home

Sunday Night Open Thread

I'm still following the ISIS news. For those of you who aren't, here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Obama Will Disclose ISIS Strategy on Wednesday | New Media Reports on ID of Foley and Sotloff Executioner(s) >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Wanted to say thanks (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 08:21:19 PM EST
    For this insightful comment in the last open -

    Recap (1.00 / 1) (#204)
    by whitecap333 on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 03:48:34 AM EST
    So here's what the tea leaves tell me happened here:  Brown....

    This is certainly what this confusing case has needed from the start.  It's hard to believe it has not occurred to anyone to apply the venerable art of tassology before now.  It is a long over due and welcome addition to the confusing "facts" which are clearly in dispute.  On that subject, congratulations on your framing.  Framing is, as Lee Atwater and Karl Rove taught us, everything.  I especially like the way those who agree with you are witness's -

    My browser is acting up.  This is intended as a reply to jimakaPPJ's comment above about the new witness found by the Post-Dispatch.  The Daily-Mail version of what he has to say is partisan damage control.  This witness blows Wilson's accusers out of the water.

    While those who do not are accusers -

    Obviously, I am not here giving words from the lips of Dorian Johnson and his fellow accusers the weight of Sacred Writ.

    There is one problem.  The only "new Post Dispatch witness" i could find says exactly the opposite of pretty much everything you say.

    The co-worker in the KTVI interview said he "starting hearing pops and when I look over ... I seen somebody staggering and running. And when he finally caught himself he threw his hands up and started screaming, `OK, OK, OK, OK, OK, OK.'"

    He said the officer "didn't say, `Get on the ground.' He didn't say anything. At first his gun was down and then he ... got about 8 to 10 feet away from him ... I heard six, seven shots ... it seemed like seven. Then he put his gun down. That's when Michael stumbled forward. I'd say about 25 feet or so and then fell right on his face."

    No witness has ever publicly claimed that Brown charged at Wilson. The worker interviewed by the Post-Dispatch disputed claims by Wilson's defenders that Brown was running full speed at the officer.

    "I don't know if he was going after him or if he was falling down to die," he said. "It wasn't a bull rush."

    LINK

    Perhaps you could direct us to the other "correct" version of his account or the other mystery witness you seem to have found.
    Just trying to help.  And thanks again.   Madam Zostra could not have done better.


    Is the equivalent of shifting the Overton (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 08:24:45 PM EST
    window?  

    Parent
    By him (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 08:28:12 PM EST
    Or me?

    Parent
    By him. My theory is wait for the release of the (none / 0) (#24)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 11:54:51 PM EST
    county's officer-involved shooting investigation. But that's really boring compared to the version set forth in the comment you dissected.

    Parent
    For people like him (none / 0) (#36)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 08:38:17 AM EST
    There is no need to move the window.   It's a freakin panorama that has a view from horizon to horizon.

    Parent
    Just to zoom out for a minute here (5.00 / 4) (#55)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 10:13:46 AM EST
    Can we please recall the the original "crime" was walking in the middle of the street.  

    Parent
    Listen to this video (2.00 / 0) (#76)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 12:01:10 PM EST
    Listen to this video (none / 0) (#133)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 03:06:50 PM EST
    It's part of a statement given to LE under the penalty of perjury:

    James Brady

     As he was falling, Brown took one or two steps toward Wilson because he was presumably hit and was stumbling forward; Wilson then shot him three or four times.

    Brady said that the pictures he took of Brown with his arms tucked in under his body is the position he was in as he was shot three or four more times by Wilson before hitting the ground.[77]

    Parent

    I'll take an (2.00 / 0) (#156)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 04:42:13 PM EST
    not requested, not after the fact real time comment over anything else.

    Parent
    Real Time Comment??? (none / 0) (#174)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 06:21:56 PM EST
    Like the real time comment that he shot him while he had his hands up and then shot him some more when he was on the ground.

    Parent
    No, the one that says (none / 0) (#184)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 07:10:21 PM EST
    he turned around and went towards the policeman.

    But you knew that.

    Parent

    Walking to a policemen (5.00 / 1) (#200)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 09:14:43 PM EST
    he turned around and went towards the policeman.

    And that's a crime how???

    And worthy of 10 shots -- the final 2 being kill shots to the head how????

    Big guys walk up  to policemen all the time to be handcuffed without the the police emptying their weapons into them.

    Is this some kind of new policing technique now -- shoot first and handcuff later.

    Parent

    Brown/Wilson (1.00 / 1) (#27)
    by whitecap333 on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 04:20:13 AM EST
    The Post-Dispatch article you link to reports on two interviews, one of a "worker," conducted by a Dispatch reporter, the other of his "co-worker," conducted by KTVI.  The article does not identify them by race, and I think it highly unlikely that, as speculated below,they are White.  Since they were 50 feet removed from the "action," they cannot be relied upon for any words Wilson may, or may not, have spoken. It is stated that, from a distance of 10 feet, Brown began advancing on Wilson, who began firing, as he retreated.  A direct quote, again, from "Worker":  "After the third shot, Brown's hands started going down, and he moved about 25 feet toward Wilson, who kept backing away and firing."  That 25 feet is fatal to your position, which is why Uncle Chip claims this is a misprint for "2-5 feet."  Mark it off and study it.  A tall man can't cover that distance in less than 10 or so strides.  There is simply no way one can inadvertently "stumble" that distance.  It unequivocally speaks of hostile intent.  All Brown had to do is stop, to avoid the last, fatal shot. Curious notion, that Brown's attempt to get within striking distance of Wilson posed no threat, simply because his hands were elevated.  At this point, we are obliged to guess at what Wilson's testimony will be.  My guess is he instructed, in no uncertain terms, his 290 lb. suspect to get on the ground.

    The Post-Dispatch has been very hostile to Wilson, and this article is no exception.  The journalists were so obsessed with demonstrating that Brown didn't "bum rush" Wilson that they were blind to the problems they were creating for the prosecution.

    Parent

    The article does not identify them by race (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 07:22:59 AM EST
    and I think it highly unlikely that, as speculated below,they are White.

    The company they work for is out of Jefferson County which is overwhelmingly white and there are pictures of them on other websites standing at the scene and they are white.

    Since they were 50 feet removed from the "action," they cannot be relied upon for any words Wilson may, or may not, have spoken.

    Well let's see -- they were running toward him so he would thus have been more likely to have heard anything said. And he heard the "OK - OK" all right from  Brown didn't he???

    "After the third shot, Brown's hands started going down, and he moved about 25 feet toward Wilson, who kept backing away and firing."

    How well do you read???

    We know from this statement that he had is hands up, and he did not start moving toward Wilson until after he had been shot at 3 times with his hands up, after which his hands began to fall, and then he moved toward him probably stumbling forward to the ground as he did and as another witness has said:

    1] Turned around hands up

    2] The first volley of 6 shots begin to come at him

    3] After the 3rd of those 6 shots which are coming rather quickly his hands begin to fall down.

    4] He begins to move forward after that 3rd shot as shots 4-5-6 come at him.

    5] As he is falling forward toward the ground Wilson backs up so that he can empty the final 4 into him -- the last 2 into his head.

    Did I get that right???

    That 25 feet is fatal to your position, which is why Uncle Chip claims this is a misprint for "2-5 feet."

    2 to 3 steps forward is what another witness says, but it's okay for you to believe 25 feet as long as you also believe the other things this witness said like that Wilson never said anything or gave any commands -- he just shot at a guy with his hands up and shot him some more as he was stumbling to the ground.

    There is simply no way one can inadvertently "stumble" that distance.

    There is no way to "charge" that distance after having run over 120 feet with a bullet in you, with the insoles of your shoes having flopped out, scared  to death from a gun firing at you from behind, and now turning around with hands up to face the mad man who now dumps 3 more bullets in you with more on the way.

    Mark that off and study it.

    Parent

    He had a point (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 08:36:01 AM EST
    Even tho the photos clearly show they are white it Is highly unlikely that they in fact are white.


    Parent
    They can't be white (none / 0) (#37)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 08:42:46 AM EST
    because then they would have no reason not to believe them.

    Parent
    Abundance of Sophistry (none / 0) (#41)
    by whitecap333 on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 09:02:16 AM EST
    The Post-Dispatch article does not say that Brown began advancing on Wilson after the third shot.  It says he lowered his hands after the third shot.  According to the witness, Wilson opened fire, retreating, AFTER Brown, from a distance of 10 feet, began advancing on him.  I've had it with correcting what do not appear to be inadvertent misstatements.  Anyone interested in the facts should consult the article.

    The Post-Dispatch does not divulge the identities of these two witnesses.  You're claiming some other website has identified them, with photos?  

    Parent

    And just in case they look (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 09:20:32 AM EST
    Suspiciously "dark" you know maybe Latin or "mixed"

    TWO WHITE CONSTRUCTION WORKERS CONFIRM BROWNS HANDS UP DURING THE SHOOTING

    Parent

    And may I just add (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 09:29:02 AM EST
    What a sick sad depressing comment it is about us that it matters that they are IN FACT white.

    Parent
    You are some piece of work (none / 0) (#42)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 09:12:57 AM EST
    Ok, let's look at the PD article.  If we do that will you stfu?

    Among the claims that ignited the fury over the fatal shooting of Michael Brown were that Ferguson police Officer Darren Wilson chased the unarmed teen on foot, shot at him as he ran away, then fired a barrage of fatal shots after Brown had turned around with his hands up.
    Almost all of the witnesses who shared these accounts with media either knew Brown; lived at or near the Canfield Green apartments, where the shooting occurred; or were visiting friends or relatives there.

