home

Tuesday Afternoon Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 04:55:56 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Open Thread.

< Closure for Amanda Knox: Written Court Ruling Slams Prosecution | Wednesday Open Thread >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Tuesday Afternoon Open Thread | 201 comments (201 topical)
    I concede my first (and not last) wrong prediction (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 07:37:23 PM EST
    of the election season. no way Scitt Walker is going to be the GOP nominee. Just saw him on MSNBC, and if there was a picture next to the word impotent in the dictionary, it would be Scott Walker. Holy hell, what a horrible candidate.

    Don't worry (none / 0) (#21)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 07:43:37 PM EST
    you'll never catch up with Jim as far as wrong predictions go. He was all in for Walker. I also seem to remember him talking about a President Newt and a President Perry. So if he continues on his current trend Trump won't be the nominee either.

    Parent
    You dream well, Capt. (none / 0) (#24)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 07:57:54 PM EST
    But anyone of the three would be a better Prez than Obama of Chicago.

    Parent
    Damn (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:00:11 PM EST
    And I voted for him because he was born in Kenya.

    Parent
    Jim's (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by FlJoe on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:44:13 PM EST
    right the Chicago Obama sucked, however the Kenyan Obama rocked, fortunately he got rid of Rahm Emanuel sooner rather then later.

    Parent
    Good to know (none / 0) (#41)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:29:01 PM EST
    Ga6th and I are now interchangeable.

    Parent
    Right. Just as McGovern, Carter, Clinton (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 12:02:02 PM EST
    Obama, -- and all blacks, Mexicans, and Muslims are interchangeable..

    Don't feel bad.

    Parent

    I noticed (none / 0) (#46)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:41:58 PM EST
    that too. Hysterical.

    Parent
    Me too. But that's because Kip Keino (none / 0) (#117)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 08:39:04 PM EST
    didn't run.

    oh, wait...


    Parent

    Damn (none / 0) (#119)
    by CoralGables on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 09:22:56 PM EST
    That was a blast from the past.

    Parent
    And yes (none / 0) (#120)
    by CoralGables on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 09:36:14 PM EST
    that is former US Congressman Jim Ryun moving into 2nd for Olympic Silver late in the race.

    Parent
    Doesn't Change the Fact... (none / 0) (#76)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 09:07:06 AM EST
    ...that you were wrong.

    And you can argue all you want that they would have been better, but the fact is your party doesn't agree with your assessment either.

    But I do love when you have nothing, your go to move is Obama.  Never fails.

    Parent

    Don't feel bad (none / 0) (#22)
    by ragebot on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 07:52:29 PM EST
    I once said no one is perfect.

    Parent
    I (none / 0) (#29)
    by FlJoe on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:15:10 PM EST
    thought Walker had the best resume, Union busting, Koch-sucking, hippy punching, non-elitist , cultural warrior, not named Bush... then he started talking, Nixon without the charisma comes to  mind.

    Parent
    Yep- on paper he is a darn near perfect GOP (none / 0) (#32)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:21:20 PM EST
    nominee. Guess that Koch money can only take you so far though.

    Parent
    Still trying to figure out (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:30:36 PM EST
    how he survived the recall.   The guy is creepy.

    Parent
    Voter suppression and vote fraud (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by Towanda on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 10:08:52 PM EST
    is how he won.  But the Kochs already had bought the state Supreme Court, so cases (bags of ballots opened and lost and counts changed oddly; the recall delayed until summer, and voter ID enacted in time just for the recall election, making it impossible for many college students to vote at home; and more, much more) were tossed out by the state court, and others then not taken to the court, without hope of integrity there.  

    The feds could have acted, but the DoJ has been abysmal about taking any action in Wisconsin, despite repeated pleas on election corruption -- and on the current court corruption re the  investigation of Walker (aka the "John Doe," the Wisconsin term for, essentially, grand jury).  

    For just one example, most recently, a federal district court judge in Wisconsin (whose wife works for a Walkerite) stopped the ongoing investigation -- and ordered that all of the evidence be destroyed.  

