll shoot to kill.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    That's not what they said (5.00 / 2) (#93)
    by Yman on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 06:31:29 AM EST
    My challenges are fact based and linked. That you are not capable of engaging in technical discussion re MMGW is your fault not mine. And I again note what Jones and Schnedier said.

    Jones: It has happened but I wish it would.

    Schneider: It's okay to lie to push the agenda.

    That's you lying about what you claim they said.  Which is why you don't post actual quotes and they're not linked or (occasionally) post clipped quotes.

    Parent

    I published exact quotes (1.33 / 3) (#95)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 07:04:20 AM EST
    and links for any and all to use.

    Please quit making things up.

    Parent

    No you didn't (5.00 / 2) (#96)
    by Yman on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 07:43:28 AM EST
    Post a link to Schneider saying "It's okay to lie to push the agenda".

    The only lie is your claim.

    Parent

    I am very happy to do so: (1.00 / 1) (#149)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 03:43:51 PM EST
    "To capture the public imagination,we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements  and little mention of any doubts one might have.

    Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective,and being honest."

    Schneider Link

    Try and deny that.

    And this from Dr Jones of East Angelia University's Climate Research Unit.

    The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998.

    OK it has but it is only 7 years of data and it isn't statistically significant.

    Now that was 7/5/2005 at 15:51. The trend continues.

    And he closes with:

    I would like to see the climate change happen,

    so the science could be proved right,

    regardless of the consequences.

    Link Jones' email

    You don't wish something could happen if it has happened.

    Thanks for asking!

    lol

    Parent

    Thanks, Jim (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by Yman on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 05:27:09 PM EST
    For proving your claims were lies.

    What Jim claims Schneider said - "It's okay to lie to push the agenda".

    What Schneider actually said     - Schneider was not, as the winger deniers claim, advocating stretching or distorting scientific truths to support their theories.  Schneider was talking about the challenge scientists face trying to communicate complex, important issues without adequate time during media interviews.  The significant sections that were omitted were "This `double ethical bind' we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each
    of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both."

    Oops.

    What Jim claims Jones was saying - "It (global warming) has (sic) happened but I wish it would."

    What Jones was talking about was the accuracy of the predictive models showing the effect global warming - which is already occurring - was going to have in the future.  And yes, in fact, a slight cooling over a 7 year period is completely consistent with MMGW and is a statistically insignificant period of time.

    You always use these clipped quotes despite the fact that they've been repeatedly demonstrated to be completely false distortions, aka lies.

    But you keep going back to them, so in the complete absence of any facts or data to support your silly claims, you go with what you've got, huh, Jim?

    Guess we know what that makes you ...

    Parent

    You may think you can sneak away buty (1.00 / 2) (#176)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 08:53:11 PM EST
    and little mention of any doubts one might have.
    Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective,and being honest."

    "It's okay to lie to push the agenda".

    Is exactly saying it's okay to lie.

    Your problem is that is not what he said and the 7 years has stretched out another 10 or so.

    I again quote Jones.

    If anything, I would like to see the climate change happen,
        so the science could be proved right, regardless of the consequences. This
        isn't being political, it is being selfish.

    That's as plain as it can be. Only someone dedicated to try and cover Jones' writing what he knew to be the truth in what he thought was a PRIVATE email would claim otherwise.

    Remember. The email became PUBLIC after the server was cracked.

    People often speak the truth when they think they are in a private conversation with a friend.

    lol

    Parent

    It's not even CLOSE (5.00 / 2) (#177)
    by Yman on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 10:13:37 PM EST
    Which is precisely why - rather than posting the actual quotes - you post your own distorting paraphrases and clipped "quotes" - aka LIES.

    No one is "sneaking away" from your lies - just exposing them.

    Parent

    Yman (1.00 / 0) (#185)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 01, 2014 at 11:02:19 AM EST
    Those are the actual quotes backed up by links to the sources.

    Why you continue to make such obviously incorrect statements is beyond me.

    BUT I believe that you, like so many people who fell for the MMGW hoax, are desperately trying to find anyway to support your belief in this exposed hoax.

    Good luck on that!