    ---

    The worker, who has not previously spoken with reporters, said he did not see what happened at the officer's car -- where Wilson and Brown engaged in an initial struggle and a shot was fired from Wilson's gun.

    His account largely matches those who reported that Wilson chased Brown on foot away from the car after the initial gunshot and fired at least one more shot in the direction of Brown as he was fleeing; that Brown stopped, turned around and put his hands up; and that the officer killed Brown in a barrage of gunfire.

    Now, please explain exactly what fu@king part of that you do not under stand.  I posted it before but just for you here is the LINK

    also for you here's a link to THE TWO FU@KING WHITE MEN IN QUESTION.

    Parent

    The Post-Dispatch article does not say (none / 0) (#45)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 09:26:21 AM EST
    that Brown began advancing on Wilson after the third shot.

    You're kidding right???

    Is this sentence from the article:

    "After the third shot, Brown's hands started going down, and he moved about 25 feet toward Wilson, who kept backing away and firing."

    What comes "After the third shot ...".

    Here's a hint: the word "and ...".

    According to the witness, Wilson opened fire, retreating, AFTER Brown, from a distance of 10 feet, began advancing on him.

    After the third shot ...

    Wilson had already been firing at Brown when Brown moved forward.

    And at only 10 feet away it is hard to believe that those 3 shots especially when added to the next 3 following in rapid succession didn't do some damage causing him to stumble forward to the ground.

    Parent

    Doing It the Hard Way (none / 0) (#56)
    by whitecap333 on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 10:36:26 AM EST
    Direct quotes, from the Post-Dispatch:  "Wilson, gun drawn, also stopped about 10 feet in front of Brown," the worker said.  "Then Brown moved," the worker said.  "He's kind of walking back towards the cop."  He said Brown's hands were still up.  "Wilson began backing up, as he fired," the worker said. After the third shot, Brown's hands started going down, and he moved about 25 feet toward Wilson, who kept backing away and firing.

    End quotes.  This testimony requires the prosecution to argue that Wilson could have allowed Brown to draw within striking distance of him, without fear of injury.  One does not extract "probable cause," much less "beyond reasonable doubt," from such testimony.

    Parent

    This testimony requires the prosecution to argue (5.00 / 2) (#78)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 12:06:28 PM EST
    that Wilson could have allowed Brown to draw within striking distance of him, without fear of injury.

    It's done by police all over the world everyday just before they handcuff their detainees and by police who haven't already put holes in the person they are handcuffing and don't still have the smoking gun pointed at him.

    He had been shooting at him for running away, so then what did he think the guy thought he was supposed to do after he stopped -- stand there and dance the jig while whistling Dixie???

    Hands up walking back to the police is done all the time and is the natural response after being shot at for running away -- especially when no other instruction is given.

    Not only is jaywalking not a capitol crime neither is walking back toward a cop who has his gun on you with your hands up saying "OK OK OK".

    If that is worthy of 10 bullets then the public need to know so that they can prepare to never surrender to the police.

    You're safer to keep running and take it in the back -- atleast you have a chance of surviving the encounter.

    Parent

    The latest witness -- an outside worker (none / 0) (#14)
    by Uncle Chip on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 09:56:16 PM EST
    The latest witness in the Brown shooting is from outside the Ferguson community and backs up what the others have said.  

    And ummmm he's a white boy -- so this is going to send a stir in the police can do no wrong blogosphere.

    Parent

    No connection to anyone (none / 0) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 10:04:06 PM EST
    Doesn't even live in Ferguson

    Parent
    That dern Darren Wilson (none / 0) (#18)
    by Uncle Chip on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 10:17:07 PM EST
    and his bevy of future crow eaters just can't catch a break. Everyone so far, black and white and gray, saw him blow the kid away while he had his hands up.

    I expect that pretty soon we will hear that having your hands up is a threatening gesture to a police officer for which he has the right to empty his service weapon into you.

    Parent

    I know I talk about (none / 0) (#169)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 05:45:36 PM EST
    Popular entertainment a lot.   Probably too much.  But it is interesting that as this unfolds in real time one of the most powerful subplots in one of the best tv series running, which btw was in the can long before the Brown incident began, involves a violent incident in the 50s and the idea that the eye witness testimony of white person is needed because the police, in St Louis no less, won't believe the eye witness testimony of black people.

    I call that timely.

    Parent

    Opps. Not a quiz. (none / 0) (#172)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 06:04:12 PM EST
    The show is Masters of Sex.

    It was developed by Michelle Ashford and based on Thomas Maier's biography Masters of Sex: The Life and Times of William Masters and Virginia Johnson, the Couple Who Taught America How to Love. Set in the 1950s and 1960s, the series tells the story of Dr. William Masters and Virginia Johnson

    So I am assuming there is at least the possibility that the incident described is based on real events.  Haven't read the book.

    Parent

    Stop and Seize (5.00 / 4) (#13)
    by squeaky on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 09:55:44 PM EST
    This is criminal...
    Aggressive police take hundreds of millions of dollars from motorists not charged with crimes

    After the terror attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, the government called on police to become the ey

    Local officers, county deputies and state troopers were encouraged to act more aggressively in searching for suspicious people, drugs and other contraband. The departments of Homeland Security and Justice spent millions on police training.

    The effort succeeded, but it had an impact that has been largely hidden from public view: the spread of an aggressive brand of policing that has spurred the seizure of hundreds of millions of dollars in cash from motorists and others not charged with crimes, a Washington Post investigation found. Thousands of people have been forced to fight legal battles that can last more than a year to get their money back.es and ears of homeland security on America's highways.



    The new road agents. (5.00 / 2) (#53)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 10:05:30 AM EST
    This is ongoing highway robbery, plain and simple. I know a TV station in Tennessee has done quite a few stories on how they concentrate on westbound traffic on I-40 to seize money rather than eastbound where they might actually seize some drugs.

    In America, if a kid with a gun tries to take your money, you can "stand your ground." But if he has a badge to go with that gun, you're supposed to say yes sir and just take it bending over, no vaseline.

    There's no law against carrying cash. What's the magic number where your carrying of cash is "suspicious"? I frequent casinos in my travels and usually carry about $5K in cash for such purposes. That's less than months salary. Is that "suspicious"?

    One lesson from the WaPo story is to not engage in any conversation with law enforcement. Almost every story in the article cites they used what the drivers said as the basis for taking their money. My new tact when asked where I'm going or where I've been is to ask the cop where he lives. Or the names of his children. This generally surprises them. When they say that's none of my business, I reply that it's two way street. If they are going to ask me inappropriate questions during a traffic, I will do the same. Where I'm going and where I've been is no one's business but mine.

    Parent

    Be Careful (5.00 / 2) (#58)
    by squeaky on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 10:39:38 AM EST
    My new tact when asked where I'm going or where I've been is to ask the cop where he lives. Or the names of his children.

    I think that you do not want to be provocative...

    maybe best to say, respectfully officer I do not need to answer that question.  Am I free to leave?

    Parent

    There is something (none / 0) (#161)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 05:05:54 PM EST
    Seriously, deeply wrong about that.  Not saying it's not true.  But it's damn sure unamerican.  

    Parent
    I was told at an airport check point that the (none / 0) (#160)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 04:57:03 PM EST
    maximum account is $5000 if you are flying.

    I have no idea if that is true.

    In the Nashville airport, several years ago, they seized around $1800 from a black man who was flying to Houston to purchase plants for his landscaping business... this was on 60 Minutes..

    About 5 years ago, I think in Detroit, they stopped a guy flying to the World Series of Poker because he had too much cash... entry fee for the main event is $10,000 cash.  They eventually let him go but I think he missed the tournament... Of course that may have saved him money...(ironic humor attempt...)

    I too play poker in casinos. You can arrange check cashing privileges after the initial visit.  I think you can arrange that for all casinos in that chain...i.e. All Harrahs' properties...All Casears .;.. etc.

    And you're right I40 W from mile marker 42 onward is heavily patrolled.

    We learned nothing from Prohibition.


    Parent

    So, now that we've seen the (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by Anne on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 07:01:41 AM EST
    Ray Rice video from inside the elevator, in which we clearly see Rice haul off and hit his then-fiancee not once, but twice, I'm completely and utterly disgusted with the Ravens organization, Roger Goodell and everyone else who saw that video - cops, prosecutors, judge, etc. - and made the whole incident seem like it wasn't "really" as bad as it clearly was.

    We already know Goodell is an a$$, but what's the Ravens' management/ownership's excuse?  So the NFL only suspends him for 2 games - why didn't the Ravens exact a harsher punishment?  Why have I had to listen to Harbaugh and Bisciotti and others speak about Ray Rice the way they have?  "Ray's a good man?"  Really?  Good men don't beat up on women.  Ever.

    One last thing: I will bet a paycheck that while this may have been the first time he hit her in a public venue, it wasn't the first time he hit her.

    I hope for her sake it was the last time.

    Ravens cut Ray Rice. (5.00 / 2) (#93)
    by Anne on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:40:44 PM EST
    Right decision, but a little late.

    Parent
    The NFL just announced that ... (none / 0) (#114)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:32:13 PM EST
    ... Rice has been suspended indefinitely. Again, it's too little, too late. Coach Harbaugh and the Ravens management have issued statements today saying that they never saw  this video. Let's hope that they're being honest about this, because if we learn otherwise, Ray Rice isn't the only one who should be out of a job.

    Parent
    How Could They Not (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 03:17:38 PM EST
    The guy who was fired over releasing the other video stated numerous times the hotel had the video from inside the elevator.

    If they didn't see it, it was willful.

    Which brings up an important issue, if that guy had not released the video, would we even know about the incident ?

