home

Monday Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 02:05:14 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Here's a new open thread, all topics welcome.

< CIA Confirms: Trey Gowdy A Bald Faced Liar | Biden Still Considering a Run >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Monday Open Thread | 207 comments (207 topical)
    Drones (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 04:20:55 PM EST
    Now the FAA wants 'drone' owners to sign up.  Yeah, I will get right on that, and I am positive the ones nearing airplanes will be right in front of me in that line.

    Not for nothing, but drones, who have not killed one person are getting their own special government registry.  Sounds great, but what about the things that kill thousand every single year, where is that gun registry ?

    Right, when is the government going to start acting like adults and start addressing issues that actually kill thousands and stop with this fascination about something that could occur, but has yet to actually happen.

    I have several and I could care less if they want it registered, big deal, it's not like I am one of the folks flying near planes, but it just burns me up that they aren't addressing real problems and keep focusing on pure BS.

    The other thing I find quit funny, is it's illegal to use the UHF frequencies without a ham radio license, yet every RC website sells UHF transmitters for long distance control, over 10km, about 6 miles.  There is a warning at the bottom of the page, but it's all on the honor system and anyone that's got $100 can buy the technology that is far superior to any other frequencies.  

    HERE is an example.

    Basically, this is illegal to use, but not illegal to sell, what I would call the fireworks laws, on the books but no one actually abides.  It's the exact opposite of decriminalization in that the supplier can sell without any interference, and the operator becomes the one responsible for obeying the law.  I would image nation wide, there probably isn't even one guy tracking down illegal UHF operators.

    My point, the drone list is going to be the same silly S where the law says one thing, but basically it turns into voluntary signing up, which will not do a damn thing for safety because the people flying near airplanes sure as hell aren't signing up on the registry so they can get caught, duh.

    For the record, drones are generally automated flight, meaning that most people, like myself do not actually own a drone, the own a quad-copter, that is controlled with a remote, whereas actual drones fly pre-programmed flight and all control is left to computers. Not that it matters, but it would be nice if the FAA used the correct terminology instead of manufactures terminology used to increase sales.

    There is a huge difference between the two, especially in regards to safety.

    HERE     & HERE are why I think it's so cool, racing.

    I guess we have drones then :) (none / 0) (#19)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 04:51:34 PM EST
    2 helicopters and 4 planes. Nobody has time to play with them anymore though. The helicopters are pretty expensive to maintain and fly too.

    Parent
    I agree with you (none / 0) (#22)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 05:06:10 PM EST
    On the registry stuff.  But drones are not all computer flown.

    Modern aircraft have computers execute inputs while pilots are in the cockpit. Why? Because computers are better at it, they don't under correct or over correct. Modern helicopters have similar capability. They will auto hover, and hovering is for some a very difficult task to learn. Now an onboard computer will hover for you. It is the same for drones Scott. They are still piloted though, it is not a computer flying them, a computer makes the inputs that the pilot tells it to make.

    Computers can't detect something on the ground, finesse that it needs a closer look, and then choose to go look at it.

    Parent

    Can't they? (none / 0) (#78)
    by ruffian on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 05:35:33 AM EST
    Computers can't detect something on the ground, finesse that it needs a closer look, and then choose to go look at it.

    I think they can if they are programmed to do that...

    Parent

    Not according to the Army guys (none / 0) (#137)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 02:40:17 PM EST
    That pilot them. There is no substitute yet for human eyes and human understanding.

    Parent
    If You are Talking About... (none / 0) (#108)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 11:38:49 AM EST
    ...governmental drones that drop bombs, yes, but I would call them UAV's Unmanned Aerial Vehicle.  Those are drones in the sense that they can fly predetermined flight, but with the ability to have a human take over, and I would imagine that humans are required to drop bombs, but I do not know.

    For the hobbyist, a drone is something that has a pre-programmed flight pattern where no human being is needed once launched.  Autopilot if you will using GPS.  I think this is more popular on Europe where they do long distance flights of up to 50 miles, but in the US I don't think actual drones exist on any meaningful level.  I have also seen where you put something in your pocket, and the drone will fly around you record a video you as you move.  It is essentially flying itself.

    Most remotely controlled aircraft are simply remote controlled vehicles with computers on board to keep it level and stable, but at no time does a computer control flight direction.  Helicopters, quad & tri-copters mostly fall in the is category.  

    Not that is makes any difference, but it would be nice if the FAA used the correct terminology when crafting rules/laws, especially when they are on the TV.

    Parent

    Regular aircraft that we all board (none / 0) (#142)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 02:53:44 PM EST
    Are also capable of flying predetermined routes. They are still human piloted though Scott. Today's new military helicopters are also capable of flying predetermined routes. They are human piloted too.

    Something being shopped around right now is having a recon helicopter's wingman be a drone. Why? Because the guys taking in the camera feeds from drones have 360 degree vision and if their aircraft is shot down they aren't dead...so they aren't dealing with that added stress while in flight. But there will be a whole team piloting that drone. A computer can fly a predetermined route they punch in though. And they are able to make changes to that route when they need to during flight. That in my opinion makes it as much a piloted aircraft as the one I ride in commercially. There are no drones that lack that capability.

    My husband has a computer program though that can fly his hobby planes.

    Parent

    Just my two cents (none / 0) (#53)
    by ragebot on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 07:11:06 PM EST
    But the DOT guy in charge of the live blurb about the new rules came off like a moron.

    He was asked how registering this type of craft would help and he simply had no answer.  There is simply no way a pilot in an airplane/heli could look out the window at UFO/drone maybe a couple of feet across and be able to ID it.  It would have to crash and be examined to find a rather small ID number, and that assumes there is not a crash and burn situation destroying any identifying marks.  Not to mention many folks, like me as an example, put their name and phone number inside the craft along with a note offering a reward for return incase of a flyaway or crash.

    But what was even sillier is the DOT moron said he wanted to get these things registered by Christmas.  Industry estimates are there were about half a million drones sold in 2014 and by some estimates in 2015 about 200,000 have been sold every month.  Not to bring up a sore point but if the DOT uses the same bozos who put up the Obamacare registration system it would be a year or so before online registration was even operational.

    Already many RC pilots view federal regulations as a joke.  As an example you are not suppose to fly in federal parks.  Problem is the rangers have their hands full with real law and rule violations.  Hell they can't even pick up the trash folks leave in the parks.  And that assumes they can even find the RC violaters who may well be in remote areas.

    The simple fact of the matter is that no one has been killed by an RC platform.  On the other hand bicycles do kill folks on a regular basis and there is no great movement to register them on a federal level.

    Not to dispute what Scott posted, but I do serious (at least to me) photography using my drone and in the hands of capable post production guys (like my hommie Gene) the results are not to bad.  But like many pilots I fly line of sight and always have my hands on the controls.  Not saying there is not any computer assist, but this example is obviously not something an autonomous flight plan could do.  No one knew where Patti would go when she was released.

    Pattie Goes Home

    Parent

    And If I am Not Mistaken... (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 11:09:11 AM EST
    ...you also build them, but even if you don't, the people that do aren't going to have a serial number to the craft, maybe the control board, but that could be used in as many different machines as one would like.  Then what, register each individual parts, the control board, motors, ECS's, batteries, it's beyond dumb.

    Parent
    I use to build them (none / 0) (#187)
    by ragebot on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 08:07:17 PM EST
    Lots of guys in my RC club seem to get more enjoyment out of building RCs than flying them.  My interest is almost exclusively about using a drone to create raw footage.  I do use Premier but an not close to the skill level of my post guy.  I also wonder about my ability to come up with something as well put together as my Inspire.  Or the new HexH2O I just got.

    This video is what sold me.  At the 1:15 mark I knew I had to have one.

    Parent

    Register guns (none / 0) (#54)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 07:23:19 PM EST
    Not drones.

    Or both perhaps.  

    Parent

    I'm not planning to register (none / 0) (#120)
    by fishcamp on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 01:01:41 PM EST
    Any of my guns, especially the 75 year old deer rifles.  If I bought a new gun I would register it.  You have to register guns if you buy from a gun store.  The gun show loophole is really stupid.  Person to person, not much can be done.  Next we'll have to register boat flare guns.  Night boating is another sport I've scratched off the list.

    Parent
    LOL! (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by Zorba on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:25:09 PM EST
    Well, our two shotguns and one light rifle we have had for the 45 years of our marriage- in fact, Mr. Zorba owned them before we got married, so they are at least 50 years old.
    And no, we don't plan on registering them.  
    Although our much more recent handgun (a Glock) is legally registered in this state.
    Which we had no problem with.  And I wouldn't have a problem with registering any new long gun that we might purchase.
    It wasn't that big a deal to register the Glock.  Go to the state police barracks, show them your receipt from the store, show your identification, they conducted a background check, we passed a brief test on gun handling (although it was online, and I might have made it a bit more difficult), and then about a week later, get the registration, take it back to the store, and pick up the gun.

    Parent
    I was just being (none / 0) (#131)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 02:07:43 PM EST
    A fly in the unguent

    Parent
    Interesting read (none / 0) (#75)
    by ragebot on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 10:56:41 PM EST
    Forbes has a story about how the rules proposed by DOT don't really solve any thing and possibly are not legal under the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012.  Hard to see how any DOT rule will not wind up in the courts.

    Parent
    It's all red yellow honey (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by jondee on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 04:39:24 PM EST
    sassafras and moonshine around here today..

    A reminder of why I've always loved October..

     

    surrey on down... (none / 0) (#80)
    by ruffian on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 05:41:56 AM EST


    Parent
    Paging SUO, JB.... (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by kdog on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 05:11:29 PM EST
    and all Alvin Bros. Fans...Dave & Phil are on the road, I'm hitting it up Thursday.

    Halloween show in Alexandria VA, West Hollywood 11/14...full tour here.

    Put some juke in your joints with this number off the new record...Feeling Happy

    Boo. (none / 0) (#26)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 05:21:09 PM EST
    Not coming anywhere near Denver.  :(

    Parent
    Bummer Mile... (none / 0) (#98)
    by kdog on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 10:26:52 AM EST
    Dave (if not w/ Phil) is a true road dog...keep your eyes peeled, he'll be around eventually.

    You'll appreciate this...one of the craziest shows I will likely ever see is on tap for 10/30...Roger F*ckin' Waters at the 299 seat Bay Street Theater in Sag Harbor, doing an intimate acoustic set with GE Smith.  

    When I heard about it I though it had to be bullsh&t, like some guy named Roger Walters or something, but it's legit!  Unreal.

