home

Thursday Open Thread

Update: Harrison Ford's son says he's battered from the plane crash but but will be alright. We're sending good thoughts his way.

Syria killed the top leaders of Jabhat al-Nusra today in a drone attack in Idlib. Among those killed: Military commander Abu Humam al-Shami. Reports say others killed include Abu Musab al-Palestinian, Abu Omar al-Kurdi, and Abu Bara al-Ansari. While locals said the U.S. launched the strikes, the U.S. said it hasn't struck Idlib in the past 24 hours. The attacks may be retaliation for yesterday's bombing of the Syrian Air Defense intelligence headquarters. But Al Nusrah says leader al-Shami was killed in Idlib on Feb. 27, so the U.S. denials about today don't matter.

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

< The Media Gets On Board: Indonesia Executions | Mohammed Enwazi's Bidoon Background >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Breaking: Plane crash in Venice, CA. (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 06:02:16 PM EST
    From the Los Angeles Times:

    "A small plane crashed at a Venice golf course Thursday afternoon, officials said. Shortly before 2:30 p.m., the aircraft crashed on the Penmar Golf Course in the 1200 block of Rose Avenue in Venice, said Los Angeles Fire Department spokesman Erik Scott. The plane's pilot, a man whose name was not released, was taken to the hospital in critical condition. No other injuries were reported. It's unclear if the plane was taking off or landing at Santa Monica Municipal Airport, which is located about two blocks from the golf course."

    That's all the L.A. Times is reporting thus far. But according to the BBC, the aircraft's pilot was actor Harrison Ford.

    Let's hope that he'll be okay.

    Update: NBC News has confirmed that ... (none / 0) (#5)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 06:09:35 PM EST
    Another link (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 06:14:34 PM EST
    with photo of the plane which is mostly still together

    Actor Harrison Ford was seriously injured Thursday when a vintage World War II training plane he was piloting crash landed on a Mar Vista, California, golf course.

    The actor was stabilized and taken to a local hospital. Sources said he sustained cuts to head. There was no word on other injuries or what caused the plane to crash. It appeared he was flying solo.



    Parent
    Update No. 2: NBC News now reports ... (none / 0) (#14)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 06:59:39 PM EST
    ... that according to L.A. Fire Dept. officials, Harrison Ford sustained only "moderate" injuries and is in fair condition at a local hospital.

    Get well soon.

    Parent

    Because things look good for Harrison (none / 0) (#28)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 06:31:10 AM EST
    The joke here this morning is if you are going to have to hit hard in a densely populated area, a doctor is more to be likely to be on the golf course than the runway.  Plan accordingly

    Parent
    What is With That Guy... (none / 0) (#35)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 07:52:32 AM EST
    ...talk about a hard luck Charlie, he broke his leg less than a year ago.

    Parent
    in case (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 06:19:18 PM EST
    you haven't had enough talk about emails:

    all of Obama's top appointees did the same thing as Hillary with regards to email

    And it was going on long before Obama came around. The Bush Administration was putting everything on the GOP server and then deleted 5,000,000 emails to keep from anybody reading them.

    Not the same thing (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Slado on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 11:36:14 PM EST
    they had unpublished or separate .gov emails to avoid Spam which seems reasonable and wouldn't violate the back up rules.  The concern was that not knowing they existed could possibly prevent someone in the future from knowing where to look.  

    Hillary was running her own personal email server completely separate from the government system.

    As I posted in the Hillary Thread it has now been confirmed that she was in violation of State Department policy during her entire tenure and for 2 more years until she turned over, or was forced to, 55,000 pages of emails.  

    Not the same thing at all.

    Parent

    I have seen no official "confirm" (none / 0) (#91)
    by christinep on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 12:50:07 PM EST
    from the State Department, IG, or other designated review.  

    Parent
    ABC News says this: (none / 0) (#92)
    by Anne on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 01:01:35 PM EST
    A senior State Department official tells ABC News that under rules in place while Clinton was secretary of state, employees could only use private email accounts for official business if they turned those emails over to be entered into government computers. They were also forbidden from including sensitive but unclassified information on private email, except under some very narrow exceptions.

    This policy is still in place, according to the Department. Until any private emails are entered into government computers, the official says, an employee is in violation of the rules.

    Clinton used a private email account for her entire tenure as secretary -- and did not even have a government-issued email. She only turned over some 55,000 pages of emails to be entered into government computer systems late last year, nearly two years after she stepped down from the State Department.

    It is also likely that some of Mrs. Clinton's emails contained information "sensitive but unclassified" as defined by the federal government, a senior State Department official acknowledged, in potential violation of the 2005 department regulation as codified in the Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM).

    "Reports claiming that by using personal email [Clinton] is automatically out of step of that FAM are inaccurate," the official told ABC News in a statement. "We are not going to prejudge the outcome of the review of Secretary Clinton's 55000 pages of emails."

    A spokesman for Clinton did not respond to ABC News' repeated requests for comment.

    Link

    Now - the e-mails to or from her personal account that went to those with .gov e-mail accounts would not need to be turned over, as they would already be in the .gov system.  Is it possible that the 55,000 e-mails she turned over were those that did not otherwise get captured in the government system, since it has been reported that some of the State Department staff also had personal e-mail accounts?

    I do have some problems with this report - but then, I think the reporting in general on this issue has been abysmal.

    I hate to say this, christine, but I think this isn't going away, won't be forgotten and is going to be a problem for her.

    Parent

    For the time being, it is not going away (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by christinep on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 01:18:26 PM EST
    It will be around so long as people are interested and/or until the Repubs in Congress overplay it.  The political dilemma for the opposition party is that (1) The top Repub candidates appear to have had the same practice--esp. Jeb Bush as Governor and Scott Walker AND (2) Unless there is a serious new there-there, people are already losing interest despite the press play (Consider the lack of stories on front pages today.)

    I'm content to await an official report.  Ron Fournier, as usual where a presumptive Dem candidate is involved, is making hay as is his wont; and, we'll watch Jonathan Karl as well ....

    Another aspect became clearer this morning when I was scrolling thru various news reports on various issues ... a TV personage (CNN?) remarked that it would be helpful if Hillary Clinton could say some more on this, which she would do as soon as declaring candidacy, etc.  Ah ha ... the old flush 'em out and push for the declaration now (on the press' terms.) Funny.

    Parent

    I find that this particular video ... (none / 0) (#11)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 06:39:22 PM EST
    ... neatly sums up the entire manufactured controversy.

    Parent
    Two major national papers (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by christinep on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 09:19:18 PM EST
    More & more--judging from the NYTimes & WashPo almost obligatory editorials on the email subject, a subject which they built up and wrote about--it seems to me that the papers feel stiffed or something like that and the result is the sniffing holier-than-thou "we should know everything" that the Clintons have never told us.  I don't know, but that is what it sure looks like at this point.

    For the most part, the NYTimes isn't hanging onto the earlier insinuations--misleading as they were (see Media Matters and David Brock's official letter to the NYTimes)--but, it is now at the big whine level.  The NYTimes has been disappointing in its initial report here; and, that saddens me.  Then I remember the old Zelleny hit piece some years back about calculating the number of nights that the Clintons did or did not spend together in Chappaqua (and, then too, I think about the Judith Miller fiasco.)  The real problem for me is that I still hold onto the fiction of the "paper of record."

    Parent

    As do I (none / 0) (#51)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 09:00:35 AM EST
    LOL (none / 0) (#17)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 07:17:48 PM EST
    Yes, honestly I thought the GOP was supposed to be setting up the GOP candidate for 2016 by showing they can govern. Once again, they have proved that all they want to do is scandal monger.

    Parent
    From your link (none / 0) (#18)
    by Politalkix on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 09:16:33 PM EST
    It seems that even the secret email accounts that are mentioned in your link are government accounts (email addresses that end with .gov).  Not exactly the same thing as HRC's email address, where HRC has full administrative and legal rights to her communications....

    We do not have all facts yet; let us not jump to conclusions either way...

    ---------------------------------

    From your link

    "The Health and Human Services Department initially turned over to the AP the email addresses for roughly 240 appointees -- except none of the email accounts for Sebelius, even one for her already published on its website. After the AP objected, it turned over three of Sebelius' email addresses, including a secret one. It asked the AP not to publish the address, which it said she used to conduct day-to-day business at the department. Most of the 240 political appointees at HHS appeared to be using only public government accounts.

    The AP decided to publish the secret address for Sebelius -- KGS2(at)hhs.gov -- over the government's objections because the secretary is a high-ranking civil servant who oversees not only major agencies like the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services but also the implementation of Obama's signature health care law. Her public email address is Kathleen.Sebelius(at)hhs.gov.

    At least two other senior HHS officials -- Donald Berwick, former head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and Gary Cohen, a deputy administrator in charge of implementing health insurance reform -- also had secret government email addresses, according to the records obtained by the AP.

    A spokesman for Cohen, Brian Cook, said the nonpublic address that HHS listed in its records -- Gary.Cohen1(at)cms.hhs.gov -- was created after Cohen rejoined the department in August 2012 following a brief absence and all emails now are directed to his public government email account. Cook called the suggestion that Cohen ever had a secret account "news to everyone, including Gary."

    The Interior Department gave the AP a list of about 100 government email addresses for political appointees who work there but none for the interior secretary at the time, Ken Salazar, who has since resigned. Spokeswoman Jessica Kershaw said Salazar maintained only one email address while serving as secretary, but she would not disclose it. She said the AP should ask for it under the Freedom of Information Act, which would take months longer."