    LOL

    Parent

    They are links to ... (5.00 / 1) (#194)
    by Yman on Fri Aug 01, 2014 at 11:45:56 AM EST
    ... part of the "quotes", and they don't say what you claim they say.  In the land of facts and reality, people don't need to clip "quotes" or pieces of emails and then falsely rephrase them to push lies.

    Parent
    Authority (5.00 / 4) (#102)
    by squeaky on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 08:12:29 AM EST
    Whatever "service" you did in naval aviation, it certainly has not made you respect authority or respect other human beings. Your blood lust and contempt for human beings appears to be the character changing effect of your "service".

    And your disregard for Jeralyn's oft stated rules about not posting past quotes, or insulting other commenters is surprising for someone who believes they are morally superior to those who have not served in the military.

    Either your character was deeply flawed and it got worse after "serving", or your service was not worth a plate of beans.

    Parent

    I'll go with (5.00 / 3) (#103)
    by Angel on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 08:36:51 AM EST
    "not worth a plate of beans."

    Parent
    The answer is (1.00 / 1) (#6)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 07:28:36 AM EST
    If we assume that if we had not intervened and revolts would have established governments with truth and justice for all who were also anti communist we should not have.

    As we know the rebels were pro communists and would have given the communists another foothold to cause us problems from then we should have.

    Of course you guys have already told me we didn't fight any proxy wars so none of this happened.

    Parent

    You did not answer (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by MKS on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 08:36:20 AM EST
    Do you think the CIA coup in 1954 was a good idea or a bad idea?

    Just answer.

    Do think Reagan's policies in Central America were a good idea or a bad idea?

    Come on, Jim, own it or not.

    And, we can talk later about whether the rebels were Communinists.

    Parent

    NYT's Brent Staples re (none / 0) (#2)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 12:27:24 AM EST
    origins of U .S. criminalization of MJ. Very interesting.

    link

    Interesting for a couple of reasons (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 09:47:55 AM EST
    It did not mention a big factor -

    Ok, enter William Randolph Hearst. Hearst's company was a major consumer of the cheap tree-pulp paper that had replaced hemp paper in the late 19th century. The Hearst Corporation was also a major logging company, and produced Du Pont's chemical-drenched tree pulp paper, which yellowed and fell apart after a short time. Fueled by the advertising sold to the petrochemical industries, Hearst Newspapers were also known for their sensationalist stories. Hearst despised poor people, black people, chinese, hindus, and all other minorities. Most of all he hated Mexicans. Pancho Villa's cannabis-smoking troops had reclaimed some 800,000 acres of prime timberland from Hearst in the name of the mexican peasants. And all of the low-quality paper the company planned to make by deforesting it's vast timber holdings were in danger of being replaced by low-cost, high quality paper made from hemp.

    Which is in itself interesting.  I have been seeing this lately.   Here is a piece that was in Alternet recently -

    Debunking the Hemp Conspiracy Theory
    Pot isn't illegal because the paper industry is afraid of competing with hemp -- it's because of racism and the culture wars.

    It's an interesting approach.  I can see why more sympathy might be generated for the cause if people can be convinced it's root is solely racism but IMO it's not.  A factor?  Absolutely.  But so was Hearst and his greed.

    Parent

    What is the source for your (none / 0) (#63)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 06:01:31 PM EST
    first paragraph?

    Parent
    Google (none / 0) (#64)
    by squeaky on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 06:05:24 PM EST
    FYI:

    You can google sentences and find the source easily enough..

    Parent

    So true. See the pending (none / 0) (#87)
    by oculus on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 11:21:49 PM EST
    plagiarism accusations against the NYT arts reporter. Still,...

    Parent
    Still,... (none / 0) (#110)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 09:57:53 AM EST
    What?

    Parent
    To me, if a commenter (none / 0) (#112)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 10:34:42 AM EST
    Is imparting factual info, why not also reveal the source?

    Parent
    1 (none / 0) (#113)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 10:43:11 AM EST
    I assume most people here know how to find the source if it's that important to them
    1.  It's information that anyone who is interested in this subject has had access to for decades and really is not in dispute as far as I know.
    2.  I just didn't.  