    Parent

    Donald, they really have nowhere to go (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by nycstray on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 03:22:50 PM EST
    on this, imo. Saying they didn't see the video before, why? They didn't know it existed, but everyone else did? They decided not to watch it until forced to by social media? Kinda out of reasonable explanations, imo . . .

    Parent
    The NFL really looks worse than before. (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by nycstray on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:32:36 PM EST
    (if that makes sense?) Saying they didn't see the video before? Really?! It existed. Employee knew about it. I'm sorry, but just dragging an unconscious woman out of an elevator should require a bit more thought put into finding out what happened. If it was something innocent, I would think a man as fit as him would have been carrying her out and asking for help. Otherwise, investigate until you know why.

    Our newscast opened with NFL didn't see video and ended with, breaking, Rice fired. This should have happened long ago, imo.

    Parent

    They didn't want to see it. (none / 0) (#119)
    by Angel on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:37:07 PM EST
    And that's the problem right there.  Thought it would just go away and they could all move on.

    Parent
    There is no way to spin it (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by nycstray on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:41:59 PM EST
    and that they can't see that, oy. I don't know how they can even show their faces in public, or in front of their wives . . .

    Parent
    Football (none / 0) (#131)
    by squeaky on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 03:04:12 PM EST
    Really, I  do not understand why anyone is surprised. Football players are bred, trained, and encouraged to be as violent as possible..

    Smashing into other people, full blast is normal for a football player.

    When they get violent off stage, seems normal.

    The sport should be banned, imo.

    Parent

    Yes and no, squeaky (2.00 / 0) (#189)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 07:39:43 PM EST
    All the players, football, basketball, soccer, cross country and softball at my grandson's school are taught that it is a privilege to play sports and that they represent their fellow students and the school in everything they do. They also must maintain a 3.0 average in college entrance type courses  and there are no exceptions. Act out of line and you're off the team.

    Now that is a private school that also teaches the Bible as a required course and has chapel every day. It has more scholastic scholarships awarded than sport types but it also has its share of sport scholarships to universities.

    Outside of the religious part there is nothing there that can't be duplicated in the public school system.

    What it takes is dedication by staff and parents.

    The question then becomes this. Where is that dedication?

    And before you go off on a tangent... it is not a race issue. Just as many white players act out in outrageous ways as blacks.

    Is it money??

    Is it culture??

    Firing Price sends a strong message but it doesn't approach the root cause.

    Parent

    Completely agree with this. (none / 0) (#142)
    by Anne on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 03:46:54 PM EST
    And I realized yesterday, as I sat down to watch the game, that I don't have the same feeling I used to have about Bisciotti and Harbaugh.  Maybe Harbaugh, especially, because he's kind of into the God talk, and seems to cast lot of sports elements in terms of religion.  

    I think when all the dust settles, it's going to turn out that Rice just flat-out lied to Goodell and the Ravens - but both the team and the NFL had a duty to get all the evidence, and at that, I think they failed.

    I wanted, in the beginning, to give him the benefit of the doubt, so I tried to just look at what we knew and not assume the worst.  Feel kind of stupid for doing that, but oh, well...

    Parent

    Yeah, But Drive Under the Influence of... (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:39:50 PM EST
    ...prescribed medication and get banned from all the facilities and all communication from the team for 6 weeks, and a half million dollar fine.

    Doesn't matter if you own one of the teams.

    Ditto for the NBA and forcing an owner to sell a team over disgusting remarks made in private.

    Both, over the top discipline, whereas the players can murder someone and still be legible to play.  Josh Brent may even come out of self appointed retirement to get back on the Cowboys roster while defending himself against manslaughter charges after killing a teammate while driving drunk.

    He is eligible to play in the NFL.

    I wonder how much cr@p they don't have to tell the public about because of the labor contract with the owners.  Last year, after someone was suspended they stated that testing positive for drugs did not have to be disclosed unless they were performance enhancing.  What else falls in the 'public can suck it' part of their contract.

    I do remember getting a good rogering from you over the use of 'public' when I initially reported this, good to see you believing elevators in hotels are public areas.

    What I find most disturbing, his entire reaction is the reaction of someone who has experience with it and thinks it's no big deal.  Like me behaving to someone throwing a ball at me, I catch it, toss it back, and go about my business.  The man of muscle can't even find it in him to carry her, he drags her and leaves her on the floor as seems to be looking for a bellhop to carry her up to the room for him.

    And her, seriously, your boyfriend knocks you out a week before the wedding, not only do you marry him, you tell people, including the NFL, you goaded him into doing it.  Which of course is what all the pigs ran with, "She's cool with it so what's the big deal ?"

    I would like to think any woman who gets knocked by her man would leave as soon as humanly possible.  I moved out long ago in about 3 hours after my woman threatened to call the cops and tell them I was hitting her.  I was not hanging around to find how deep that craZy hole went.  For the record, I have never hit a woman in my life.

    I used to go out with a girl who had been married to a cop.  She would never call the department he was at, even though all the other cops hated him, because at some point, it would effect her income for the kids.  He never hit her, but I quit drinking and driving after I spotted him more than once outside my place in the AM.

    But it just drive me nuts that a woman would allow someone to act like that because of money.  In her case, not much, as what he did was in the 'not to be promoted' area.  Nothing he would have been fired over.

    Parent

    This . . . (5.00 / 3) (#123)
    by nycstray on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:44:12 PM EST
    And her, seriously, your boyfriend knocks you out a week before the wedding, not only do you marry him, you tell people, including the NFL, you goaded him into doing it.  Which of course is what all the pigs ran with, "She's cool with it so what's the big deal ?

    is not uncommon with abused women . . . sadly.

    Parent

    Honestly, if that had been my daughter, ... (5.00 / 3) (#124)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:49:15 PM EST
    ... I'd have dragged her out of that man's house -- even if it was kicking and screaming -- and made her move back home with us for her own safety and good. Then I'd have gotten her a good family law attorney, and sought a restraining order against him. You mess with a member of my family like that, and I'll be messing with you.

    Where were her parents and immediate family during all this?

    Parent

    I have jokingly mentioned (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by jbindc on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:59:01 PM EST
    to my very peacenik BF that if he ever even THINKS about doing something like that to me, that he better make his first shot a good one, because he won't get a second one.

    He has to sleep sometime.

    Parent

    That's What She Said (5.00 / 1) (#132)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 03:06:23 PM EST
    Lorena Bobbitt

    Parent
    LOL! That's worthy of a coffee spew! (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 03:24:07 PM EST
    Lorena Bobbit only made one mistake (none / 0) (#143)
    by jbindc on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 03:53:28 PM EST
    She didn't use the garbage disposal.

    Parent
    Now I'm worried your BF... (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by kdog on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 03:57:23 PM EST
    may be a potential victim of domestic violence (kidding, kidding;)

    Parent
    I'm 5'3" (and a half) (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by jbindc on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 03:59:31 PM EST
    He's 6'5.  He's safe.

    (Besides, I adore him, and can't imagine I'd find anyone better, so I's gots to keep him around and healthy!)  :)

    Parent

    Domestic violence is no laughing matter. (none / 0) (#137)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 03:18:46 PM EST
    My mother attended a funeral a month ago in northern California for her best friend's 24-year-old grandson, who had been shot to death by his wife. Now that she's since been arrested for murder, it's come to light that she had apparently been physically abusive to him for some time, including an incident where she attacked him with a hammer and broke his collarbone. Inexplicably, he declined to press charges and testify against her. Instead, he stayed with her, and that decision proved fatal.

    Parent
    I'm not a fan of the NFL... (none / 0) (#125)
    by kdog on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:54:47 PM EST
    playing justice dept. with off the field stuff...but if they're gonna be morality police, they need to seriously rewrite their code and fast so it jives with common sense and common decency.  How up until this morning the league thought it was appropriate to suspend Josh Gordon for a year for failing two piss tests for weed, while giving Rice two games...it's retarded.

    Their justice system is more f8cked up than America's...and that's really saying something.  

    Parent

    Kman... (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 03:13:32 PM EST
    ...suspending someone from work is not exactly playing justice department.

    They aren't locking anyone up over at the NFL.

    Employers discipline people all day long over morality, some even fire people over it.

    Parent

    Off the clock? (none / 0) (#140)
    by kdog on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 03:45:24 PM EST
    Suspending someone for what they do off the clock unrelated to work is playing justice/morality police...and I just can't get down with it.

    Why is Wes Welker suspended for what he may have done on his day off at the Kentucky Derby?  What does it have to do with football?  As sick and depraved and criminal as knocking a woman unconscious is, what does that have to do with football?  

    I know the players agree to all that morality clause and drug testing crap when they sign their contracts...but I don't think it's right.  Can you play or can't you play, and leave law enforcement to law enforcement. In this football fans opinion, I don't care what kind of people the players on my favorite team are, all I really care about is if they can play, and I tune in to watch the best players in the world play football, not to watch the nicest people in the world play football.  Same for the art world...I'm in it to appreciate art, I really don't give a sh*t what kinda human being the artist is.

    But like I said above...if you're gonna play morality police, at least play it right...the NFL got it all twisted.

    Also worth mentioning...where does an outfit that does so much immoral sh*t like the NFL get off passing judgement on anybody?  Their history of drugging players without informed consent and workplace brain injuries and not taking care of the old-timers is piss poor.  

    Parent

    Except (none / 0) (#147)
    by jbindc on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 04:08:16 PM EST
    The players agreed to a union contract, wherein a personal conduct policy was included.  So this is a case where the "goverened" are being subjected to rules they themselves agreed to.

    Can't really find fault with that - that is democracy in action.