    Parent

    Being discussed this morning (none / 0) (#27)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 06:27:22 AM EST
    Nobody violated the rules as they were written.  But Jay Carney did say that all government emails would be on government servers at some point in response to what the Bush administration had done with secret email accounts.

    Because so many appointees had their email set up in this fashion though it would seem that suggestions were made.

    Parent

    I'm tired (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 07:44:35 AM EST
    of this whole discussion and I guess the press must be getting tired of it too. There's been so much erroneous stuff put out there too.

    Parent
    And no GOP leaders coming to Selma (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 07:51:17 AM EST
    Heinous Phuckers.  How can the whole country not be sick to death of their ugly evil a$$e$?

    Very little will be said about their Selma absence though.  Just another day in paradise :)

    Parent

    Why would (none / 0) (#39)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 08:21:03 AM EST
    they? It's a party of neoconfederates.

    Parent
    But half of the country considers them (none / 0) (#40)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 08:28:32 AM EST
    Their party or will vote for them.  This is what wedge politics purchases in the end before the final explosions, voters with no North Star, inconsistent values, obliterated critical thinking, shattered judgement, conscience adrift.  I don't remember the party ever being this blatantly soulless, this inhumane and broken.

    Parent
    They've (5.00 / 2) (#58)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 09:48:46 AM EST
    always been this bankrupt in the south. Remember Strom Thurmond is the one that built the southern GOP and now is has a virus that infects the entire party.

    Parent
    I do, when Nixon was in the WH. (none / 0) (#44)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 08:41:02 AM EST
    and back then the infection didn't extend to legislators, as it does today.

    Parent
    Babs Bush sobbing as Nixon left (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 08:54:31 AM EST
    The White House.  Oh her poor beautiful mind :)

    Parent
    Nixon on the WH tapes (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 08:59:08 AM EST
    expressed admiration for her ability to hate.  That's like Willie Mays saying you're a good hitter.  

    Parent
    She is an astonishing woman (none / 0) (#52)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 09:02:46 AM EST
    She has great hair :). She gave her sons resilient hairlines.

    Parent
    As always when someone is (none / 0) (#32)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 07:47:38 AM EST
    Ginning them up vs them practicing journalism.

    Parent
    Eight inches of snow today, temps (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Anne on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 06:44:42 PM EST
    going down into the low teens tonight, wind chills well below zero...

    But hey - we get to turn the clocks ahead this weekend: one hour closer to spring!  

    The DST thing (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 06:49:40 PM EST
    really snuk up on me this year

    Parent
    seriously (none / 0) (#56)
    by CST on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 09:43:21 AM EST
    is it really this weekend?  That was quick.

    Parent
    Hot and fishy down here... (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by fishcamp on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 07:14:53 AM EST


    Have you tried... (5.00 / 2) (#103)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 01:45:25 PM EST
    baby powder?  That's what I use when it gets hot and fishy down there.

    Try the veal!

    Parent

    First, take a bath! ;-) (none / 0) (#154)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 11:12:39 PM EST
    That is the forecast for my weekend. (none / 0) (#102)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 01:40:21 PM EST
    What has happened to Jesus? (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 08:46:06 AM EST
    Where did the loving face of Jesus go?  My childhood Jesus images were all loving, graceful, exuding boundless kindness.  CNN is broadcasting ads for their new 'Finding Jesus' and their Jesus faces in the ad are very serious or scowling. When did Jesus become so unhappy?

    He's listening to the prayers (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 08:49:11 AM EST
    of the people who want the gays to disappear and for women to know their place in society making babies and not leaving the home.

    Parent
    Play it! (none / 0) (#48)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 08:52:15 AM EST
    I guess (none / 0) (#62)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 10:00:01 AM EST
    it's all about making the fundamentalists happy. Fundamentlist Jesus is a hateful and vengeful person and uses fear.

    Parent
    That's what I think it is! (none / 0) (#64)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 10:17:48 AM EST
    They have accepted that Jesus probably had brown eyes.  But people with brown eyes can be beatifically loving and kind and full of grace too.  Guess not though.  We have brown eyed stern Jesus :)

    Parent
    Yup 'merciful jesus' (none / 0) (#70)
    by ruffian on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 10:48:10 AM EST
     isn't even a figure of speech anymore!

    Parent
    Jesus, ,like everyone else (none / 0) (#119)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 03:31:26 PM EST
    Is on FaceBook.  I spoke with him yesterday.  He lives in Glendale has two kids and is a lighter at Digital Domain.

    Parent
    Cardinal Glick.... (none / 0) (#139)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 05:25:27 PM EST
    295,000 and 5.5% (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by christinep on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 01:06:57 PM EST
    Good numbers with 295,000jobs added in February and unemployment now at 5.5%.  With more than 200K jobs per month being added for 12 straight months and an unemployment rate now in the Fed's good range (5.2 to 5.5), the various reports are buoyed (with the word "terrific" used in NYTimes Upshot report.) Growth rate is also up, with projection at solid 3% ... much better than other world economies.  

    Important footnote: Wage growth remains sluggish.  Hourly wages only increased 2 to 3 cents per hour this past month.  It seems that the latest focus concerns how to increase pressure on increasing wages.  For now, decreased energy costs have helped; but, resistance among the major movers on wages has not abated yet.

    Yes, wages... (none / 0) (#104)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 01:53:49 PM EST
    the 50 year enigma of economic "science"...lol.

    Check out the US real wage graph from 1964 to 2014...were working people a patient in a hospital, we'd call 'em a flatliner aka deader than dead.

    Parent

    That actually (none / 0) (#105)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 01:55:39 PM EST
    says little change in purchasing power which would mean we are doing as well now as we were 50 years ago.

    Parent
    It says... (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 02:03:53 PM EST
    we haven't gotten a real raise in 50 years....running to stand still.

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#111)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 02:43:34 PM EST
    yeah, but I've heard people say we're actually behind which that is not saying.

    Parent
    When you factor in.. (5.00 / 2) (#115)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 03:11:33 PM EST
    the dramatic increase in US worker productivity, which has increased approx. 65% since 1979, we are behind....way behind.  

    Parent
    And only about 62% are (none / 0) (#198)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Mar 08, 2015 at 08:54:24 PM EST
    participating in the workforce.

    What happens when it becomes 50%?

    Parent

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 03:55:58 PM EST
    I couldn't repy to Anne and Howdy in the other thread so I guess I'll try here.

    Anne, I agree with what you are saying about the press not talking about issues but that happens regardless. What do we remember about George W.? That in 2000 people wanted ot have a beer with him? Told you exactly nothing about where he was going to go with poliyc.

    And Howdy when I was dinging Obama about transparency it was his statement about being the most transparent administration or somesuch. However all that did was end up being another thing for the GOP to scream about and throw in his face in their numberous "investigations".

    Guess you aren't current on that one (5.00 / 1) (#201)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Mon Mar 09, 2015 at 01:08:17 AM EST
    LOL!

    An Internal Revenue Service watchdog has located an estimated 30,000 of the lost Lois Lerner emails, according to a source familiar with the matter.
    The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration told congressional staffers Friday the emails belonging to the most controversial figure in the IRS controversy were located on disaster recovery tapes.
    The IRS told Congress in late spring that it had lost two years worth of the former head of the tax-exempt division's emails in a 2011 hard drive crash. They didn't believe the emails had been backed up anywhere and said her broken hard drive had been recycled.
    Lawmakers balked at being told more than a year after the original scandal broke -- and several months after the IRS and White House found out.



    Brrr (none / 0) (#1)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 04:49:33 PM EST
    on the weather here today. Yesterday it was in the low 70's. Today cold and rainy. Oh, my bones feel it. I'm getting old!

    Just out of curiosity (none / 0) (#19)
    by Yman on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 09:17:24 PM EST
    What's "cold" in your neck-of-the-woods this time of year?  We just got 8 inches of snow last night and it's supposed to be a high of 25 tomorrow ... usually high 40s-50 degrees by this point up here.

    My daughter's trying to decide between colleges and I think this weather is moving College of Charleston up on the list and UConn down.

    Parent

    CofC (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 07:43:17 AM EST
    is my alma mater. Cold yesterday was in the 30's I blieve but it was raining too so you feel it more.

    Parent
    A humid cold sux (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 08:34:47 AM EST
    Give me a dry Colorado cold any day.  So what if my hair is a science project and I shock babies with my very touch :). This is a cold bummer :)

    Parent
    You are too (none / 0) (#60)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 09:54:42 AM EST
    funny. And you have fabulous hair!I just got all mine cut off yesterday!

    Parent
    I'm going there too as soon as it heats up (none / 0) (#63)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 10:10:46 AM EST
    My hair grows like a weed so I have never really suffered much from a bad do.  I think it is growing even faster as I age though.  In July I cut it short, the back was stacked at my neckline and the front was bobbed but sloped longer toward the front.  I'm wearing an 8 inch long ponytail now and it makes Josh laugh.  A gray haired teenager. That was why I had to give in to the gray.  There was no way to keep up dyeing it.  When it decided to go gray it just went boom too.

    My daughter turned me onto some incredible makeup.  I went over to see her and she wanted to go shopping so I borrowed some of her things.  Amazing, expensive but amazing, brand is Urban Decay :). Just can't make this stuff up :) Great foundation, eye shadow doesn't get all jacked up in my wrinkling lid, and I got a highlighter that goes around the eyes...almost looks less wrinkly :)

    Parent

    Who'da thought ... (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by Yman on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 10:18:26 AM EST
    you could market a brand of makeup with the word "decay" in it?