    I did not think that could be done during an ongoing investigation.  

    Parent

    Paying the jockey more (none / 0) (#50)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:50:55 PM EST
    ...doesn't make the horse any faster.

    The GOP nomination is like the theme of Trading Places, billionaires manipulating suckers, not to help the suckers, but to compete among themselves as to whose hoss can get farther.

    Parent

    True (none / 0) (#66)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 10:11:02 PM EST
    but paying a jockey less can make a horse slower.

    Parent
    Would that make Donald (none / 0) (#78)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 09:55:07 AM EST
    a jockey or some part of the horse?

    Parent
    "part" (none / 0) (#118)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 08:42:47 PM EST
    is correct.  Here's your answer in a little more detail.  An old joke but true enough.

    Parent
    Dean's comment about (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by lentinel on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 05:09:23 PM EST
    Sanders, (quoted yesterday by Anne)


    People like Bernie are always attractive, as I was. They speak truth to power. The problem with candidates like that -- and like me -- is that as you get closer to election time, you're more careful about how your vote's going to be used. You're going to tend to want to see somebody who you think looks presidential as the nominee of your party. That's one of the things that sank me. I knew that as an insurrectionist, I wasn't going to get elected by my party to be the nominee. I just had a lot of trouble turning a corner from being an insurrectionist to being somebody who people could see as president.

    is rather self-serving in my opinion.

    In my opinion, Dean screwed up his own campaign.
    That line about what "looks presidential" is hooey. In my opinion.

    I remember one of the things that drew me to Dean was the way he supported his wife. She was, as I recall, a physician. She was not going to be part of the campaign - and if Dean were to be elected, she would not be dwelling in the White House - but would continue to serve her patients. Dean supported this. I thought, wow. A "first lady" that was a dedicated physician - breaking the mold of a flotus whose function is to offer kitchen wisdom and read to children. (Not that there's anything wrong with reading to children...)
    Then, as things start to get dicey, there is an interview - with Barbara Walters as I recall, and who is sitting there dutifully, albeit with figurative teeth clenched, is Mrs.Dr. Dean.
    Oh boy. I thought to myself... here we go.

    Then there was the scream.
    I saw it live.
    I knew the moment that he did it that he was finished. The gent that the press had been describing as an angry man lets out a most bizarre sounding vocal utterance.
    Goodbye Mr. Dean.

    Sanders, to date at least, is sticking to being who he is. He does speak in slogans now and again.
    That is tiresome to me. But what he is saying is unvarnished leftist talk - and I find it refreshing.

    Even here, we are not prone to discuss anything Sanders is saying. That is because, I believe, we too have our ideas about who is "electable".

    When it comes to "electability", none of those who have been given that mantle - on either side of the aisle - is anyone that I could consider voting for.

    Hillary Clinton is sounding like McCain's "Bomb-Bomb-Iran" ditty. Distancing herself from Obama by moving to the right. Just what we need.

    Jeb? Trump? The rest of those nitwits?

    The only one who sounds sane to me is Sanders.

    We need Dean to support him, not come out and say that he's and insurgent with a short-term appeal who doesn't seem "presidential" - whatever the fk that is.

    A guy in a wheelchair. That was presidential.
    On the other side of the spectrum, a half-wit actor - that was presidential.
    A semi-reformed junkie alcoholic with an IQ in the single digits and a silver spoon up his arse was presidential. Twice!

    Don't tell me what's "presidential", Señor Dean.

    Baltimore mayor (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by Anne on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 09:58:25 AM EST
    will not seek reelection:

    Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, beleaguered by the death of Freddie Gray and the protests and rioting that followed, announced Friday she won't seek re-election.

    She said she is stepping out of the race to focus on "work to move our city forward," and not out of any concern she might not win the race against a growing field of challengers.

    "It was a very difficult decision, but I knew I needed to spend time, the remaining 15 months of my term, focused on the city's future and not my own," she said at a news conference at City Hall.