    FTR
    this
    Is the source.  Which I found by copying the first sentence and pasting it into google.  

    Ok?


    Parent

    My feeling is that if you're the one (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 11:03:12 AM EST
    who's making a point and using an outside source to support that point or opinion, it's incumbent upon you to provide a link to that support, not for the reader to go in search of it.

    You're already on the site from which you're cutting and pasting an excerpt, so how hard is it to embed the link to it?  

    If you were having a conversation in person with someone, and said "I read that so-and-so said this-and-that..." and were asked, "where did you see that?" would your response be, "well, if you really care, you can look it up yourself?"

    Really, it's just kind of rude and selfish.  Everyone else has the courtesy and consideration to provide links to what they're excerpting - what's so special about you?

    Parent

    What's so special about me? (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 11:09:12 AM EST
    I can DANCE

    Parent
    Just link Capt (5.00 / 3) (#119)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 11:31:30 AM EST
    Saves on lecture bandwidth....I hope :)

    Parent
    But then maybe people wouldn't (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 11:38:56 AM EST
    pay as much attention to him...

    Parent
    Could you possibly pay (5.00 / 2) (#121)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 11:41:52 AM EST
    Less attention to me?

    Thank you.

    Parent

    Sigh....really? (none / 0) (#125)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 12:01:08 PM EST
    It's why everyone blogs, to include you

    To share opinions with someone

    Parent

    Forget it (none / 0) (#127)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 12:12:18 PM EST
    I have.

    But I don't link enough??  Seriously.

    Parent

    I do realize I can ferret out cut and paste (none / 0) (#116)
    by oculus on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 10:46:20 AM EST
    via google. But linking is so simple!!!!

    Parent
    Here's a link to the site (none / 0) (#115)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 10:43:46 AM EST
    The mathematics of a purely alphabetic string of words are such that googling an incomplete sentence will give you the source of a given statement.

    Like this    :

    How Marijuana Became Illegal
    by Bud Fairy

    Sula Io > Q: What is hemp? Just another word for marijuana?

    Yeah, and that's one of the things that happened in 1937. Cannabis Hemp was one of history's most widely used plants. Tincture of Cannabis was the basis for almost every patent medicine prior to the discovery of aspirin. Hemp was used for rope, twine, and cloth. Sailing ships were loaded with hemp. The word "canvas" is derived from "cannabis", because that's what canvas was. Sails were made of hemp because salt water deteriorated cotton. Old sails were made into wagon covers and ultimately original Levi's Jeans. And the pressed oil from hemp seeds was used for paints and varnishes. Everyone knew what hemp was. But nobody knew what marijuana was.



    Parent
    I was only looking for (none / 0) (#67)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 06:09:36 PM EST
    That information.  Which I know is accurate because I have read it for years.  I didn't even look at the rest of the site.  Probably a pro hemp site.  There are lots.

    Parent
    Mordiggian 88 (none / 0) (#14)
    by jbindc on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 09:24:33 AM EST
    Since you were so concerned with Stephen A. Smith of ESPN and his comments, and you were so willing to give a pass to Keith Olbermann, maybe you should know that ESPN suspended him for a week.

    Not apparently as willing as you are ... (none / 0) (#62)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 05:59:52 PM EST
    jbindc: "... and you were so willing to give a pass to Keith Olbermann ..."

    ... to continue to grasp a six-year-old grudge. Obviously, you didn't watch Keith Olbermann's comment from last Thursday night. Because if you had, you'd have noted that K.O. publicly mocked himself in acknowledgement that his own past derogatory commentary regarding both Hillary Clinton and Michelle Malkin had been sexist and misogynist, and was thus wholly unacceptable.

    I do understand why you and others don't particularly care for Olbermann. I can only take him in limited amounts myself and admittedly, I found his on-air behavior at MSNBC in 2008 pretty hard to swallow. But really, jb, would you like it if others were to continue to hold you to personal account for the things you said and did years ago, which might have otherwise offended them?

    As I've had to deal with recent health issues and the chemo that accompanies it, I've come to fully realize that the personal grudge is perhaps the purest form of negative energy and emotional antimatter on this earth.