    Parent
    Makes you look awesome (none / 0) (#66)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 10:21:13 AM EST
    You are almost glad to be decaying so you have a reason to put it on :)

    Parent
    I have heard (none / 0) (#68)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 10:34:37 AM EST
    good things about their eye makeup but did not know about their foundation. I might try some of their eye stuff but the only makeup that does not seem to break me out is Lancome.

    Parent
    My daughter's skin is pretty sensitive (none / 0) (#71)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 10:54:22 AM EST
    She seems to be doing okay with it right now.  She did just recently buy the foundation though.  She has had the Naked palettes for awhile.  I only bought the number 2 palette.  She can wear all the colors, I'm too much of a cool, only one palette really suits me.

    We need samples!

    Parent

    Wow -that's colder than ... (none / 0) (#41)
    by Yman on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 08:30:14 AM EST
    ... I would've thought for GA.  

    I didn't know much about CofC, but she went to visit our with a friend and feel in love with it.  They're offering her a scholarship and admission to the honors school, but I think the bigger attraction for her I'd the beautiful campus/city and the weather.

    Parent

    The weather (none / 0) (#59)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 09:54:05 AM EST
    can be wonderful there and it also can be horrrible. A short spring and then the misery sets in and going back in August? 100 degrees and 100% humidity is pretty awful. Winters are so so. When I was there the winters were usually about 50 and constant rain with some colder days here and there. It's nice being able to go to the beach though. We used to hang out at the Isle of Palms though I understand now Folly Beach is where everybody hangs out.

    Parent
    80 Wedenssday... (none / 0) (#37)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 08:05:26 AM EST
    ...36 yesterday and raining, then 30 this morning with a 10mph winds.  Granted it was 40 by the time I got to work, but GD I moved from Wisconsin to Texas to get away from cold weather.

    And I swear, if one more person says to me, "But you're from Wisconsin..." I am gonna snap.  I have not lived there since 1997.

    Parent

    Tied record (none / 0) (#2)
    by FlJoe on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 05:49:47 PM EST
    high 88 here today.

    In between day (none / 0) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 05:58:35 PM EST
    frigid yesterday.  30 today.  40 tomorrow.  50 on Saturday.  60s after that.  Maybe even a 70.  It might be the end of winter.

    That's the good news.  The bad news is starting tomorrow my backyard is a giant mud hole until it sinks or evaporates.

    We still have about 5-7 inches of snow.

    Please drop bombs on me (none / 0) (#6)
    by Slado on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 06:11:17 PM EST
    Iraq upset US won't drop more bombs in Iraq.  

    LINK

    Can't blame the Pentagon for not wanting to take sides in a Sunni Shia sectarian conflict although ISIS is supposed to be out chief concern.   Not sure how we keep Iraq from eventually becoming an ally of Iran.

    Where (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by FlJoe on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 06:27:12 PM EST
    the heck have you been?
    Not sure how we keep Iraq from eventually becoming an ally of Iran.
    That pigeon flew the coop years ago. Influence gifted to Iran signed sealed and delivered by W. and his neo-con puppet masters.

    Parent
    Oh please quit trying to (2.00 / 2) (#69)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 10:42:59 AM EST
    hide the fact that Obama ignored the advice of the military.

    And before you start about the SOFA try and remember that Iraq had no choice except to do what we wanted.

    We had conquered them.

    Obama left because that was his stated goal. And now the chickens have come home to roost.

    Now all he wants is to kick the ball down the road and turn his messes....all over the world...to the next president.

    Parent

    thanks for (5.00 / 5) (#75)
    by FlJoe on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 11:17:39 AM EST
    the honesty Jim. Glad you finally rid us of that silly notion that we went to Iraq to "liberate" them.
    We had conquered them.
    Of course any general worth his salt will tell you once you "conquer" a nation you must keep a boot on their neck until such time they have been properly subjugated (this time TBD by aforementioned generals). Silly Obama he was handed a perfectly "unmessy" situation by his predecessor and he managed to screw it up by believing in all that liberation crap sold to the American people.

    Screw the American and Iraqi people, screw the democratically elected Iraqi government, the always infallible advice of the generals must always be heeded. The beatings should continue until morale improves

    Parent

    That's just a flat-out dishonest post, Jim. (5.00 / 2) (#90)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 12:49:39 PM EST
    You're only accomplishment here has been to further discredit whatever little that remains of your own credibility on such matters.

    Parent
    Really? (none / 0) (#153)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 11:11:21 PM EST
    You are saying that Obama didn't want to get out and couldn't have stayed.

    That is utter nonsense. And worry about your own credibility.

    FlJoe - Yes, we had conquered them. Now, watch my lips. That's what war is for.

    Jondee - Where ever they were created, my personal opinion is hell, they have invaded Iraq and seized a big chunk of it. If we had stayed that would not have happened

    Repack - The purpose of the military is to carry out foreign policy by other means.


    Parent

    Double Really/ ? (5.00 / 2) (#172)
    by FlJoe on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 09:07:36 AM EST
    Historically wars have been fought for many different reasons, with several notable exceptions  majority of our wars were not about conquering anybody.
    we had conquered them...... That's what war is for.
     That is a textbook definition of militaristic imperialism. Your  preferred policy of conquer and occupy  mirror those of the European colonialists of the late 19th, early 2oth century. Guess what it didn't work then and it absolutely will not work now.

    Parent
    It's not "wherever" (5.00 / 1) (#183)
    by jondee on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 12:10:51 PM EST
    they started in Syria.

    And then gained power and support in Iraq in large part due to the actions of an ineffectual, short-sighted Iraqi President that the Shrub and his neocon nitwit advisors handpicked to lead the country.

     

    Parent

    We didn't really "conquer" Iraq, Jim. (5.00 / 1) (#191)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 04:01:39 PM EST
    Julius Caesar conquered Gaul for Rome, and the region was an integral part of its empire for nearly five centuries. The British conquered India, and remained there for the better part of two centuries. The Allies conquered Germany and Japan, and even today the United States maintains an active military infrastructure in both countries.

    We merely invaded Iraq and occupied it militarily for eight years. An actual conquest would've required the subsequent pacification of its peoples as a necessary step toward establishing and sustaining a long-term socio-economic presence that was accepted (however grudgingly) by its inhabitants.

    That never happened in Iraq. All we did was overthrow its government by force, and create a political power vacuum which has yet to be filled.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    ISIS was bred out of the chaos (5.00 / 2) (#133)
    by jondee on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 04:13:13 PM EST
    in Syria.  

    The U.S military isn't omnipotent and can't control all events and bring to heel every entity and person in the ME.

    But then you live in a fantasy land populated by "conquerors" and the conquered..

    Parent

    "The advice of the military" (5.00 / 2) (#143)
    by Repack Rider on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 05:56:53 PM EST
    ...is ALWAYS to attack somebody.  It's the only justification for their salaries.

    It is NEVER to negotiate, if that might lead eventually to (gasp!) peace.

    I remember that the "advice of the military" when I was in the Army was that if you killed enough Vietnamese, the survivor would eventually like you.

    When it comes to international relations, I hope Mr. Obama seeks the advice of the PTA and the SPCA before asking the JCOS.

    Parent

    That's one way to put it (none / 0) (#21)
    by Slado on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 11:11:08 PM EST
    another is as explained in this Washington Post Op-Ed...

    Obama inherited Bush's mess and made it worse.

    Parent

    You really ought to consider the source here:

    "Ali Khedery is chairman and chief executive of the Dubai-based Dragoman Partners. From 2003 to 2009, he was the longest continuously serving American official in Iraq, acting as a special assistant to five U.S. ambassadors and as a senior adviser to three heads of U.S. Central Command. In 2011, as an executive with Exxon Mobil, he negotiated the company's entry into the Kurdistan Region of Iraq."

    Khedery was a Bush administration appointee, and it looks like he's done quite well personally since getting the hook with the change of administrations. You don't think that he might have a vested interest in deflecting blame for Iraq from his political friends and sponsors, and instead leveling it elsewhere?

    After all, given that Khedery was "a special assistant to five U.S. ambassadors and as a senior adviser to three heads of U.S. Central Command" in Iraq while working with the Bush administration, one could easily conclude that he was likely a big part of the overall problem there in the first place.

    :-|

    Parent

    One magical day I'll (1.00 / 2) (#25)
    by Slado on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 01:31:39 AM EST
    read a response were the ideas and facts of a persons opinion will be countered with an argument and other opinions or facts.  

    Rather then the typical character attack that lends nothing to the argument.

    Don if I considered the source I'd never read a single one of your posts.    

    This guy was there, on the ground and was witness to the downfall of our Iraq policy.  He even himself criticizes Bush for creating the mess he tried so hard to fix.  

    The simple reality is by both presidents putting their faith in Maliki the U.S. alienated the Sunni's and allowed Iraq to fall into the sectarian chaos we see today.  

    Obama inherited Iraq.  History will judge bush quite harshly for his poor judgement and reckless invasion of Iraq.  

    But Obama said he was leaving Iraq as a strong independent nation when we left and nothing could have been farther from the truth.    We can quibble over the percentage of responsibility with Bush always having more but you simply can't let Obama off the hook for sticking with Maliki and ignoring the growing threat of ISIS.

    Parent

    The credibility and biases ... (5.00 / 3) (#26)
    by Yman on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 06:13:02 AM EST
    ... of a source of information are always an issue - and they should be.  I'm not sure why anyone would have a problem with the impeachment of a source's credibility unless they were repeatedly citing sources that lacked credibility or were inherently biased - like a senior Bush Administration official saying, "It's not our fault - it was them!"