    Parent

    Everybody got a price... (none / 0) (#166)
    by kdog on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 05:27:57 PM EST
    I'd sign that puppy for the league minimum too, that's mad bank...then try to beat them drug test and brain damage and cripple odds;) But my point is that don't make it right...just means the price is right.

    Parent
    If my business is public entertainment, ... (none / 0) (#150)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 04:14:00 PM EST
    kdog: "Suspending someone for what they do off the clock unrelated to work is playing justice/morality police...and I just can't get down with it."

    ... and if you as my employee are engaged in off-hours behavior or reckless conduct which holds rich potential to alienate public opinion and thus impact my operations negatively, then you better believe that what you're doing on your own time is also my business.

    And if your "private" behavior ends up depressing the box office take and costing me business -- thus threatening my livelihood -- then you can rest assured that I'd fire you without even thinking twice about it, because I'm not running a charity and I also have a responsibility and obligation to the others in my employ -- not just to you, who otherwise seems to be capable of thinking only hedonistically.

    I don't believe that employers have the right to be personally intrusive without cause just because you so happen to be on their payroll, as long as what you as an employee are doing doesn't potentially impact their bottom line. But if you repeatedly show up late and hung-over and give your employer a half-a$$ed performance, then yeah, then your off-hours activities will give him or her cause for concern.

    If you want to do your own thing, fine. Then go all out 100%, and start your own business so that henceforth, your mistakes will be truly your own.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Exactly my point... (none / 0) (#163)
    by kdog on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 05:19:32 PM EST
    The bottom line ain't going anywhere...this country is a football addict. We all know or should know by now the players are literally risking brain damage and wheelchairs for life for our entertainment, and we're supporting it with our dollars more than ever. Your favorite team could field 22 serial killers and we'd be totally cool with it as long as they made the playoffs...with a parade for a Super Bowl title.

    They aren't protecting the bottom line, that I could understand...honestly I don't what the f#ck they're doing.

    In regards to their dim drug rules, theoretically that could be hurtin their bottom line...show me a Browns fan who is happy right now that Josh Gordon is out for the year. If every player who smokes weed sat out in protest next week you might have fans asking for refunds. Come to think of it, that's all that could hurt the bottom line...scab players and/or subpar talent.  Bad men in uniform...nobody gives a sh#t, despite their proclamations to the contrary when a player does horrible things and it makes the news.

    Parent

    I wonder if the Romans ever had (none / 0) (#164)
    by jondee on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 05:25:34 PM EST
    these type of arguments about the gladiators. I bet some of them did.

    Parent
    The Herald reports... (none / 0) (#171)
    by kdog on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 05:51:47 PM EST
    "Nero has suspended Attilius indefinitely from the Coliseum for violation of Table IV."

    Parent
    I thought about you very early Saturday (none / 0) (#193)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 07:59:40 PM EST
    During band camp this summer the H.S. was really stinky.  FFA had meticulously spread cow manure all over the H.S. lawns for fertilizing.

    Saturday morning at 7 a.m. everyone in the band was at the H.S. getting on buses to go to the football game in Montgomery.  Humidity was pretty high, temp was high 70's already, the grass was misted with dew and psilocybin mushrooms.  And as far as I could tell I was the only smirking chimp who noticed :). You would have been howling though, and then after the buses left you would have probably been busy "cultivating".

    Parent

    Anne, since you prob followed this closer than I (5.00 / 2) (#126)
    by nycstray on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:56:36 PM EST
    did, did she receive any medical treatment? I just watched the 3:34 min video again and it occurred to me, if that had been RR on the field in that condition, he would have been surrounded by medical personnel.

    Parent
    He didn't even bother to (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by jbindc on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 03:00:21 PM EST
    pull down her skirt while she was knocked out.

    What an a$$.

    Sorry Anne - I hope Baltimore loses all its games this year AND loses tons of money for this.

    Parent

    I'm not sure what purpose it serves to (none / 0) (#185)
    by Anne on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 07:11:56 PM EST
    wish an entire season of losses on 52 men who didn't coldcock their wives or girlfriends, unless you can make a case that they all knew the real story and have been protecting Rice.

    Parent
    You know, I don't know that she did, (none / 0) (#182)
    by Anne on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 07:05:13 PM EST
    or at least I don't recall that being part of the incident.  I would think that if she had sought treatment, he likely would have faced more than the measly 2-game suspension he initially received.  Watching how she hit her head on the metal bar at the back of the elevator car, I'm surprised she wasn't seriously injured.

    Just a few minutes ago, John Harbaugh spoke to the media and took questions; I didn't find it very satisfying.  I realize that Harbaugh is close to Rice, and apparently they've done a lot of talking in the months since the incident, but he really had no answers to the obvious questions: what did they see in that video that differed from what Rice had told them, and was that what made the difference?  His answer to a lot of the questions was, "I'm just not going to get into that - that's personal."

    But that question - what did they see today that made the difference - is one I don't think they can ever answer with any credibility.  I guess they chose to believe what Rice - and Janay - had told them, and maybe what they saw didn't match up.

    I hope this is a turning point for the league, that one of the things that comes out of this is a serious, meaningful policy on domestic abuse and violence issues.  Maybe they need to have seminars for the women of the NFL, provide some way for them to get help - real help - when things go bad.  If these players and the league in which they play really want to be role models, they have to do more than wear pink gear for a month of Sundays.

    Parent

    Rumors are already abound that ... (5.00 / 2) (#187)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 07:26:36 PM EST
    ... contrary to statements made today, senior members of the NFL and Ravens establishment in fact DID see that elevator video.

    Honestly, I'm not sure what or who to believe at this point. But looking at earlier articles from last July, it's clear that somebody in a senior position had seen the video, because its existence had been leaked by someone in the NFL front office to reporters, some of whom had described its contents accurately seven weeks ago.

    But if NFL and Ravens management lied today about not having seen it, there's a better than even chance that some heads will roll -- perhaps even Roger Goodell's.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    The earth just moved (2.00 / 0) (#80)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 12:12:50 PM EST
    We agree on something.

    Parent
    Gee, that's interesting (none / 0) (#33)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 07:49:20 AM EST
    Since you sang another tune about this case a while back:

    What you saw - what everyone has seen - was a woman, clearly either unconscious or so drunk she couldn't function, being dragged out of the elevator.  Period.  You don't know what her condition was before she got on the elevator, and you don't know what transpired on the elevator.

    So, tell me again: what happened to Janay Palmer?  What have you seen that no one else has?  Something apparently did happen that Rice feels responsible for, and he's accepted that responsibility, but that doesn't mean you know any more than the rest of us what took place in that elevator.



    Parent
    I wasn't "singing a tune," (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by Anne on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 09:19:09 AM EST
    I was trying to deal with the facts as we knew them, and at the time, we hadn't seen any video from inside the elevator.  

    Do you think it's a bad thing that I've changed my mind now that there is more information?  Am I not allowed to do that?  Would it have been better if I had leaped to conclusions without the facts and had to change my mind in the other direction because the elevator video didn't show what we're now seeing?  

    Seems like looking at the facts is something you've been pretty adamant about in connection with the Michael Brown shooting - why would you give me a hard time for doing the same with regard to this situation?

    Parent

    No, but I was shocked (1.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 09:46:07 AM EST
    that you were so disingenuous about what happened in the elevator before this new evidence came to light.

    But, hey, I got it right, and you got it wrong.  Let's not let such trivial differences split us apart here.

    Parent

    If it was so trivial, why'd you bring it up? (5.00 / 2) (#62)
    by Anne on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 11:18:27 AM EST
    So you could gloat about being "right?"  

    Gee, that's mature.

    Would you have posted a comment here if it turned out you were wrong in your assumptions?

    Kind of sad that you would call me disingenuous for objecting to people stating as fact what happened in that elevator before anyone ever saw what transpired; it would be more shocking, don't you think, if, after seeing the video, I made excuses for or justified or otherwise minimized what we saw?

    There are people doing that around the web - maybe you could go bother them.

    Parent

    H. L. Mencken (none / 0) (#77)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 12:03:32 PM EST
    allegedly was asked what would he say, if, after he died, he found himself in Heaven, facing G-d and His angels and everything.

    He replied, "Gentlemen, I was wrong."

    If, in your update to the case, you had mentioned in passing that your interpretations of what may have happened was wrong, or that you considered it settled with the legal issues resolved, that would've been interesting.

    Parent

    Seriously? (5.00 / 2) (#112)
    by sj on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:26:17 PM EST
    You're telling her how to comment? You have decided that an abject mea culpa is the appropriate thing to do? If so, then you need to review your own comment history and make sure that you are meeting your own requirement. Because I expect that -- as prolific as you are -- errors and misconceptions can be found that aren't followed by sackcloth and ashes.

    But review your comment history yourself. I'm not going to pounce on your prior comments. This one is annoying enough.

    Jeebus.

    Parent

    Do Unto Others? (5.00 / 0) (#129)
    by squeaky on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 03:02:11 PM EST
    Seriously?  You're telling her how to comment? You have decided that an abject mea culpa is the appropriate thing to do? If so, then you need to review your own comment history....
    .

    Doesn't seem that you are setting a good example here, sj...

    Feigning outrage that someone is telling Anne how to comment, and the you tell the commenter how to comment?

    Guess it is common to criticize someone for something and then in the same breath, do exactly what you were criticizing..

    must be human nature.

    Parent

    Well if I accept what you have to say.. (none / 0) (#135)
    by sj on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 03:14:32 PM EST
    ...seeing as how you are the one wagging fingers now I'd say that the pot/kettle thing here has added another level.

    Serious question: do you ever read yourself?

