home

Wednesday Open Thread

Very busy at work today. Here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Tunisia Attack: Message From ISIS? | March Madness Day 1 Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Memoirs... a preview. (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by lentinel on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 05:43:57 PM EST
    WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama said Wednesday that if he could go back and do his presidency over again, he would have immediately shut down the U.S. detention center in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

    "I think I would have closed Guantanamo on the first day," Obama said to applause at an event in Cleveland, Ohio.

    How about now, on the seven hundred and eighty-eighth day?

    Give it a whirl.

    oops... (none / 0) (#28)
    by lentinel on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 05:48:38 PM EST
    Make that two thousand, two hundred and forty-eight days...

    Parent
    It's all about (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by jbindc on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 07:49:36 AM EST
    transparency

    And selling books, of course.

    Parent

    Happy Spring tomorrow, people (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by Zorba on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 05:24:28 PM EST
    Meanwhile, we are projected to get, depending upon which forecaster is correct, somewhere between two to ten inches of snow, starting some time after midnight.
    Great, just great.
    Where's the Spring weather, anyway?

    Hang in there, Mme. Zorba. (none / 0) (#146)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 05:44:38 PM EST
    You'll soon be up to your ankles in mud, before you even realize it!

    ;-D

    Parent

    That's what I'm afraid of (none / 0) (#148)
    by Zorba on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 06:25:42 PM EST
    And I'd be more than happy to send much of our precipitation to those in the drought-stricken areas out on the West Coast.
    ;-)

    Parent
    Actually, Pelosi (5.00 / 2) (#190)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 09:20:13 AM EST
    made the trip with the help of the State Department at the time.

    But, according to Hannity:

    On his show March 10, 2015, Fox News host Sean Hannity said that Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., acted counter to President George W. Bush's strategy of diplomatically isolating Syria's president, Bashar al-Assad, by traveling to Syria in 2007 to open up relations. Pelosi was then the House speaker.

    Yet this barely caused a ripple at the time, Hannity suggested.

    "In 2007, when Nancy Pelosi met with President Assad of Syria against the Bush administration's wishes, nobody got upset," Hannity said. "But now this is the greatest sin of all times, and they're being called traitors in the New York Daily News on their cover."

    Betcha didn't know this:

    Hammill emphasized Wednesday that Pelosi's delegation included then-Rep. David Hobson (R-Ohio), a senior defense appropriator; it was preceded just days earlier by a similar visit to Damascus by GOP Reps. Joe Pitts (Pa.), Robert Aderholt (Ala.) and former GOP Rep. Frank Wolf (Va.). And Rep. Darrell Issa (Calif.) met with Assad just a day after Pelosi did -- a meeting that led Johndroe to comment, "We just don't think this is helpful."

    While Pelosi was the most senior U.S. representative, Hammill also noted that she coordinated the visit with support from the administration.

    "This visit was organized by the Bush State Department, executed by the Bush Defense Department, and officials from the Bush Administration's Embassy at the time in Damascus even sat in the meeting with President Assad," Hammill said. "As Republican Congressman David Hobson said at the time about the delegation's visit to Syria, 'I think we actually helped the administration's position by showing there's not dissension.'

    "The comparison between the Republican Senator letter to Iran and Leader's Pelosi bipartisan delegation to the Middle East in 2007 does not stand up to any level of scrutiny," he charged.

    --This report was updated on March 12 at 9:25 a.m.

    0 for 2 so far, Jim.


    Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud Party Wins (none / 0) (#1)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 11:09:31 AM EST
    The Likud Party, led by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has defied expectations and emerged as the winner in Tuesday's parliamentary elections, the Jerusalem Post reported.

    Isaac Herzog, Israel's opposition leader, contacted Netanyahu on Wednesday to concede, Reuters reported.

    The final results, as reported by Haaretz, showed Likud won 30 seats while the Zionist Union came in second with 24 seats.


    LINK

    What does this mean, full wage war on Palestine, trying to drag the US into something with Iran ?

    Fear is... (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 02:56:15 PM EST
    a helluva drug.

    Netan-yahoo appealed to lowest human common denominator in order to win, he should be ashamed of himself.

    Parent

    Slight correction... (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by vml68 on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 03:01:14 PM EST
    It is Mr."Nut-n-yahoo" to you, sir!

    Parent
    That made me laugh out loud (5.00 / 3) (#11)
    by sj on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 03:02:37 PM EST
    And there were people in the halls outside my office.

    Parent
    Glad to oblige. (none / 0) (#12)
    by vml68 on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 03:12:54 PM EST
    Saw your comment about your "brown" episode. With the police I am assuming? Hope it was not too ugly.

    Parent
    Thanks, and... (5.00 / 6) (#17)
    by sj on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 03:39:08 PM EST
    ... no, not police this time. Unless you count rent-a-cops. I was just followed around the store.

    The weird part is, I'm fair skinned. I was left alone until I helped (in Spanish) an elderly, indisposed, and a little rough around the edges customer. My vocabulary may be limited but my accent is awesome.

    I'm guessing the elderly gentlemen was probably also followed.

    Jerks. They could have just helped him themselves. So not violent. Which is not to say that I didn't feel violated, because I did.

    Thanks for your concern though. I seriously suddenly feel better.

    Parent

    Yes, well, (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Zorba on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 06:18:03 PM EST
    I can at least somewhat relate.  One of my oldest and best friends is a black woman married to a white man.  I used to take her kids out shopping with me on occasion when they were younger, and noticed that we were frequently followed around by what I assumed were store security.
    Not to mention the number of times I used to be pulled aside for extra scrutiny, after 9/11 but before the porno-scanners, at the airports, because, at least I think, I have olive skin (especially in the summer after a bit of a tan), black hair (before it started to turn grey) and very "Mediterranean" looks, if you know what I mean.  I used to be totally confused about this, until one of my friends pointed out, some years ago, that I basically looked Arabic.  Oh, well, pardon me!  Sorry about how I look.

    Parent
    I know, right? (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by sj on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 06:21:13 PM EST
    Oh, well, pardon me!  Sorry about how I look.
    Although in my case it was how I spoke.

    Parent
    I got it for how I dressed (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by nycstray on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 06:29:48 PM EST
    back in the day . . . art school, what did they expect, lol!~

    I still get the sideways look from the cops on occasion, must learn to clean up after gardening and before walking in public . . . they tend to think I'm a local crackhead because I'm skinny :P

    Parent

    ha! (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by sj on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 06:45:16 PM EST
    hmmmm... would I trade "local crackhead" misconception for some skinny? maybe.... lol

    Maybe not, because then it would be latina local crackhead.

    Parent

    Well if you look Arabic (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by MO Blue on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 06:33:36 PM EST
    Funny things tend to happen. As part of a TOTALLY random airport security check, you will be randomly selected 10 out of 10 times.

    Funny how random selection works.

    Parent

    Speaking of looking Arab... (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by vml68 on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 08:36:11 PM EST
    A few years ago when my husband was travelling in Europe, he was waiting for a connecting flight in Frankfurt airport when a couple of police officers walked up to him and asked him to accompany them. He said as soon as he heard the words, "Sir, can you come with us?", all the stories of rendition he had read about flashed through his mind and he had a moment of absolute panic.
    Luckily, he was on a business trip, so he had the complete itinerary of all the meetings he had attended in various countries.

    Recently, we were at a store shopping and I noticed an old white lady watching him. She seemed like she wanted to say something to him but was hesitating. She finally walked up to him and said she needed some help and would he mind if she asked him a question. He said he was happy to help. So, she told him she had a question about some construction work on her roof. I guess she saw brown skin and thought construction worker! I have never seen him so flustered. I wanted to howl with laughter but kept a straight face. He very politely told her he knew nothing about construction. But, she kept insisting that she just wanted a few answers. I felt bad for her. She seemed so bewildered that this brown man was claiming to know nothing about construction.

    I guess if you have brown skin the options are terrorist or laborer!

    Parent

    My daughter and SIL (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by MO Blue on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 09:09:03 PM EST
    Went to Ensenada, Mexico on a mission trip with my daughter's church. One of their projects was to repair a local school in an extremely poor area. My SIL, while a highly educated and successful man, is also a rather short brown man who is very good at fixing things, works very quickly and is very exact in producing high quality work. Quite a few people were not aware that he was part of the mission trip and would come up to him and start speaking rapid Spanish. In response, he would rely with one of the few words of Spanish he knew, Hola. Also quite a few people thought he was one of the Mexican laborors and tried to hire him to work for them.