    So much for that theory that all the Freddie Gray-related decisions were about boosting her chances for another term, eh?

    Now (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 10:48:43 AM EST
    watch the silly claptrap slide effortlessly from "boosting her election chances" to "because she knew she would lose" or "she fled be for an indictment" yada yada

    That's the great thing about silly claptrap.  It's very malleable.


    Parent

    Next comes "Biden, who reluctantly" (5.00 / 1) (#132)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 11:23:46 AM EST
    assumed the mantle of Democratic hopes blah blah blah*..."

    * because we didn't see enough of this standard issue S.O.B. at the Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill hearings.


    Parent
    Jennifer Granholm last night (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 11:29:34 AM EST
    look, we are 5 months away from a vote being cast.  All the bedwetters should just take a deep breath.

    A-freakin-men

    Parent

    I agree with this (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 12:27:16 PM EST
    I'm so tired of the bed wetters and the concern trolls also.

    Parent
    You do realize we were talking about (none / 0) (#135)
    by Anne on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 11:40:41 AM EST
    the mayor of Baltimore and not Hillary Clinton, who has not, to my knowledge, dropped out of the race.

    Unless you think Biden is going to run for Mayor of Baltimore?

    Parent

    I think (5.00 / 2) (#136)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 11:46:09 AM EST
    that was what we call a topic jump.

    Parent
    Maybe she's telling the truth (1.00 / 1) (#151)
    by McBain on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 02:13:34 PM EST
    Maybe she has the best interest of the city of Baltimore in mind and not her own.  However, it reminds me of the House of Cards episode I saw the other night  where Keven Spacey tells the nation he's not seeking reelection so he can focus on doing what's right for the country.  

    I'm not suggestion Blake is an evil sociopath like Francis Underwood. I am suggesting there's a lot going on behind the scenes.  

    If Blake wanted to be a good mayor, she would have done everything in her power to prevent that ridiculous payout to Gray family. I don't get the feeling she's an activist like Mosby.  I think she's in over her head.    

    Parent

    I don't suppose your thoughts and (5.00 / 2) (#160)
    by Anne on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 04:49:07 PM EST
    feelings have anything to do with the fact that both Mosby and Rawlings-Blake are women of color, do they?

    It seems your knowledge of the mayor's experience is lacking, which is a shame since her cv is widely available and there for anyone who actually wants to speak from the facts and not deeply-seated bias.  So, here, for your enlightenment, consider:

    Rawlings-Blake ascended to the city's highest elected office in February 2010 when Dixon resigned amid a corruption scandal. She's been a political fixture in the city since 1995, when she became the youngest person ever elected to the City Council.

    Baltimore City Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake announced Friday that she will not seek re-election.

    She served on the council for 15 years, including three as the president.

    During her tenure, unemployment has dropped from 12.1 percent to 8.1 percent and the city added about 12,000 jobs. She shepherded a plan to secure $1 billion for new school construction and opened the city's first new recreation center in a decade.

    Rawlings-Blake also said she's leaving office to spend more time with her 11-year-old daughter, Sophia, in the years before she heads to high school. Rawlings-Blake lives in the city's Coldspring neighborhood in North Baltimore with her husband, Kent.

    By the time she leaves City Hall, Rawlings-Blake will have served seven years in the job, about the same amount of time as Martin O'Malley. He had been at the helm for less than two full terms when he left the city to become governor.

    Rawlings-Blake is expected to also spend the coming months pushing her plan to finance the construction of more rec centers by selling some of the city's parking garages, among other initiatives.

    Rawlings-Blake grew up in politics as the daughter of the late Del. Howard P. Rawlings. She is a graduate of Western High School and went on to earn a political science degree at Oberlin College in Ohio and a law degree from the University of Maryland.

    She worked as an attorney with the Baltimore Office of the Public Defender from 1998 to 2006.