    Thus, even though I publicly swore off Markos Moulitsas for the way he treated Mrs. Clinton during the 2008 Democratic primary campaign, I decided to give up that ghost and start reading Daily Kos again -- not regularly as I used to, but I do check in every few days. And I'm jettisoning other old baggage, as well.

    As most people get older, they are often tempered and wizened by their respective life's experiences, and they can and do amend / alter their views over the corresponding years as a result of personal enlightenment.

    K.O. is no exception, nor are you. Given his own well-documented and -publicized experiences, he's not necessarily the same man he was in 2008, any more than you are necessarily the same woman you were back then.

    Surely, we can learn from history and experience, without being encumbered by the past or beholden to its ghosts in perpetuity. It's best to let go of past slights and offenses both real and perceived, and instead make a sincere effort to understand and accept people for who they are today, and not judge or dismiss them in the present because of what they they may have been years ago.

    (That doesn't mean you now have to love them or even like them, but kudos if you can somehow learn or manage to do either or both. And regrettably, in spite of our own sincere efforts to empathize and understand, we'll sometimes still need to re-learn why there's no fool quite like an old fool.)

    I'm now signing off because I've got to go to treatment and focus on myself for the rest of the day. But I wish you Peace and Aloha.

    Ciao 4 now.

    Parent

    Good luck with that last part (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 06:11:11 PM EST


    Parent
    Ciao 4 now? (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 07:24:01 PM EST
    Someone has obviously hacked Donald's TL account.

    Parent
    .Nope. That was all me, and .... (none / 0) (#91)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 04:02:17 AM EST
    ... not Barney from "How I Met Your Mother." I'm going back to bed. Chemo's been a really tough go of late. Auf wiedersheren, mein Herr.

    ;-D

    Parent

    MMMMMMMMMM (none / 0) (#65)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 06:05:37 PM EST
    Look up the word proportionality.  It seemed to me on that thread that somehow KOs past statements for which he apologized made him somehow worse for criticizing Mr. Smith than what Mr. Smith actually said.

    My advice to Mr Smith:  Make sure brain is in gear before engaging mouth.

    Parent

    NYPD Beat.... (none / 0) (#18)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 10:16:49 AM EST
    Tired of manhandling human beings, the NYPD has switched it up and turned their sights on "illegal" fruits and vegetables.

    In a city where people struggle to find work and make ends meet to eat, and where food pantries are bare, this is a deadly f*ckin' sin.  Another day another metropolitan shame.

    San Antonio Raiders ? (none / 0) (#47)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 02:56:05 PM EST
    I just thew up a little when I read this:

    According to a report Tuesday in the San Antonio Express-News, Raiders owner Mark Davis and "two top lieutenants" recently met with city officials to discuss a potential move.

    Davis on Tuesday confirmed through the team that he sat down with civic leadership.


    ...
    Is Texas big enough for three teams? Jones weighed in on the possibility Tuesday.

    "I am very pleased that we have the fan base that we have down there and the percentage of fans we have," the Cowboys owner told reporters on Tuesday. "I think it is 97, 98, 99 percent Cowboys fans in the area. But it doesn't surprise me at all. I know that there were those kind of rumors regarding the Saints."

    I have always found it rather humorous that Hispanics cheer for the team named after the people who stole all this land from them.  But Jerry is right, they love them sum Cowboys.

    Or his is just working an angle (none / 0) (#48)
    by nycstray on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 02:58:30 PM EST
    to get a new stadium here. Both Oakland teams have been playing the stadium/move the team game :)

    Parent
    For Sure (none / 0) (#51)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 03:52:43 PM EST
    San Antonio built the Alamodome with the belief that the NFL would give a city with a stadium one of the expansion teams in '96.  It went with Jacksonville & and Carolina.  So the city had a football stadium and no team, so they took a huge curtain divider and the Spurs played in half the football stadium for nearly a decade.

    The market is simply top small and after Bud Adams  pulled the Oilers out of Houston, no city has denied an NFL team a stadium.