    Parent
    Well, I've been (none / 0) (#39)
    by Zorba on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 08:05:04 PM EST
    mistaken for Latina and even Native American as well, at times.
    Doesn't bother me in the least.  Although I have been tempted to start speaking in Greek to the yo-yos, especially the ones at the airport, but have refrained, because I just didn't want to end up missing my flight, or on some kind of no-fly list or something.
    But it's been extremely tempting, believe me.   ;-)

    Parent
    I suspect that it's all Greek to them... (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by unitron on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 07:12:07 AM EST
    ...which means they'll think it's some A-rab language and that you're praising Allah just before flipping the detonator switch.

    Parent
    Something similar happened to me a long (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by vml68 on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 08:01:59 PM EST
    time ago. Was shopping at a Macy's and as I was browsing through the racks I noticed a man talking on a walkie-talkie. He seemed to be watching me but every time I glanced in his direction, he would duck behind something. I found it odd but did not give it much thought. Then, as I was leaving the store, he came sprinting behind me but as soon as I walked past the security detectors by the door, he stopped abruptly. That's when it clicked in my head that he thought I was stealing!

    Parent
    Happened to me in a grocery store (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by nycstray on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 08:08:30 PM EST
    where my mom lives (stuffy suburbs) when I was in college. Mom was none too happy when I informed her the guy she noticed following me was security :P I didn't think much of it since it wasn't the first time, Mom on the other hand . . . . something along the lines of "how dare you", lol!~

    Parent
    Gotta love Moms (5.00 / 4) (#41)
    by MO Blue on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 08:22:42 PM EST
    When they go into "how dare you" mode.

    Parent
    You all (none / 0) (#48)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 06:48:35 AM EST
    are making me think that as a blue eyed blonde I could have robbed someplace blind and have gotten away with it. And you're probably right.

    Parent
    And (none / 0) (#8)
    by lentinel on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 02:59:54 PM EST
    he has a lot of yahoos in the US Senate who are deliriously happy.

    Yet another nail in the coffin of world peace.

    Parent

    Insanity stalks the land (none / 0) (#36)
    by MO Blue on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 07:44:20 PM EST
    Thomas Friedman, in a solemn piece following Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's stunning electoral performance Tuesday, asks his readers "Should we be arming ISIS?"

    While top Pentagon officials have indicated that Iranian forces could be helpful in beating back the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, also known as ISIS, Friedman has his doubts about the strategy.

    "Why are we, for the third time since 9/11, fighting a war on behalf of Iran?" Friedman writes in his New York Times column, suggesting that ISIL is the "homegrown Sunni Arab response" to the fall of Saddam Hussein, the Taliban, and any "durable counterbalance to Iran."

    "I simply raise this question rhetorically because no one else is: Why is it in our interest to destroy the last Sunni bulwark to a total Iranian takeover of Iraq? Because the Shiite militias now leading the fight against ISIS will rule better? Really?" Link



    Parent
    Oy, vey (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by Zorba on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 07:57:29 PM EST
    And apparently, Friedman fails to re-read his previous columns, as well, given that, ten years ago, he was advocating arming the Shiites and Kurds of Iraq against the Sunnis.

    In his September 29, 2005, column in The New York Times, Friedman entertained the idea In his September 29, 2005, column in The New York Times, Friedman entertained the idea of supporting the Kurds and Shias in a civil war against the Sunnis:"If they the Sunnis won't come around, we should arm the Shiites and Kurds and leave the Sunnis of Iraq to reap the wind."[39]

    Link.

    Tom, Tom, Tom.  At least be consistent.
    Or maybe that's asking too much of him.

    Parent

    Seems like he consistsntly lusts (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by MO Blue on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 08:28:44 PM EST
    after death and destruction in the M.E. He is merely changing players. Hey, if the US backed ISIS, friedman would get a twofer. ISIS could kill off the Shia and then have another blood bath when they slaughter everyone else.

    Parent
    People who think God (none / 0) (#21)
    by jondee on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 04:30:34 PM EST
    supports their cause are incapable of shame.

    If history teaches us anything, it teaches us that. Over and over again.

    How about no more money from the U.S for unconstitutional religious settlements?

    And then a worldwide demand that Israel pay reparations to the families of the 500 children they killed in Gaza?  

    Parent

    At the moment, (5.00 / 4) (#46)
    by lentinel on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 09:31:21 PM EST
    I can't think of one prominent politician who doesn't think or declare that they are doing God's work.

    God is all over the place.

    ISIS God.
    US God.
    Russian God.

    All Gods.
    All the time.

    Busy busy person, that God.

    Parent

    It seems (none / 0) (#10)
    by lentinel on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 03:02:03 PM EST
    symbiotic to me.

    The US Senate is licking its lips for war in Iran.
    They used Netanyahu as much as he used them.

    Down into the pit we go - arm in arm.

    Parent

    Going to war with Iran (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by jondee on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 04:51:29 PM EST
    would be the definition of insanity and immorality.

    Not that the giant roach motel in Washington attracts many of the lucid and ethical.

    Parent

    What Netanyahu said yesterday (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Politalkix on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 05:23:16 PM EST
    about Arab citizens of Israel casting their votes entered David Duke territory. For those that are not convinced yet, just replace the word Arab with African-American or Jewish and imagine a leader of a western country saying something similar to what Netanyahu did to understand the ugliness of this guy.

    Parent
    How many lawyers... (none / 0) (#2)
    by jbindc on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 02:12:03 PM EST
    does it take to argue same-sex marriage before the Supreme Court?

    Seven, in two-and-a-half hours of argument, if approved by the Court.

    So, by remaining the same sex (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by fishcamp on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 02:46:29 PM EST
    and not getting married, I'm legal?

    Parent
    Yep. :) (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by jbindc on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 02:47:20 PM EST
    No human being is illegal.... (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 02:54:10 PM EST
    Jeralyn taught us that! ;)

    Parent
    But, we can be aliens...:-)! (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by vml68 on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 02:58:49 PM EST
    The DHS gives you an Alien# during the immigration process.

    Parent
    F*ckin' Earthlings, what can you do...n/t (5.00 / 3) (#14)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 03:19:11 PM EST
    Going out on a limb here (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Peter G on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 05:44:21 PM EST
    I am predicting that the Court denies this motion and that it will instead require the challengers to pick not more than two lawyers (plus one US govt lawyer as "amicus curiae" in support) to argue the two issues presented by the four cases. The four states whose laws are under challenge have picked two lawyers to argue (from Tennessee and Michigan, IIRC). To recap, the two issues are: (a) Does the Constitution bar a state from licensing only opposite-sex marriages? (b) Does the Constitution at least require every state to recognize the validity of same-sex marriages lawfully performed in other states?

    Parent
    Bad Parenting File... (none / 0) (#13)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 03:13:26 PM EST
    I know she probably meant well, but the first rule of parenting (sh*t, first rule of existing) is never ever ever call the police unless you've exhausted every other option, and even then think twice....three times even.  

    Link of Woe

    not for anything (none / 0) (#16)
    by nyjets on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 03:31:50 PM EST
    It was the action of only ONE police officer that did this. The rest were actually pretty cool about the situation.
    And you are wrong. There are A LOT of situations that require a call to the police. The majority of them are good.
    There are I agree some bad ones. And the police do a lousy job of self regulating or allowing others to regulate themselves.


    Parent
    Did I just (none / 0) (#20)
    by sj on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 04:13:42 PM EST
    agree with everything you said? Yes, I think so.

    Parent
    I'd say... (none / 0) (#53)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 08:22:26 AM EST
    select few situations over A LOT, and this was not one of those select few situations.  

    Lesson learned for the poor mother...the hard way.

    Parent

    no (4.00 / 1) (#75)
    by nyjets on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 10:21:31 AM EST
    There are a lot of situations where police are required.
    This situations was the decisions of the parent. And she did nothing wrong. It was the one cop who did something wrong.

    Parent
    I hope they nail (none / 0) (#54)
    by jbindc on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 08:32:52 AM EST
    This officer.  What a jerk!

    I don't see anything wrong with what the Mom did, and in fact, this seems to be a better teaching method than yelling and screaming at the kid or smacking him around. Maybe she shouldn't have called 911, and instead taken her son to the police station and had someone talk to him there.

    I hope she gets tons of money and a formal apology. And some family therapy.