    Funny stuff.

    Parent

    "Typical character attack"? (5.00 / 2) (#89)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 12:42:52 PM EST
    Slado: "One magical day I'll read a response were the ideas and facts of a persons opinion will be countered with an argument and other opinions or facts. Rather then the typical character attack that lends nothing to the argument. Don if I considered the source I'd never read a single one of your posts."

    That description of Ali Khedery was a verbatim quote from your own linked op-ed, Slado. He was the Bush administration's No. 2 man in Baghdad during the enire "Mission Accomplished"-plus phase of the war -- which, if you're even willing to remember at this point, just so happened to be the same exact period when this Good Ship Lollipop turned into a complete clusterphuquing fiasco.

    Khedery wasn't sent to Iraq just to bear witness to history. Rather, he was one of the primary architects of the Rube Goldberg contraption that became for the Bush administration's Iraq policy, which was likely a key reason why it failed so miserably!

    If you're now going to insist that the above shouldn't be a wholly relevant consideration when seeking to determine this guy's veracity and credibility on this particular subject, then you're nothing more than yet another intellectually dishonest hack who, like Paul Simon's "The Boxer," hears only what he want to hear and disregards the rest.

    You're wasting our time -- and yours -- by posting this sort of nonsense from self-serving a$$clowns such as Khedery. And if all you're going to subsequently do is mock those who would dare point out the painfully obvious flaw in your "evidence" of the Obama administration's so-called "failure" in Iraq, then you're simply doubling down on stupid.

    It's as though you're merely expecting us to act as your dutiful echo chamber, blithely validating your own cherry-picked "facts" and further reinforcing your willful misconceptions. And when you play people for fools like that, you're really only deceiving yourself.

    Have a nice day.

    Parent

    Brilliant op-ed (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by FlJoe on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 07:52:13 AM EST
    Khedery starts
      among the very few Americans in Baghdad who took his phone calls. In 2006, I helped introduce him to the U.S. ambassador, recommending him as a promising option for prime minister.
    Proudly promoting and backing his fair haired boy.

    By 2010, however, I was urging the vice president of the United States and the White House senior staff to withdraw their support for Maliki. I had come to realize that if he remained in office, he would create a divisive, despotic and sectarian government that would rip the country apart and devastate American interests.
    After years of careful analysis he discovers the obvious, He never even seems to apologize for his errors.

    Then he finally shows his true neo-con colors

    This might be averted if we rebuffed Iran by forming a unity government around a nationalist alternative such as Abdul Mahdi. It would be extremely difficult, I acknowledged, but with 50,000 troops still on the ground, the United States remained a powerful player.
     Translation: Lets use American military muscle to install my newest fair headed boy.

    Tragically wrong then and tragically wrong now. Why do these guys always expect a mulligan ? More importantly why do so many want to give it to them?

    Parent

    Bush (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 07:55:49 AM EST
    sent a bull into a china shop. There's pretty much nothing that can be done to fix the situation.

    Parent
    How many arms and legs and traumatized (5.00 / 4) (#38)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 08:08:01 AM EST
    Brains does it take to satisfy you?  How many orphans that you will then argue to not care for will you create to slake your lust?

    You didn't have the manpower to do it by the way.

    All these attempts to rewrite history.  Iraq broke the military in manpower.  Nobody wanted to serve there by the time we reached pullout, nobody wanted to die there or be forever wounded there.  It was all bul$hit and lies and the whole military knows it.  They had to stop-loss soldiers, it's called a backdoor draft!  It was conscription.

    Parent

    Short of our reoccupation of Iraq, we can't. (none / 0) (#10)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 06:30:28 PM EST
    The majority of Iraq's population is Shi'ite Muslim. We ensured an eventual rapprochement between the two countries when we invaded and toppled Saddam Hussein's regime in 2003.

    Our own country's long-term interests in the Persian Gulf region would be best served by our achieving our own reconciliation and normalization of relations with Iran. Neither of us can change the history between us, but there's absolutely no reason why we should both continue to allow past animus to hold the future of both countries in perpetual captivity.

    It's not unlike our relations with Cuba. At some point in time, everyone has to recognize that what's done is done, and for everyone's sake it's time to forgive one another and move on.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    While I think it's possible (none / 0) (#22)
    by Slado on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 11:17:14 PM EST
    to achieve such things with Cuba I worry about coming to normal relations with the religious zealots that run Iran.  Especially when one of their main goals is the destruction of Isreal.

    If they take that one off the table maybe we can talk.

    What I will say is I have zero interest in getting in between the sectarian war that is at the heart of the conflict in the Middle  East.    

    Unfortunately picking between Iraq and ISIS is doing exactly that at the moment even though ISIS is presently the larger of two evils.  

    Parent

    When it comes to religious zealots (5.00 / 2) (#74)
    by Repack Rider on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 11:16:32 AM EST
    ...I'm more worried about the religious zealots who run the Republican Party than I am those in Iran.

    Parent
    Yeah... (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 01:17:27 PM EST
    ...Iran isn't trying to steal my social security and Iran didn't send thousands of US boys to get killed and maimed halfway across the planet for reasons still unknown.

    Matter of fact, I have not one issue with Iran, other than the frightful things republicans want to do to them in my name, with my tax dollars.

    Parent

    And then there's the zealots (none / 0) (#124)
    by jondee on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 03:54:29 PM EST
    who keep expanding the settlements in the Occupied Territories..

    There are plenty of zealots to go around.

    Parent

    Progress? (none / 0) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 07:00:47 PM EST
    That looks (none / 0) (#16)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Mar 05, 2015 at 07:15:47 PM EST
    like the police I saw in NYC that almost made me scream at the top of my lungs.

    Parent
    Public option (none / 0) (#42)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 08:31:21 AM EST
    Strange that ... (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by Yman on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 10:25:08 AM EST
    ... the VA system - apart from being much more efficient than private plans - consistently outranks them in terms of customer satisfaction.

    You may want to look for another example.

    Parent

    The VA Hospital (none / 0) (#117)
    by Repack Rider on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 03:26:46 PM EST
    ...About 50 miles up the road at an Air Force Base treated my friend for a very serious condition.  He could not have received better care, and he told me that the patient load where he was treated was very small.

    My wife's medical insurance has taken care of me, but if I didn't have that I would certainly take advantage of my veteran status.  A couple of my friends actually washed out of the military, only served a few months, but remain eligible.  I like that a lot.

    Parent

    Ain't no VA treatment... (none / 0) (#129)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 04:00:35 PM EST
    like the WWII vets get.  My great-uncle is there twice a week...they do physical therapy to keep his old legs movin', free meds up the wazoo (you should see his medicine cabinet, looks like a CVS up in there), they even clip his toenails for him for heaven's sake.

    Personally I think he abuses the sh*t out of the VA system, and it ain't right. He'll come home from the VA with free toiletries and clothes and stuff. I tell him that stuff is for the homeless vets and destitute vets with no families, and I'll buy him f*ckin' tube socks if he needs tube socks.  But he's a miserable stubborn old bastard and I don't have the patience to argue with him when I make my rounds to check on him and cook for him.  

    Parent

    My mother (none / 0) (#131)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 04:05:06 PM EST
    in law did something similar. She took the stuff for breakfast that the people who couldn't sit down and eat would take and eat on the run. My husband was livid. He said you had breakfast. This for people who don't have time and need to eat something on the run. Her answer: they won't miss it. Geez.

    Parent
    As he probably went through the Great DepressioN (none / 0) (#152)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 08:18:08 PM EST
    he's probably stocking up before the next one hits.  😀

    Parent
    Consder yourself lucky (none / 0) (#182)
    by jondee on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 12:03:44 PM EST
    that he hasn't adopted forty cats, dog.

    Some elderly people, for whatever reasons, sometimes get into strange hoarding behaviors..

    As Mord said, it may be related to traumatic memories of the Depression or possibly the war..

    Parent

    Obama administration (none / 0) (#45)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 08:42:20 AM EST
    has been pretty terrible towards whistle-Blowers in general,

    Don't know why you think having things privatized would bring any different results.

    Parent

    This should not be too hard to understand. (none / 0) (#53)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 09:13:21 AM EST

    1. As a private sector whistleblower you are not asking the government to investigate itself.

    2. A private sector service provider risks losing business if bad practices become public, not so for a government monopoly.


    Parent
    Illogical (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 09:20:32 AM EST
    Privatizing services always leads to costs going up, not down

    And unless the laws are rigorous, it's easy for private businesses to fire somebody for whiste-blowing before the government can intervene to save their job.

    As for private businesses vs. government monopoly, lots of places where Comcast or another business has a virtual monopoly in a given market, thus the poor customer ratings of the former and probably firings of whistle-blowers as well.

    Parent

    And gathering evidence that insurance (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 09:35:20 AM EST
    Companies were stalling treatments and denying treatment to those they insured was impossible.  They had legally locked all evidence down.  Before the ACA insurance companies had figured out how to legally kill people.

    Parent
    Shhhh! (none / 0) (#57)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 09:46:12 AM EST
    You'll wake AAA from what Immanuel Kant termed a "dogmatic slumber" of his libertarian dreams.

    Parent
    If you are referring to the VA (none / 0) (#72)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 10:59:10 AM EST
    as a specific example, yes. Costs have and will go up because providing better and faster care will cost more.

    As a general comment, no. Privatizing some government services doesn't increase costs to the government unless the government elects to pay more for the service.

    Of course it is possible that when government elects to have a command and control society, as in the USSR and in the current administration, that everything will go up and nothing will improve.