    Parent

    Los Angeles (none / 0) (#66)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 06:07:42 PM EST
    They haven't fallen for the myth of "Needs an NFL team here", and despite the other problems they have, this lack seems to need to be filled at this time.

    Parent
    Mark Davis has also been meeting with ... (none / 0) (#52)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 03:52:51 PM EST
    ... people from Los Angeles regarding a potential re-relocation down south. He's also recently met with Sacramento officials.

    Most all of it will turn out to be kabuki. He's looking for leverage to negotiate a new stadium deal with Oakland and Alameda County officials. I'm sure he remembers that his father's move to the L.A. Coliseum three decades ago was both impetuous and ill-considered, and that it ultimately did damage to the team's brand name.

    Oakland fans have long enjoyed a reputation as some of the most loyal and exuberant in major league sports, particularly where the Raiders are concerned. And now that the 49ers have relocated to Santa Clara County / San Jose, they are the only NFL ream in the north Bay Area -- and there are a lot of Raider fans in San Francisco. I think he'd be foolish to leave, and would regret it if he did.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Yup, I'm having a bit of a problem with my (none / 0) (#60)
    by nycstray on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 05:48:10 PM EST
    team moving down to bro-grammer land :/ What's sad is, if they split CA into 6 states, both teams would be in the same state, leaving a chunk of us in the area without a team! Unless of course the Raiders move to Sacto ;)

    Parent
    Not to break the lugubrious mood (none / 0) (#56)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 04:29:46 PM EST
    But the weather here is amazing.   4:30 on July 30th.  It should be 90+ with steam room humidity.  It's 73 with a dew point if 55.

    Temperature records set way back in the 1880s were broken as unusually cool air blanketed a large part of the country in the heart of summer. It felt more like fall from the Upper Midwest into the South this past week.

    An unusually strong cold front for July began its southward plunge on Monday, July 14. The result was below-average temperatures for much of the central and eastern U.S.

    Many all-time record low temperature records for the month of July were broken. On Wednesday morning Joplin, Missouri tied its all-time July record low of 50 degrees.

    The state of Oklahoma recorded its coolest July day on Thursday with an average temperature of 63.6 degrees. The previous record was 66.3 degrees set on July 12, 1953. The average temperature is found by adding up all the high and low temperatures across the state, then dividing the total by two and then dividing by the number of reporting stations.

    On Friday, all-time record coolest high temperatures for the month of July were set across much of the South. A few of the cities that set records are Memphis, Tennessee; Greenwood, Mississippi; and Longview, Texas.
    Ok (none / 0) (#71)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 07:21:11 PM EST
    It's 7:15.  Not even dark and I just had to get up and close windows.  Because it's chilly. Chilly.

    And trust me I am not a chilly person.  I'm the one who makes others wear sweaters with the AC.

    Parent

    Send it south (none / 0) (#73)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 07:27:12 PM EST
    It was 90° when I ran at 6:00pm last night and 81° when I ran at 5:15 this morning.

    Parent
    That might not be good for you CG... (none / 0) (#77)
    by fishcamp on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 08:46:25 PM EST


    Parent
    In the long run you are probably right (none / 0) (#80)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 09:20:08 PM EST
    but a few days of heaven would be nice.

    Were you fly fishing or chasing mini-season bugs today?

    Parent

    Just dawned on me you may have meant (none / 0) (#81)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 09:32:26 PM EST
    running in that heat may not be good, but if I ever run the Keys these 80° - 90° runs should be helpful.

    Parent
    He denounced "trickle down economics" (none / 0) (#57)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 04:55:33 PM EST
    The HILL

    A popular piece of legislation that seeks to honor Pope Francis is stuck in Congress.

    With time running out on the Capitol Hill calendar, the lawmakers who crafted the bipartisan measure are getting impatient with Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio).

    The resolution, written by Reps. John Larson (D-Conn.) and Pete King (R-N.Y.), congratulates Francis on his March 2013 election and recognizes "his inspirational statements and actions."
    The seemingly innocuous resolution was referred to the House Foreign Affairs Committee, which hasn't acted on it. The panel didn't comment for this article.

    The inaction and the lack of a white smoke signal from Boehner have sparked speculation that politics is at play.