    Parent

    Actually, I have friends (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by Zorba on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 11:09:30 AM EST
    Who basically did your second suggestion with their son, who was giving them all kinds of sh!t and constantly threatening to beat up his siblings as well as kids at school, and had gotten into a couple of fights at school, resulting in a couple of suspensions.  They tried everything to show him the errors of his ways (no physical punishment or anything), including psychological counseling (which he still goes to).
    Mom finally called the local police station (this was a small town, not the big city), told them the problems they were having, and the officer suggested that they bring all their kids to go and get a tour of the police station, including a look at the holding cells, and an officer gave a talk to the kids.  Afterwards, he pulled the miscreant child aside and gave him a separate talk about what might happen to him if he didn't see the error of his ways.  No threats, apparently the officer was quite calm and nice, but he told the kid the possible penalties for assault and battery, and also explained about the juvenile detention centers, and that they also were not the nicest of places.
    According to my friends, this really made an impression on their son and, although he's not any kind of "angel," his behavior improved a whole lot.
    This type of thing is perhaps what you were suggesting.  A much better way of handling it, and the police went out of their way to try and help.

    Parent
    Oh no.... (none / 0) (#55)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 08:44:35 AM EST
    there was something very wrong about what the mother did, though her intentions were good.  

    Maybe in a better world with better police it would be ok, but as a black woman in NYC especially, she shoulda damn well knew better.

    Parent

    Maybe True... (5.00 / 3) (#57)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 09:00:23 AM EST
    ...but you are still blaming the victim for what is clearly a police problem.

    The problem as demonstrated in this story is that the police are incapable of finding fault within.  It's a damn shame that 3 cops couldn't convince one of their own to be a descent human being.

    Unless the police clean up the police and realize that these idiots are the ones giving therm a bad name, they will never have the respect that most of them deserve.  

    IOW, it's their own GD fault no one trusts them, they are not trustworthy when they let what happened above, happen again and again.

    Parent

    I'm not sure how (none / 0) (#59)
    by jbindc on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 09:09:50 AM EST
    I'm "blaming the victim".  Obviously, this mother didn't feel the police couldn't be trusted (her feelings may have changed), otherwise she wouldn't have donr this in the first place  but face if every single police officer could become model citizens, do everything by the book - for a hundred years, guess what?  There will still be people who don't like them or trust them - like criminals, for example.

    But it sounds like these three police officers were trying to build a relationship and teach this kid something so he doesn't get into real trouble in the future, and show him that all police aren't bad. And if everyone isn't willing to come to the table, then there's really no hope, so we should just give up now and shut up.

    Parent

    Can we agree... (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 09:15:55 AM EST
    that the burden to repair the fractured relationships between police and community falls primarily on the police?  The burden to restore trust?

    err...police and lawmakers.  The drug war & general "tough on crime" crap created much of this sad state of relations.  

    Parent

    JB (none / 0) (#68)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 09:45:21 AM EST
    That was in response to kdog.

    Parent
    I disagree (none / 0) (#56)
    by jbindc on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 08:53:46 AM EST
    1. Teaching her son that it is wrong to steal and that actions have consequences; and

    2. Building trust and relationships, one brick at a time, by putting people face to face.  Things aren't going to change if no one wants to communicate, or only if "one side" is expected to change but the "other side" isn't.


    Parent
    Ya don't need the cops... (5.00 / 3) (#58)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 09:05:03 AM EST
    to teach that stealing is wrong...parents, relatives, teachers, preachers, neighbors can do that...and they're all typically unarmed, with no arrest powers.

    Building trust and relationships sounds marvelous...this is not the way to go about it.  The power dynamic is too skewed one way. The venue for that is inviting the police to a community board meeting or something similar, not dropping a dime on your own damn kid.

    Parent

    Well, the abusive cop certainly (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by oculus on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 09:41:49 AM EST
    delivered that message. Why didn't his colleagues shut him up?  What was his rationale for arresting her?

    Parent
    You know police... (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 09:53:05 AM EST
    they are not really interested in policing themselves and their own ranks.  

    Parent
    You Don't Need the Police... (5.00 / 3) (#71)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 09:56:24 AM EST
    ...to do many things, but in reality the police should be someone kids can trust so that when they say don't steal, or don't do drugs, it carries a little more weight than the people telling them don't do this or that, all day long.

    My Sunday school teacher once took us to the PD, where we were finger printed and toured the police station, they even showed us the machine to tell if you were lying.  It was awesome, we were probably 3-5th graders, they also gave us the low down on drugs and other crimes.  Not in your face, but basically you don't want to end up there, pointing to a cell.

    It was complete non-sense looking back, but at the time it was cool and IMO a good way to show what happens to people who don't obey the law.  It was the Mayberry version of the police, but to me it was reality and I still think it was a good learning experience and I am sure I wasn't the only one.

    Granted this is small town USA where the jails are normally empty with the occasional drunk on the weekends.

    You are assuming this woman has some sort of extended family and/or a network of trustworthy and descent people readily available to her.  Many do not, if anything they have the opposite.

    Parent

    You're talking about... (none / 0) (#73)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 10:18:07 AM EST
    a different society that we have not created my man.

    I would agree...but that is not the world we live in.

    I'm not saying it's easy to be a single parent with no support system raising a potential rapscallion, only that this is not the avenue to ask for help.  The cops are not your friends, your social worker, or role models.  I wish this was not the case, but you know it is.  

    You're talking pie in the sky Utopian society.

    Parent

    THat is not sure (none / 0) (#77)
    by nyjets on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 10:22:59 AM EST
    Some cops are not your friend.
    But a lot are.
    (you are correct in one point, the cops are not interested in being policed themselves, hence they cut there own throats. The few bad cops make it worse for the rest)

    Parent
    I would agree with kdog. (none / 0) (#81)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 10:42:00 AM EST
    I have friends who are cops, but I have never had a positive experience with a cop who was on the job.

    While they may spend some small % of their time doing community outreach, or whatever, the overwhelming majority of their time is spent enforcing the law.

    And if you are in contact with them, for the most part, it's because they are enforcing the law(s) that you are not abiding by.

    Parent

    I once had a cop (none / 0) (#92)
    by CST on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 11:25:35 AM EST
    try to rent me an apartment.

    Our apartment had been robbed, so we called the cops - just so we could have a police report on file for renter's insurance, and he tried to become our new landlord.

    I've had a number of positive experiences with cops on the job, but I also recognize that there is a certain amount of white female privilege when it comes to dealing with the cops.

    Parent

    come and (futily) dust my business for prints one time after I was robbed, so I guess I shouldn't say I've never had a positive experience with a cop on the job.

    Parent
    Did the officer... (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 12:26:09 PM EST
    Ha! It was interesting, though, (none / 0) (#109)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 12:38:02 PM EST
    to see just how ridiculous expecting to find useable finger prints really is.

    Parent
    Serious question... (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 12:43:49 PM EST
    did you report the robbery solely for insurance purposes?  

    Seems like that is normally the case, and nobody expects the cops to actually do anything except provide the requisite report for insurance purposes.

    Parent

    The alarm co called the po po. (none / 0) (#112)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 12:47:28 PM EST
    The police report was useful for the insurance co.

    Parent
    Gotcha... (none / 0) (#115)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 01:00:57 PM EST
    that's always fun here at my job when somebody sets off a false alarm and doesn't know the code...there is always that 2 seconds of panic when you see a uniform walking towards the door.

    Parent
    Two Instances... (none / 0) (#114)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 01:00:47 PM EST
    ...but same GF.

    One time she came home to see an open window and called me, I lived right around the corner and told her to call the cops.  Like 3 hours later, they show up.  They took fingerprints, but never took ours.  To this day I am not sure if it was for show or if ours, and anyone else in her condo had their fingerprints loaded into their system.

    They stole her luggage, so now every time I see someone walking down the street with luggage, I always think, 'did they just rob someone ?'

    The other incident, we were eating in a popular part of town, came out and 6 vehicles had their windows broken w/i 50 feet of each other.  Called the cops, too busy to come down, told to call on Monday.  She called on Monday, they took her statement, then told her she could pick up the report the next.  They charged her, I want to say, $12.

    Assuming everyone else went through the same non-sense, the cops made $72 for an crime they never responded to.  Don't get me wrong, I would have them fighting real crime, but they didn't have to charge her for a report.

    Parent

    FYI Fellas... (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 01:12:22 PM EST
    ...if your GF gets robbed and the cops don't show up, guess who gets tot clear the place to make sure the criminal(s) aren't still inside ?   Not fun playing hid-n-seek for robbers.

    Parent
    hah! (5.00 / 2) (#127)
    by CST on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 01:34:06 PM EST
    In our case my sister and I (we were living together) just came home with a group of friends, rather intoxicated on a Friday night, and spent the first 15 minutes after we got home arguing about who had left the back door wide open.

    Then she got mad at me for moving her laptop.

    Then I got mad at her for moving my laptop.

    Then about 20 min later we realized our laptops were in fact missing.

    Then about 15 minutes later we noticed the back window was smashed.

    Then we figured out who had left the back door open and stopped arguing.