    In over her head?  I don't think so.  She probably had more knowledge about how city government works before she was even old enough to vote.  You don't spend 15 years in the city council, and rise to the level of president of that body if you're in over your head.  She finished out the term of the previous mayor and then was elected in her own right: that doesn't happen to someone who's in over her head.

    Methinks that the only person in over his head here is you.

    Parent

    She looked like a deer in the headlights (2.00 / 1) (#171)
    by McBain on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 07:45:20 PM EST
    during the riots.  Blake was in a tough position but she said stupid things and made bad decisions. She wasn't the kind of leader Baltimore needed during a very extreme situation.

    Her skin color has nothing to do with my criticism.   The knee jerk reaction to play the race card in here is getting old.  

    Parent

    Stop trolling. (none / 0) (#173)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 08:21:55 PM EST
    You keep saying the same thing, over and again. And as far as the right-wing trope "race card" is concerned, you're the one who made the following statements in this Open Thread, inferring that Black Lives Matter is a violent organization:

    • "I think it has to do with the riots, Black Lives Matter, and public opinion in general. The city is afraid of more bad publicity. However, decisions made out of fear are often bad ones." (#69)

    • "Black Lives Matter is doing more harm than good."(#92)

    • "I believe BLM is partially responsible for some of the riots and violence we've seen in the past few years. They're responsible for some of the misinformation that gets spread around causing gullible people to believe it's 1960 and racism is a big problem." (#101)

    There's also the little matter of your equating the late Walter Scott with a "fleeing felon," when he was simply a man with a broken taillight who was in arrears on his child support payments. (#104.) But I'll confine myself to the BLM nonsense for now.

    If you want to express racist sentiments about African-Americans on a liberal website, by which you're basically parroting Fox News and AM squawk radio talking points, then you best grow a pair and be prepared to get called out on it.

    By accusing others here of "playing the race card," you've reduced yourself to yet another example of a pathetic right-wing whiner who's unwilling to own what he / she says and take personal responsibility for it.

    :-(

    Parent

    I stand by my comments 100% (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by McBain on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 10:03:22 PM EST
    Nothing I have said is remotely racist.  I don't make personal attacks, insults or threats.  Why must you?

    I don't like much of what the Black Lives Matter activists are doing and I will continue to voice my opinion. The fact BLM was founded, in large part, because of the George Zimmerman trial is ridiculous.  There wasn't any racism against TM in that case and TM's life mattered to a lot of people.    

    I didn't like that they were involved in the protests of the Michael Brown case.  I believe they played a part in ruining the life of Darren Wilson, an innocent man.

    I didn't like what BLM did to Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton even though I would probably never vote for either one of them. They can't seem to accept the opinion that all lives matter... that bothers me...and they came across as bullies. No one likes bullies.  If they keep up that behavior, they will lose any influence they have gained.

    TalkLeft isn't just a liberal website, it's also a legal website. I'm here much for more the legal side of things.  I only wish Jeralyn had more time to discuss these cases.

    I assume you consider yourself to be liberal. Why are you and so many others in here so intolerant of other opinions?  Aren't liberals supposed to be the tolerate ones? Why do you assume criticism of a black person or group must be racist in nature?

    I get along just fine with my black friends and colleges. Their skin color has never been an issue to me.  I'm not a racist.  I'm also not politically correct and I don't have any white guilt.  I understand that bothers some people but I won't stop voicing my opinions.  

    Parent

    Tediousness (5.00 / 2) (#183)
    by MKS on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 10:39:21 PM EST
    This is a liberal site.

    The arguments of conservatives here are often just slogans from Fox News.  

    If I want to know what conservatives think, I can watch Fox or read any number of conservative websites or papers.

    Tolerance does not mean allowing you guys to clog up the threads with tedious slogans.  And your "I have a Black friend," and tacitly attributing much to "white guilt" are very, very shopworn.

    Why do you bother us with this stuff?  

    I would rather read something from someone who brings facts or interesting opinions to the table....

    Parent

    No. This is not a liberal site (5.00 / 1) (#184)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 11:11:51 PM EST
    it is a Left wing site. People here routinely attack others for their opinions.