    See Solyandra.

    Parent

    The constant claim (none / 0) (#80)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 11:52:54 AM EST
    By RW hacks and the like is that privatization is the cure-all for every problem with government services.

    However, history demonstrates the truth of the matter that privitization often allows for graft and fraud, especially in such things as charter schools and the recent privitization of the parking meter system in Chicago.

    Of course, there are centrist and moderate Democrats who usually get taken in by these sorts of things as well as most Republicans.

     It's usually those far Leftists who stand in the way of such things, which one would expect from the anti-business wing of the Left.</s>

    Parent

    Hillary sure seems to think... (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 12:20:03 PM EST
    privatization is the cure-all for email security. (j/k...could not resist!)

    Parent
    My third paragraph above. (none / 0) (#93)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 01:05:17 PM EST
    Indeed.... (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 01:16:11 PM EST
    and lets not forget the sister "-tion", deregulation.  Bill loved him some financial deregulation...I'd expect more from Hillary seeing how Wall St. loves to hear her speak at 200 large a pop.

    Parent
    As long as you want examples (none / 0) (#155)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 11:17:29 PM EST
    tell us how well gun control is doing in Chicago.

    Parent
    It's the lack of gun control (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 06:40:06 AM EST
    in the areas outside of Chicago, like Gary, Indiana, where many of the illegal guns in Chicago come from.

    In six years, 3,824 guns taken off Chicago gang bangers that were used in crimes came from our next door neighbor: Indiana. It's why WGN Investigates took undercover cameras over the border to see why.

    Our producer and photographer walked in to an Indianapolis gun show one recent Saturday afternoon wearing undercover camera gear. They listened as one gun dealer showed them a semi-automatic with a 30 round magazine.

    Asked why anyone would need that, the dealer said, "Everybody needs something."

    For a $5 dollar entry fee, you can buy all sorts of stuff at the gun show - bullets, handbags with hidden pockets, and of course, guns.  The law for buying a gun is different for those who live in Indiana than those who live in Illinois.

    Either you are ignorant of that fact, or it doesn't fit in with your Fox-pox News view of the world.

    As usual, no charge for answering your question.

    Parent

    Always an excuse (none / 0) (#165)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 07:44:59 AM EST
    from the people who want to take away our rights.

    Parent
    The right to sell guns to gangbangers (5.00 / 1) (#170)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 08:56:51 AM EST
    ahould be abridged, IMHO.

    As for excuses, you're the Alibi Ike around here, Jim.

    Parent

    "our rights" Funny, I heard somewhere (5.00 / 2) (#185)
    by jondee on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 12:47:49 PM EST
    that the words "well regulated" figure prominently in the Second Amendment..

    Why should crazy people who, in their rare moments of clarity see the world like an adolescent Conan the Barbarian, be granted the "right" to hoard and traffic in guns in this country?

    We might as well let the blind and the severely intoxicated drive on the expressways.

    Parent

    Privatizing reduces costs more often than not (none / 0) (#83)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 12:15:24 PM EST

    Note that tax exempt public colleges routinely contract with for profit contractors to for food and other services because those services can be delivered at lower cost.  

    A business that needs to turn a profit to stay in business has a powerful incentive to control cost.  If the legislature is going to fund you unless your costs are completely over the top, the big incentive is not cost control, but staying on good terms with the politicians.

    Parent

    I'm not talking about stuff like that (5.00 / 1) (#160)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 06:49:08 AM EST
    I'm talking about taking functions previously handled by the government which is then given to a private business to make money from, at the expense of the people paying the taxes, as in the two examples above in my comment.

    As for cost control, a private company usually sees privatization meaning they have a captive consumer base that has to put up with their service, and unlike Starbucks or Subway stores, where said consumers can go elsewhere if they don't like the service and or fees charged for said service.

    Glad I could clear this up for you.

    Parent

    A private (none / 0) (#61)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 09:58:02 AM EST
    sector whisteblower is asking the private sector to investigate itself pretty much and frankly most of the time anybody blows the whistle on the private sector their life is ruined. Or do you want bigger government to solve the private sector problems? You guys amaze me with your ability to turn off critical thinking skills.

    Parent
    Not true (none / 0) (#86)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 12:20:30 PM EST

    Whistleblowing on criminal fraud is a matter for law enforcement (i.e. the government). Do you really think that the private sector should be doing law enforcement?

    Parent
    You know (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 01:36:42 PM EST
    as well as I do that private sector fraud is rarely prosecuted.

    Parent
    It could take a hedge fund out (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 02:19:17 PM EST
    Pensions could roll and Social Security might be put in a lock box :)

    Parent
    I Don't Know... (none / 0) (#100)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 01:21:07 PM EST
    ...the private sector is in far off lands helping us wage wars, the added benefit, in case you forgot, is they answer to know one, and make 10 times than our own soldiers.

    Parent
    A simple question (none / 0) (#73)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 11:13:01 AM EST
    Laying aside all the justifications, claims that they did it too ............

    Does anyone here think any government official should have private communication methods with any other government official...or anyone else for that matter... in which the people's business is discussed?

    It boggles my mind to think that many of you think, or at least claim to think, that it was okay for Hillary...or any other government official for that matter...to have her own server and get emails from her staff and others that may or may not have violated secrecy laws.

    And if that happened and Hillary didn't correct the problem isn't she guilty of aiding and abetting??

    I agree (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by FlJoe on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 12:02:52 PM EST
    that this whole mess points to the fact that we need to set clear, definable goals as to the transparency and security of ALL government communications.

    One of the big flaws in "big government" is it's inertia in the face of change. The transition from the paper/cable/telephone communication system of the recent past to the newer internet/e-mail method is obviously a work in progress.

    I have yet to see a definitive explanation of exactly where, when and how HRC or anybody in the administration actually broke the rules and regulations, which seem to have several truck-sized loopholes in them.

    Unsurprisingly HRC and others chose to drive through said loopholes. Instead of wasting time crying over spilt milk (save for CDS I think this would already be water under the bridge) we should all calm down and work together on a better clearer set of guidelines, without the loopholes.

    Parent

    Jim has turned 180 degrees! (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by Yman on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 08:09:04 PM EST
    Back when Karl Rove was using private emails which were deleted instead of turned over, you weren't outraged by his use of a private email account.  In fact, your only statement was to say it was reasonable for him to assume those deleted emails would be automatically archived.

    What a difference of few years (or a POTUS) makes.

    Parent

    et al (1.00 / 1) (#156)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 11:33:50 PM EST
    Anne - Guess you didn't read the complete comment.

    "to have her own server and get emails from her staff and others that may or may not have violated secrecy laws.
    And if that happened and Hillary didn't correct the problem isn't she guilty of aiding and abetting??
    "

    Ga - Agreed that ALL sides are guilty. What we need is a fix.

    Yman - Did Rove have his very own private server in his home? He was using a government system and yes, he would have assumed as I would have if I used my companies system that they would be archived.   And if Hillary had been using the DOS system they would have been saved.

    Parent

    baa waa waa (5.00 / 1) (#157)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 06:25:01 AM EST
    Jim she didn't have a server at her house. She had her own server just like your heroes Rove et al. The bill was sent to her address. So you're confusing billing with location. A friend of mine's son works for Google and SOP is that no one knows where the servers are located for security reasons.

    Parent
    Actually, (none / 0) (#159)
    by jbindc on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 06:45:13 AM EST
    You're both right.

    In the early days, her emails went to a server that was located in her home.  Later on, they were hosted by servers in North Carolina.

    It's not that hard to do - servers aren't that large anymore.

    Parent

    Scott Walker (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 07:08:35 AM EST
    is the pot calling the kettle black here, but it's funny how nobody seems to be bothered by his and his staffs' e-mail shenanigans before and after he became governor of WI.

    Parent
    Scott Walker (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 07:35:22 AM EST
    is a psychotic loon.

    The funniest thing about this whole email thing is that even the Hillary haters over at the GOS are now defending her against the idiotic jihadists in the GOP.

    Parent

    Apparently Nicole Wallace, who (none / 0) (#173)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 09:10:32 AM EST
    worked with Sarah Palin in the 08 campaign was on Morning Schmoe  this week saying it was no big deal, while some Demos are predicting gloom or doom over this issue, in 2016.

    I think think it will blow over in a month or so.  With the past records of many Republicans doing the same thing, and the total lack of any specific law/rule/regulation that she is suppose to have violated, it will die down because hand-wringing will be all that is left for the Republicans to do about it.

    Parent

    The interesting (5.00 / 1) (#174)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 09:26:18 AM EST
    thing is they are blowing up Scott Walker who only a week ago they were touting as presidential material.

    Jim Messina tweeted Dems need to stop wetting the bed. Sheesh. He's right on that account.

    And that's precisely why I think she is the one that put the story out there. It's going to be dead by the time she announces. None of these stories hang around very long anymore with the stuff going on in the middle east these days.

    Parent

    She turned Ron Fourier (none / 0) (#175)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 09:39:17 AM EST
    into a raving maniac who declared she should give up running right now.  That alone is worth the whole kerfluffle over Hillary now.

    Pass the popcorn, things are going to be interesting for the next couple of weeks.

    Parent

    Fournier's claws (none / 0) (#178)
    by christinep on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 10:45:33 AM EST
    Ron Fournier has had the claws out for top Dems for years ... his characterizations of former Prez nominees Gore and Kerry being borderline examples of his partisan obsession. Yet, he has been slipping into the mania you describe in recent years, imo.