     

    Parent

    That'll wake you up (none / 0) (#97)
    by jondee on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 10:15:03 AM EST
    and put some glide back in your stride..

    Makes me think of when Jack Black walks into the record shop in the morning, pulls the plug on the "old sad bastard" music and puts on the rock 'n roll :)

    Parent

    I'm (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by lentinel on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:34:20 PM EST
    enjoying the way Trump is putting out there Bush's responsibility for 9/11 - about how ignored warnings and had an agenda.

    I wish the Democrats would do that also.

    They did ages ago (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:53:14 PM EST
    It's old news to Democrats and Liberals. It's probably old and easily forgotten news to Conservatives and Republicans until their current chosen leader starts saying it. Then it bypasses the lizard brain and shoots right into the prefrontal cortex.

    And when this happens, Jeb Bush starts whipping his head about when he talks, and he gets all shrill :) (The Gods know I have longed to point these things out when a Conservative man is doing them...and one in the spotlight is right this minute)

    Parent

    It may (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by lentinel on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 07:49:16 PM EST
    be old news to Democrats and Liberals and just about anyone - but they aren't saying it. They aren't campaigning on it. The biggest betrayal of the American people in memory - and the Democrats aren't saying anything about it.

    If Kerry had directly confronted Bush he could have and probably would have defeated the s.o.b.

    But he didn't and couldn't.
    He mumbled something about Tora Bora and left it at that.

    I know that this is supposed to be between Trump and Jeb -- but it happens that this is the forum in which this scandal happens to be being discussed.

    And but for that, we wouldn't even be talking about it. Amazing.

    Parent

    Not (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by FlJoe on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 08:32:33 PM EST
    old news, more like disappeared history. Democrats always sit back and allow history to be rewritten or outright fabricated.  It is deliciously ironic that Trump would pull this gem out of the Republican dumpster of inconvenient facts. Democrats are just afraid to get their hands dirty or something.

    Parent
    Consequences. (none / 0) (#67)
    by lentinel on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 08:48:35 PM EST
    Democrats are just afraid to get their hands dirty or something.

    If they continue to be fearful, for whatever reason, they deserve to lose.

    It gives me the impression that they in it up their eyeballs. They don't really see things much differently than the people they are supposedly running against.

    Parent

    It's great for a couple of reasons (none / 0) (#41)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:42:33 PM EST
    any democrat who said that would be crucified.   The reason it's getting press and being reported is because it's a republican who is saying it.
    I agree.  It's great.  It's also brilliant. Jeb can't ignore it, not only is W his brother but 16 of his 20 or so FP advisors are W retreads, but every time he talks about it he reminds everyone about W and how he would be the third Bush.

    I think this is the beginning of the end for Jeb.  

    Parent

    Not for Nothing... (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 01:10:35 PM EST
    ...Jeb is the one who started it by claiming GWB kept us safe from the terorizers.

    But I agree, had this come from the HRC camp, there would have been a reaction so over-the-top it would have given Jeb an opportunity to make the claim throughout his campaign.

    Parent

    Well, this looks interesting (5.00 / 4) (#64)
    by jbindc on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 08:34:25 PM EST
    The George and Tony show

    A bombshell White House memo has revealed for the first time details of the `deal in blood' forged by Tony Blair and George Bush over the Iraq War.

    The sensational leak shows that Blair had given an unqualified pledge to sign up to the conflict a year before the invasion started.

    It flies in the face of the Prime Minister's public claims at the time that he was seeking a diplomatic solution to the crisis.

    He told voters: `We're not proposing military action' - in direct contrast to what the secret email now reveals.

    Who sent the secret emails?  Colin Powell.


    The damning memo, from Secretary of State Colin Powell to President George Bush, was written on March 28, 2002, a week before Bush's famous summit with Blair at his Crawford ranch in Texas.

    In it, Powell tells Bush that Blair `will be with us' on military action. Powell assures the President: `The UK will follow our lead'.

    SNIP

    A second explosive memo from the same cache also reveals how Bush used `spies' in the Labour Party to help him to manipulate British public opinion in favour of the war.

    Now here's the funny part (emphasis mine):

    The documents, obtained by The Mail on Sunday, are part of a batch of secret emails held on the private server of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton which U.S. courts have forced her to reveal.

    So, more damning evidence against the Bush Administration and how they lied us into War, and it's only revealed because of the email witch hunt.

    Oops.

    No wonder (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 08:47:13 PM EST
    she's smiling about all the email stuff.

    Parent
    Why would an email sent by Colin Powell (none / 0) (#72)
    by caseyOR on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 09:39:52 PM EST
    be found on Hillary Clinton's private email server?

    Also, is this email,perhaps,  one of the reasons Powell deleted all his emails, leaving him with none to turn over to the Sate Dept.?

    Parent

    She inherited it (none / 0) (#76)
    by jbindc on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 05:07:20 AM EST


    Parent
    Inherited the email? (none / 0) (#117)
    by caseyOR on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 12:53:06 PM EST
    I do not understand what you mean. Was Clinton issued the exact same laptop that Powell used as SoS, a laptop that still had Powell's deleted, but not wiped emails?

    Parent
    I doubt it (none / 0) (#122)
    by jbindc on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 01:10:44 PM EST
    But she /the State Department would have them.  As the Secretary, she would  be allowed access to any level of emails from her predecessors.

    From the article I linked to:

    Why have these memos come out now?

    The U.S. courts have ruled that 30,000 emails received by Hillary Clinton when she was U.S. Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013 should be released.

    She may have asked for these documents to grasp the background to the Iraq War.




    Parent
    Now it makes sense. Thank you (none / 0) (#125)
    by caseyOR on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 01:19:27 PM EST
    for explaining it.

    Parent
    A Very Few Good Men. (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by KeysDan on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 02:03:26 PM EST
    Maj.General Michael Nagata, the army general in charge of the $500 million program to train and equip, as it effectively turned out, four or five Syrian rebels, is in line for a third star in his promotion to lieutenant general, and is scheduled to take a senior position at the National Terrorism Center in D.C.

    The training program did not live up to the Army's expectations for 15,000 fighters, but was probably better than any detached and informed observer's estimate of one to two.

     The first 54 graduates of the training program in the Syrian rebel group did not fare well in an attack by Syrian al Qaeda rebels, with leaders and members captured. They had no support from the local population and poor intelligence.  The program is being discontinued.

    A face of criminal justice in America (5.00 / 1) (#199)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 09:18:15 PM EST
    "Lady, people charged with crimes, they are criminals."

    - Mississippi Judge Marcus D. Gordon

    "The criminal system is a system of criminals. Sure, their rights are violated. But not all rights are violated."

    "His rights are violated only if he exercises his rights--to ask for an attorney, to ask for a trial, to ask for prosecution or discharge."
    kdog - I do like your young pitchers (5.00 / 1) (#207)
    by ruffian on Wed Oct 21, 2015 at 01:34:18 PM EST
    A hybrid of these two teams would be unstoppable!

    Murphy - what can I say, the guy is just too hot to handle right now. Getting homers every game, then beating out an infield hit. That was when I knew we were done.

    Actually if it got done tonight at least I would have my life back. I have made my peace with it!

    Conspiracies to watch for (none / 0) (#1)
    by Stellaaa on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 02:54:14 PM EST
    There are two major conspiracies about the primaries that are quite a hoot:

    1.  Hillary and Sanders are in on it together (coming from the far left), Sanders will draw into the party and then drop out.  

    2.  Far right: Hillary and Trump are in it together and he is a shill for her hell bent on destroying the GOP.  

    In a time when most people live off fantasy games, books etc, they create a political narrative that suits their appetites.  Better to contrive conspiracies than face reality.  

    Wouldn't it be awesome (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by jbindc on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 02:59:35 PM EST
    If BOTH were true???

    She could destroy the left and the right and SHE WILL RULE THE WORLD!!!  BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

    She's smarter than I thought.  :)

    Parent

    Based on my recollection of her (5.00 / 10) (#3)
    by Peter G on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 03:05:27 PM EST
    from law school days, Hillary is almost definitely smarter than you thought, pretty much regardless of how smart it is that you thought she was.

    Parent
    It fascinates (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 03:12:19 PM EST
    me that you actually know or knew her.

    I actually have a mutual friend in common with Hillary. Or really more of an acquaintance who knew her back from when she was First Lady of Arkansas.

    Parent

    She had this handsome, ambitious boyfriend (5.00 / 4) (#62)
    by Peter G on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 08:32:42 PM EST
    at the time from some little town in Arkansas that was almost able to keep up with her, but not quite. He also cheated at intramural flag football, I am here to tell you from bitter experience.

    Parent
    "who was almost ...," that is, (none / 0) (#63)
    by Peter G on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 08:34:19 PM EST
    not "that was almost" ....

    Parent
    LOL! How does one cheat at flag football? (none / 0) (#81)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 05:43:51 AM EST
    I bet he tied the flags to his belt.

    Parent
    By switching without notice to tackle (5.00 / 5) (#92)
    by Peter G on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 09:20:57 AM EST
    He and his third-year teammates, the way I remember it (from 40+ yrs ago), did not find our first-year team amusing and decided to express that sentiment forcefully. We, on the other hand, were having a lot of fun and not trying especially hard to win, which Bill & friends found frustrating if not incomprehensible. We were the only co-ed team in the league, in addition to which most of us were stoned at the time.  The other team (Bill's) was not.

    Parent
    That's because ... (none / 0) (#157)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:42:07 PM EST
    ... they probably didn't inhale.
    ;-D

    Parent
    I figured that out (5.00 / 4) (#6)
    by jbindc on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 03:19:36 PM EST
    In 2008 when I watched the interviews both she and Obama did with editorial boards of the Iowa newspapers before the primary.  She absolutely blew me away with her giant brain.  Obama didn't come close, as he appeared as a mere mortal.

    Then I met her after a fundraiser/rally and when she asked me what I did, and I told her (at that time) that I was a doc review attorney, she not only knew the job well (and the drudgery of it), but she voiced concern that the DC market rates were dropping and some of the work was being offshored to India at the time.  I mean, really??? (Then I almost was a guest of the Secret Service as the advance person was a bit casual telling me to exit "over there," and when I went "over there" it was out the door right where her Suburban was parked, doors open. Oops).

    Parent

    I got a chance to first meet her in 1995, ... (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 04:44:35 PM EST
    ... when I was working for Congresswoman Patsy Mink, and both she and President Clinton were in Honolulu to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the end of the Second World War. She blew me away with her innate policy acumen, and also her genuine interest in what I -- a fellow policy wonk, if but a mere mortal -- had to say. Needless to say, I've been a big fan of hers ever since.