    Parent
    "A left wing site" (5.00 / 3) (#194)
    by jondee on Sat Sep 12, 2015 at 12:54:20 AM EST
    from the guy who says there are no moderate democrats..

    There's simple solution to your problem with the site: do yourself and everyone else a favor and quit coming here.

    Parent

    Too bad MKS (5.00 / 1) (#185)
    by McBain on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 11:14:16 PM EST
    You can't have everything you want.  Some of the opinions are going to come from conservatives. Some will come from people like me who aren't as conservative as you think.

    I don't watch much Fox news these days because it's 90% political and I find that boring. I find the fear of Fox News from many here fascinating.

    "This is a liberal site."

    Then act like it. I suggest you read the "About" TL page.  It opens with

    Welcome to TalkLeft, the on-line source for liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news.

    I'm mostly here for the injustice news.  What you and many others don't get is my opinions are often more liberal than yours.  Many here want to convict those accused of crimes before we even know what the evidence is.  That's not a liberal view.  

    The "About" page goes on to say...

    Our mission is to intelligently and thoroughly examine issues, legal cases, candidates and legislative initiatives as they pertain to constitutional rights, particularly those of persons accused of crime.

    I have a problem when people are unjustly accused of crimes or considered guilty with a rush to judgement.  That goes for cops, black people, white people, everyone.  I came to TL because of the annalysis Jeralyn gave to the Duke Lacrosse and Kobe Bryant cases.  

    "I would rather read something from someone who brings facts or interesting opinions to the table...."

    Yet you read mine.  And not just that.. .you responded.  If you really want me, and others you don't like to go away.. stop responding.  


    Parent

    It doesn't work (none / 0) (#187)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 12, 2015 at 12:21:35 AM EST
    ignoring you.

    You fill up the site with conservative jargon....Do you how many times I have heard the "I have a black friend so I am not racist" comment?  It is beyond a cliché.....

    So you advocate justice but generally only on behalf of white cops who shoot black men.....

    You take up space that could be afforded those on the Left.    

    Parent

    McBain (2.00 / 1) (#186)
    by The Addams Family on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 11:44:01 PM EST
    across the political spectrum there are people who misconstrue certain complex, nuanced legal or political questions as strictly moral issues

    such people, generally convinced of being morally in the right, cannot tolerate the least dissent from their views, & so they reflexively dismiss all disagreement, no matter how principled or fair-minded it may be, as bigoted & racist -- as evil, in a word

    i too wish that Jeralyn had time to observe & take action on the sump of despicable accusations that some of these threads have become

    Parent

    It would be easier (none / 0) (#188)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 12, 2015 at 12:26:23 AM EST
    if the wingers would stop taunting the liberals....

    Would be a much better site....

    Parent

    Interesting point, Addams Family... (none / 0) (#199)
    by McBain on Sat Sep 12, 2015 at 01:45:14 AM EST
    "across the political spectrum there are people who misconstrue certain complex, nuanced legal or political questions as strictly moral issues"

    And then it gets emotional which often brings out the worst in people. Common sense and respect go out the window.  

    Parent

    I've heard more than enough from you. (none / 0) (#156)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 04:16:25 PM EST
    McBain: "I'm not suggestion (sic) Blake is an evil sociopath like Francis Underwood."

    Oh, really, you're not making that suggestion. Then why even offer the noxious comparison? The only thing I see here that's ridiculous, McBain, is your asinine opinion on this matter. Mayor Rawlings-Blake is "in over her head"? You haven't a friggin' clue about responsible governance, just like the a$$wipes you're listening to on Fox News.

    All you're doing is making specious allegations against Baltimore's mayor, about whom you quite obviously know nothing. And this time, amazingly, you're now using an episode of "House of Cards" for inference.

    I mean, really! You're saying that Rawlings-Blake is untrustworthy because of something you saw on a phuquing Netflix TV drama? That's just so way beyond stupid that it's simply insulting. And when we consider your earlier insinuations about African-Americans and the Black Lives Matter movement being prone to using violence and intimidation, I must say that you've compiled one helluva record here in this thread.