    By the time we figured it out we kind of assumed that they hadn't stuck around to listen to us bicker for an hour and were probably gone by then.

    Parent

    Ha!... (none / 0) (#123)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 01:15:15 PM EST
    That's happened to me once...but I was back in NY when my then GF in Tallahassee called that the door was busted in.  I told her to go across the street and have my buddy take a look inside.  

    But that was just an aborted robbery attempt...no intruders, nothing missing.

    Parent

    Kdog, there are police, (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by Zorba on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 04:25:09 PM EST
    and then there are police.
    There are a few of our neighbors who are either County Sheriff's Deputies or State Police.  They are all regular people, whose kids went to school with my kids and who we ran into during PTA meetings and Little League baseball games and such.
    I do admit that I never had to deal with them in their professional capacities, though.
    I did have one of my neighbors, a State Policeman, once tell me (remember, I live way, way up in the boonies, and the police response time is, understandably, very slow) that, if I ever had to shoot someone dangerous outside of our house, drag him inside the house before I called 911.  I said to him, but don't they do forensics and stuff and would be able to tell that he was shot outside?  He answered, "This isn't like some big city TV show.  They don't do that."
    Oh, well, that's comforting.  Sort of.  I guess.

    Parent
    To be sure Z... (none / 0) (#145)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 05:41:52 PM EST
    I've got friends who are cops too, good stand-up guys...doesn't change the fact what they do for a living is pretty f#cked up.

    And that goes for many a profession besides law enforcement...Lord knows I do sh#t I'd call grimey at my job to keep my job (every salesman is a thief).

    Everybody got a lil Eichmann in them, cogs in the machine making their deal with the devil..paying taxes alone qualifies.

    Parent

    what is wrong with what the do for a living (none / 0) (#149)
    by nyjets on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 06:53:51 PM EST
    Police are necessary. As long as there is humanity, there will always be crime. Without police you would have anarchy and chaos.
    I am not saying that they are perfect, but there is nothing Eichmann about them,


    Parent
    I've shared my robbery... (none / 0) (#119)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 01:04:41 PM EST
    story before...I did not report when my house got broken into, I just sent out a civilian a.p.b. around the neighborhood to be on the look out for somebody trying to sell my Playstation.  

    Parent
    fwiw (none / 0) (#120)
    by CST on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 01:05:58 PM EST
    with our renters insurance we were able to cover the cost of two new laptops.

    Parent
    Cool... (none / 0) (#122)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 01:12:24 PM EST
    as for me, insurers are only a few rungs below cops on my sh*t list.  I'll pay any price for the privilege of not having to deal with them;)

    Parent
    we got it through (none / 0) (#125)
    by CST on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 01:26:26 PM EST
    either AAA or our car insurance, I don't remember anymore.  But I do remember that it didn't cost us anything extra to sign up for it - which I thought was weird.

    As far as big corporations go - I got nothing bad to say about AAA, they've helped me out of more than one jam and is definitely worth every penny.  And my car insurer is a local company, which my landlord works for, and when he started doing my insurance my rate went down about 70% from the progressive/geico quotes.  My rent has never been raised since I started living there - which means it's insanely cheap for Boston right now since rents have been shooting up over that period - and while he doesn't fix $hit, we don't really break $hit, and the place is in decent shape.

    So I'm actually cool with those insurers.

    Parent

    Insurance co's... (none / 0) (#129)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 01:54:14 PM EST
    are great...till you file a claim or have an accident.

    The time I got sued over a fender-bender for (cue Dr. Evil voice) 1 million dollars, the insurance co was great at first...they fought that gold-digger all the way to trial, which is almost unheard of.  Jury found me 100% not at fault for the fender-bender, and the plaintiff got a big fat Zero.  

    Not long after my total vindication, the insurer dropped me like yesterday's trash.  Yes I'm still bitter;)

    Since then I've had one or two fender-benders and have been able to work it out with the other party and leave the insurance people out of it, so nobody's rates get jacked up or got dropped.

    Point taken though, they are certainly not all as evil as my mind makes them out to be.  And insurers are also below financiers and bankers on my sh*t list, so they got that goin' for 'em;)

    Parent

    I filed a police report once when my car (none / 0) (#135)
    by vml68 on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 03:08:07 PM EST
    was stolen. A few days later, the police found my car and had it towed to the impound lot. I did not have to pay for the report but I had to pay about $200 to get my car back from them!

    I will say though that for the most part my interactions with the police have been pleasant. They have been professional and courteous. Even, in the one instance when I was yelling at a cop while he was in the process of arresting an ex-boyfriend, the cop remained calm, told me to stay calm and asked me to follow him to the station and bail out my boyfriend.

    In my reckless, careless, foolish younger days, I was pulled over on a regular basis (close to 20 times,not something I am proud of now) for speeding and a time or two for expired tags/DL. I was always let off with a warning, no ticket.
    Then, one time I was going about 120mph in a 70mph zone (It was about 2 in the morning, no other cars around) in SC and got pulled over. The cop asked me if I was aware of how fast I was going and I of course pretended I did not. He just gave me this look and said if he wrote down my actual speed, he would have to arrest me and take me to jail. I don't think I have ever been so scared in my life as I was at that moment. He then told me if I promised never to speed again, he would write me a ticket saying I was going 80 on a 70mph zone. I made the promise and have stuck to it ever since.

    The one other time I was scared of a cop was when he pulled me over and then asked me to get in the front seat of his car (again late night, no other cars around). He then proceeded to flirt with me while he ran my DL info!
    I can't claim to be white but I think just being female really helped.

    Parent

    I have gotten a warning only one time in my entire life, and that was just a couple years ago.

    I was so attuned to cop cars in my younger days that one time in college I slowed down on the highway in NJ and my buddy asked why, and I had no good reason, just a feeling.

    Sure enough, a couple minutes later, a car from the traffic behind me drove past us and it was a cop in an unmarked car and he gave me the serious stink eye as he passed by.

    Parent

    I'm about 1/3 (none / 0) (#138)
    by CST on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 03:47:13 PM EST
    In terms of tickets/being pulled over ratio.  And I'm slightly embarrassed to say I probably should have way more tickets because I do speed.  (As a group, and I include myself in this - traffic engineers are the worst people in the world I've ever seen at following traffic laws)

    I don't even get tickets from lady cops.

    Female privilege with police is a real thing.  I tried to explain to my male friend who complained about not being able to flirt his way out of a ticket - that it is far more effective to play the wide-eyed innocent "I didn't realize how fast I was driving officer" act than to flirt your way out which could cause all sorts of problems.

    Parent

    Yes, I have come to realise just how (none / 0) (#147)
    by vml68 on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 06:19:10 PM EST
    lucky I have been, specially being a foreigner and brown skinned.
    When I read about police abuse cases that started out over something trivial, the phrase" there but for the grace of God, go I" comes to mind.

    Parent
    in our case (none / 0) (#116)
    by CST on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 01:01:16 PM EST
    we had some hopes of finding prints - basically whoever broke in, they think that we surprised them - because they left the back door wide open and didn't take anything beyond our laptops.  But they left what looked like prints on our Playstation as if they thought about taking it and didn't - presumably because we came home.

    They still couldn't get usable prints.

    It was kind of funny, it happened on a Friday night after we'd been out at the bars.  We walked down to the station Saturday morning to report it and they told us we had to go home and call 911.

    Parent

    Yes - the trust gets built by the experience (none / 0) (#65)
    by ruffian on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 09:38:13 AM EST
    of positive mundane interactions, not in a high stress situation like that, even if it had not had such awful consequences.

    Parent
    Calling the cops (none / 0) (#103)
    by Chuck0 on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 12:18:51 PM EST
    is almost always the worst decision. Want to make nonviolent situation violent? Get a cop involved. Want to turn a minor squabble into a felony? Get a cop involved. Want your to see your pet dead? Get a cop involved.

    Cowards and bullies, the lot of them.


    Parent

    as with most things on the internet (none / 0) (#61)
    by CST on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 09:20:21 AM EST
    Don't read the comments.

    Parent
    Is Halliburton... (none / 0) (#15)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 03:23:23 PM EST
    withholding kickback residuals to Dick Cheney or something?  

    Dude must be short on cash, he's out robbing banks now.

    Couldn't have been Cheney... (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by unitron on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 07:19:24 AM EST
    ...no one got shotgunned.

    Parent
    The high cost of non-Housing. (none / 0) (#18)
    by KeysDan on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 03:59:12 PM EST
    The Secret Service has requested $8 million to construct a Potemkin White House for training its agents.  A Hollywood back-lot type structure is needed to get a feel for the real White House.  