    Only 19 of the 221 co-sponsors are Republicans. The dearth of GOP members on the measure could be attributable to assertions that the pope is "too liberal," according to a Republican backer of the legislation.

    The source noted that Francis last year denounced "trickle-down economics."

    Some Republicans believe the pope is "sounding like [President] Obama. [The pope] talks about equality -- he actually used the term `trickle-down economics,' which is politically charged," the GOP official said.
    Wow, the media sure is hyping this (none / 0) (#58)
    by Anne on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 05:36:53 PM EST
    Ebola outbreak, to the point where NBC is breathlessly reporting the freak-out in an American emergency room over symptoms in a patient who, once clearer heads prevailed, was determined not to have Ebola.

    Jesus...let's get everyone all wound up and afraid.  Feels like medical terrorism for the sole purpose of cranking up ratings.

    Just so irresponsible.

    Ugh.

    Remember SARS? (none / 0) (#69)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 06:13:30 PM EST
    The media did the same thing back then, probably because they really don't know any better. It was the same thing when AIDS first reared its ugly head in the '80s. The possibility that they could induce a public panic is clearly lost on them.

    So, whenever they tell us to freak out, let's just get up and dance. While it won't solve the immediate problem, it's certainly better than burning down our neighbor's house out of irrational fear.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    It's epidemic on the hater sites as evidenced by (none / 0) (#70)
    by Angel on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 06:28:47 PM EST
    the comments saying that Ebola is going to be brought into Texas by those who are illegally crossing the border.  Seriously.  

    Parent
    I guess these are the same people (none / 0) (#101)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 08:02:53 AM EST
    who can't tell the difference between Africa and Central America on a map.

    Parent
    These same people don't know the difference (none / 0) (#104)
    by Angel on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 08:37:29 AM EST
    between Mexico and New Mexico.

    Parent
    Haha... (5.00 / 1) (#173)
    by desertswine on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 08:12:54 PM EST
    We ain't new, and we ain't Mexico.

    Parent
    The common clay of the New West (none / 0) (#105)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 08:42:23 AM EST
    "You know, morons."

    Parent
    Instead of dealing with the issues at hand (none / 0) (#100)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 08:00:02 AM EST
    it is easier to call other people cowards on baseless grounds, IME.

    Synthetic "leaf" (none / 0) (#107)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 08:44:45 AM EST
    that produces oxygen

    Not sure what this means (none / 0) (#108)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 09:29:22 AM EST
    I think it means everyone should stop acting like this is a black and white situation.

    Arab Leaders, Viewing Hamas as Worse Than Israel, Stay Silent

    CAIRO -- Battling Palestinian militants in Gaza two years ago, Israel found itself pressed from all sides by unfriendly Arab neighbors to end the fighting.

    Not this time.

    After the military ouster of the Islamist government in Cairo last year, Egypt has led a new coalition of Arab states -- including Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates -- that has effectively lined up with Israel in its fight against Hamas, the Islamist movement that controls the Gaza Strip. That, in turn, may have contributed to the failure of the antagonists to reach a negotiated cease-fire even after more than three weeks of bloodshed.

    "The Arab states' loathing and fear of political Islam is so strong that it outweighs their allergy to Benjamin Netanyahu," the prime minister of Israel, said Aaron David Miller, a scholar at the Wilson Center in Washington and a former Middle East negotiator under several presidents.

    "I have never seen a situation like it, where you have so many Arab states acquiescing in the death and destruction in Gaza and the pummeling of Hamas," he said. "The silence is deafening."
    What the NFL has here... (none / 0) (#132)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 01:22:05 PM EST
    is a drug-testing problem, not a drug problem.

    Now we all know the NFL shouldn't be testing for marijuana at all, it's not performance enhancing and has medical uses related to the maladies typical of a NFL player...but if they're gonna, they should at least match the thresholds of the US Army, or even the World Doping Agency.  If you walked in my house you'd probably fail an NFL piss test...sh*t if you walked passed my house even.

    Above all, the NFL has a ridiculousness problem.  Mr. Goodell, stop being ridiculous.