    Anne is right. The reason we even need a Black Lives Matter movement in this country in the year 2015 is due almost entirely to lily-white racist jackwagons like you, who work overtime to deny persons of color both their humanity and the basic respect and decency they deserve. You can't even bring yourself to call Mayor Rawlings-Blake by her correct name.

    :-(

    Parent

    Sounds like (none / 0) (#161)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 04:54:43 PM EST
    She made the right move.
    She is correct, right now she needs to govern the city forward,

    And there are already several prominent candidates that were poised to place a primary challenge.

    Kudos for the right move.

    Parent

    I need to stop being surprised (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by ruffian on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 04:59:30 PM EST
    Big gender gap in latest Dem Quinnipiac poll

    The misogyny (5.00 / 2) (#168)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 06:10:18 PM EST
    has just been so depressing some days.

    Parent
    So, it has to be misogyny ? (5.00 / 1) (#178)
    by NYShooter on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 09:31:45 PM EST
    Maybe, just maybe, she's running a worse campaign than she did eight years ago, if that's even possible.

    If she goes down to defeat you need look no further than that ridiculous, self-mutilating, "apology," she muttered the other night.

    Maybe she should take a break from campaigning, cloister herself in a hotel room, and watch 20 hours of Donald Trump campaigning. Maybe, then she'll see what Self-confidence looks like, and, how voters will line up to follow someone who's not afraid to display it.

    Apology.......

    She should have said, "apology, Andrea?" "Here's your apology: I apologize for feeling how badly I'd like to take your request, and shove it so far up your #@$#! it won't stop till it comes out in China. Now, either ask me a question about how I plan to make America work again, for ALL its citizens, or, get the hell out of here, and send in someone who doesn't treat her viewers like eight year olds!"

    My Lord! People want to see a candidate whose willing to fight for their vote. You remember how great she looked towards the end of her Primary fights with Obama? When reality had set in, and the numbers had slipped away from her, she, finally, just said, "F**k-it, let's have some fun." She dived into the crowds, sang with them, knocked down some boilermakers with the folks, laughed her head off, and made a lot of people wish she had let, "Hillary be Hillary," from the get-go.

    When a Wesleyan, hippie girl can go into Texas, and beat a man, any Man, you know you've struck gold. And, that started just as soon as she fired all those high priced geniuses that managed to take her from certain victory, to such an inglorious defeat.

    Somebody better start remembering, and soon.


    Parent

    I think (none / 0) (#182)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 10:35:02 PM EST
    the apology was for the bedwetting Dems. However yes, I wish she had told Andrea to stuff it. And she should tell Ed Henry especially to stuff it.

    Parent
    Apology was painful (none / 0) (#198)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 12, 2015 at 01:37:14 AM EST
    At some point, the fighter must re-emerge....

    In 2008, she was crackerjack good after Super Tuesday, which actually went pretty well for her....

    Just start kicking butt.....stop worrying about what others are doing....

    Parent

    I just accept it as par for the course. (5.00 / 1) (#179)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 09:34:27 PM EST
    We shouldn't accept misogyny in any form, of course, but it just is what it is. Some people are threatened by the prospect of strong women in leadership roles, and for the life of my I don't understand why. What really irks me, however, is the blatant double standard by which the media has long judged the Clintons, the so-called "Clinton Rules." The malevolent spin they put on practically everything the couple does, either together or separate, does get tiresome.

    Parent
    HuffPost columnist: Sen. Sanders (none / 0) (#1)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 05:16:05 PM EST
    will be the Dem. presidental nominee!

    We could do worse (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 05:37:27 PM EST
    Wasn't the rap on Bernie that he was un-electable?

    The media won't be able to ignore him, and then they would have to tell people what he's saying.

    They might even put him on TV.  I think Bernie would have a good time debating The Donald.