    Parent
    You Can't Possibly Know... (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 03:38:54 PM EST
    ...how much entertainment I would get from finding out Trump was a HRC/Bill plant.  OMG, that would be one conspiracy that I would give a lot of cash to make true, Donald Trump able to single-handedly win the election for HRC on the backs of the republican idiots.

    Now I think most of that is true, that Trump is helping HRC.  But to dig up an email in the Benghazi debacle from Trump to HRC with a very descriptive plan and how he is going to destroy the republican brand using republican voter idiocy.

    The only problem is she is going to win it because she is the best person for the job, dammit.

    Parent

    You left (5.00 / 4) (#5)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 03:13:04 PM EST
    out Bill from the conspiracy theory since he apparently is the one who talked Trump into running!

    Parent
    Then who is telling Joe to run? (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by BarnBabe on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 03:41:25 PM EST
    My heart slips every time I read that he will run and we will end up with a President Trump. I always liked Joe but he had his times before and could not make it over the hill. I watch him lately and he has gone from a man in deep sorrow to one with a teeth grinding grin. Which is he?

    Parent
    If Joe threatens to run (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:37:16 PM EST
    A plant like me gets to get on the blogs and talk about what a crazy hawk out of his mind Joe is, and that doves Hillary right up.

    Plants like Jeralyn talk about his crime bills, and then all eyes fall on BLM and all the dead bodies.

    We also get to talk about Anita Hill. By the time we are done, Everyone Is Ready for Hillary :)

    Parent

    For a while (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:45:10 PM EST
    I was like if Joe runs okay. Whatever. However at this point he's really created a lot of strong dislike from me. It's like he or Draft Biden keep trying to create this artificial demand for him. However his poll numbers have not moved so apparently around 20% is his ceiling. Before all the talk of him running it was at 10%. So for all the Joementum we've been subjected to by the press over the last few months it has only moved him 10 points which keeps him still around 3rd place. I guess he could get in and fight with Bernie as to who is going to get 2nd and who is going to get 3rd. According to an article in the Daily Beast no one the author talked to seemed to want Biden to run.

    Parent
    It's also being reported (none / 0) (#46)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:48:57 PM EST
    That he "wants to keep the Clinton's out of the White House"

    That they are not legitimate heirs to the Obama legacy.

    I find this easy to believe.

    Parent

    Yes (none / 0) (#47)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:51:37 PM EST
    I am not surprised to hear that. This has been a problem in the party for quite a while. The establishment loves people like Biden and Obama not the Clintons.

    Parent
    OR the Repubs (none / 0) (#74)
    by christinep on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 10:47:11 PM EST
    The people I've heard pushing it the most are--my, my--Repubs.  Repubs love to play wedgie with the Dems & Hillary ... always have.

    Parent
    But the public loves Bill (none / 0) (#83)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 07:35:25 AM EST
    He needs to be out there doing serious leg work for Hillary. One of the things about Bill that we all love about him was the memory of our financial status and what he left office. First of all, we remember what our 401K were like. I was set for life. Lost a majority of it. Then we remember it was a peaceful time and how we all learned to do our own stock daytrading. For a while the Wall Street guys did not know what to do with us. We were in their domain and they had lost control. That did not last long enough but it sure was fun. and it was a time of the internet. And when Bill left office, their was a balance budget and SS was in decent shape. GOP people choose to forget that the debt that has accumulated is a lot about a goofy invasion which dominoed into a mush of a middle east.

    But it was our wallets that make us smile about Bill.

    Parent

    Not for nothing... (none / 0) (#96)
    by kdog on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 09:57:26 AM EST
    those 401k riches when he left office were an illusion, and the illusion came crashing down when the effects of deregulation and trade deals passed by Congress, and signed by Bill, took hold.  Ushered in a market crash and the great recession.

    The middle class made no real gains.  Whether people are smart enough to put two and two together is another question....but Bill didn't do much of anything lasting for the working and middle class, in fact he contributed to it's long demise.  

    Which is what worries me about a HRC presidency...will it be a continuation of Bill's economic policies?  I don't think we want that...I know I don't want that.

    Parent

    They weren't an illusion (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by CoralGables on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 10:56:49 AM EST
    The stock market goes up and goes down. Over the long haul it rises steadily. 401K's are a godsend to those wise enough to use them properly.

    Parent
    Indeed (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 10:59:51 AM EST
    I have a house and no mortgage payment solely because of a 401k

    Parent
    It's an illusion... (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by kdog on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 11:20:58 AM EST
    till you cash out.  Just like chips on a roulette table....only unlike roulette where you can cash out anytime, 401k you have to sit at the table till you retire.

    Mainly I took issue at describing Bill Clinton's economic policies as a home run for working/middle class people...they were not, they contributed in part to everybody who wanted to cash out their 401k in 2007-2008 getting f*cked outta retirement.  The Clinton economy was a perfect storm of the birth of the internet and cheap gas, not policy.  I do miss that 99 cent a gallon gas though;)

    401k may be better than nothing, but it ain't no pension.  

    Parent

    But most people do not cash out all (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by Anne on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 12:04:18 PM EST
    at once, kdog.  Unless your money is in a Roth IRA and funded with after-tax dollars, it would be pretty stupid to cash out an account that would be reportable as income for tax purposes.  Huge tax bite, and then what do you do with what's left?  If you invest it, the income will be taxable, and all you've done is reduce the possibility of the account continuing to grow - especially if you keep taking money to supplement whatever other income you have.

    While it's true that the Required Minimum Distribution would have been less at the end of 2008, and for several years thereafter, and that may have affected people's decisions whether they could afford to retire, it's also true that as the market has come back, so have the values of the retirement accounts from which people are making withdrawals - and the RMD's with it.

    If you're only taking the RMD, your account is likely to outlive you - it's supposed to.  Depending on how much you can accumulate, it can make a decent addition to Social Security.

    I think it's possible you may not completely understand how retirement accounts work - you are not alone, there, trust me - which may be affecting your opinion about their value to the retiree.

    Parent

    I definitely don't fully understand... (none / 0) (#116)
    by kdog on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 12:46:58 PM EST
    the game turns me off too much, I don't wanna play.  And where as I could swing (but not stomach) 20 bucks or so a week in a 401k, many others cannot, they need every penny of their stagnant income to live.

    Great that it works for people with disposable income to save...don't get me wrong.  But it's hardly the ideal system to allow for rest and security in our golden years...that's a pension, and we gave what our forebearers bled for away for Wall St. dreams.

    Parent

    The best deal was the matching (5.00 / 1) (#149)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:19:27 PM EST
    A lot of companies matched what you put in up to a certain amount. Percentage really. So if you were putting in $20 per week, and the company was matching it, you were making 100% on your bucks. If they only matched 5% (as they usually did the percentage)then it was important that you put 5% into your 401k account. Or try to at least. It replaced the pensions and was a great way to save. It also allowed you to borrow against your account for education, house down payments, and emergencies. So your money was not held in a non refundable jail.

    Parent
    I was able to buy my house (5.00 / 3) (#156)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:42:02 PM EST
    Because of matching funds and a happy coincidence.   When I started work they gave me the form which I thought was the amount I wanted deducted per month.   Turns out it was per paycheck.   So it was twice what I intended .  I kept meaning to change it but forgot.   So by the time I got around to needing it because of matching funds it was about 5 or 6 times what I was expecting.

    Parent
    Very well said Anne (none / 0) (#119)
    by CoralGables on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 12:59:10 PM EST


    Parent
    Maybe and maybe not (none / 0) (#138)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 02:45:07 PM EST
     Unless your money is in a Roth IRA and funded with after-tax dollars, it would be pretty stupid to cash out an account that would be reportable as income for tax purposes.

    Let's say you're effective tax rate is 30%. That's better than any loss greater than 30%.

    Of course most folks split their investment between go-go, steady growth and conservative.

    Parent

    Careful there kdog (none / 0) (#136)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 02:39:54 PM EST
    They'll start thinking you're a Social Liberal.

    ;-)

    And don't tell'em that the NASDAQ went down 50% between 3/2000 and 3/2001.... They'll be writing that Bush was sworn in a year early!

    Parent

    Well we already knew (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by jondee on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 02:47:12 PM EST
    kdog was a social liberal.

    That makes one of you.

    Parent

    Smoke and mirrors Jim... (none / 0) (#147)
    by kdog on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:09:21 PM EST
    smoke and mirrors, this "Bill Clinton Economy" meme...scratch the surface the guy was Reagan without the drunken Star Wars defense spending we're still paying for.  A deregulating broker stroker, a kick the dog welfare buster.  

    Parent
    No Offense... (none / 0) (#155)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:41:38 PM EST
    ...but that illusion you speak so lowly of is pretty much the illusion that ensures most people don't die broke and hungry in the street.

    For most, money is an illusion, unlike you all they see is numbers on a computer or piece of paper and rarely touch more than casual spending money, that doesn't mean it's unimportant.  It's the lifeblood of most human beings, it's why I sit at this crappy desk doing a job no one would do if not for that illusion, that puts food on the table and pays the bills.

    I will take an illusion with lots of zeros any day before I stuff the same illusion, aka cloth paper, into a mattress.  Because one will buy you a good time, the other will ensure you live a comfortable life after retirement.

    But I do have to say, you crack me up with this silliness.  And while I respect your fortitude, that is where it stops.  The rest is cutting off your nose for spite.

    Parent

    Time will tell Scott... (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by kdog on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:56:37 PM EST
    if I drop dead at 58 I'm a f*ckin' genius...live to 108, I probably f*cked myself but good to spite banksters who couldn't care less that they've been spited out of my broked*ck pennies...plenty of other rubes around and they all buy in.

    Absolutely right that is all an illusion...but one illusion is of use to me right now for goods and services.  The other, who knows if there will even be a stock market in 30 years.

    But I'll go to the grave knowing I never willingly forked over any of the sweat of my brow to the crooked casino on Wall...that's priceless to me.  Whether it will be when I'm old is another time will tell...my fallback plan is a third world country where you can live on social security alone, if that's still there when the time comes.

    Parent

    Exactly What I Said... (none / 0) (#167)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 04:33:09 PM EST
    ...spite.  You don't have to cut off your nose.

    Genius, well if you think that dying at 58 is some kind of genius status in the year 2035, then who am I to argue.