    Oy

    Parent

    Our host, Jeralyn, has asked us not (5.00 / 2) (#67)
    by oculus on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 11:40:43 AM EST
    to throw the archived comments of others back at them.

    Parent
    Archived Comments (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by squeaky on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 11:55:01 AM EST
    Aren't you doing the same thing by bringing up Jeralyn's comment about archived comments?

    Parent
    I love J (5.00 / 2) (#74)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 11:58:23 AM EST
    And it's her site but I never under stood that.  IMO people should have to be responsible for what they said yesterday.

    But that's just me.  I do understand the aversion to bickering.   Not that I think that helps much.

    Parent

    People Change (none / 0) (#79)
    by squeaky on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 12:11:37 PM EST
    And bringing up the past can lock up change..

    IOW someone decides that it is a good idea to sweep the street in front of their house because they realized it is much nicer not to have garbage outside all the time.

    After a week, a neighbor says to the sweeper, it is about time as you are such a slob, what we had to live through.. bla bla bla..

    The sweeper says f' off and stops sweeping.

    Best to stay in the present. And be glad for good changes. Hard to do though, particularly when you do not trust someone or have an ax to grind..  haha...

    Parent

    Ha! Bur but but. (5.00 / 2) (#75)
    by oculus on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 11:58:55 AM EST
    "Cross-examination is the (none / 0) (#72)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 11:51:11 AM EST
    greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth."

    John Henry Wigmore

    Parent

    IMHO, your comment appeared to be ... (5.00 / 2) (#130)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 03:04:02 PM EST
    ... less cross examination than "Nyah, nyah, nyah!" When circumstances on the ground have obviously changed as new evidence comes to light, you should graciously grant to others the opportunity to amend their positions accordingly.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Given that we hadn't yet seen the ... (5.00 / 2) (#100)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:52:06 PM EST
    ... offending video at the time she posted that particular comment, Anne was simply pointing out to others that since we hadn't seen the video, we couldn't really state definitively what went on inside that elevator. While I admittedly took some issue with it myself at the time, I still saw it as an eminently reasonable stance.

    But now that the video's been released, I join in her disgust with NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and Baltimore Ravens management, who HAD seen it earlier but then decided for some unfathomable reason to deliberately underplay its significance in their findings.

    Further, please be advised that the host prefers that you not refer to past comments offered by others. Obviously, what Anne said earlier is no longer applicable given the new information and circumstances, and I'm sure she'd agree with that. In such instances, people do deserve the right to amend and change their opinions accordingly, and your resurrection of her past comments are irrelevant in light of the present situation.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    The NFL is claiming that it had not (none / 0) (#108)
    by Anne on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:14:24 PM EST
    seen that video - and the Ravens have not commented, other than to announce Rice's termination from the team.

    This is going to be a real test for Rice's commitment to being a better man; I hope he passes it.

    Parent

    Ravens management is parroting .. (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:40:47 PM EST
    ... the NFL front office, claiming that they never saw the video. I have to say that I'm now inclined to believe them both, because they'd otherwise be amoral monsters to have first seen that horrific video a few months ago, and then not acted decisively on it at that moment. I watched the tape just a little while ago, and it's truly chilling.

    Parent
    I hope they don't say they didn't know about it (none / 0) (#118)
    by nycstray on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:36:06 PM EST
    because an employee seems to have . . .

    I think the NFL front office needs an overhaul. It's getting embarrassing to be a fan . . .

    Parent

    Why did Brown's body remain on the street (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 12:52:31 PM EST
    for 4+ hours?

    Calvin Whitaker, the livery service owner, said he was at the shooting location for 2 hours before it was deemed safe enough for he and his wife to get out of their vehicle and retrieve the body.

    Timeline:

        Saturday, August 9, 12:01 in the afternoon, Ferguson officer Darren Wilson encounters Michael Brown and a friend walking in the street.
        12:07 the shooting is reported.
        12:10 a paramedic in the area responds and finds no pulse.
        12:15 other Ferguson officers start to arrive
        And the body is partially covered with a white sheet.
        12:43 country officers notified of shooting.
        1:30   county homicide detectives arrive
        2:01 Calvin Whitaker is called to pick up and deliver the body to the county morgue...
        His county contract states, he must be on the scene within an hour.
        2:25 Calvin arrives at the shooting scene.
        and 2 hours and 12 minutes later at 4:37 he delivers Brown's body to the morgue. A 15 minute drive from Ferguson..



    Sorry (none / 0) (#87)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:21:23 PM EST
    I call bullsh!t.  Deemed by who.  People were all over the area.

    Charles Pierce

    They left the body in the street.

    Dictators leave bodies in the street.

    Petty local satraps leave bodies in the street.

    Warlords leave bodies in the street.

    A police officer shot Michael Brown to death. And they left his body in the street. For four hours. Bodies do not lie in the street for four hours. Not in an advanced society. Bodies lie in the street for four hours in small countries where they have perpetual civil war. Bodies lie in the street for four hours on back roads where people fight over the bare necessities of simple living, where they fight over food and water and small, useless parcels of land. Bodies lie in the street for four hours in places in which poor people fight as proxies for rich people in distant places, where they fight as proxies for the men who dig out the diamonds, or who drill out the oil, or who set ancient tribal grudges aflame for modern imperial purposes that are as far from the original grudges as bullets are from bows. Those are the places where they leave bodies in the street, as object lessons, or to make a point, or because there isn't the money to take the bodies away and bury them, or because nobody gives a damn whether they are there or not. Those are the places where they leave bodies in the street.

    Bodies are not left in the streets of the leafy suburbs. The bodies of dogs and cats, or squirrels and raccoons, let alone the bodies of children, are not left in the streets of the leafy suburbs. No bodies are left in the streets of the financial districts. Freeze to death on a bench in the financial districts and you are whisked away before your inconvenient body can disturb the folks in line at the Starbucks across the street. But the body of a boy can be left in the street for four hours in a place like Ferguson, Missouri, and who knows whether it was because people wanted to make a point, or because nobody gave a damn whether he was there or not. Ferguson, Missouri was a place where they left a body in the street. For four hours. And the rage rose, and the backlash built, and the cameras arrived, and so did the cops, and the thing became something beyond what it was in the first place. And, in a very real way, in the streets of Ferguson, the body was still in the street.



    Parent
    It may be BS. However, your response seems (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:25:09 PM EST
    to indicate that you did not even listen to the explanation in the link given by the livery drive, as he very clearly identifies who "deemed" it.

    Parent
    I watched it (5.00 / 2) (#90)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:31:58 PM EST
    It confirmed what everyone knew.  The police let his body lay in the street.  If it was "unsafe" for mr sideburns why didn't the police do it? The police were everywhere.  It was a human being.   I call bullsh!t.


    Parent
    for the Tee Vee interview, but decided not to trim the Joe Cocker sideburns?!

    Parent
    I'm not blaming the guy (none / 0) (#97)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:47:11 PM EST
    I do not doubt that is what he was told.

    Parent
    Well ... (none / 0) (#113)
    by sj on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:29:11 PM EST
    ... maybe it was unsafe for four hours. The cops may have still been trigger happy.

    Parent
    Timeline (none / 0) (#91)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:32:20 PM EST
    The amazing thing about that Timeline is that:

    The final volley of shots was fired 12:02:15 [75 seconds after meeting him on the street]

    The Black Canseco video began recording the scene at 12:06:30 -- before the County Police even knew that there had been a shooting.

    By that time there were FPD units on the scene and the yellow tape was already up all the way around.

    FPD never notified the County about the shooting -- County Police heard about it from the news and dispatched police to secure the scene at 12:07. Repeated calls from the County to Ferguson for clarification went unanswered.

    It isn't until 12:16 when the County Police arrive that Wilson decides to cover the body.

    And of course he waits until 12:43 to call the County Police to get the forensic investigation started.

    Parent

    I am expressing my opinion here (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:36:19 PM EST
    It was left there as a message

    Parent
    Thanks for your consistent standards (2.00 / 1) (#205)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Sep 10, 2014 at 08:34:57 PM EST
    folks, I can see that, to quote, Tennessee Williams, there is an odor of mendacity around here.


    Ferguson / Brown /Wilson (1.00 / 2) (#25)
    by whitecap333 on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 12:33:26 AM EST
    As I have pointed out, in the previous open thread, the new witness interviewed by the Post-Dispatch is devastating to the prosecution.  He has Brown advancing on Wilson for a full 25 feet as Wilson is retreating, trying to get away from him, firing as he goes.  Brown initially raised his hands, but then lowered them.  A tall man needs about 10 strides to cover a distance of 25 feet.  Brown had only to halt to avert the last, fatal shot.  We can safely assume Wilson will say he emphatically instructed his 290 lb. suspect to get on the ground.  The reporters tell us another witness says Brown fell about 4 feet from Wilson.  This suggests Brown was advancing more rapidly than Wilson could back up.  What could inspire such self-destructive behavior?  Perhaps he just wasn't thinking clearly that day.  It baffles me why Brown, knowing he had been caught red handed with those cigars, didn't hand them back, and refrain from assaulting the clerk, instead of risking criminal charges by swaggering through the door with them.  Just doesn't make sense.  

    Did I miss something? Who is currently (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by oculus on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:04:57 AM EST
    being prosecuted?

    Parent
    Trial by blog comments (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by CoralGables on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 06:04:31 AM EST
    Pretty obvious by (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 08:51:33 AM EST
    How shameless it is what the 67% of Ferguson and surrounding areas deal with day to day isn't it?

    Parent
    My question exactly (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 09:37:02 AM EST
    Did I miss a prosecution?