     Actually, he should read the latest from the old stomping-ground he trod the s#&$ out of when he was editor there (AP) ... Hoo, hah ... one of AP's top stories in the past hour is about how so many Repub contenders had their own servers, private email, and all that. Beginning with Scott Walker & Jeb Bush. Apt adage: "What goes around comes around...."

    Parent

    You're in good company, Christine! (none / 0) (#179)
    by jbindc on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 11:00:25 AM EST
    You are on the same page as Breitbart.

    Parent
    And stopped clocks.... :) (none / 0) (#181)
    by christinep on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 12:00:17 PM EST
    Nah (none / 0) (#189)
    by jbindc on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 03:29:44 PM EST
    Conservative blogs and writers routinely have the same complaint as you - all I had to do was giggle "Ron Fournier. So if a journalist is hated by everyone parish, maybe he's just actually getting a little to close v to b the truth.

    So we'll just say that you think like and agree with Breitbart and The National Review.

    Parent

    Lots of lefty blogs (5.00 / 1) (#190)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 03:45:54 PM EST
    have slagged Ron in the past about his attitude towards Obama for a long time now, so perhaps the conservative sites you cite are just Johnnie-come-latelies from another perspective.    👽


    Parent
    Fournier covers his tracks, usually (none / 0) (#193)
    by christinep on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 04:14:48 PM EST
    This is simply speculation: His candidates (the ones that get the nice coverage, imo) are the he's-the-one-you-want-to-have-a-beer-with types ... so, candidates of the Bush variety (or Christie) would seem to fit that, based upon his past assignments.

    Parent
    I don't tend to visit Repub-oriented sites (none / 0) (#192)
    by christinep on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 04:10:17 PM EST
    But hey ... you did make me laugh with that quip ... wrong, but funny. 'Like the sense of humor.

    Parent
    A blind pig can find an acorn (none / 0) (#184)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 12:34:00 PM EST
    once in a while.

    Parent
    For those (none / 0) (#176)
    by FlJoe on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 09:53:37 AM EST
    of us who see Bush's finger prints it looks like he got a two'fer.

    Parent
    Actually (5.00 / 2) (#177)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 10:06:55 AM EST
    this blows up his chances too with the GOP screeching about it. Bush is going ot look like an idiot talking about this when he did the same thing. And how do you know he didn't release all his emails?

    Anyway, IMO Bush has bigger problems than his private email account and it's named Terri Schiavo where he thought he could flout the law and send in the state troopers. Sharia law for America courtesy of Jeb Bush.

    Parent

    He (none / 0) (#180)
    by FlJoe on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 11:09:32 AM EST
    released "all" his e-mails less then a month ago, he saw this coming, he actually seemed to rush it as he carelessly released SS#s and other sensitive personal info. It does not matter if I believe he released all of his correspondence , I don't, it matters how the media spins it, dollar to donuts they will dub Jeb as a paragon of transparency.

    Remember, Jeb left office 8 years ago do you really expect the media go back and look for "secret" servers and such? Besides we all know that true modern conservatives and their media enablers have a very "selective" view of history.

     Jeb's actions in the Schiavo saga were truly abhorrent, but I  have little doubt they will be ignored or marginalized by the media. Ancient history you see.

    Parent

    Jeb (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 01:05:13 PM EST
    has bigger problems. He openly defied the law in the Terri Schaivo case. He acted just like George Wallace did back in the 1960's. He even announced at CPAC that he was proud he defied the courts in Florida. Lawton Chiles made a fool out of him and he's been out of politics for a long time and he stupidly has the same advisors his brother had. So while the press might try to give him a break there's a motherlode of information out there that would kill him in a general election besides having the toxic name of Bush. If he even makes it to the general, he's got to fend off a lot of nuts before then and he's even sounding really nutty himself these days. Those speeches at CPAC are enough to take any of the down in a general election.

    Parent
    You're too funny (5.00 / 2) (#163)
    by Yman on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 07:19:35 AM EST
    You're outraged by HC's use of a private email account that "may or may not" have violated a SD policy (not a law), but you defend Rove's use of one because he should've assumed they would be archived. - Heh:

    1.  No idea what company you work for (and it's not relevant), but the most widely used email applications (Outlook, etc.) do not automatically archive deleted emails.

    2.  They were using a private Internet domain (gwb43.com) owned by and hosted on an email server run by the Republican National Committee - can't get much more partisan/secret than that.

    3.  They deleted the archives.

    4.  As many as 22 million emails were deleted.

    5.  Rather than express your newfound outrage over the use of private email accounts, you defended Rove's use of them.

    Sometimes, the hypocrisy is just too funny.

    Parent
    et al again (none / 0) (#166)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 07:57:59 AM EST
    Your partisan rants prove my points after I wrote:

    Laying aside all the justifications, claims that they did it too ............
    Does anyone here think any government official should have private communication methods with any other government official...or anyone else for that matter... in which the people's business is discussed?

    Thank you.

    Oh well.

    Yman, you still can't read. I said that I expected my emails, and I think Rove did to, were being archived. But the greater point is that no matter what Rove did Hillary wouldn't be in deep doodoo and you folks would not be running in circles trying to justify her actions if she had just used government equipment.

    And yes, if she sent or received confidential/secret information she broke the rules.

    Have a nice day. I'm done here.

    Parent

    "You expected" (5.00 / 2) (#167)
    by Yman on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 08:01:42 AM EST
    ... and you think Rove expected, too.

    (Can't ..... stop .... laughing .......)

    I think you're right, though.

    You ARE done here ...

    Parent

    She's (5.00 / 2) (#168)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 08:05:04 AM EST
    not in "deep doo doo" except in the fantasy world of conservatives. There is no law saying what she did is illegal but it's certainly getting funny watching the Republicans self immolate over this. By the time she announces they are going to have conjured up so many conspiracy theories and then all the emails are going to be released and you guys are going to be sitting there yet again looking like fools with eggs thrown on your face. You guys never learn do you? You keep trying the failed strategy of slinging mud but somehow it always ends up back on your faces. Just put on the suicide jackets and made it short.

    Parent
    Rove deleted the e-mails (none / 0) (#171)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 08:59:32 AM EST
    so why would he archive hem afterwards?

    You're very funny with your lapses of logic.

    Parent

    In case you never had an email (none / 0) (#197)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Mar 08, 2015 at 08:50:34 PM EST
    account in which you have more than 1 a day, you delete them to allow the account to be manageable.

    For example, as a hiring manager (someone who could hire) I received a copy of every email that HR put out. e.g, If the email was about qualifications needed for a position in Mexico and Mexico wasn't mine to manage I would delete the email knowing that it would be archived and "findable" if I needed it later. Multiply that a hundred times and you may be able to get the picture.

    But irrespective of what Rove did or did not know or do my point was that two wrongs do not make a right.

    If Rove was wrong that doesn't mean that what Hillary, or any government official, did is right.

    And you continue to show an interesting moral lapse.

    Parent

    He didn't archive them at all (none / 0) (#199)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun Mar 08, 2015 at 09:20:08 PM EST
    WHAT PART OF THAT DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND?

    and that wasn't true of Hillary's e-mails, so far as we know.

    Get that through your thick skull.

    And, for the record, if she did anything wrong, that should be held against her, but you're ready to find her guilty without knowing all the facts in the case.

    That's an interesting moral lapse on your part.    

    Parent

    Lois Lehner (none / 0) (#200)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Mar 08, 2015 at 10:49:15 PM EST
    Enough said. LOL and I'm done here.

    Parent
    George W. Bush (none / 0) (#76)
    by Repack Rider on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 11:18:45 AM EST
    ...and his administration certainly thought so.

    Is that "one" or "many?"

    Parent

    I don't have a problem... (none / 0) (#77)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 11:33:40 AM EST
    with brainstorming or idea sessions being off the record and private...being able to speak freely without your ideas being used against you or taken out of context would seem to be vital.  Though the best format for that would be face to face meetings...not email or phone.

    But other than that, everything should be in the public record....including many things currently deemed classified.  

    Parent

    no... (none / 0) (#79)
    by Reconstructionist on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 11:52:12 AM EST
     That (as do a limited number of other reasons)  constitutes justification for rules which permit certain materials  to be exempt from public disclosure for some period of time, but it does not justify a reason to allow officials to decide for themselves that such communications will not be preserved.

    Parent
    Understood... (none / 0) (#87)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 12:41:41 PM EST
    though I wonder if that rule causes officials/staffers to self-censor controversial ideas that are at least worthy of consideration...fear of it coming out a later time and damaging their career/boss/party at that point.

    Parent
    Hell yes :) (none / 0) (#95)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 01:10:10 PM EST
    Jocelyn Elders... (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by kdog on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 05:37:19 PM EST
    comes to mind. Though her ideas were hardly radical, and she made no attempt to keep them private...she serves as a cautionary tale of what droppin' straight dope can do. And there are many more examples.

    Parent
    In all the latest business development (none / 0) (#150)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 07:57:38 PM EST
    Writings, we are encouraged to entertain the craziest ideas along with all others when spitballing because that can lead to new novel working solutions.  Don't get caught actually doing that though :)

    Parent
    Agreed. There should (none / 0) (#88)
    by KeysDan on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 12:42:34 PM EST
    be an algorithm between the declassification of old secrets and classification of new secrets.  Daniel Patrick Moynihan maintained that officials hoard secrets because they are the currency of power, but too many secrets debase the currency.