    I think most people would consider death at 58 a horrible injustice, as they plan on living well into their 80's.

    Let's be serious, I am sure you plan on next month's rent and all the included necessary bills, how is this any different, if you die tomorrow, spending your rent money today would be your definition of a genius move, but to most, it's what it is, idiotic.

    Parent

    I hate to get all existential here (none / 0) (#170)
    by jondee on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 04:44:20 PM EST
    but Nobody is guaranteed one future minute on this ship of fools, so every man may as well strive to always live by his principals; which may or may not always be a "portfolio decision", as they say on Wall St.

    Parent
    I hate to think of you (none / 0) (#189)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 08:15:48 PM EST
    in your dotage living off whatever comes your way from Social Security and relying solely on Medicare. No money for smokes or concert tickets. Sad.

    Parent
    I've actually started to think it could be a good (none / 0) (#44)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:46:59 PM EST
    Thing.  For all the reasons you say.  Hillary can't beat Bernie up.  Not that she wants to.  She can beat the crap out of Joe.  Coukd be good practice for what's coming.

    Plus I personally see him as zero threat

    Parent

    Me too (none / 0) (#50)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:55:38 PM EST
    I see him as zero threat. When it comes to polling, the idea of him is much more romantic than the reality of him.

    Parent
    Or (none / 0) (#49)
    by FlJoe on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:53:43 PM EST
    the bankruptcy bill and TPP. It just seems he will be sailing straight into the political winds.


    Parent
    That's what I see too (none / 0) (#51)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:56:18 PM EST


    Parent
    I'm sayin (none / 0) (#52)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 07:02:09 PM EST
    He won't run


    Parent
    I'm kind of surprised he is still (none / 0) (#85)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 08:15:08 AM EST
    Contemplating it after the first debate. Clinton and Sanders have the issues covered. He's bringing nothing that Dem voters are lacking or looking for to the race.

    Parent
    Not really that surprised about that (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 08:41:51 AM EST
    The moment he says no will be the last time any one point a camera at him.

    Parent
    The Bankruptcy Bill... (none / 0) (#146)
    by kdog on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:06:38 PM EST
    that both Hillary and Joe supported in the Senate?

    The TPP deal that Hillary is now against and once was for?  

    If Biden does jump in, voters might realize how similar Joe and Hillary are on economic issues....banker's besties.  Joe is Hillary without the email garbage, and a worse record on criminal justice issues.  6 in one, half a dozen in the other basically.

    Parent

    No (none / 0) (#150)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:22:00 PM EST
    Hillary did not support it IIRC.

    Parent
    Yes and no GA... (none / 0) (#159)
    by kdog on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:48:21 PM EST
    She voted for the 2001 version that later died, and understandably missed the vote in 2005 while Bill was in surgery. Says she would have voted nay in 2005, fwiw.

    To her credit, she has expressed regret for voting in favor in 2001, in addition to the regret for the Iraq vote, and regret for the Patriot Act vote.  How many mulligans you're willing to give, mileage varies (obviously;)

    Remember reading somewhere she kinda blamed Biden for the 2001 bankruptcy vote, she had reservations but he twisted her arm to support it, and she deferred to senior Joe as a Senate rookie....fwiw squared.

    Parent

    The Chaffee defense. (none / 0) (#190)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 08:18:26 PM EST


    Parent
    Well, (none / 0) (#11)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 04:26:43 PM EST
    apparently a mixture of people but it seems mostly people that were not included in any of the other candidate's staff and are looking for a job. It seems a lot of the Biden stuff is being shopped by Dick Harpoolitan in SC Biden's apparent number one fan in existence.

    I like what ruffian says Feel the Joementum!

    Parent

    Joementum! (5.00 / 4) (#9)
    by ruffian on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 04:00:01 PM EST
    The Biden/Lieberman ticket we have been waiting for for 15 years!

    Parent
    I have wondered about the Trump (none / 0) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 04:39:32 PM EST
    And the Republican Party thing.   It might be more personal than that.
    Trump has been quoted as saying he might not be president but neither would Jeb.  He would make sure if that.

    Maybe some day we will know the backstory to that.

    Parent

    I think it has to do with what Jeb alluded (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by ruffian on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 05:39:33 AM EST
    to in the last debate. Jeb did block Trump from getting casinos in Florida. I'm sure that is all Trump needs to hold a grudge.

    Parent
    I believe a lot more of bad crap (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 07:40:42 AM EST
    My political friends in Fla tell me that their were a lot of shady deals made under Bush. He is not squeaky clean. When I heard him talk the other day to a reporter, he was far from a polished politician. He is not prepared and sounds almost afraid to speak.

    Parent
    It's strange (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 08:20:07 AM EST
    As the days go by, he is becoming even more tongue tied and flustered, projecting even less confidence and leadership capability and qualities.

    I didn't expect any of this, I had always been told/sold that he was the gifted Bush child.

    Parent

    He is the brightest of the three (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by CoralGables on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 08:46:31 AM EST
    The problem is, for 24 hours a day everyday of the week he's soaking in the thought that he's going to lose...the only Bush to lose. And yes he will lose.

    Parent
    It is indicative of how he manages stress (none / 0) (#104)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 11:00:39 AM EST
    I can't think of many jobs more stressful than President of the United States. Particularly at this time.

    Parent
    Brightest of the three: (none / 0) (#192)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 08:34:10 PM EST
    Dubya and the purple cow guy...  that's not much competition.

    Parent
    He looks (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 08:20:14 AM EST
    like his mama and daddy are making him run for president.

    Parent
    Well, (none / 0) (#93)
    by jbindc on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 09:27:36 AM EST
    Stick a fork in Carly:  she's down 11 points from her peak, to 4%.

    Parent
    Carly (none / 0) (#94)
    by CoralGables on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 09:34:13 AM EST
    peaks after debates, and falls back into the valley soon after.

    She jumped to 9 points after the 1st debate. Went as high as 15 after the 2nd debate. And has now settled back again to about 5. The next debate can't come soon enough for Fiorina.

    Parent

    Where is (none / 0) (#134)
    by KeysDan on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 02:36:01 PM EST
    Rand Paul these days?  He seems to have gone missing.

    Parent
    Tapped out financially right now (none / 0) (#162)
    by CoralGables on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:54:12 PM EST


    Parent
    And speaking of conspiracy theories, ... (none / 0) (#31)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 05:58:11 PM EST
    ... I wonder how Republicans will explain their support from adult entertainer Jenna Jameson, a woman who evidently knows her own base audience very well.

    Parent
    There must be some clinical (none / 0) (#99)
    by jondee on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 10:48:07 AM EST
    paranoia inducing agents slowly seeping into the groundwater around the country.. Maybe it's all the over-prescribed super antibiotics and psych meds. That, coupled with the surreal, too-much-information rabbit hole that is the internet..

    and these people want more guns..

    A guy I do business with, who I had previously always thought was fairly well grounded, the other day started telling me about how "they" are now releasing genetically modified misquitos into the environment for some unspecified nefarious purpose..

    Oy.

    Parent

    Snopes (none / 0) (#100)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 10:55:38 AM EST
    [Collected on the Internet, 2002]

    Love Bugs are actually man-made. Scientists were genetically engineering females of a species of insect that would mate with the male mosquito, but be sterile and produce no offspring. Unfortunately, they accidentally also created a male Love Bug, and a pair somehow escaped into the wild. Since the bugs had no natural predators, their numbers quickly exploded into the millions.

    [Collected on the Internet, 1995]

    Back when I was a student at Florida State, I was told that love bugs were accidentally released from a biological experiment station at the University of Florida.

    [Collected on the Internet, 1998]

    Supposedly, the lovebug was "created" in a lab at UF by crossing a fly and a mosquito in an attempt to create an enemy for mosquito larva. It supposedly got loose and now populates the whole southern US.

    I've heard this too

    Parent

    Of course if you read it all (none / 0) (#105)
    by CoralGables on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 11:02:08 AM EST
    Snopes says all the love bug rumor, just like GOP nefarious rumor is always false.

    Parent
    I think it did get loose (none / 0) (#110)
    by jondee on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 11:47:46 AM EST
    and is in the South..

    Present company excepted, of course.

    Parent

    The internet is to the urban legend-creating (none / 0) (#113)
    by jondee on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 11:53:42 AM EST
    reflex what atom-splitting was to energy production and weaponry..

    Parent
    Yglesias (none / 0) (#12)
    by The Addams Family on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 04:28:23 PM EST
    discuss

    Forget Yglesias. (5.00 / 1) (#174)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 05:50:24 PM EST
    What are we going to do about the "chickification of the news"?

    LOL! I know, I know, consider the source.

    Still, I can't believe that someone actually said this in the year 2015.

    Parent

    We discussed (none / 0) (#13)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 04:35:12 PM EST
    it on the other thread. Hillary recognizes this is a problem and has a plan to start rebuilding the state parties which have really suffered under Obama.

    Parent
    thank you (none / 0) (#73)
    by The Addams Family on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 10:11:54 PM EST
    i'll read comments there

    Parent
    Senator Bernie Sanders (none / 0) (#16)
    by KeysDan on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 04:40:53 PM EST
    to give a speech on democratic socialism. In response to a question, Senator Sanders said, "to me, democratic socialism means democracy. It means creating a government that represents all of us, not just the wealthiest people in the country"

      And, the senator urged a look to socialistic programs at work: social security, medicare, public libraries, fire departments, police departments.  But, he did agree that "we have some explaining and work to do."  In light of the inevitable attacks, some just beginning,  such as Trump's "communist," and Paul's Pol Pot, Senator Sanders is behind the curve, and needs to do more.  

    Confused a bt (5.00 / 3) (#34)
    by Stellaaa on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:04:30 PM EST
    I think he got all twisted.  The Scandinavians and most of Europe are not Socialist Democracies, they are Social Democracies.  I am afraid he has created the confusion by insisting on being a socialist and talking of "revolutions".  There is a big difference.  The Nordics and Germans etc. are committed capitalists with a safety net.  Socialist Democrats are not "managed capitalists" they embrace a socialist system.  

    I think I know what he means, but he is stuck somewhere in mid-century names and terminology and he does not know that neoliberalism rules in the Nordic and European nations.  

    Parent

    Confused a bt (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Stellaaa on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:04:56 PM EST
    I think he got all twisted.  The Scandinavians and most of Europe are not Socialist Democracies, they are Social Democracies.  I am afraid he has created the confusion by insisting on being a socialist and talking of "revolutions".  There is a big difference.  The Nordics and Germans etc. are committed capitalists with a safety net.  Socialist Democrats are not "managed capitalists" they embrace a socialist system.  