    I'm not sure (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by sj on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 04:12:37 PM EST
    that a new playground will help them correct the types of mistakes that they have made recently. Those incursions aren't that much more sophisticated than what could have been done anytime over the last 50 years.

    Parent
    That is One Thing... (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 04:50:04 PM EST
    ...that is really getting under my skin, when the people in the government screw up, the problem is never them, it's they didn't have enough money.

    IOW, failure = more money.

    9/11 being the prime example.

    Parent

    While for citizens.... (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by kdog on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 07:16:13 PM EST
    the opposite holds true...it's never because you don't have enough money, it's because you're a screw up.

    See the bleed the poor problem in municipal court.

    Parent

    in all fairness (none / 0) (#45)
    by nyjets on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 09:14:02 PM EST
    In some cases mistakes in governments are in some cases because of lack of money.
    I mean look at social services. You cant tell me that they are overfunded.


    Parent
    Really, they don't need a (5.00 / 3) (#117)
    by fishcamp on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 01:01:16 PM EST
    White House.  Didn't those guys climb over the fence.  Give them a fence to practice with.  

    Parent
    Exactly - if they have reached the house (5.00 / 3) (#133)
    by ruffian on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 03:00:43 PM EST
    they have gotten way too far. Recreating the grounds should be enough for starters

    Parent
    By Washington standards (none / 0) (#22)
    by jondee on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 04:43:54 PM EST
    8 million seems like relative chickenfeed..

    Single individuals make that on the speaker circuit giving cliché-ridden, investor-massaging "speeches" that would make Cicero kill himself all over again..

    Parent

    fishcamp (none / 0) (#33)
    by CoralGables on Wed Mar 18, 2015 at 06:38:18 PM EST
    I will most definitely be checking out what exists of the path in the Lower Keys from MM-50 to MM-0 in May. I haven't the mental instability to check it out from MM-100 to MM-0. Only halfway unstable.

    sounds good CG. (none / 0) (#131)
    by fishcamp on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 02:21:45 PM EST
    MM 50 is the beginning of the 7 mile bridge, so be ready for that crossing.  You'll see lots of fish just looking down.  There's a great boat launch and parking lot at the southern end of the bridge, which is actually the western end.  No facilities, but there are places just down the highway.  Watch out for the Key Deer.  They have a new giant fence so they can't get out on the highway anymore.  But if you turn at the stop light in Big Pine Key and pedal around some neighborhoods you will see them eating peoples yards.  They love white bread, and wait at pull off places for drivers to feed them.

    Parent
    I'd pedal it if it was an option (none / 0) (#155)
    by CoralGables on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 10:19:16 PM EST
    but I'm running it.

    Parent
    50 miles in S. FL in May? (none / 0) (#156)
    by oculus on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 11:29:54 PM EST
    Jesus would be so proud (none / 0) (#47)
    by MO Blue on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 06:18:46 AM EST
    KCBS reported that the "no trespassing" signs outside the primary church for Archdiocese of San Francisco, Saint Mary's Cathedral, did not mention what would happen to the homeless who tried to sleep under the cover of the building's doorway.

    At random times throughout the night, "[w]ater pours from a hole in the ceiling, about 30 feet above, drenching the alcove and anyone in it," the station noted. "The shower ran for about 75 seconds, every 30 to 60 minutes while we were there, starting before sunset, simultaneously in all four doorways. KCBS witnessed it soak homeless people, and their belongings."
    ...
    A neighbor pointed out to KCBS that the watering system was not only an "inhuman" way to treat people, it also was a waste of water during a serious drought.

    Cathedral staff confirmed that the system had been in place for about a year, and that it was intended to discourage homeless people from seeking shelter in the church's doorway. link

    TV station KCBS reports that Saint Mary's Cathedral installed the sprinklers specifically to keep the homeless out of its covered doorways, a popular destination because of their relative shelter and safety. The archdiocese issued a statement after the report saying the sprinklers were being removed immediately. The reason? As KCBS also notes, the system was installed without the proper city permits.

    The archdiocese explains that it put the sprinklers in place as a "safety, security and cleanliness measure," because the homeless were leaving trash, needles, and other nasty items in places where churchgoers walked. "The idea was not to remove those persons, but to encourage them to relocate to other areas" of the cathedral, says the statement. "We are sorry that our intentions have been misunderstood and recognized the method used was ill-conceived." link



    Not to Point Out the Obvious... (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 09:34:56 AM EST
    ...but that sounds like free showers to people without access to any.

    I used to let homeless people come into a moistly unused hallway of the Pfister hotel in Milwaukee when it was below zero.

    I worked 3rd shift and no one made a fuss so long as they were out by the time first shift arrived.

    For a church to deny people shelter is unforgivable IMO.


    Parent

    Temperatures drop down into (5.00 / 4) (#113)
    by MO Blue on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 12:47:46 PM EST
    The low 40s in San Francisco. These showers drenched all their belongings so the people did not even have dry clothes to wear after being soaked. As stated, the church not only treated people inhumanely but wasted a great deal of water during a time the area was experiencing a serious draughts and people were asked to conserve water. The church provided no drainage to the where the sprinklers were installed so rather than cleaning the impacted areas they created pools of standing water.

    Parent
    Not a surprising move (5.00 / 2) (#130)
    by KeysDan on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 02:14:08 PM EST
    for Salvatore Cordileone, Archbishop of San Francisco.   Cordileone got off to an inauspicious beginning with his new appointment having been arrested, and caused to stay over-night in a San Diego Jail on a DUI almost delaying his investiture.  Having recovered from that mishap, he has been on a roar since.

    There were no cautionary signs regarding the sprinklers. They are now being dismantled thanks to the City Department that found code violations, and the Archdiocese is now getting permits to do the job. The apology may still be a "sincerely held belief" despite the city's intervention and the bad press. At least, the excuse was not given that the sprinkling was actually holy water, a Lenten ritual, or the makings for water being turned into wine.

    With this misunderstanding now resolved, Cordileone can continue to tackle his controversial proposal to make all of the Archdiocesan school teachers "ministers," so that he can control their private lives.

       

    Parent

    I Understand What They Were Meant to do... (none / 0) (#132)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 02:43:26 PM EST
    ...what I saw saying is like a fountain here in Houston, which wasn't meant as a homeless bathing spot, is being for a purpose other that it's intended one.

    Obviously, something they might not want to do when it's cold out, or bring everything they own under the water, but surely there are moments when being clean, even for someone w/o a home would be welcomed, even if it's meant to keep them out.

    Parent

    It's a rare day in SF (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by nycstray on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 03:04:54 PM EST
    that it is actually warm enough to get soaked and then just wander around without catching a chill.

    Parent
    Well, enjoy it. You need the water. (none / 0) (#142)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 04:28:10 PM EST
    Last night's forecasts for Oahu called for some serious rain today, which is supposed to continue through the weekend. It was a beautiful early morning, with nary a cloud in the sky, but in the last two hours it's really gotten dark, which is the usual prelude for an expected deluge. I'm just glad it held off until after St. Patrick's Day.

    Parent
    "Mistakes were made." (none / 0) (#64)
    by oculus on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 09:38:13 AM EST
    baptism (none / 0) (#118)
    by The Addams Family on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 01:03:35 PM EST
    it's a sacrament

    Parent
    Israel elects a pro-American PM (none / 0) (#52)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 07:55:14 AM EST

    Obama is unhappy.  WTF?

    ... and a clueless tool who regularly conflates xenophobia and bigotry with patriotism stops by TL to gloat about it.

    Parent
    ... is trying to walk back his Apartheid era-worthy comments about Palestinians and Israeli Arabs, which he offered as red meat to hardline conservative voters three days ago.

    That's much too little and way too late, in my opinion. Benjamin Netanyahu effectively mortgaged whatever credibility he still retained on the world stage, just to win a domestic election. What he said in his capacity as Israeli PM should neither be excused nor tolerated.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    You may (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by lentinel on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 09:22:41 PM EST
    not be aware Abdul, but Netanyahu came here to sabotage the strenuous efforts of the American administration to reach an agreement with Iran.

    Did you expect that that would make Obama happy?

    It didn't make me happy.

    Parent

    Hopefully Presidents won't act like (1.33 / 3) (#164)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 06:27:23 AM EST
    spoiled children when they don't get their way.

    Oppps.... He did.

    Parent

    But the rest of the Western world (5.00 / 2) (#171)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 07:30:57 AM EST
    Agrees with our Presidents actions. The EU is debating sanctions against Israel that now will surely go farther than just debate.  Once again, some American BuBu can't grasp that it isn't all about Murika.

    Parent
    MT, all of the intelligence agencies (none / 0) (#174)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 08:50:15 AM EST
    agreed with our President that Iraq had WMD's.