    Sick Goal!!! (none / 0) (#133)
    by kdog on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 01:24:08 PM EST
    My favorite female soccer player in the whole world scored one helluva goal for her club team.

    RAPINOE!

    Okay, can someone (none / 0) (#136)
    by MKS on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 01:48:45 PM EST
    email Jeralyn about this?

    I 'd say time to zero Jim out.

    Do Nothing Congress (none / 0) (#142)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 02:36:43 PM EST
    113th Congress (2013-14): 142 public laws
         (as of July 31, 2014)
    112th Congress (2011-12): 283 public laws (total)
          At this SAME point in the 112th Congress:
          151 (as of July 30, 2012)
    111th Congress (2009-10): 383
    110th Congress (2007-2008): 460
    109th Congress (2005-2006): 482
    108th Congress (2003-2004): 498
    107th (2001-2002) : 377
    106th (1999-2000): 580

    80th (1947-48): 906

    LINK

    The 80th Congress is the infamous Truman 'Do Nothing Congress'
    Not sure if numbers is the only measure, but damn, if they had spend the time being constructive instead of fighting ACA after the fact, shutting down government, and now suing the President they might have actually had to time address things that we, the people actually need addressing:

    • Immigration Reform
    • Climate Change
    • Increase Minimum Wage
    • Extend Unemployment Benefits
    • Extend Farm Bill

    It was nice to see Cantor make his "wish I weren't leaving" speech.  The thing is if recent history is an indication, he will be replaced with someone even more ridiculous.

    They couldn't even pass the border thing (none / 0) (#151)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 04:07:37 PM EST
    Thanks apparently to Speaker Cruz.  
    And the best part is after passing the lets sue him for using executive orders bill yesterday they say the president has the powers he needs to deal with the border problems.  

    You really can't make this stuff up.

    Parent

    That (none / 0) (#171)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 07:52:56 PM EST
    seems to the beltway consensus is that Crazy Cruz is now the defacto speaker of the house.

    Parent
    What's more fun (none / 0) (#172)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 08:07:35 PM EST
    Than a Peter King vs Ted Cruz cat fight.

    Parent
    Not too much (none / 0) (#178)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 01, 2014 at 04:45:45 AM EST
    I'm sure King will win with the press and Cruz will win with the GOP base.

    Parent
    72 hour cease fire (none / 0) (#170)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 31, 2014 at 07:26:49 PM EST
    in Gaza

    Lasted All But 2 Hours... (none / 0) (#187)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Aug 01, 2014 at 11:13:16 AM EST
    ... with Friday stacking up to be one of the bloodiest days of the conflict.
     66 Israeli deaths
    1418 Palestinian deaths
    3196 Israeli strikes on Gaza
    2968 Rockets launched into Israel from Gaza

    Makes me wonder if there is any hope.

    Parent

    No kidding (none / 0) (#189)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 01, 2014 at 11:23:03 AM EST
    Actually I thought it ended two hours before it was supposed to officially start.  Either way.

    Parent
    I can't believe (none / 0) (#181)
    by jbindc on Fri Aug 01, 2014 at 08:58:48 AM EST
    That on a blog dedicated to the criminal justice system and politics, no one is discussing the soap-opera trial of former Virginia governor and his wife Maureen in their dealings with Star Scientific CEO Jonnie Williams.  

    JEZEBEL has had some great coverage, along with the usual WaPo, NYT, etc.  There's even an activity book so you can color and follow along!

    Virginia ex-governor Bob McDonnell and ex-First Lady Maureen McDonnell are currently on trial for corruption, and even without the schadenfreude that comes from watching a rising whackadoodle star of the GOP be taken down all the pegs, the entire proceeding is at least twice as salaciously soapy and entertaining as the less murdery and threesomey episodes of House of Cards.

    This trial has everything. Tears. Lavish weddings. Scammy dietary supplements. A guy named Jonnie. A wandering marital eye. Mandatory transvaginal ultrasounds (actually, those happened independently of the corruption trial, but it still really adds to the drama, don't you think?)

    GAWKER has some some great updates too.