    I think I know what he means, but he is stuck somewhere in mid-century names and terminology and he does not know that neoliberalism rules in the Nordic and European nations.  

    Parent

    Happy (none / 0) (#102)
    by Nemi on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 10:58:50 AM EST
    to be able to give you a 10 for that comment. ;)

    Parent
    So the difference between our version (none / 0) (#141)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 02:50:12 PM EST
    and the EU version is the size of the net and the amount taken in taxes.

    Parent
    Ha! (none / 0) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 04:41:48 PM EST
    Mo Brooks is on MSNBC saying the handling of the emails is an impeachable offense.  And if she is elected she should be impeached.

    Nothing like getting a head start.

    Mo Brooks is a fool and a tool. (none / 0) (#21)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 05:05:42 PM EST
    It should be fairly apparent to anyone who's listening to his parroting of GOP talking points that he probably hasn't entertained an original thought since junior high school. Why the folks at MSNBC would waste air time talking to the same windbags who populate the other cable news channels is beyond me.

    And speaking of windbags, I saw Donna Brazille yesterday on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos, where she once again phoned in her share of the glittering generalities which so often pass for insightful political analysis nowadays. While I don't begrudge her public appearances on This Week, such as they are, I've increasingly come to resent the impression given by Stephanopoulos that she's somehow speaking for Democrats in general, when she obviously does not.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Somehow, Mo Brooks (none / 0) (#25)
    by KeysDan on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 05:16:24 PM EST
    was just not on my radar.  So, with the aid of Wikipedia, I learned about him.  Summary: to the right of right wing Alabamans. Quirks in the otherwise all too familiar mold, not opposed to use of medical marijuana, joined Church of Latter Day Saints in 1978, but does not consider himself a Mormon, but a nondenominational Christian, Mo is a nickname for Morris, not to be mistaken as being short for moronic.  

    Parent
    I don't think he is just a loony venting (none / 0) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 05:24:27 PM EST
    I think this and the talk already circulating that illegal immigrants will elect Hillary are part of a planned and coordinated effort to begin the delegitimization of Hillary's presidency.


    Parent
    Agreed, Mo (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by KeysDan on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:22:37 PM EST
    and his crowd are not to be taken lightly.  The fact that he may be loony is not a unique quality of House Republicans--he, as you astutely observe, is a peep show.  He is showing just an ankle but we know there is more to come.  

    Parent
    Pierce (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 07:29:25 PM EST
    GOP Congressman Wants to Impeach Hillary Clinton the 'Day She's Sworn in'
    These really are the f*cking mole people



    Parent

    They are the (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 07:34:36 PM EST
    mole people and apparently stupid mole people don't realize that impeachment is for actions taking while POTUS.

    The mole people hopefully are going to destroy themselves before they get around to destroying the rest of us.

    Parent

    That is (none / 0) (#33)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:00:14 PM EST
    why she's on a mission to completely destroy the GOP in an election. Trey Gowdy target number one is already limping away.

    Parent
    May the hype be with you (none / 0) (#20)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 04:55:46 PM EST
    Tickets for "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" go on sale Monday, two months before the movie hits U.S. theaters.
    Sales will start after a new trailer for the seventh installment of the "Star Wars" saga airs during the "Monday Night Football" broadcast on ESPN, Walt Disney Co. said in an e-mailed statement Sunday. The movie is set to open in the U.S. and Canada on Dec. 18.

    I will be in line

    Have fun. (none / 0) (#24)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 05:16:05 PM EST
    My interest in anything Star Wars was likely fatally compromised in 1999 with Jar-Jar Binks. IMHO, the first two installments of the series were superior films, the third was much less so but still entertaining. But the fourth proved to be a mind-numbing 190-min. exercise in tedium, and came across as more of a marketing concept for theme-related toys and merchandise, than it was apparently concerned with a coherent plot. I couldn't even tell you what it was about, and I haven't watched a Star Wars film since. I've really no desire to see the new one, despite its resurrection of old and beloved characters.

    Parent
    That should set you apart from (none / 0) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 05:21:39 PM EST
    The rest of the world.

    But fwiw J.J. Abrams is not the aging George Lucas who pi$$ed away one f the greatest movie franchises in history.

    I can't wait.  It's expected to be the highest grossing movie ever.  I have no reason to doubt that.

    Parent

    Like I said, have fun. (none / 0) (#38)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:28:46 PM EST
    When it comes to matters of personal entertainment, I prefer to seek my own counsel and walk to the beat of my own drum. Speaking for myself only, I'm really not all that terribly enamored with J.J. Abrams' work product, either, e.g., Forever Young, Armageddon, Mission Impossible III.

    Because speaking of pi$$ing things away, while I thought that Abrams actually did a very good job with rebooting a beloved TV and film franchise with 2009's Star Trek, for his follow-up Star Trek Into Darkness he clearly decided to recycle the end of the 1982 film Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan -- a lazy decision that personifies the apparent lack of imagination underscoring so many Hollywood scripts and productions today.

    In so doing, Abrams thumbed his nose at us older Star Trek afcionados, while simultaneously hoping that fans under the age of 30 perhaps wouldn't notice or care about his film's bait and switch, which I consider to be cynical filmmaking at its finest. Between Into Darkness and The Wrath of Khan, the latter remains the superior film. So, a hearty round of boos and hisses to Abrams on that count, too, for making me not want to see any more Star Trek films by him.

    Again, have fun. I'm sure Star Wars VII  will be spectacular to watch from a visual standpoint. I'll perhaps catch it when it's released later on DVD/BluRay.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    A crude overview of the Star Wars franchise (none / 0) (#201)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 10:16:16 PM EST
    What If The New Star Wars Sucks, Too?\

    Don't read this if you're squeamish.

    Parent

    Thank god (none / 0) (#29)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 05:27:01 PM EST
    I have a DVR.so I don't have to watch Monday nite football.

    Parent
    Pre-emptive impeachment (none / 0) (#32)
    by Stellaaa on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 05:59:49 PM EST
    they are confusing themselves

    Parent
    Ha (none / 0) (#36)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:09:23 PM EST
    Misplaced but yes.

    Or possibly premature impeachment

    Parent

    #boycotstarwars (none / 0) (#60)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 08:26:04 PM EST

    Being a racist, sexist, science fiction-obsessed Twitter melter-downer may not sound like an appealing combination. But why would that stop anyone?

    Apparently a group of people are planning to boycott the upcoming Star Wars VII movie because its cast is fronted by a woman and a black man, according to the Mary Sue. The fact the cast isn't as white and male-dominated as the previous iterations of the space adventure series has some escalating things rather quickly, claiming it points to white genocide.

    The tweet above refers to Black Lives Matter activist DeRay McKesson and the injustice racist geeks feel about what they believe to be a "social justice warrior" (SJW) version of Star Wars

    LINK

    Parent

    If you boycot a film (5.00 / 5) (#65)
    by Repack Rider on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 08:34:34 PM EST
    ... and it still sells out every screening and makes $105M on the opening weekend...

    I guess you showed THEM.

    Parent

    Trailer coming at halftime (none / 0) (#70)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 09:04:09 PM EST
    Lawerence is going to show it on his show tonight.

    Parent
    The trailer is excellent (none / 0) (#71)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 09:18:27 PM EST
    You see Carrie Fisher and Harrison Ford.

    Oddly, no Luke Skywalker.  Lots of chatter about that.

    But very good.

    Parent

    Personnal Factoid. (none / 0) (#126)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 01:24:47 PM EST
    I have never seen a Star Wars movie.

    Seen bits and pieces, but never sat down and watched an entire movie.  Granted I know a lot about it because of pop-culture, but the MNF preview looked to me as something silly, not saying it is, but not having seen any of it, there is no context for me.  So Darth Vader has a new 21st century mask, big deal, Batman's had like 3.

    I thought Mike Tirico looked like he would rather have stuck his head in a dirty toilet then have to to promote Star Wars at half time.

    Parent

    One of my friends (5.00 / 2) (#153)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:30:11 PM EST
    was an employee of Lucas' before I ever heard of him.  My friend told me in 1977, you gotta see this film, it's not like anything you ever saw.

    As we know, Star Wars was hugely popular and influential, and spawned...an empire.

    My friend got me some work with Lucasfilm, and because he was the projectionist in George's personal screening room at his house, he screened THX-1138 there for us, and we had mountain bike slide shows there as well.

    One Christmas I got the job of accompanying George to his several business locations while we delivered Christmas presents to the staff of 50 or 60 people.  I drove the truck with the presents, and followed George while he shook the hands.  George used to eat breakfast at the local diner, sat at the counter like anyone else.

    A funky little music store sat for 30+ years in the same location near George's house in the town where I live.  Because it was a nice location, eventually the landlord raised the rent to far more than what the owner could pay, so he could get rid of the guy and demo the building for a real estate office.

    George stepped in.  He preferred a music store near his house over a real estate office.  He bought the property, built a beautiful commercial facility, re-installed the music store, and told the music store owner that the rent will be the same as he originally paid in the former decaying firetrap, for as long as the guy wants to stay.

    Parent

    THX-1138 (none / 0) (#161)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:51:19 PM EST
    Is such a great movie.   I saw it recently.   It's just as good and relevant as the day it was made.

    Parent
    Cap'n, did you ever see ... (none / 0) (#166)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 04:31:37 PM EST
    ... Nicholas Roeg's 1976 sci-fi film The Man Who Fell to Earth with David Bowie, Candy Clark, Rip Torn and Buck Henry? That film enchanted me back in high school. Sadly, I've never seen it since, but I remember it very fondly.

    Parent
    Of course (none / 0) (#171)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 04:51:25 PM EST
    It was on cable recently.

    I just saw a little gem you might enjoy.   It's called Lost River.   Very Roegish.   Reviews are mixed, to say the least, but I really enjoyed it.   It was directed by Ryan Gosling.  Here is a bit from an Ebert review.  To all the artsy directors he mentions I would add Tarsem Singh.  The guy who did The Cell, The Fall and The Immortals.  All of which I love-

    The reviews for Ryan Gosling's directorial debut in "Lost River" (which he also wrote) out of Cannes last year were so vitriolic and downright hateful that I expected some sort of narcissistic variation on "The Room". The good news is that "Lost River" is far from horrible; there are too many interesting ideas and strong visual compositions to write it off completely, and it's actually kind of bizarre that so many people did so on the Riviera. The bad news is that it still doesn't quite work, largely because Gosling has bitten off more than he can chew, assembling ideas and images without the directorial vision to connect them. His film was clearly influenced by Nicolas Winding Refn, David Lynch and Terrence Malick, and one gets the distinct impression that mimicking filmmakers with such confident visual sensibilities may not have been the best way for a rookie director to get his feet wet. The result is a piece with images that connect only superficially, never finding the thematic resonance of a Lynch or Malick vision. Gosling's eye is too confident to ignore, but one hopes he points it at a more-engaging product next time.