    Parent
    Complete and Utter Lie (5.00 / 5) (#178)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 08:54:54 AM EST
    My, my (2.00 / 1) (#182)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 09:01:18 AM EST
    I suppose you will also tell us Congress didn't approve and Hillary didn't say he had them.

    Scott, you can't carry truth in a bucket.

    Parent

    Jim (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 09:06:19 AM EST
    I seem to recall the Bush Administration calling France and other European countries childish names because they wouldn't go along. And who gave them the information? Could it have been Bush gave them the same lies that he gave everybody else?

    You know, Bush withheld information that Saddaam had no ties to Al Queda and no nuclear weapon plans from his own party on the intelligence committee. Not only did Bush lie to you and every other American about it, he lied to Europe, he lied to his own party. And until you guys can quit making excuses and take responsbility for what Bush did the GOP is going to continue to circle the drain.

    Parent

    Yeah... (5.00 / 1) (#187)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 09:09:27 AM EST
    ...as a Fox News disciple, you wouldn't know the truth from a "Romney Wins !!" mem.

    Parent
    Must we Jim? (5.00 / 2) (#199)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 09:55:59 AM EST
    Must we all watch the youtube speech of her AUMF vote again? We have the internet now.  Rewriting history is so much tougher.

    Parent
    Your britches are on fire (5.00 / 2) (#196)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 09:45:16 AM EST
    Funny how the coalition going into Iraq became a laughing stock.  It was Murika with her booty poodles of the UK and Australia...even Canada argued.

    Everyone showed for "Obama's War"...everyone!

    Jus sayin

    And I would like to apologize to the poodles of the world for my inappropriate wording :)

    Parent

    Funny, Calling Anyone... (none / 0) (#175)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 08:51:27 AM EST
    ...a spoiled child, republicans in Congress are the ones who have voted 56 times to abolish a law that has zero chance of getting abolished.  Zero.

    They went behind the Presidents back in an effort to disrupt peace talks, they decided to host a world leader whose sole purpose is too disrupt peace talks with Iran.

    Jim, you know, talks to get the Iranians from getting nuclear weapons.  Now I understand the record the republicans have with giving arms to Iran, but it would be nice if they would start acting like adults, and let the people trying to keep Iran from getting nuclear weapons, do their jobs.  

    This delusional belief that we are going to keep Iran from getting nuclear weapons by force is not doing anyone any good.  It's a child like view of reality, the idiots couldn't even win a war with a country a third the size.

    The only children are the ones who want a war that we can't possibly win.  Children don't learn the lessons of the past, and Iraq was a colossal failure, left too many Americans dead, and cost us more than we can't afford.  And most importantly, republicans started an unprovoked war that they lost.  And if that isn't enough they, and you, can do nothing but blame others for their failures.

    Those are the acts of children.

    Parent

    Scott, the only way to keep Iran from getting (2.00 / 1) (#180)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 08:59:32 AM EST
    nukes is to destroy their equipment. But we don't have to agree to let them get the weapons they will use on us.

    And COngress didn't go behind Obama's back. As 1/3 of our government and responsible for oversight they when right over his head.

    HINT: He isn't king, although he thinks he is.

    And we can't win a war with Iran?? Really?? And Iraq was won until Obama gave it away.

    Parent

    Exactly... (5.00 / 1) (#188)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 09:12:27 AM EST
    ...it's democrats fault that republican could win the war they started.  Everything The R's fail at doing isn't their fault.  

    Never mind all the BS about it being a cakewalk, Bush on a flight deck, and that we were liberators.

    Parent

    Republicans (none / 0) (#181)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 09:00:25 AM EST
    are a bunch of spoiled children. Never seen anything like it in my life. Yes, they never take responsiblity for their actions but sure like to hand out sanctimonious lectures to everybody else about "personal responsiblity".

    Parent
    Yeah, imagine not liking (none / 0) (#62)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 09:21:51 AM EST
    somebody who is anti-Obama.  Who does the Kenyan Ursurper think he is, someone in charge of ME foreign policy?

    Parent
    Yes, according to the Republican (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by KeysDan on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 09:47:04 AM EST
    protocol, Tommy Cotton and John Boehner should extend congratulations to Bibi on his win, not the President or Secretary of State.

    Parent
    Pro-American... (none / 0) (#67)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 09:43:36 AM EST
    ...guess that depend on your definition.  If slighting the President of American is pro-American, then sure, you are spot on.

    I would say he is pro-Republican, but I think any war monger who is given access to the military secrets we give Israel, would have to be pro-Republican.  No Democrat would arm a country in the ME with nukes and give them aircraft that no one else in the world has access to.

    Parent

    Your last sentence doesn't ring true. (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by oculus on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 10:02:25 AM EST
    Surely Dem. Presidents and members of Congress have a history of providing military aid to Israel.

    Parent
    Well said... (none / 0) (#78)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 10:27:46 AM EST
    only Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama come to mind as Brand D presidents who tried to be at least be somewhat even-handed when it comes to the Mess-o-potamia....but even they favored Israel over all others.

    American foreign policy isn't almost universally reviled in the Arab world for nuthin'...ya can't pin this all on Brand R.

    Parent

    What would be a good reason (none / 0) (#79)
    by Reconstructionist on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 10:39:08 AM EST
     for being "even handed" in our dealings with Israel and its enemies?

      Strategically/politically or morally what argument exists that we should not assist Israel in ensuring its security, which necessarily conflicts with aspirations of its enemies?

      One can oppose certain specific actions by Israel but, on balance, can you make any case that is not more worthy of our support?

    Parent

    Peace... (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 10:50:37 AM EST
    is a good reason to negotiate even-handedly, and in good faith.

    Unless you know of a way that we can arm Israel without making Palestinians and other Arabs insecure.

    Parent

    What leads you to (none / 0) (#84)
    by Reconstructionist on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 10:57:57 AM EST
    believe Israel's enemies desire peaceful coexistence? What word or deed from any regional actor other than Jordan and the Egyptian military (and even those can be reasonably viewed as rational acceptance more than principled agreement Israel has a right to exist and be secure) supports the notion that "negotiation" would be the course chosen were Israel not so strong militarily?

    Parent
    Some of them do (none / 0) (#85)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 11:03:27 AM EST
    Do you really think no Palestinians..no Arabs LIVE, work, grow up, marry, and celebrate happily within the state borders of Israel?

    This is why Bibi seems so deranged to 75% of Israel.  Let's remember once again that Netanyahu's block only makes up 25% of Israeli parliament.

    Parent

    "Regional actors" (none / 0) (#89)
    by Reconstructionist on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 11:14:04 AM EST
     does not connote individuals living private lives.

      It's beyond absurd to suggest that because Lkud received 25% of the votes that all other voters consider Netanyahu "deranged." First, unlike you, a great many people can think  a different leader or party is preferable absent the belief of "derangement." Second, obviously, many of those 75% voted with the expectation the party they supported will join with Likud in the governing coalition.

      I  find ironic that elsewhere in this very thread you bemoan the irrationality and "lack of critical  reasoning" skills of others. Take this as you will, but I'd suggest you are not well suited, temperamentally or intellectually to accuse others of such failings.
     

    Parent

    No, those voting for (none / 0) (#97)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 11:49:41 AM EST
    Zionist Union knew they were leaving the Netanyahu block.  I think the extreme Conservative grip on Israel now is going to burn Netanyahu down.  And Sheldon Adelson has an agenda he expects Netanyahu to deliver on too.  I think it's an agenda that 75% of Israel wants nothing to do with.

    And it isn't just Obama and the Obama administration cooling on where Israel is going, it is Europe too.


    Parent

    And, the leftier possible PM (none / 0) (#87)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 11:07:57 AM EST
    Gave/gives no indications that he wasn't defense leaning. He was/is an Israeli Obama or Clinton.  The crazy Christian Dominionists in this country are melting at the very thought of it all.  And it is still nipping at their heels because the PM position is never really locked down.

    Parent
    But of course... (none / 0) (#90)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 11:18:28 AM EST
    hardliners and violent extremists on all sides are the obstacle to peace.  But there are Palestinians who want peaceful co-existence, and Iranians who want peaceful co-existence...and the only way I see that we can be of assistance, and cease to be another obstacle...is to be even-handed, and stop sending arms to anybody.

    Working for peace instead of perpetual conflict is certainly not without risk to national security...but I think it's worth it.

    imo if we can't or won't be even-handed, best to not be involved at all and support no regime...lest we make more enemies ourselves as we have done in the past.  afaik, the United States had no problems with Arabs and/or Muslims prior to WWII, after which when we started meddling and gave somebody else's land away and propped up the Shah amongst other things.  Now we can't undo the mistakes of the past, but we can at least try to stop making mistakes that will cripple the future.