    So far the evidence looks pretty damning to me. (none / 0) (#182)
    by Angel on Fri Aug 01, 2014 at 09:50:37 AM EST


    Parent
    The fact that (none / 0) (#183)
    by jbindc on Fri Aug 01, 2014 at 10:19:57 AM EST
    The defense's main argument is "She had a crush on Jonnie and the McDonnell marriage was so bad they were barely speaking (so of course, Bob wouldn't know about these gifts and money)" and that should tell you all you need to know how ridiculous an argument it is.

    Any juror with common sense is going to ask the following question (as I'm sure the federal prosecutor will):

    "So, Maureen asks the man she has a "crush" on (with no romantic or sexual relationship) to purchase expensive gifts (like a $7000 Rolex) for the husband to whom she is barely speaking?"

    Logic fail.

    Parent

    Yeah... (none / 0) (#188)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Aug 01, 2014 at 11:21:46 AM EST
    ...when I heard the defense I was thing, really that is what you are going with, "They were barely speaking so they could not have conspired".

    It funny and so sad at the same time to realize the governor and his wife are basically the idiot neighbors who play stupid so well it's hard to tell if they are really playing.

    Parent

    Duh (none / 0) (#192)
    by jbindc on Fri Aug 01, 2014 at 11:40:42 AM EST
    Defense: Star witness trying to save own skin

    Yeah - tell that to anyone who hasn't watched Law & Order or any other cop show over the last 20 years.  Duh.

    But Jonnie Williams has immunity for his testimony, so at this point, he's got nothing to lose.  

    When Williams said the immunity deals only hold if he tells the truth, Burck shot back: "The government decides whether or not it's true."

    Uh, no, Defense Attorney Burck.  You need to go back to first-year law school. It's the trier of fact (i.e. the JURY) who ultimately decides if JW is telling the truth. But since much of his testimony is backed up by other evidence, this is just another example of a weak defense.  Not his fault, since it seems he's taken on a dog of a case, and he's trying to make lemonade out of lemons, but, really?

    Hey JW is no angel, but I'm betting the McDonnell's wish they didn't fire this guy in the first place.

    Parent

    And yes, (none / 0) (#193)
    by jbindc on Fri Aug 01, 2014 at 11:45:05 AM EST
    I realize the government decides what is true for an immunity deal, but if they didn't think it was true, then a) they would be suborning perjury and open to ethical violations (as well as losing a huge case), or b) they wouldn't have offered it to JW and touted him as their star witness in the first place.

    But it's still up to the jury to decide "what is true".

    And a strike against the McDonell's is that most of the public is already conditioned to think that politicians are lying scum who will sell themselves to the highest bidder without blinking an eye.

    Parent

    Is this news? (none / 0) (#184)
    by oculus on Fri Aug 01, 2014 at 10:32:05 AM EST
    After the initial publication of this article, the military's censor informed The New York Times that further information related to the soldier would have to be submitted for prior review. Journalists for foreign news organizations must agree in writing to the military censorship system to work in Israel. This was the first censorship notification The Times had received in more than two years.


    [NYT excerpt.]

    um.... link? (5.00 / 5) (#190)
    by sj on Fri Aug 01, 2014 at 11:26:55 AM EST
    Or should I do a google search on the quote?

    :)

    Parent

    Here you go: (none / 0) (#195)
    by oculus on Fri Aug 01, 2014 at 02:58:17 PM EST
    NYT

    Any reaction to the excerpt I posted and accredited?

    Parent

    Your logic is incredibly shoddy (none / 0) (#200)
    by jondee on Sat Aug 02, 2014 at 11:12:17 AM EST
    Jim.

    The fact that Jones expressed a desire to have his hypothesis definitively proven correct is utterly beside the point. It's certainly no proof of a "hoax"being perpetrated by 97% of the climate scientists in the world.

    Every person on the planet has wishes, hopes, and ambitions
    That's no proof or disproof of anything other than that everyone has wishes, hopes, and ambitions.

    This thread is closed (none / 0) (#201)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Aug 02, 2014 at 12:38:58 PM EST
    Some comments insulting other commenters and quoting their past comments have been deleted.

    Tuesday Night Open Thread | 183 comments (183 topical)