    Far be it from me to disagree with Rog.  But I do.

    Parent

    Definitely underrated (none / 0) (#197)
    by McBain on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 09:00:45 PM EST
     

    Parent
    Wow (none / 0) (#132)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 02:13:22 PM EST
    You and a couple of Australian Bush People.  

    And I'll bet the Bush People see VII

    Parent

    Well, It's not as Rare as You Think... (none / 0) (#148)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:16:48 PM EST
    ...but for me it was pretty simple, my best friend in grammar & junior high school was a Mormon, and he hated that he parents would not let him see movies, especially SW, so I did out of solidarity, and by the time we were no longer friends, it wasn't available like it is today.  You couldn't rent SW at the video store and by the time you could download, I was 4 movies out.

    The oddest thing about my friend, his parents bought him tons of SW action figures and the fighting crafts and I believe he even had a death star, but he could not watch the actual movie.

    I actually had a long running gf who never saw any of the movies either.  It was actually a running joke in that she asked when I met her to tell her something no one else knew about me.  So now I have a fondness for that dumb thing.

    Parent

    Also never seen any of the SW films. (none / 0) (#133)
    by Anne on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 02:21:12 PM EST
    Can't explain it - they just didn't interest me.

    Parent
    I only saw a couple (none / 0) (#154)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:35:30 PM EST
    But, I saw the best one. The first one. Now SW people will disagree as they delight in the advances of movie magic, but I had no idea of what to expect. So the first one was a great surprise. When CPO sounded like Cary Grant and R2D2 was a cute companion, they were the odd couple. When they went into the local gin mill, it went and showed you how people of different sizes, shapes, and looks all still acted the same as in any gin mill. Harrison Ford was so cocky and adorable as the pilot in his piece of junk space ship. So the first one was my favorite.

    Parent
    Actually no (none / 0) (#160)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:50:06 PM EST
    Purists delight in the first movies.  Before the "movie magic". Most agree, including me, that movie magic mostly ruined the last three.   Also there was a computer graphics update if the first three, where Lucas added a bunch of stuff he could not do in the original, and it was not well received.    Most still will watch the original version.

    People respond to the movies because they are a classic heroes  journey.   It came mostly straight from Joseph Campbell (a personal hero) who worked closely with Lucas in developing the story.

    The story is primal.   That's what people respond to.

    The first three movies I'm talking about.  

    Parent

    Joseph Campbell (none / 0) (#176)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 06:23:04 PM EST
    and the heros journey in Star Wars

    If you google
    "joseph campbell hero's journey star wars new hope"

    You will find more than you care to know on this subject.  I thought the one I linked to was good-

    Simba, Neo, Shrek, Shaun, Nemo, Moses, Hercules, Westley, Peter Parker, and almost every cinematic (and literature-based) hero can trace all or most of his (or her!) path to Joseph Campbell's hero's journey, described in The Hero With A Thousand Faces published in 1949. No character more so than Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) follows this monomyth, as George Lucas attributed Campbell's book to having had a strong influence on him when crafting his iconic character, as seen in the original Star Wars trilogy.

    Seventeen stages divided into three sections, there have been a number of variations written since - countless response papers, books, and documentaries that narrow the number of steps, that add some other steps or sub-steps, that change the order around, and so on. But there's nothing like checking back with an original theorist and looking closely at our own "farm boy."



    Parent
    Btw (5.00 / 2) (#178)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 06:38:34 PM EST
    The Lucas/Campbell relationship was more than that paragraph suggests-


    Some of Star Wars' detractors call the series schlocky, blunt, predictable, and implausible even by fantasy's standards. A defender might respond that they're looking at it all wrong: to appreciate Star Wars, you need to watch it as an epic myth. George Lucas himself, who has more or less mounted this argument in response to charges of unsubtlety, rarely seems far from dropping the phrase "the power of myth." That, surely not coincidentally, is also the title of a 1988 Bill Moyers television series on mythologist Joseph Campbell and his ideas about myth through time and across human cultures. Moyers and Campbell actually conducted their first five episodes' worth of conversations at Lucas' Skywalker Ranch. Just as Lucas did his reading of Campbell, Campbell did his reading of Star Wars: in the brief clip from The Power of Myth above, the scholar expresses his enthusiasm for the films' use of mythological elements drawn from across the world.

    LINK

    The Power Of Myth is one of the greatest things ever on TV.  PBS.  I have the DVD and drag it out from time to time just because I love it so.

    Parent

    Later on I was thinking (none / 0) (#182)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 07:12:18 PM EST
    I love old movies and when thinking of Star Wars I imagined old movie comparisons. I thought of the actors who could have been a part of the movie. I mentioned Cary Grant but I also thought of he and Roselin Russell in His Girl Friday. Maybe Barbara Stanwick but not as much. Jimmy Stewart talking to Harvey. How about George Raft or Bogart? What I mean is that I saw a lot of early Hollywood and at the end, early James Bond conflict. I know that was not the intention but it was easy for me to see similarities in the old and the new. I appreciate the information. I read it all and thank you. But knowing George and Steven sat around thinking about old movie matinees for Raiders, I have to be a bit suspect. Heh.

    Parent
    Ha (5.00 / 1) (#183)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 07:36:05 PM EST
    Not matinees exactly, serials.

    Janet Maslin from 1981

    How Old Movie Serials Inspired Lucas and Spielberg

    And Mr. Kasdan sums it up most succinctly. ''George is a real American boy. A lot of things he's interested in have touched a lot of us American boys. One of the things George understands in a very liberating way is what his audience is about. It's not the only audience in the world. But it just happens to be an enormous one.''

    Never really thought of myself as "a real American boy" but in that sense I am.  Totally.

    And if you look at what's happened to movies, the explosion of pulp and comic theatrical  fiction, we are all real American boys now.

    Parent

    Scott, I highly recommend the first three, ... (none / 0) (#165)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 04:23:19 PM EST
    ... which have since been renumbered and renamed as Star Wars, Episode IV: A New Hope (1977, the original Star Wars which started it all), Star Wars, Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back (1980), and Star Wars, Episode VI: Return of the Jedi because George Lucas apparently chose to tell the entire saga out of sequence.

    (If you want a good laugh, watch this cheesy Christmas 1976 trailer for the original Star Wars, and don't judge the actual movie by it. The film is much, much better than its trailer ever lets on.)

    As I said above, I find the first two to be superior pieces of filmmaking, both in their filmcraft and their storytelling. The third doesn't quite attain those lofty standards, but it's still very entertaining -- although I could have done without its obvious overabundant marketing of ewoks as a merchandise line -- and further, it completed the original storyline.

    I think that Star Wars, Episode I: The Phantom Menace (1999) is a thoroughly misconceived mess, and that's where the series went off the rails, IMHO. I haven't seen the subsequent two, Star Wars, Episode II: Attack of the Clones (2002) and Star Wars, Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (2005).

    I've no real desire to see them, for that matter, preferring instead to forget Episode I altogether and remember the first three as its own complete box set.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    I wish I could forget the three prequels (none / 0) (#198)
    by McBain on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 09:15:17 PM EST
    The only good thing to come out of that mess was the epic Red Letter Media review.
    here
    Warning: salty language, extremely funny, and dead on

    Parent
    Funny... (none / 0) (#169)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 04:41:13 PM EST
    ...like no one else if told me I must see this one.

    Even funnier, no one commented on Mike Tirico having to promo it on MNF.

    Parent

    This (none / 0) (#30)
    by FlJoe on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 05:43:28 PM EST
    is what we have been blathering about for days
    Whatever you make of this agenda substantively, there's no way to actually enact it without first achieving a considerably higher level of down-ballot electoral success than Democrats currently enjoy.
    Everybody cnoncedes that point.

    Mostly we were talking about The House but it any would understands that the States are part of the same structural problems.

    This has been a long time coming but Yglesias seems to think he just discovered it. He may be right when he says

    The Democratic Party is in much greater peril than its leaders or supporters recognize, and it has no plan to save itself.
    same as it ever was.

    Frankly there is no good "plan" avaialable, the Republicans have has a 50 year head start, from Nixon's Southern strategy to the Mythos of Reagan, the doublespeak of Luntz and the ratfkng of Atwater and Rove, always the ratfkng. All delivered nonstop by talk radio and their own personal news network.

    The Democrats meanwhile have good ideas.......sigh.

    There isn't one now (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by sj on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:44:56 PM EST
    But there was a plan: Howard Dean's 50 state strategy. Main stream Democrats  preferred their traditional (and losing) strategy which was to increase the percentage of Blue Dogs. Who were eventually replaced by real either Republicans or real Democrats:
    Blue Dog numbers in the House were reduced from 54 members in 2008 to 26 members in 2010 and two of the Coalition's four leaders (Stephanie Herseth Sandlin and Baron Hill) failed to secure re-election...

    ...and its membership totaled 14 when the 114th Congress took office on January 3, 2015.



    Parent
    I (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by FlJoe on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 07:44:21 PM EST
    Was always a fan of Dean's strategy but considered  it a more long term benefit. I am not sure we would be any better position but it could hardly be worse. We would however be better position moving forward.

    Unfortunately the Democratic political machine usually seems uninterested in thinking long term.

       

    Parent

    Weren't you just decrying ... (none / 0) (#112)
    by sj on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 11:52:22 AM EST
    ... lack of a strategy? Don't you think the GOP Southern strategy was a long term one? You have to start somewhere.

    And, as a Dem officer during Dean's tenure, I can tell you that the shorter term benefits were poised to materialize when the strategy and the State parties was/were abandoned.

    Parent

    I agree (none / 0) (#114)
    by FlJoe on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 12:01:18 PM EST
    there needs to be a long term strategy, but there is really no good short term one available. I pointed out the current Republican strength is the results of the GOP long game.

    Dean's strategy would be great to restart, but it would not bear fruit for years to come.

    Parent

    Yes, years surely (none / 0) (#118)
    by sj on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 12:56:23 PM EST
    But not as many as you appear to think.