    Parent
    Michael Browns (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 09:40:01 AM EST
    Prosecution continues apace

    Parent
    As does Officer Wilson's. We don't (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by oculus on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 11:07:33 AM EST
    need no stinkin' grand jury!

    Parent
    I'm not prosecuting anyone (none / 0) (#63)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 11:23:45 AM EST
    I am linking to facts.  And I will not let some doofus bleat his Wilson support group talking points unchallenged.   Obviously he is immune to facts but others may not be.


    Parent
    I think the reality is (none / 0) (#65)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 11:33:44 AM EST
    the new info from the workers supports both the idea that Brown was giving himself up and the idea that Wilson felt Brown was a threat.

    Then Brown moved, the worker said. "He's kind of walking back toward the cop." He said Brown's hands were still up.

    Wilson began backing up as he fired, the worker said.

    After the third shot, Brown's hands started going down, and he moved about 25 feet toward Wilson, who kept backing away and firing. The worker said he could not tell from where he watched -- about 50 feet away -- if Brown's motion toward Wilson after the shots was "a stumble to the ground" or "OK, I'm going to get you, you're already shooting me."

    Indeed:

    There is no way to determine how many witnesses have spoken to law enforcement without making public statements.


    Parent
    at least one more witness who has not make public statements.
    At the 1:42:15 mark some unidentified (I presume) caller says his cousin was working down the street from the scene of the shooting, and the cousin told him that "that second little boy," presumably Dorian Johnson, "he was running with a gun".

    And then here in the first 5 or so seconds of this video, someone, presumably Dorian Johnson, says what sounds like: "I was behind the car. I was sitting behind the car. I didn't shoot the gun."

    Parent

    oops, strike first sentence fragment: (none / 0) (#82)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 12:40:03 PM EST
    Strike this:
    at least one more witness who has not make public statements.


    Parent
    Seriously (none / 0) (#84)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:06:49 PM EST
    Instagram and talk radio

    Parent
    Ha! Talk radio. I wonder if the cousin is (none / 0) (#86)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:21:01 PM EST
    one of the witnesses interviewed but has not come forth publicly.

    Seriously though, what have you got against a video posted to Instagram that was taken at the scene?

    I expected there to be (legitimate) disagreement about what is heard to be said in the vid. I didn't expect we would be admonished that vids on Instagram are, what, fake?

    Parent

    I'm not sure what your point is. (none / 0) (#88)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:25:04 PM EST
    We know there was probably a shot fired in the car.  Why is it important that,  assuming you are correct about the speaker, he says he didn't fire the shot?

    Parent
    Huh? I must have been really unclear, (none / 0) (#94)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:41:47 PM EST
    my apologies.

    In my first comment I quoted the SL article being discussed which said there may be other witnesses who have not come forth in public.

    I then searched around regarding that, and one thing led to another, and I found that vid of the talk show in which this cousin of the caller may be one such witness.

    The caller says his cousin said that DJ had a gun, which I had never heard of before.

    So I searched around about THAT, and found the vid where it sounds like DJ says that he did have a gun but did not shoot it.

    The "point" is additional information.

    Parent

    Dude (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:46:24 PM EST
    The caller says his cousin said that DJ had a gun, which I had never heard of before.

    Seriously?

    Parent

    Um, yeah, Dude. Seriously. (none / 0) (#103)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:58:50 PM EST
    Was not on my radar in any way until about an hour or so ago.

    Sounds like you were very, extremely aware of it previously, congratulations.

    I must redouble my efforts on this topic, and keep up with the TL Joneses...

    Parent

    Actually I did not (none / 0) (#105)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:07:52 PM EST
    But you are a smart guy.
    The caller says his cousin says......?

    That was my point.   We were better of  with tea leaves.

    Parent

    Make those Japanese green tea leaves... (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by fishcamp on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:32:27 PM EST
    as to who was interviewed and what they all said.

    Parent
    the cousin told him the second little boy (none / 0) (#106)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:08:28 PM EST
    presumably Dorian Johnson, "he was running with a gun".

    with a gun or from a gun???

    We know from Dorian's interview that Brown gave him the cigarillos to hold while Brown was trying to get out of Wilson's grip at the SUV.

    So the cousin probably mistook those cigarillos for a gun.

    If the police could have arrested Dorian for anything to keep him from giving his interview on the scene they would have done so.

    And little by little the other witnesses and forensic evidence are corroborating what he said in that interview.


    Parent

    The caller said the cousin said: (none / 0) (#111)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:25:50 PM EST
    "he was running with a gun." Definitely did not say: "he was running from a gun."

    But it is certainly possible and reasonable that DJ could have had the cigarillos in his hand and they could have been mistaken for something else, like a gun, by an observer.

    Parent

    Actually, I was not accusing you (none / 0) (#68)
    by oculus on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 11:43:09 AM EST
    of prosecuting Wilson.

    Parent
    Thank you (none / 0) (#70)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 11:46:12 AM EST
    "Some" would

    Parent
    Probabilities and Possibilities (1.00 / 2) (#28)
    by whitecap333 on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 04:55:37 AM EST
    In trying to reconstruct this affair, we are confronted with two opposing scenarios:  Wilson "gunned down" a helpless youth, in a fit of racial animosity, or this youth assaulted Wilson.  Are you seriously proposing that Wilson shouldn't be permitted to contend that he was attacked?  That he should not be permitted to set forth possible motives for the attack?  Fear of being arrested for "strong armed robbery" would certainly seem to represent such a motive.  Irrational behavior a few minutes before confrontation with the officer would also seem to be highly relevant.  What rational explanation can you propose for Brown risking a criminal complaint by assaulting the clerk and brazenly departing with those Swishers?  There is simply no way around this, which is why Brown's defenders are setting up the frivolous claim that he in fact paid for the cigars, and merely defended himself against a clerk maybe a third his size.  That's a certain recipe for getting laughed out of court.  

    Parent
    Addenda (none / 0) (#60)
    by whitecap333 on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 10:56:16 AM EST
    Let me further point out it now seems likely Wilson will say that, after admonishing Brown and Johnson to get out of the road, but before the physical confrontation at the squad car, he realized, spotting the cigars, that the two were likely the subjects of the robbery Bolo he had heard on his radio.

    Parent
    The really sad part of this is if and when (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 11:25:32 AM EST
    Wilson is convicted you will just say it was rigged or some such BS.  Ignorance may be bliss but it's still sad.

    Parent
    Don't know about that (2.00 / 0) (#66)
    by CoralGables on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 11:34:11 AM EST
    but do know if Wilson isn't convicted many here will just say it was rigged or some such BS.

    Parent
    Honestly (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 11:44:02 AM EST
    If you have been reading the way the law is skewed toward giving police a liscense to kill Im happy to say it's rigged right now.  I will be stunned if anything happens to Wilson.

    Parent
    Let me further point out it now seems (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:10:21 PM EST
    likely Wilson will say that ...

    I and everyone else expect him to lie through his teeth and you are proving that.

    He's had a month to work on his story with the benefit of all the other evidence laid out in front of him and an army of police union lawyers.

    His story will be so embellished that the Chief will probably feel compelled to submit his name for another commendation.

    You shoot a guy 12 times for jaywalking or shoplifting $3 worth of cigarillos within 60 seconds of meeting him on the road surrendering with his hands up.

    And you call that good police work???

    Parent

    After the third shot -- (none / 0) (#34)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 08:05:00 AM EST
    He has Brown advancing on Wilson for a full 25 feet as Wilson is retreating, trying to get away from him, firing as he goes.  Brown initially raised his hands, but then lowered them.

    You have that wrong.

    You forgot about the 3 bullets that were fired at him as he stood still with his hands up BEFORE he moved forward:

    Here is the precise statement from the article that you posted:

    "After the third shot, Brown's hands started going down, and he moved about 25 feet toward Wilson, who kept backing away and firing."

    After the third shot

    According to this witness he was shot at by Wilson as he stood with his hands up BEFORE moving forward wounded and stumbling -- the 3rd shot of that first volley of 6 shots doing the most damage to that point.

    Parent

    Misstatement without End (none / 0) (#59)
    by whitecap333 on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 10:43:25 AM EST
    I have, again, corrected your misstatements in my most recent comment, above.

    Parent
    I have, again, corrected your misstatements (none / 0) (#116)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:32:35 PM EST
    Hardly --

    All you have done is try to make shoplifting $3 worth of tobacco into a capitol offence, along with surrendering to the police with your hands up -- and sentence carried out without the benefit of counsel or trial.

    I suspect that there are actually going to be people with brains on that Grand Jury -- which won't help Wilson.

    Parent

    Let's Get Real (1.00 / 1) (#173)
    by whitecap333 on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 06:17:04 PM EST
    So Officer Wilson, possessed by a deep, brooding hatred of all things black, finally went berserk,and walked up to Brown, in broad daylight, in a crowded area and,without saying a word, gunned him down.  You have serious issues.

    Officer Wilson is going to testify that Brown struck him with his fists, then defied his instructions to stay in place or get on the ground.  Three fourths of the jury is going to believe him.

    Parent

    You have serious issues (5.00 / 2) (#176)
    by Uncle Chip on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 06:42:40 PM EST
    Officer Wilson is going to testify that Brown struck him with his fists, then defied his instructions to stay in place or get on the ground.

    So then in other words he is going to lie.

    And that surprises you why???

    And of course on cross examination he will have to explain why defying the instructions of a police officer calls for a dozen bullets -- the final 2 point blank to the head.

    Understand something -- if he had stopped at 10 Brown would still be alive but those final two shots were kill shots into the head someone from whom he had nothing to fear at that point

    And you have the audacity to tell me that "I have serious issues".

    Get real -- and get yourself a conscience while you're at it.