    Parent

    hardliners and violent extremists (none / 0) (#93)
    by Reconstructionist on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 11:25:39 AM EST
      I'd say "hardliners" (depending on one's definition) are fairly prevalent in Israel (and most other nations). I think there is a huge disparity in the prevalence of "violent extremists" period, and certainly if we compare influential leaders.

      I believe you are being guided by well-intentioned wishful thinking in that our refusing to arm Israel would lead to "peace." Even once Israel had been destroyed and all the Jews either killed or forced to flee, it is doubtful "peace" would ensue.

    Parent

    Ending our... (none / 0) (#96)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 11:47:13 AM EST
    long-standing "gasoline on a fire" policy alone will not bring peace...it's just a necessary start imo, if we want to be a peace broker instead of a war stoker.

    Certainly no magic wand...this is a mess that took 70 years to make.

    Parent

    probably (none / 0) (#107)
    by Reconstructionist on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 12:28:15 PM EST
    More like 4000 years. History did not commence with our post-war ascedancy and all the world's problems are not due to our acts and omissions. Even to the extent wr contribute to or cause problems, they are just different problrms than would exist if the USA never existed
    .  We have quite tje national ego.

    Parent
    4000 years... (none / 0) (#111)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 12:46:26 PM EST
    too true, too true.

    But we only have a say in how we roll, and our national conscience (or lack there of) concerns me most.

    And even then, not really.  Voting, at the end of the day, can better be called enabling.  

    Parent

    Can't be an influential leader (none / 0) (#128)
    by vicndabx on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 01:48:02 PM EST
    If you're hamstrung by the others you need to work with.

    I guess you think it's a good idea Bibi keeps building.

    The idea behind not arming Israel is not to destroy it, but to stop being an enabler.

    Parent

    Ummm... (none / 0) (#91)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 11:24:55 AM EST
    ....because the US has been in peace talks with Iran.

    Parent
    I'm not sure (none / 0) (#95)
    by Reconstructionist on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 11:42:12 AM EST
      if that response is directed to me.

     If it was, you seem to miss the point that the current negotiations are, of course, being conducted with Israel's military strength  being a reality.

      Moreover, these are not "peace" negotiations by any stretch of the imagination. We are not asking Iran to do anything beyond taking limited measures to delay its ability to develop nuclear weapons. Iran is not being asked as a condition to the agreement to refrain from engaging in supporting aggression against Israel (or any other enemies for that matter).

    Parent

    If, in fact... (none / 0) (#98)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 11:54:26 AM EST
    the Iranians want to make nukes...doesn't that stem from us giving Israel nukes?  If Israel and the US had no nukes, I don't think the Iranians would be in a rush to get nukes.

    Sh*t it seems to me the only way to guarantee your country doesn't get invaded and occupied is to have nukes, as long as countries with nukes have a history of invading and occupying and a CIA backing coups and dictators.

    Parent

    Re:Tom Lehrer (none / 0) (#99)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 12:07:28 PM EST
    Israeli's getting tense
    wants one in self-defense
    "The Lord's our shepherd,
    Says the Psalm.
    But, just in case--
    We better get a bomb."

    Parent
    If Iran wants nuclear weapons... (none / 0) (#158)
    by unitron on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 05:29:31 AM EST
    ...it probably has more to do with the deterrent effect keeping anyone from messing with them than it does a desire to use them offensively.

    I'm sure they remember all too well when Iraq attacked them in September of '80 and no one cared.

    And they take note of how North Korea gets away with continuing jerkitude.

    Parent

    No cared?? (none / 0) (#160)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 06:11:31 AM EST
    I'd say that the American captives taken from our Embassy cared.

    Parent
    Why would they (none / 0) (#168)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 07:05:01 AM EST
    They weren't in any danger from the Iraqis?

    Parent
    It Was a reply to Your Question (none / 0) (#100)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 12:11:09 PM EST
    What leads you to believe Israel's enemies desire peaceful coexistence?

    In reality, Iran is more or less living in a peaceful coexistence with Iran currently.  The rhetoric on the other hand...  

    So yes, I would consider peace talks that keep Iran from getting a nuclear weapon as a sign that they 'desire peaceful coexistence'.  Considering the very real possibility that Israel will bomb Iran if they attempt to acquire them.

    Parent

    Bill Clinton tried his best, too. (none / 0) (#143)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 04:44:27 PM EST
    Both he and Secretary of State Warren Christopher managed to get Israelis and Palestinians talking to one another, and with the signing of the Oslo Accords probably closer than they'd ever been to an agreement, before or since.

    But in obvious retrospect, I'd offer that Prime Minister Yitzak Rabin's subsequent assassination at the hands of an Israeli right-wing hardliner really altered the political trajectory in his country, and not for the better. The killing of Rabin heralded a lengthy period of internal political disarray within his Labor Party, which led to its eventual eclipse by Netanyahu's Likud.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Albright worked hard also. (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by oculus on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 07:31:22 PM EST
    Yes, she did. (none / 0) (#157)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 03:52:45 AM EST
    What a shame that the Israelis and Palestinians couldn't reach an agreement before George W. Bush took office. That window of opportunity will likely not open again for a long time.

    Parent
    And it is time to ... (none / 0) (#104)
    by Chuck0 on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 12:20:55 PM EST
    STOP. Turn of the spigot.

    Parent
    That relationship strengthens the moderates (none / 0) (#74)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 10:20:23 AM EST
    Though in Israel, and is a reality that caused a Conservative voting panic.  Being a PM is not the same as being elected a President.  If for some reason members of Bibi's existing block shift or want him replaced, he is gone.  How the President is handling the situation is spot on.  There is a rift in Israel's most important allied relationships now.  It isn't just us rifting with Bibi and a new even righter wing Israel right now.

    Parent
    Sheldon Adelson has this relationship with (none / 0) (#76)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 10:22:43 AM EST
    Netanyahu and Israel's Conservatives, not Obama or the Obama administration.

    Parent
    The NYT op ed (March 19) (none / 0) (#80)
    by KeysDan on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 10:40:16 AM EST
    by Youssef Munayyer, a Palestinian American, provides his perspective on the Israeli elections, essentially trying to make  lemonade out of lemons.

    However, Mr. Munayyer finds his lemonade in world-wide sanctions and isolation to force external change in Israeli behavior to Palestine--"His (Bibi) government will oppose any constructive change, placing Israel on a collision course with the rest of the world. And this collision has never been more necessary."  

    This, to me, illustrates the distinct danger that the election win will bring loss. Unlike many campaigns, where post-election calls for "unity," are commonplace, the electoral sentiments are likely to be indelible.  Peace will continue to be elusive. An armistice is possible but only on the basis of naked realities,  not on the basis of the shrouded pieties of the past.

    Parent

    I find it interesting that (none / 0) (#165)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 06:30:56 AM EST
    no one seems to grasp the fact that launching missiles into Israel has had, and will again because the Palestinians will do it again, have an effect on the "peace process."

    Parent
    If they were to give it up tomorrow (none / 0) (#169)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 07:06:23 AM EST
    Netanyahu would still be intransigent toward any peace efforts.

    Parent
    Really?? (2.00 / 1) (#173)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 08:48:43 AM EST
    Look, we both know that the only acceptable solution for Israel is the Nazis's "Final Solution."

    Parent
    Oh Jim... (5.00 / 1) (#179)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 08:55:44 AM EST
    ...that is called Godwin's Law.

    Parent
    If Netenyahu believed that (none / 0) (#177)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 08:53:57 AM EST
    why did he change his stance on a two-state solution?

    So, now we've established you're to the right of Netenyahu.

    Parent

    Jonathan Capehart's reading and writing skills (none / 0) (#82)
    by Uncle Chip on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 10:46:51 AM EST
    leave a lot to be desired. Here from pps7-8 of the DOJ Report on shooting of Brown is what the report really says:

    The autopsy results alone do not indicate the direction Brown was facing when he received two wounds to his right arm ...

    Thus physical forensic evidence in the form of autopsy shows that he could have been shot from behind. The DOJ just chose to discount the 75% of witnesses who made that statement, even though the autopsy showed that their statements were valid and possible.

    And same with the Hands Up part in the report:

    Although there are several individuals who have stated that Brown held his hands up in an unambiguous sign of surrender prior to Wilson shooting him dead, their accounts do not support a prosecution of Wilson....

    Certain other witnesses who originally stated Brown had his hands up in surrender recanted their original accounts, admitting that they did not witness the shooting or parts of it ...