    Parent
    Howard (none / 0) (#45)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 06:48:41 PM EST
    Dean was also a fan of getting blue dogs to run simply because in some places that's the best you are going to get.

    My understanding was the difference between Dean and Rahm was not the blue dogs so much as Rahm thought that only swing districts should be contested and Dean thought every race should be contested even if it was a sure loser.

    Parent

    Yep (none / 0) (#111)
    by sj on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 11:49:21 AM EST
    The first rule of the 50 state strategy was to always field a candidate. Before Dean, the DNC had just conceded a lot of seats to the GOP. Because redistricting or something. Dean believed that a candidate should always be in place to potentially take advantage of changing or volatile situations even in a "Republican district". Also just to be a presence.

    The second part was to provide paid party support to the field (which was hugely helpful). Rahm did not like spending money that way. He did not care about down ticket races.

    And I was a little short-cutty in implying that Rahm's stated strategy was to promote blue dogs. He said that he wanted to support contested races. His candidate choices said that he preferred blue dogs.

    I'm trying to recall who right now, but I know that refused to fund a liberal candidate who had an excellent chance of winning with just a little financial support. We were told he needed to keep the money for the Presidential race. Frankly, "the Clintons" also preferred to keep the money for the Presidential race. They just let Rahm be the one openly obnoxious about it.

    Bottom line: Dems had a strategy. But they don't now.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#128)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 01:42:47 PM EST
    I can't speak for any other state but the Clintons did not starve the state party here in GA. Terry Mac actually helped the state party perhaps not as much as Howard Dean but the one who's been a complete disaster on this account is Obama.

    Parent
    Good to hear (none / 0) (#173)
    by sj on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 05:17:33 PM EST
    And yes, Obama is a disaster on this account and also much more directly influential .

    But, to clarify (also for myself): It was Obama's pick of Tim Kaine who followed Dean as DNC chair. But he was in the same mold as Rahm (who was DCCC chair).

    Any influence "the Clintons" had was residual.

    Parent

    I'm really talking (none / 0) (#175)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 06:15:01 PM EST
    about the 90's the party here was doing okay. Dean was getting candidates to run here locally that pretty much had no chance but you can't beat something with nothing. Once Dean left and then Obama took control of the money that was the end of getting any candidates to run. Even for major seats Tim Kaine has been unable to recruit candidates which Dean was able to do.

    Parent
    It's kind of hard (none / 0) (#177)
    by sj on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 06:27:52 PM EST
    Even for major seats Tim Kaine has been unable to recruit candidates which Dean was able to do.
    to recruit candidates when they already know they will be getting no Party support.


    Parent
    And for all this, we can thank ... (5.00 / 1) (#180)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 06:52:25 PM EST
    ... Mr. Obama's remarkably petty and vindictive former chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, who's presently serving as the mayor of Chicago, and also on my short list as one of the frontrunners in the category of most overrated Democratic politician in my lifetime.

    It was Emanuel, in his former capacity as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, who clashed repeatedly with then-DNC Chair Howard Dean regarding the merits of the latter's "50-State Strategy."

    That fact that this strategy actually proved to be wildly successful in its application, delivering to Democrats solid majorities in both houses of Congress in 2006 and 2008, mattered much less to Emanuel than his personal need to avenge himself at Gov. Dean's expense for the self-perceived slight of not being given due deference as one of Washington's so-called movers and shakers.

    That's why Dean was subsequently shown the door upon Obama's 2008 election, and how we got the feckless Time Kaine installed at the DNC in his stead.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    True (none / 0) (#179)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 06:40:22 PM EST


    Parent
    And those good ideas are??? (none / 0) (#144)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 02:58:12 PM EST
    I know!!! Universal single payer health care.

    Oh wait. We have Obamacare. That fixes things.

    (dripping with sarcasm)

    Parent

    Pierce on Carson (none / 0) (#57)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 07:39:47 PM EST
    so funny

    Ben Carson Confuses Iraq, Afghanistan, Past, Future, Space, Time, Whatever
    There are a lot of unknown unknowns

    Moving along, there's only one choice for this week's House Cup and that's ABC, where Ben Carson visited This Week With The Clinton Guy Shocked By Blowjobs, and where the good doctor demonstrated that not only is he not qualified to be president, he is not qualified to pass a 10th grade contemporary world history final. This was utterly amazing.

    The gob, she is so thoroughly smacked. Do go on, doctor.

    At this point, the Clinton Guy looked as though he were conversing with a llama from Mars. Dr. Carson did not appear to notice.
    CBC projecting Harper out Liberals in (none / 0) (#68)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 08:54:57 PM EST
    In Canada.

    Not a surprise if you have been following this.

    Or maybe I only know liberal Canadians.

    Guardian (none / 0) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2015 at 08:58:06 PM EST
    Canada election: networks call victory for Liberals and Trudeau - live



    Parent

    The Liberal Party wins Canada's national election. (none / 0) (#77)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 05:22:29 AM EST
    Justin Trudeau is the new prime minister, replacing the unpopular Stephen Harper and his Conservative government.

    (The writing was on the wall when Harper's party was wiped out in last year's provincial elections in Alberta, nominally a staunch Conservative stronghold. Harper has resigned as both prime minister and leader of the Conservative Party.)

    The Liberals won seats in 184 districts, needing 170 to gain a majority on the 338-member House of Commons. The Conservatives were next with 99 seats, followed by the New Democrats (44), Bloc Quebecois (10) and the Green Party (1).

    Congratulations, Prime Minister Trudeau.

    Amusing anecdore: (none / 0) (#129)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 01:52:45 PM EST
    "Tonight we'll dispense with the formalities. I'd like to toast the future prime minister of Canada, to Justin Pierre Trudeau."
    - President Richard Nixon, offering a toast to Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau's then-four-month-old son during an April 1972 state dinner in Ottawa.

    Parent
    QUESTION Re:Shadow Investments (none / 0) (#82)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 07:20:21 AM EST
    During the debates Hillary was talking about her concerns referring to Shadow Investments or something of this sorts. It was during the Sanders/Hillary financial section. I understand the term, but I am not familiar with what she was talking about. It went fairly quickly and no one seemed to address her concerns. Can someone please fill me in on this subject which escaped me? Thanks.

    Trump bites (none / 0) (#90)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 08:52:13 AM EST
    From Mike Murphy running the Bush SuperPac-

    "He's dead politically. He'll never be president of the United States, ever," Murphy, a longtime friend and consultant, told Bloomberg's Sasha Issenberg. "By definition I don't think you can be a front-runner if you're totally unelectable. I think there's there an a priori logic problem in that."

    This in spite of the latest polls showing that Donalds numbers on electability within the party have flipped from the summer and 59% now say they would vote for him.  Btw that's 9 points higher than the number that says they would vote for Jeb

    2.

    This is a quote circulating this morning from Trumps 2000 book-

    In 2000, 19 months before Sept. 11, 2001, Donald Trump wrote extensively of the terrorism threat the United States was facing.

    Trump, who at the time was considering a presidential bid on the Reform Party ticket, went so far as to say that an attack on a major U.S. city was not just a probability, but an inevitability.

    "I really am convinced we're in danger of the sort of terrorist attacks that will make the bombing of the Trade Center look like kids playing with firecrackers," wrote Trump in his 2000 book, The America We Deserve. "No sensible analyst rejects this possibility, and plenty of them, like me, are not wondering if but when it will happen."

    Trump even mentions Osama bin Laden by name, in a criticism of an American foreign policy that too quickly jumps from one crisis to the next.

    "One day we're told that a shadowy figure with no fixed address named Osama bin-Laden is public enemy number one, and U.S. jetfighters lay waste to his camp in Afghanistan," The Donald wrote. "He escapes back under some rock, and a few news cycles later it's on to a new enemy and new crisis."

    Pretty interesting considering recent news

    Murphy is trying (none / 0) (#91)
    by CoralGables on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 09:15:27 AM EST
    to keep his paycheck for as long as possible.

    Parent
    On a guy actually wrestling with a (none / 0) (#95)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 09:56:56 AM EST
    Momentous decision-

    It's said Paul Ryan is going to be Speaker.   Not sure if that's a good or bad thing but I'm leaning bad.   I wanted more Agent orange by default.

    The Republican Wackos, (none / 0) (#124)
    by KeysDan on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 01:19:14 PM EST
    aka Freedom Caucus, should get Paul Ryan.  Don't let him get away.  Just because he smiles on occasion, should not deter them from realizing that he is just what they are looking for. A button-down con man who will do what they want to have done. And, for him, it can only help--the House is in such chaos and disarray, that anything he does can be spun as a success.

    Parent
    Ryan just got an endorcement from (none / 0) (#188)
    by ragebot on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 08:15:39 PM EST
    Harry Reid.

    Pelosi said she would support him as well in exchange for input on what the Congress does.

    Parent

    Indiana man off sex offender list (none / 0) (#109)
    by McBain on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 11:45:52 AM EST
    link

    This is an update of the 19 year old man who was given a harsh sentenced even though the 14 year old girl he had sex with admitted she lied about her age.  The previous judge didn't like that they met on a dating app and sentenced him to 25 years on the sex offender registry.  

    my question . . . (2.00 / 1) (#145)
    by zaitztheunconvicted on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 02:59:28 PM EST
    there was some discussion of this a month or two ago when the story first came up . . .  I guess my question is how and why Donald of Hawaii or any others would have had an objection to making sure that the fellow is more protected in this situation.  At least, I think D of H said that Hawaii had a more liberal law, but said this fellow might be or should be out of luck . . .  but the public reaction as measured on cnn seems fairly clearly in his, the defendant's, favor.

    Parent
    Some sanity prevails... (none / 0) (#123)
    by kdog on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 01:17:59 PM EST
    on the Michigan side of the line at least...still on the registry in Indiana for the time being.

    Parent
    on cnn few minutes ago (none / 0) (#143)
    by zaitztheunconvicted on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 02:55:14 PM EST
    There was discussion of this on cnn a few minutes ago, between 12:50 and 1 p.m. Pacific time.  Two female lead anchors or discussants are happy for him getting some of his life back and hoping that laws are changed in the state and in the rest of the USA . . .
    I think it was Brooke Baldwin and one of the female reporters . . .  The lead anchor was thanking the other for helping to cover the story . . .

    Parent
    Sometimes the media makes things worse... (none / 0) (#158)
    by McBain on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:45:35 PM EST
    Zimmerman and Wilson cases come to mind.  Sometimes the media helps correct an injustice.  