    We learned from  Chelsea Manning that the disclosures about the state department depicted some embarrassing memos, but caused negligible harm.  Indeed, Manning's disclosures seemed to  depict our foreign policy, in largest measure, to be principled, intelligent and pragmatic.  And, consistent (although often in less polite ways--sort of the way people talk) in public and private.  Which, perhaps, was the best kept secret.  On the other hand, the disclosures of Edward Snowden, showed a deceitful government that was caught up lying to the  citizens on the invasion of their privacy.  

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#78)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 11:42:33 AM EST
    it's kind of hard to think Republicans really care about this that much from all the things that have happened in the past with them but I have to ask do you really want to spend tax payer money on preserving conversations with florists and caterers about Chelsea's wedding? That's essentially what you're saying and what about time away from work? Should they even have any private email address at all that friends can send them jokes on? Or do you think that once someone works for the government they should cede all privacy? That seems to be what you are saying? It's kind of a moot point though. Kerry is the first one to use .gov exclusively.

    Parent
    Aiding and abetting what, jim? (none / 0) (#81)
    by Anne on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 12:01:14 PM EST
    Can you be specific?

    What we think has nothing to do with what the policies, protocols and rules/regs were at the time, does it?

    I have less of a problem with Hillary and her staff communicating about the day to day, unclassified, aspects of the job than I did with Karl Rove and his cronies using personal e-mail accounts to engineer the US Attorney firings and God knows what else.  It matters why one is using a "secret" account.

    And as far as "private" v. "public," unless we all can have immediate and ongoing access to the contents of people's government e-mail accounts, those government accounts are, for all intents and purposes, way more private than they are public.  Oh, you can make a FOIA request for them, but you may not live long enough to get them, since, as I understand it, the people responsible for reviewing and archiving the e-mails are so far behind they may never catch up.

    As for Hillary - I don't know if it was okay, jim.  I don't know if State's IT people vetted her system, if it was adequately firewalled and secure. And neither do you.

    Let's face something, shall we?  We have about as much chance of getting accountability and transparency from our elected, appointed officials as we do of being on the next mission to the international space station.  It's all smoke and mirrors, kabuki, farce - pick one - but what it isn't is being responsive to the people - regardless of party affiliation.  

    That ship has sailed.


    Parent

    I'm an aider, an abettor (none / 0) (#84)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 12:18:10 PM EST
    I'm a lover, and I'm a sinner, I play my music in the suuuuuuun!

    Parent
    All communications should be subject to sharing (none / 0) (#109)
    by vicndabx on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 02:28:09 PM EST
    eventually. There has to be adequate funding however to provide technology so we don't have these issues ever.  There is absolutely no reason for those we entrust with the running of our government to have less than what you or I can get.

    I don't fault officials for following the rules as they exist at any given time. Aiding and abetting, hardly.

    Parent

    Senator Menendez going down (none / 0) (#96)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 01:11:44 PM EST


    I'm not a fan of Bob Menendez. (5.00 / 3) (#146)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 06:16:21 PM EST
    I would have to assume that if an indictment is imminent, DOJ investigators and lawyers are confident that they can duly establish to a trial jury that there was a direct quid pro quo relationship between the senator and Dr. Melgen, which obviously goes well above and beyond their mutual claim of a longtime personal friendship between them. Because to be honest, the information contained in the New York Times account doesn't really provide much enlightenment in that regard.

    That said, if Sen. Menendez is correct in his assertion that he didn't cross any ethical boundaries in his relationship with Dr. Melgen, he sure seems to have been skirting the frontiers of impropriety with his rather strenuous advocacy on the ophthalmologist's behalf.

    This is why anyone who has any business whatsoever pending before lawmakers in any capacity should steer clear of any gift giving and exchanges with friends / acquaintances in both elective or appointed public office. The appearance of a conflict of interest is often as damaging as any actual conflict itself, because both serve to further undermine already-fragile public confidence in the integrity of the political process.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Menendez and NJ machine politics (none / 0) (#195)
    by Politalkix on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 07:55:52 PM EST
    The Democrats will be just fine. (5.00 / 1) (#196)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Mar 08, 2015 at 04:43:31 PM EST
    Lucky for them that the New Jersey GOP is in no position to avail themselves of the unexpected opportunity, given that they're presently led by an unpopular governor who has his own serious ethical problems.

    In politics, timing can be everything.

    Parent

    Link (none / 0) (#107)
    by jbindc on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 02:16:44 PM EST
    Via google news, Fox news points out that (none / 0) (#110)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 02:40:32 PM EST
    the senator opposes the Obama administration's pursuing negotiations w/Iran and cuba. Payback.

    Parent
    If you believe the Fox News people (none / 0) (#162)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 07:14:22 AM EST
    then I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to show you the next time you're on the East Coast.

    Parent
    Believe Fox news? (none / 0) (#187)
    by oculus on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 01:57:00 PM EST
    At least you're (none / 0) (#188)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 02:26:06 PM EST
    Not gulllable enough to believe they are a form of news.

    Parent
    SUO... (none / 0) (#112)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 03:05:08 PM EST
    ...Did Rain Man just tell you take a nap in another thread ?

    Pretty sure it's obvious to normal people that he's "a touch" out there, so I see no need to continue with him.

    Parent
    I am sick of winter (none / 0) (#113)
    by Zorba on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 03:10:16 PM EST
    I am more than ready for spring.
    Hey, Donald, do you and your wife have a guest room?  If so, get it ready, I may be there.  
    I can cook pretty well, to earn my keep.   ;-)

    LOL! Winter will be over soon, I promise. (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 03:49:35 PM EST
    The eastern seaboard certainly got clobbered this season, for sure. But just think of all that mud and gunk which you can look forward to seeing this spring! It's been constantly raining out here for most of this past week, with very strong wind gusts, and the mountains over on the big Island are snow-capped.

    We're actually in the midst of preparations for our pending move to Hilo, which we anticipate will be completed by mid-June. We're flying over there tonight to meet tomorrow morning with the contractor who's been doing the remodeling. He's already finished the bathrooms, and is about to start on our kitschy '70s-era kitchen by knocking out the interior walls so that the kitchen looks out over the dining room, and replacing all the cupboards.

    Buying a new home while deciding to hang onto the old one has become a time-consuming proposition, not to mention pretty expensive. We've already bought a brand-new range & oven, dishwasher and refrigerator for the remodeling, and will be buying new furniture for the Hilo house as well. We're not shipping any furniture over to the Big Island; the old stuff is staying right where it is, here in Kuliouou Valley. Elder Daughter will continue to live here for the time being, and we'll still have a place to stay whenever we need to return to Oahu for whatever the reason, work, etc.

    But there will be no vacation travel to exotic locales this year. We might visit the folks in south Texas and Southern California come the December holidays. And we're taking two weeks off in June to square things away in our new home and get ourselves reoriented to new environs. While we've gotten to know Hilo town pretty well, we want to familiarize ourselves with the rest of East Hawaii island.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    I remember (none / 0) (#126)
    by jbindc on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 03:55:07 PM EST
    We stayed in a house in Volcano.  It was February, and while we had lovely weather that day in Hilo, by the time we made it up to the house in Volcano, the temperature dropped so low that we kept a fire going all night, I slept in sweat pants and a sweatshirt (which I never do) and I slept under TWO comforters!

    Weirdest part of my stay in Hawaii!

    Parent

    ... given that Hilo is at sea level, while the town of Volcano is situated nearly 4,000 feet above that on the windward slope of Mauna Loa (the world's largest mountain by size and bulk) in the middle of the Pacific, which renders it exposed to ocean winds. Were you staying at Kula Lodge on the slopes of Haleakala in upcountry Maui, you'd have likely experienced a very similar chill.

    In February, it's not at all uncommon for temperatures at that elevation in the islands to dip regularly into the low 50s and high 40s during the nighttime hours. At present in Volcano, 1:30 p.m. HST, it's currently 61 degrees and raining. Go upslope another 5,000 feet, and you'd find yourself knee-deep in snow right now.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Well, just remember, (none / 0) (#136)
    by Zorba on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 04:52:31 PM EST
    If you need a cook, not only am I (if I do say do myself) an excellent Greek and Middle Eastern cook, I'm also pretty good with Mexican, Thai, Vietnamese, and French (thank you, Julia Child) cooking.  As well as having a certain expertise in canning and preserving food, and making all kinds of pickles.
    Just saying.   ;-)

    Parent
    Let us hereby give thanks that ... (none / 0) (#114)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 03:10:56 PM EST
    ... the average interisland flight on Hawaiian Airlines is only a half-hour long.

    Can someone explain this to me? (none / 0) (#118)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 03:30:04 PM EST
    I am not a statistician.

    From the Ferguson DOJ report:

    Of all stopped black drivers, 91%, or 8,987, received citations, while 87%, or 1,501, of all stopped white drivers received a citation.

    [...]

    These disparities in the outcomes that result from traffic stops remain even after regression analysis is used to control for non-race-based variables, including driver age; gender; the assignment of the officer making the stop; disparities in officer behavior; and the stated
    reason the stop was initiated.

    Upon accounting for differences in those variables, African Americans remained [...] 2.00 times more likely to receive a citation;

    Huh?

    91% black drivers get citations when stopped, vs 87% of white drivers.

    (91-87)/87 = 4.5%.

    So AA drivers get citations 4.5% more than whitd drivers when stopped.

    How does "regression analysis" boost 4.5% more citations to 100% more? ("2.00 times more likely" is double, ie., 100% more)

    the only thing I can think of (none / 0) (#120)
    by CST on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 03:45:06 PM EST
    is that "accounting for differences in those variables" made it even more likely that a black driver was being cited?