    While credible witnesses gave varying accounts of exactly what Brown was doing with his hands as he moved toward Wilson - i.e., balling them, holding them out, or pulling up his pants up - and varying accounts of how he was moving - i.e., "charging," moving in "slow motion," or "running" - they all establish that Brown was moving toward Wilson when Wilson shot him....

     Although some witnesses state that Brown held his hands up at shoulder level with his palms facing outward for a brief moment, these same witnesses describe Brown then dropping his hands and "charging" at Wilson.

    Do those words say that "Hands Up Don't Shoot" was "based on a lie"???

    Or do those words say that "Hands Up Don't Shoot" was an exaggeration of the facts.

    Nearly all witnesses who saw the shooting testified to "hands up" in one form or another for a moment -- even Team Wilson witnesses.

    But in the DOJ opinion how his hands were up, how far they were up, and for how long just didn't rise to the level of prosecution.

    Clearly Capeheart and others write their articles without reading sources and checking facts and don't know the difference between "probable", "possible" and "prosecutable".

    They're the ones who should have their "Hands Up" and surrender their pens and talking points.

    Good grief (2.00 / 1) (#161)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 06:17:01 AM EST
    Or do those words say that "Hands Up Don't Shoot" was an exaggeration of the facts.

    I went fishing last fall and caught a 30 pound catfish...

    I did go fishing. I did catch a small catfish.

    I lied.

    Parent

    catfish (5.00 / 1) (#198)
    by Uncle Chip on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 09:54:01 AM EST
    I went fishing last fall and caught a 30 pound catfish...

    I did go fishing. I did catch a small catfish. I lied.

    When you add that "30 pound catfish" into your statement, that does make it a lie. You are right on that point.

    But there is no "30 pound catfish" lie in the statement that "he had his hands up".

    Nearly every eye witness to the event contemporaneously stated that "he had his hands up" and there is not one viable witness or lick of physical evidence to say otherwise.

    Only people who were not there are making that claim.

    Parent

    You (none / 0) (#162)
    by Uncle Chip on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 06:23:47 AM EST
    proved my point -- thank you.

    Parent
    Are you saying (none / 0) (#163)
    by FlJoe on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 06:24:08 AM EST
    that the construction worker started lying instantly? We all saw the video Jim.

    Parent
    I'm saying an exaggeration is a lie. (2.00 / 1) (#166)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 06:33:28 AM EST
    And we ALL did??

    Really??

    You must have a mouse in your pocket.

    Parent

    Anybody (5.00 / 2) (#167)
    by FlJoe on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 06:47:25 AM EST
    who has looked at this case closely must have seen the video of the white construction worker with the hands up gesture. Who was HE lying to? Answer the question please.

    Parent
    Why bother (5.00 / 1) (#183)
    by FlJoe on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 09:03:22 AM EST
    you obviously ignore all evidence that doesn't fit your preconceived notions.

    Parent
    Provide the video. (none / 0) (#172)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 08:46:59 AM EST
    video (5.00 / 1) (#194)
    by Uncle Chip on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 09:37:11 AM EST
    Provide the video

    The video has been all over the internet and is part of the physical evidence that he had his "hands up" in the GJ report.

    If you don't have it and need someone to provide it to you at this late date, then that proves that you are arguing from gross ignorance and have been doing so for months.

    Parent

    "Certain other witnesses" (none / 0) (#86)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 11:03:45 AM EST
    Certain other witnesses who originally stated Brown had his hands up in surrender recanted their original accounts, admitting that they did not witness the shooting or parts of it
    iow, they lied.

    Parent
    certain witnesses (none / 0) (#94)
    by Uncle Chip on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 11:34:00 AM EST
    The Hands Up was not based upon the "certain other witnesses who did not witness the shooting" but upon those witnesses who did witness it.

    And just because they did not witness it didn't and doesn't mean that it did not happen.

    The lie was that they witnessed it -- not that it didn't happen as other witnesses testified to.

    I didn't witness the sunrise this morning -- that doesn't mean that it did not happen.


    Parent

    MB did raise his hands and did surrender last August. And I'm heartened to learn that the the "Hands Up" meme had nothing to do with the people who did not see him do it but repeatedly said they did.

    Parent
    suo (none / 0) (#108)
    by Uncle Chip on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 12:29:40 PM EST
    And I'm heartened

    capeheartened -- no doubt.

    Parent

    Limp Bizkit Front Man Didn't Kill Anyone (none / 0) (#124)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 01:18:43 PM EST
    NEW ORLEANS (AP) - A Louisiana State Police trooper says millionaire Robert Durst has been booked on weapons charges in that state - on top of a first-degree murder charge lodged by Los Angeles authorities. Trooper Melissa Matey told the Associated Press that an arrest warrant was issued for the former Limp Bizkit frontman and he was rebooked in the Orleans Parish Jail on Monday under two new charges.
    LINK

    I guess he did it all for the nookie.


    Speaking of hot microphones... (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 01:32:54 PM EST
    former DHS head Janet Napolitano accidentally lets her new subjects at UC know how she really feels.

    "Let's go, we don't have to listen to this crap."


    Parent
    A new twist on the Iraq War (none / 0) (#136)
    by ruffian on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 03:34:55 PM EST
     'Blood for Oil' scenario, which I never quite bought. Blood for No Oil makes more sense.

    This raises the question... (5.00 / 1) (#159)
    by unitron on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 05:52:11 AM EST
    ...of why GWB's administration, a bunch of oil guys, wouldn't have wanted to keep Saddam in power but limited in how much oil he could sell.

    (There wasn't anything else worth taking over the country for, was there?)

    How do you install a brand new sovereign government in Iraq and then tell them "...but you have to remain in OPEC and limit your sales to the quotas they impose."?

    There was talk that Saddam wanted to establish a petroleum bourse which would deal, not in U.S. dollars, but in the Euro, which would have increased the demand for Euros with which to buy oil and decreased the demand for dollars with which to buy oil.

    The law of supply and demand works with money, too.

    A particular type of money which is in high demand experiences an increase in value and a particular type for which demand falls experiences a drop in value.

    Parent

    You know what is sad? (none / 0) (#139)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 03:47:28 PM EST
    I don't think that we are ever going to know the truth. It's not like Bush, Cheney, Rice or any others in the Bush Administration are going to tell the truth.

    Parent
    And, (none / 0) (#153)
    by lentinel on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 09:17:00 PM EST
    tragically, it's not as if the Obama administration is going to go about doing anything that would make them tell the truth.

    He's about "turning the page" on deeds that will not go away no matter how many pages he turns.

    Parent

    An amazing and anger-producing (none / 0) (#151)
    by oculus on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 07:49:07 PM EST
    revelation.

    Parent
    What a coincidence. Monica Lewinsky (none / 0) (#152)
    by oculus on Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 08:27:33 PM EST
    article and photo. Front page above the fold. NYT. She is advocating against cyber-bullying.

    I know you're referring (5.00 / 1) (#189)
    by CST on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 09:16:03 AM EST
    to the Hillary implications - but can we all just take a minute to say it's time to let her off the hook.  She has been in the news lately because she's trying to make something of herself, and frankly, I think she has something valuable to say.  Link

    Parent
    Yes... (5.00 / 1) (#197)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 09:46:15 AM EST
    ...it's a coincidence in that she's been doing this for a year, but now because of the election, she is actually getting press over it.  I want to say the same thing happened about a year ago, ah yes, the Benghazi out her out out front.  I think she did some interviews as well.

    If there is anyone more deserving of pass and life from politics, I can not think of one.

    Parent

    Agreed. Without a very likely HRC (none / 0) (#191)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 09:26:02 AM EST
    candidacy, it seems unlikely the editor would have run the article and photo at the top of the front page.

    Parent
    I guess I really don't care (5.00 / 2) (#195)
    by CST on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 09:44:44 AM EST
    about the Clinton factor.  I don't think Monica is going to be a factor in the election either way and if this is what she's doing at this point in her life and the timing hits where there is extra publicity - it is what it is.

    And if she's using that extra publicity to take a stand on an issue that matters to her - I say all the more power to her.

    Parent

    To me (none / 0) (#192)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 09:26:29 AM EST
    it's no biggie. Mostly Monica has been dropped from conversation and questions after she said she wanted to be left alone about her past. Monica isn't the only one talking about cyberbullying. So is Ashley Judd.

    Parent
    this thread is now closed (none / 0) (#200)
    by Jeralyn on Fri Mar 20, 2015 at 06:50:12 PM EST
    and the sniping and insults between jim and mordigan deleted.

    Also, please don't quote huge pieces of material found elsewhere. Use a link and a short quote from it to make your point. Anyone who is interested can follow the link to read the material. This space is for comments, not reprinting big swaths of others' work.