    Parent

    Shots (1.00 / 1) (#196)
    by whitecap333 on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 08:18:48 PM EST
    There was a three second pause before the last 4 shots.  The first 2 of these 4 were arm shots, with the arm down.  The final 2 stopped Brown.  He was the author of his own misfortune.

    I assume everyone is familiar with the demographics of St. Louis County.  I wonder if the prosecution can request a change of venue.

    Parent

    Some of the things you write (5.00 / 4) (#198)
    by Anne on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 08:47:01 PM EST
    make me wonder about the shape of that "whitecap."

    Oh, and has someone been charged?  I wasn't aware there was any "prosecution" that would require a change of venue.

    Parent

    Lets get real (5.00 / 3) (#178)
    by nycstray on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 06:45:00 PM EST
    Brown decided to run toward a man (who was as big, if not bigger than him) who was actively blasting bullets into him.

    See how that works?

    Parent

    lordy, that's just nauseating (none / 0) (#181)
    by sj on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 06:56:39 PM EST
    Officer Wilson is going to testify that Brown struck him with his fists, then defied his instructions to stay in place or get on the ground.  Three fourths of the jury is going to believe him.


    Parent
    Indeed (none / 0) (#183)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 07:09:26 PM EST
    More so because it's probably true.

    Parent
    only if (none / 0) (#188)
    by NYShooter on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 07:35:26 PM EST
    the prosecutor is as inept as the one in Florida was.

    Parent
    I don't know. The more I learn..... (none / 0) (#191)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 07:54:36 PM EST
    Daily Beast
    The death of 18-year-old Michael Brown is not the first time an officer supervised by Ferguson Police Chief Tom Jackson has killed an unarmed man.

    Back in 2000, two unarmed young men were shot and killed in a Jack in the Box parking lot in the suburban town of Berkeley adjacent to Ferguson by a pair of officers assigned to a county-wide drug task force where Jackson was deputy commander.

    Early reports suggested that a vehicle occupied by Earl Murray and Ronald Beasley moved toward Officers Robert Piekutowski and Keith Kierzkowski, causing them to fear being pinned against another car.

    Subsequently, investigators decided that the car occupied by the two men had not in fact begun to move in their direction when the fatal shots were fired. The officers insisted they were in fear for their lives nonetheless, essentially arguing that the car was itself a deadly weapon pointed their way. That was enough for the shooting to be ruled justified under Missouri state law. The cops were not indicted.

    As the St. Louis Post-Dispatch noted on Monday, this law was also cited in a 2005 incident, after police in Lincoln County, Missouri, shot another unarmed young man named Michael Brown.

    This other Michael Brown was 23 years old and riding with four friends in a pickup truck driven by 22-year-old Tyler Teasley when a sheriff's deputy clocked them going well over the 55 mph speed limit. Deputy Nic Forler sought to pull them over, and Teasley tried to elude him by pulling into a driveway and shutting off the truck's lights.

    In his panic, Teasley apparently left the truck in neutral and it began to roll toward Forler down a slope of just 2.1 degrees as he approached. Forler fired repeatedly through the tinted back window, missing three of the occupants, but striking Brown and Teasley in the heads, killing them.

    But after Forler was indicted on manslaughter charges, he was found not guilty in criminal court even though the truck was estimated by the FBI to have been rolling toward him at no more than 3.5 mph.

    More at the link

    Parent

    Agreed. One would probably be forgiven ... (1.00 / 0) (#203)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Sep 10, 2014 at 07:47:39 PM EST
    sj [to Mordiggian 88]: "And to think: I once took your comments seriously."

    ... for thinking that we've recently had a 12-year-old posting in our midst, given the mindless personal insults and mass troll-ratings.

    Who's watching (none / 0) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 07:50:12 PM EST
    The last season of Boardwalk Empire starting tonight?

    Moi (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 08:05:34 PM EST
    Watching it right now (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:51:58 PM EST
    Illegal booze and gangsters, perfectly appealing :) Throw a big slab of Buscemi on there, what's not to like?

    Parent
    Ray Donavon was great (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:55:13 PM EST
    And so was The Strain.  We finally get to see the head creepy guy.  It's to bad the don't have genitals cause with those fingers......

    Parent
    Going vamptai? (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 04:22:44 PM EST
    Seve Buscemi is a great actor, but ... (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:03:45 PM EST
    ... he will forever be known to me as "your friend in the woodchipper."

    Parent
    Excellent new teaser for AHS:FS (none / 0) (#110)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 02:22:40 PM EST
    NEWS/ Jessica Lange Rules All in American Horror Story: Freak Show's Character Teaser

    Jessica Lange rules all, especially in American Horror Story: Freak Show.
    In FX's new teaser for the fourth season of American Horror Story, we get a glimpse at the Emmy winner as Elsa Mars, the owner of one of the last remaining freak shows in the 1950s in the US. Some of her "freaks" include the bearded lady Kathy Bates, Angela Bassett with three breasts, Michael Chiklis as the strongman, Sarah Paulson as conjoined twins and Evan Peters with some type of claw hand (?).
    The song you hear is Melanie Martinez's "Carousel."


    Parent
    I can't watch it :) (none / 0) (#151)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 04:19:12 PM EST
    First season my husband and I tried watching it, he jumped up and said, 'Phuck all that Freudian messing with my head :)"

    I continued to watch, but they drove me off a cliff.  I am creepy in the eyes of the Christians around here...but I'm not THAT creepy

    I am glad Jessica Lange is having great fun with the series though....and she is.

    Parent

    But so are others (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 04:42:53 PM EST
    Kathy Bates for one.  I can't wait to see her bearded lady.   They are all having fun.  Clearly as much as the viewer.  It's one of the things that IMO make it great.

    Parent
    Also (5.00 / 1) (#167)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 05:31:17 PM EST
    Have you noticed that it is very much a woman's series.  Possibly not audience wise but all the good parts are women.  And these are not objectified women. They are strong independent powerful and beautiful.  That's part of why I love the idea of the tiny new star.  From what I know of her she fits in perfectly.

    Parent
    OMG (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 09:20:45 PM EST
    Leftovers just went right off the creepy deep end.

    Parent
    Is that coming back next season? (none / 0) (#9)
    by ruffian on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 09:22:25 PM EST
    Yes (none / 0) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 09:23:13 PM EST
    Are you watching?

    Parent
    Nope, I never could get myself interested (none / 0) (#50)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 09:57:45 AM EST
    Just wondering if HBO is sticking with it.

    Parent
    I have a hard time going with it and enjoying it (none / 0) (#98)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:48:53 PM EST
    I think next season I will record it, and then  during down time watch more than one episode at a time.  I never watched  'Lost'.  My husband binge watched it and enjoyed it.  I'm going to try that with Leftovers next year.

    Parent
    It took a bit for it (none / 0) (#101)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 01:53:09 PM EST
    To take with me,  but that last episode was incredible.  How freakin creepy would it be to come down to coffee and find your dead/disappeared husband and children sitting at the table dressed in their own clothes.  Remember the GR stole clothes from all the disappeared to dress the creepy dolls in.

    And of you haven't  been keeping up that is also why they stole the  pictures.  Because the doll company needs pictures to make the dolls look like the disappeared.

    Parent

    I got that portion (none / 0) (#149)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 04:13:00 PM EST
    There are subplots going on.  And they drag the clarifications out just a hair too much to keep me hooked.

    I got dishes, laundry, dog doodles to pick up....you just can't string me along too much :). I'm burning daylight around here :)

    Parent

    There are still more questions (none / 0) (#159)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 04:43:50 PM EST
    Than answers.  You have to be ok with that.

    Parent
    End (none / 0) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 10:02:16 PM EST
    of June Or thereabouts

    Parent
    Home late (none / 0) (#11)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 09:24:15 PM EST
    A prize waits for me

    Parent
    I sort of knew it was coming (none / 0) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 09:26:11 PM EST
    But to see it is absolutely hair raising

    Parent
    That was (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 10:03:09 PM EST
    Amazing.  Perfect.

    Parent
    I'll watch it later. (none / 0) (#8)
    by ruffian on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 09:21:40 PM EST
    Interested to see how they take it in for a landing.

    I will miss Richard Harrow though.

    Parent

    One of life's unanswered questions: (none / 0) (#3)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 08:12:38 PM EST
    did BTD predict Notre Dame would roll over Michigan?

    The Wolverines had a bad game. (none / 0) (#19)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 10:30:32 PM EST
    I think it'll prove an aberration. All they can do is put it behind them and move on.

    Parent
    I have to say the Oregon Ducks (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by caseyOR on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 10:36:57 PM EST
    looked pretty sweet as they defeated the Michigan State Spartans 46-27.

    The Ducks had a rough first half, but more than recovered and owned the second half.

    GO, DUCKS !!!!!

    Parent

    The Ducks really need to lose ... (4.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 10:52:57 PM EST
    ... those screaming yellow zonker uniforms. What an eyesore!

    Parent
    Are you guys in San Diego ... (none / 0) (#21)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 10:51:18 PM EST
    ... getting any rain tonight from Norbert? My brother in Glendora said it was thunderstorms for most of the day.

    Parent
    Not yet. I was at the outdoor (none / 0) (#23)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 07, 2014 at 11:52:40 PM EST
    theatre at the Old Globe in Balboa Park. Shirtsleeve weather.  Excellent production of "Two Gentlemen from Verona."  