    Parent
    Repack... (none / 0) (#127)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 01:39:05 PM EST
    ...thought you might dig this.

    Riding Is My Ritalin: How One Cyclist Gained Control Over His ADHD

    No so much for the one story, but the research done and the link between cycling and ADHD control.  It's amazing that exercise is rarely an option for these kids, yet works very well, and exercise with concentration, like cycling is the best.

    I searched for this because there was a show on TV about a group in California that is taking ADHD kids out for rides before class and then being taken off medication with great success, but I could not find that article.

    This to me pretty much says it all:

    Maybe that's the biggest reason no one has been loudly touting the benefits of exercise: There is no profit in it. Exercise has no drug reps. In 2007, the pharmaceutical industry invested $58.8 billion in research and development. Bike manufacturers don't sponsor medical studies. There's so little money for exercise research, in fact, that Michael Wendt had to finance his ADHD study. It cost him $15,000.

    There's something else to consider. During the years when Ritalin prescriptions spread through the nation's classrooms, school districts across America were cutting back on physical education programs and coming under increasing pressure to boost standardized test scores. From 1991 to 1995, the very era when ADHD diagnoses were sky-rocketing, the percentage of high school students enrolled in daily PE classes dropped from 42 percent to 25 percent. For money-strapped school districts, cutting PE became an easy way to save money and devote more time and resources to "teaching to the test."
    My friend Marilyn Price (5.00 / 2) (#135)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 02:38:55 PM EST
    ... is overdue for sainthood.  She conceived an organization called Trips for Kids.  From an initial chapter here in Marin County, it has spread across the country.

    The goal is to take kids who would not otherwise have the opportunity, on mountain bike rides, not only for the exercise, but because many of these kids never get to see the countryside.  The effort also supports the "Recyclery," a bike shop where kids learn mechanical skills, while they refurbish donated used bikes for sale.

    Because of her good works, big bike companies love to give Ms. Price bikes.  She sells them or raffles them off, donates the money to the charity, and keeps riding her 25-year old Schwinn.

    Parent

    deBig deGame 3 NLCS tonight... (none / 0) (#140)
    by kdog on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 02:48:43 PM EST
    deGrominator v. Hendricks in the warmer confines of Wrigley Field...and early weather reports indicate the winds will be blowing out tonight.

    Will the winds and warmer weather at their home field awaken Chicago lumber?  Or is there no solvent for the paint on deGrom's brush?

    Will an average starter awaken all Mets bats not wielded by Grandy & Murphy? The last (and only) time we faced a pedestrian starting pitcher in the playoffs, we scored 13 runs.

    All these questions answered and more tonight at 8:07 EST...Lets Go Mets!

    Well, so far: Murphy continues (none / 0) (#194)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 08:40:20 PM EST
    his home run hitting. But 2-2, bottom of the 5th.

    Parent
    Go Mets! (5.00 / 1) (#195)
    by jbindc on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 08:47:00 PM EST


    Parent
    They did! (5.00 / 1) (#200)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 10:12:08 PM EST


    Parent
    Oh, lord (none / 0) (#151)
    by jbindc on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:22:26 PM EST
    SFiddle school delays election results because winners weren't diverse enough

    Really?

    That's pretty funny (none / 0) (#163)
    by McBain on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 03:54:15 PM EST
    Different situation but it reminded me of the underrated Alexander Payne film, "Election" with Reese Witherspoon and Matthew Broderick. I'll have to watch that again.

    Parent
    When my elder sister was a high school junior ... (none / 0) (#172)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 05:02:37 PM EST
    ... in 1970 during the height of the Vietnam War, the student body at her school elected a non-establishmentarian, antiwar free spirit-type as their student council president over a straight-laced All-American boy, much to the consternation of the school's resolutely establishmentarian administration.

    The principal therefore declared that election a "primary" and ordered a do-over, whereupon the student body proceeded to re-elect Mr. Free Spirit. That was enough for the principal, who declared the election null and void and announced that Mr. All-American was hereby the new president of the student council.

    The students rebelled in an uproar, and parents including my mother complained loudly about the "banana republic" example the principal was setting for his young charges. And to his credit, Mr. All-American refused the principal's offer, declaring that his opponent had won fair and square and should be allowed to assume the office.

    The principal responded by disbanding the student council altogether, declaring that its members served merely at the administration's pleasure. That only incensed parents further, and the Pasadena school district was subsequently moved to remove the principal from his post at the end of the school year.

    The new principal called for new student council elections at the beginning of my sister's senior year. By that time, Mr. Free Spirit was understandably no longer interested, and Mr. All-American was elected president. But my sister, who's now 62, has never forgotten that chilling exercise in petty authoritarianism.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    That story is similar in nature (none / 0) (#181)
    by CoralGables on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 07:02:08 PM EST
    to how Scottsdale Community College became "The Fighting Artichokes".

    Parent
    Such resistance to conformity also probably ... (none / 0) (#184)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 07:38:03 PM EST
    ... explains why UC-Irvine's sports teams became known as the Anteaters, and UC-Santa Cruz's teams as the Banana Slugs. Over time, what was initially perceived as a symbol of student defiance has since gradually become a unique and endearing expression of each school's individuality.

    Parent
    FARGO! (none / 0) (#168)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 04:38:03 PM EST
    It was so good last night.  It just gets better and better.  I absolutely love that for whatever reason the 70s are hot in popular entertainment.   There was the epic nod in last weeks American Horror Story and Fargo is set in the 70s this season.  It captures to look and the feel so well it's amazing.

    So naturally  I was was dancing with the dogs when the AWSUM disco version of War of the Worlds with the Richard Burton voice over popped up in the closing credits.

    Breaking news alert (none / 0) (#185)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 08:00:07 PM EST
    Paul Ryan is apparently about to jump?

    Oops (none / 0) (#186)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 08:03:25 PM EST
    I forgot my DVR is on a 30 min delay so I don't have to watch commercials.    What's he's doing is laying out his terms.

    Clearly he really doesn't want the job.  IMO he is making demands that won't be met.  

    I understand one is ALL republicans have to vote for him.  Though I have not yet heard him say that.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#191)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 08:25:42 PM EST
    if all Republicans have to vote for him then like you say he's not going to be the speaker because there are those that have already said they will not vote for him.

    Parent
    That seems to have been (none / 0) (#193)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 08:39:00 PM EST
    Revised.  Not every member but all three of the main groups must support him.  The freedom cactus says 4/5 must support him for that to happen.   Unlikely?  Perhaps.

    More difficult I think may be his demand that the "vacate the chair" rule be done away with.   Can't imagine the full mooners giving that up.

    Parent

    Update: Fox News' resident phony CIA agent ... (none / 0) (#196)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Oct 20, 2015 at 08:54:30 PM EST
    ... and self-styled expert on terrorism -- as well as long island iced teas, whiskey sours and piña coladas, apparently -- has been ordered held without bond by a federal judge, who called him a "significant danger to the community":

    "The suspect, Wayne Simmons, 62, of Annapolis, Maryland, was denied release by U.S. Magistrate Ivan Davis. He cited Simmons' 11 arrests for driving under the influence, an arrest for a 2007 assault and firearms convictions as reasons to keep him behind bars." (Emphasis is mine.)

    How did Roger Ailes ever find this yahoo?

    Natural on Star Wars (none / 0) (#202)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Oct 21, 2015 at 07:52:56 AM EST
    That was pretty funny.  I think I missed some points, J.J. Abrams being the largest, and did a lot of stating the painfully obvious.
    But it was funny.  Fwiw I disagree about Return of the Jedi.
    Mostly because of the stuff I posted last night about the required arc of  the heros journey.
    Anyway this was my favorite part

    Two great movies, one mediocre one, and three of the worst major motion pictures ever made. The odds are against The Force Awakens. Minimum bet is the cost of one movie ticket, and I kinda feel like a sucker already. But I've already bought two.
    ragebot (none / 0) (#203)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Oct 21, 2015 at 10:09:14 AM EST
    You know a video you posted here is what go me into the hobby.  I had no idea there were putting cameras in drones at the time.

    Anyways, when I saw the waterproof quad I thought of you because you had posted what I believe were videos from the everglades and in one there was a water crash.

    kdog, please let us win at least 1 game please (none / 0) (#204)
    by ruffian on Wed Oct 21, 2015 at 12:31:07 PM EST
    Being swept is embarrassing!

    I wondered about this (none / 0) (#205)
    by jbindc on Wed Oct 21, 2015 at 12:59:05 PM EST
    Cops are asking Ancestry.com and the like for their customers' DNA.

    When companies like Ancestry.com and 23andMe first invited people to send in their DNA for genealogy tracing and medical diagnostic tests, privacy advocates warned about the creation of giant genetic databases that might one day be used against participants by law enforcement. DNA, after all, can be a key to solving crimes. It "has serious information about you and your family," genetic privacy advocate Jeremy Gruber told me back in 2010 when such services were just getting popular.

    Now, five years later, when 23andMe and Ancestry both have over a million customers, those warnings are looking prescient. "Your relative's DNA could turn you into a suspect," warns Wired, writing about a case from earlier this year, in which New Orleans filmmaker Michael Usry became a suspect in an unsolved murder case after cops did a familial genetic search using semen collected in 1996. The cops searched an Ancestry.com database and got a familial match to a saliva sample Usry's father had given years earlier. Usry was ultimately determined to be innocent and the Electronic Frontier Foundation called it a "wild goose chase" that demonstrated "the very real threats to privacy and civil liberties posed by law enforcement access to private genetic databases."
    We totally would Ruff... (none / 0) (#206)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 21, 2015 at 01:03:27 PM EST
    but the thing is I got this Alvin Brothers show tomorrow night, so I really need a Mets W tonight so I don't miss a game of this surreal journey we're on.  I wanna have my cake and eat it too;)

    Either way, nothing to be embarrassed about...our pitchers make the best of them look foolish.  It's not you guys, it's the Amazin' Arms of the Miracle Mets.  And Murphy...Daniel Motherf8ckin' Murphy.  

    Was that 3rd strike passed ball go-ahead run classic Miracle Mets or what?  Crazy.

    Though I was scared for our lives immediately after when the Ivy saved a run, maybe two.  That's the kinda flukey play that can pull a 180 on a ballgame or a series.  Thank goodness it wasn't Poison Ivy for the Metropolitans.

    Maybe Joe Madden should ask The Ivy to play LF...Schwarber is a beast at the plate, but what an eyesore in left...my god, I almost felt sorry for him out there.

     

    Monday Open Thread | 207 comments (207 topical)