    To be honest I think the most confusing part of that whole thing is the use of 2.00 times more likely - that's a pretty precise number being thrown out there out of context and in a way that makes me think it's really not supposed to be nearly that precise.

    Parent

    The percentages are not what stand (none / 0) (#123)
    by Anne on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 03:51:54 PM EST
    out for me, it's the sheer numbers: almost 9,000 v. 1,500.

    Parent
    percentages matter more than sheer numbers (none / 0) (#125)
    by CST on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 03:54:58 PM EST
    White people are also a much smaller portion of the general population.

    Parent
    Actually, when you look at what the (none / 0) (#128)
    by Anne on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 03:57:04 PM EST
    total pool of stopped drivers is, the numbers are even worse.

    Parent
    the other possibility (none / 0) (#121)
    by CST on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 03:47:37 PM EST
    is that they are trying to say that black drivers received twice as many citations.  Although that's not what they're actually saying - they could possibly be trying (and failing) to say that.

    Parent
    Ya agreed, I really don't get it. (none / 0) (#130)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 04:03:17 PM EST
    Anyway, the more I look at that report, the more it seems like traffic stops and jaywalking/etc., are the trigger for the whole mess.

    A lot of people get in the system through these stops and once a person gets in the system, unless they either get the offense dismissed or pay the total fine on conviction, they stay in the system for a long time. And the longer they stay in the system, the more opportunity there is for additional charges and fines, etc.

    Parent

    Without a link (none / 0) (#132)
    by Reconstructionist on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 04:05:40 PM EST
      I think the 2X is intended to mean that AAs are twice as likely to receive a citation when you account for both the increased likelihood they will be stopped and the increased likelihood they will be given a citation once stopped.

    Parent
    91% AA received citations vs 87% white (none / 0) (#134)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 04:13:46 PM EST
    Bottom of page 65.


    Of all stopped black drivers, 91%, or 8,987, received citations, while 87%, or 1,501, of
    all stopped white drivers received a citation.

    891 stopped black drivers--10% of all stopped
    black drivers--were arrested as a result of the stop, whereas only 63 stopped white drivers--4%
    of all stopped white drivers--were arrested. This disparity is explainable in large part by the
    high number of black individuals arrested for outstanding municipal warrants issued for missed
    court payments and appearances.

    As we discuss below, African Americans are more likely to have warrants issued against them than whites and are more likely to be arrested for an
    outstanding warrant than their white ounterparts. Notably, on 14 occasions FPD listed the only
    reason for an arrest following a traffic stop as "resisting arrest." In all 14 of those cases, the
    person arrested was black.

    These disp arities in the outcomes that result from traffic stops remain even after regression analysis is used to control for non-race-based variables,including driver age; gender; the assignment of the officer making the stop ;
    disparities in officer behavior; andthe stated
    reason the stop was initiated.

    Upon accounting for differences in those variables, African Americans remained 2.07 times more likely to be searched; 2.00 times more likely to receive a citation; and 2.37
    times more likely to be arrested than other stopped individuals.



    Parent
    We can agree (none / 0) (#169)
    by Reconstructionist on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 08:21:42 AM EST
     that in terms of expository writing it is not a model of clarity. Whether it's just "poor writing" (omitting a necessary step in the analysis  to provide a clear explanation of how the determination that 2X blacks are more likely to be cited), an inadvertent mistake or a calculated effort to exaggerate disparity I don't know.

       The way the analysis begins by using "all stopped black drivers" and ends with the more general "African Americans [are] 2.00 more likely to receive a citation" confuses the issues.

      Clearly among "stopped" drivers the disparity is much less than 2X (91/87%).

      It's possible that elsewhere stats are provided that indicate black drivers are approximately twice as likely to be stopped, but it's not stated in that passage. Perhaps, it is elsewhere n the report and this passage just doesn't "show it's work."

       I'd also note, it's would take a lot of data to demonstrate with validity that one class is x% more likely to be stopped. Simply comparing number of stops to percentage of population would not suffice. All citizens don't drive and they do not drive the same number of miles within the town. Additionally, some people of both races who don't live in Ferguson undoubtedly drive through it. Without actually knowing the "driver miles" or "driver hours" corresponding to different groups you really don't have sufficient data for that purpose. It's possible that other factors could be at play as well. For instance peole might do more or less of their driving at different times. It would not be surprising (or necessarily race based) if  many more stops per unit of traffic were performed from say 10 PM to 4AM, etc.

    Parent

    You ask a very good question. (none / 0) (#135)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 04:31:11 PM EST
    I'm just speculating here, because I don't have access to the DOJ's actual statistics used as a basis for its findings, but the investigators may have also been considering the greater likelihood of an African American driver being pulled over by the police in Ferguson, than a white person.

    While African Americans are 63% of the city's population, per the DOJ report they accounted for 86% of all police traffic stops within Ferguson city limits. Conversely, white Americans comprise about 33% of the city population, yet accounted for only 13% of all traffic stops.

    In other words, the DOJ found that while black drivers were being deliberately and systematically targeted by Ferguson police, white drivers were far less likely to be pulled over in the first place.

    Further, the DOJ report noted that black drivers were more likely to receive multiple citations per police traffic stop, than were white drivers.

    In one specific instance noted by the report, a 32-year-old black resident who was sitting in his car on the street after a basketball game was confronted by a white police officer because the vehicle's window tinting was darker than legally allowable by city ordinance.

    This man was ultimately charged with eight counts, including making two false declarations for providing a short form of his first name ("Mike" rather than "Michael"), and for giving a current address that, although totally legitimate, was different than the one listed on his current driver's license because he had recently moved.

    When factored into the overall equation, that could account for the DOJ's conclusion about the disparity in the actual rates of ticketing by Ferguson police officers.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    One correction and further clarification: (none / 0) (#137)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 05:04:14 PM EST
    According to the DOJ report, "[d]espite making up 67% of the population" -- not 63%, as I said above -- "African Americans accounted for 85% of FPD's traffic stops," and not 63% and 86%, respectively, as I mistakenly cited above. My bad. The report also finds that:

    "African Americans are 2.07 times more likely to be searched during a vehicular stop but are 26% less likely to have contraband found on them during a search. They are 2.00 times more likely to receive a citation and 2.37 times more likely to be arrested following a vehicular stop."

    I would assume that these numbers would probably also include those African Americans who were occupants of the vehicles being pulled over by police and were searched, asked for ID, etc., yet who were not necessarily the vehicle's driver. Further:

    "African Americans are more likely to receive multiple citations during a single incident, receiving four or more citations on 73 occasions between October 2012 and July 2014, whereas non-African Americans received four or more citations only twice during that period."

    Here, while the term "incident" is likely inclusive of all police traffic stops, it's not necessarily exclusive to traffic stops per se. Finally, and I think this point is important:

    "African Americans account for 95% of Manner of Walking charges; 94% of all Fail to Comply charges; 92% of all Resisting Arrest charges; 92% of all Peace Disturbance charges; and 89% of all Failure to Obey charges."

    Again, the language used here implies that not all of citations necessarily have anything to do with a traffic stop by police.

    Therefore, if I'm reading and understanding this correctly, the DOJ is stating that African Americans as a whole -- not just African American drivers -- are more likely to receive a citation from Ferguson police than are white Americans. And given the above statistics, that finding makes sense.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    come home, but that won't explain what the report actually says. Here is the report, see the bottom of page 65 for this specific question.

    Parent
    The (5.00 / 1) (#147)
    by FlJoe on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 06:34:10 PM EST
    nut phrase at the end  of pg 65
    African Americans remained 2.07 times more likely to be searched; 2.00 times more likely to receive a citation; and 2.37 times more likely to be arrested than other stopped individuals.
    is at worst a a  bit of sloppy analysis, and most likely just a confusing presentation.

    Looking at the raw numbers presented  the 2.07 and 2.37 look correct. I assume these are arrest/search per stop numbers. I think the confusion is creeping in because the citations/per stop number is being used. Given other evidence that shows that the number of citations per stop skews higher for AA it is quite possible that the cites per stop can be much higher then the driver cited per stop %.

    Parent

    I saw the report. (none / 0) (#142)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 05:39:05 PM EST
    In fact, the quotes I cited above are from page 65 itself.

    Suffice to say that a DOJ report such as this would be very carefully reviewed by multiple people prior to its public release, given the potentially inflammable nature of its findings.

    Therefore, Justice Dept. investigators aren't likely to make careless mistakes in their statistical analysis of Ferguson citation and arrest records, and probably aren't inclined to offer findings and conclusions that the evidence does not support.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Well, (5.00 / 2) (#144)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 06:13:34 PM EST
    let's just say I am not as optimistic as you regarding the quality of fed gvt work.

    Parent
    You sure about that? (5.00 / 2) (#148)
    by jbindc on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 06:35:06 PM EST
    We have a massive health "care" bill that was chalkengrd yesterday at the Supreme Court because of basically sloppy writing (or so the government argues).  A bill, which took over a year to pass, and which was presumably seen by hundreds of people.

    Parent
    Here's an interesting "sentence" (5.00 / 1) (#149)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Mar 06, 2015 at 07:05:14 PM EST
    from the DOJ's report.

    The chart noted, for example, that while other municipalities' parking fines generally range from $5 to $100, Ferguson's is $102.

    I think I know what they are trying to say, but, wow...

    Parent

    Apples and oranges, jb. (none / 0) (#194)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Mar 07, 2015 at 04:19:41 PM EST
    We're talking about a Justice Dept. report, and not a piece of legislation hashed together by multiple committees. There are entirely different processes at work in both instances.

    Parent
    I'm sure it would be interesting.

    Parent