    Parent
    Hey (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 10:02:09 AM EST
    While cleaning out the photo trunk I came across something I thought you might like.  It's a portrait done by my best friend for many years.  He did portraits of all his friends using photo booth images back when they were B&W blurry and cool.  I miss him.  I posted it on FB and everyone thought is was some kind of digital thing.  Hardly.  Done in  the late 70s.  Don would take the photo booth image, make a transparent color xerox,  put that in a slide mount and then make multiple transparent color xeroxs messing with the color controls.  He would then combine them with paint and this stuff called "zipatone" which was sticky clear plastic sheets with things like type and different patterns on then.  The moray pattern you see is the result of slightly misaligned dots of the multiple color xerox es.  
    he would work on them for days.  I had forgotten I had this.  Getting it framed and perfected.

    Parent
    That's cool. Love it. (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by Angel on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 10:05:29 AM EST
    It is (none / 0) (#54)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 10:12:49 AM EST
    He was a talented boy.

    Parent
    I think he inspired Shephard Fairey. (none / 0) (#57)
    by oculus on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 10:36:36 AM EST
    Ha (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 11:50:12 AM EST
    Doubt it.  His art is only appreciated by his friends and family.  He was, as he called himself, a "professional" waiter.  In a city where every waiter is an actor/writer/director in waiting he took pride in the fact that he took pride in being the best damn waiter in NY with no further ambitions.

    I tried a couple if times to get him to interview in my industry.  I'm sure I could have gotten hired but he was not interested.

    Parent

    Togetherness. (none / 0) (#29)
    by lentinel on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 05:21:14 AM EST
    From the NYTimes:

    The Obama administration is preparing to carry out a phased campaign requiring a sustained effort that could last until after President Obama has left office, according to officials.

    Nice.

    Obama will give to the next chief executive the same gift that he received from GW Bush.

    Not exactly change one can believe in, but delightful in its continuity.

    Scotland appears to be on the verge of ... (none / 0) (#141)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 03:45:43 PM EST
    ... on the verge of proclaiming its independence from the United Kingdom. With only a week to go before the referendum, the pro-UK campaign has lost its momentum, and if it does win, it may be a squeaker at best.

    If Scottish voters opt to go their own way, this is a decision which would have enormous ramifications for not only England but the European Community and the United States as well, given that Great Britain is our closest ally.

    So, why aren't we talking about this?

    Having just visited Scotland (5.00 / 2) (#146)
    by Zorba on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 04:07:59 PM EST
    a few months ago, I am very interested in this, as is Mr. Zorba.
    The impression I got when we were there, in speaking to the locals, was that it was pretty much 50-50.
    And now recently, the "Yes" to independence feelings have gone up slightly.
    It seems to me to be a combination of Scottish nationalism and pride, North Sea oil revenues, and lately, a feeling among many Scots that they don't want the British nuclear submarine base there.  The latter may not be a very large number, but even 1% or less of the votes could make a difference.
    It will be interesting.

    Parent
    If Scotland goes its own way, ... (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 04:30:05 PM EST
    ... I would hope that the UK's breakup will be amicable, like Czechoslovakia's was in the 1990s. The Czech Republic and Slovakia both recognized that their people had many mutual interests, and the ties between the two countries are arguably closer today than when both peoples were under the same flag.

    Scotland needs England, and vice versa. How both countries ultimately choose to define their relationship is best left to them, but given that they share an island, their mutual interests will always endure.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    So goes the way of all empires. (5.00 / 2) (#199)
    by desertswine on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 09:10:33 PM EST
    The Scots we spoke to (none / 0) (#155)
    by Zorba on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 04:39:19 PM EST
    seem to think that Scotland will still be part of the British Commonwealth, like Canada and Australia, etc, and the Queen will still be Head of State, but that Scotland will be entirely independent in governance.
    We shall see what happens.

    Parent
    To quote Mike Meyers... (none / 0) (#148)
    by Dadler on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 04:09:11 PM EST
    All I know is what I learn on (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 04:39:14 PM EST
    Outlander.  Mostly that I love the Gaelic language.  

    Parent
    At one point when we (5.00 / 2) (#175)
    by Zorba on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 06:33:21 PM EST
    were visiting Scotland, I overheard two couples at the next table speaking a language I could not place (and usually I'm pretty good at guessing at least the language group, if not the exact language).
    I happened to glance over at them, and one of them was wearing a big button that said "Yes."  I turned to Mr. Zorba and said, "It's Scottish Gaelic."
    Interesting language.
    Even more interesting is the variety of Scottish accents while speaking English.  They're not all like those you hear in films or on TV shows.  The people in Edinburgh I spoke to said that they had problems understanding the Islay islanders, and even, sometimes, the Glaswegians.

    Parent
    I had trouble understanding the hard Irish accent (5.00 / 2) (#177)
    by nycstray on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 06:42:46 PM EST
    I almost didn't go over there because the cabbie I had in London sounded like he was speaking a non-english language! I met some 'soft Irish' accents on the train and they played my tour guide the first couple of days. Once my ears adjusted I was better . . .

    I was 'warned' by a waiter one morning to be careful while shopping. He didn't want me to be taken advantage of with MY accent! People, I'm from California, we do NOT have an accent! lol!~  ;)

    Parent

    Hahahahahaha! (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by Zorba on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 07:22:56 PM EST
    Yes, we do all have accents.  Your viewpoint definitely depends upon where you live, and what the "standard" accent is there.
    Lots of different accents in various parts of the US, and various parts of Great Britain.
    Heck, different accents just in London.  Or in Boston, for that matter.    ;-)

    Parent
    I'm born and bred Texan and I can't tell you the (5.00 / 1) (#192)
    by Angel on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 07:55:01 PM EST
    number of people who have told me I have a British accent.  I do have very good diction, but British?  

    Parent
    The problem (5.00 / 1) (#194)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 08:01:56 PM EST
    is people have said the same thing to me. Usually it's people in the south because I don't use ain't, double negatives and try to speak correctly. My father was a stickler for using correct English.

    I'm also one of those people who pick up accents horribly. I would live in Texas six months and probably have a really bad twang.

    Parent

    I definitely have a kind of southern accent (none / 0) (#195)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 08:05:39 PM EST
    But since I was a small child I remember people asking me 'why don't you have an accent like the rest of your family?'

    I don't have an answer.  The only thing I can think of is that I was an (essentially because all my siblings were much older) only child who spent many formative years alone with the tv.   Explains a lot doesn't it?  I think I learned the language from tv.

    Parent

    I have one granddaughter who is (5.00 / 2) (#197)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 08:36:56 PM EST
    Fixin to do things and another who speaks textbook English with no drawl, and they are sisters :)

    Parent
    This is the first time I ever heard Gaelic (none / 0) (#179)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 06:45:37 PM EST
    Pink Floyd: Several Species of Small Furry Animaks Gathered Together In a Cave and Grooving With a Pict

    I sat up from what ever stupor I was in and said 'what the he11 was THAT'
    Someone said that was Gaelic.   I was hooked.

    Parent

    Gaelic starts (none / 0) (#180)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 06:47:40 PM EST
    At about 3:35

    Parent
    A Scottish of friend mine (none / 0) (#162)
    by jondee on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 05:19:02 PM EST
    cut a window hole in his refrigerator so he could make sure make the light went off when he closed the door..

    The older joke is about the Scotsman who married the tattooed lady from the carnival so he could watch moving pictures for free.

    Parent

    Personally (none / 0) (#165)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 05:26:43 PM EST
    I think the workd, and especially the tight a$$ Brits, are frightened and intimidated and maybe even jealous of a man who is not afraid to wear a skirt with no underwear.

    Parent
    I'm going with jealous (5.00 / 1) (#168)
    by jondee on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 05:35:51 PM EST
    what did they used to say about the House of Lords?

    It was kept together by rum, sodomy, and the lash?

    Parent

    I've been following this about a week (none / 0) (#157)
    by sj on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 04:42:42 PM EST
    the journalistic yawning has progressed to raised eyebrows. It's starting to be taken seriously in a "can this be real?" sort of way. I can't tell if the momentum will accelerate or deflate.

    Parent
    The journalists should have (none / 0) (#170)
    by Zorba on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 05:46:42 PM EST
    taken this more seriously a long time ago.
    Even more importantly, so should the UK government.
    It was pretty clear when we were there that it could easily go either way.
    If the Scots vote for independence, I don't think it will be good for Great Britain, the EU, or even Scotland, in the long term.
    We shall see.

    Parent
    Paul Krugman on Scotland's path: (none / 0) (#190)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 08, 2014 at 07:45:55 PM EST
    "The Scottish independence movement has been very clear that it intends to keep the pound as the national currency. And the combination of political independence with a shared currency is a recipe for disaster. Which is where the cautionary tale of Spain comes in. [...] I find it mind-boggling that Scotland would consider going down this path after all that has happened in the last few years. If Scottish voters really believe that it's safe to become a country without a currency, they have been badly misled."

    LINK.

    Parent

    Anne, Donald, and sj (none / 0) (#201)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Tue Sep 09, 2014 at 06:42:55 AM EST
    Thanks for your feedback, but the truth remains that Anne was incorrect about her speculation about what happened in the elevator, and the record shows I was not, and where Anne was satisfied what had happened in court before and with the 2-game suspension, now she isn't .

    O.M.G. (none / 0) (#202)
    by sj on Tue Sep 09, 2014 at 11:49:48 AM EST
    Anne, Donald, and sj (none / 0) (#201)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Tue Sep 09, 2014 at 05:42:55 AM MDT

    Thanks for your feedback, but the truth remains that Anne was incorrect about her speculation about what happened in the elevator, and the record shows I was not, and where Anne was satisfied what had happened in court before and with the 2-game suspension, now she isn't .

    And to think: I once took your comments seriously.


    Ever hear the saying (none / 0) (#204)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 10, 2014 at 07:56:33 PM EST
    "Stop digging?"