    Parent

    A Vermont socialist (none / 0) (#31)
    by Politalkix on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:17:14 PM EST
    is less threatening than a Kenyan Muslim socialist :-) to those that take such labels seriously.

    What more harm can a white socialist do that the President has not already done? :-). BHO's presidency has inoculated the American electorate against socialism. Ofcourse, BHO is not a socialist and Bernie is; however the President is called a socialist on TV and only perception and not facts matter for some people.

    If Bernie wins the nomination, I will not be surprised if the President plays socialist on SNL/late night comedy with Bernie to boost Bernie's chances.

    Parent

    Gosh (none / 0) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 05:35:14 PM EST
    it nmust be so.   I wonder if they will stop covering Donald as "entertainment" when win the nomination.

    Parent
    This is (none / 0) (#5)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 06:20:05 PM EST
    starting to remind of the Dean campaign without the leading in the polls.

    Parent
    Dean was sandbagged (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 07:05:41 PM EST
    ...by the media, who went viral with the "Dean Scream" as though one second of exuberance in front of an excited crowd was all the dude was campaigning on.  I guess Bush never gave anyone an embarrassing sound bite.

    Dean would have been a fine president, but the media didn't allow him to be taken seriously.  Kind of like Bernie, who is being ignored even though he can fill a football stadium on two days' notice with a phone call.

    Parent

    The media came out against Dean (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by MO Blue on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 10:05:49 PM EST
    long before the scream. Even NPR distorted events and slanted the news against Dean. The powers that be want a president who will march to the corporate drum and they will stack the deck however necessary in order to accomplish that task.

    Anyone who thinks that the media does not go all out in picking who gets the presidential nominations for each party, hasn't been paying attention.

    Parent

    Dean (none / 0) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 07:06:47 PM EST
    is the first candidate I ever contributed to

    Parent
    True (none / 0) (#13)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 07:09:59 PM EST
    but I'm mostly talking about before the scream. According to the press Bernie is "the Trump of the Left".

    Because it's all about reporting the lowest common denominator instead of, you know, issues that might actually have some impact on people's lives.

    Parent

    What happened to Dean? (none / 0) (#17)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 07:28:19 PM EST
    Washington Monthly:

    In the places where we still re-litigate the 2004 Democratic presidential nominating contest--i.e., in the progressive blogosphere--many veterans of the Howard Dean campaign still contend their candidate was "taken down" by a shadowy cabal of Establishment figures, probably orchestrated by the (bwahahaha!) DLC. That happened, it was said, most obviously in the wildly exaggerated coverage of The Scream, but perhaps even earlier in the shadowy ads (actually, best as I could tell, run by friends of the equally doomed Dick Gephardt) in Iowa showing HoDean in an earlier incarnation praising NAFTA and criticizing entitlement spending.

    The counter-argument is that Dean lost Iowa because the orange-hat freaks volunteering for his campaign freaked out the local Democrats (they didn't exactly get Clean for Dean), and then he flamed out afterwards not just because of The Scream, but because his campaign had spent all its abundant money on incautious investments in much later contests that he would not survive to contest.

    Here's Dean himself addressing the Sanders phenomenon:

    People like Bernie are always attractive, as I was. They speak truth to power. The problem with candidates like that -- and like me -- is that as you get closer to election time, you're more careful about how your vote's going to be used. You're going to tend to want to see somebody who you think looks presidential as the nominee of your party. That's one of the things that sank me. I knew that as an insurrectionist, I wasn't going to get elected by my party to be the nominee. I just had a lot of trouble turning a corner from being an insurrectionist to being somebody who people could see as president.

    My sense is that the media will be thrilled for Sanders to beat Clinton in Iowa and New Hampshire, because they've been pretty much made no secret how much the like beating up on her - but once that happens, they'll turn on Sanders.  Especially if Biden has thrown his hat in the ring.  Biden's like the mayor of the Village, so why wouldn't they want to cheerlead for him?

    Whole thing is just a complete clusterfk, and the Dems are the ones with the normal, sane candidates.  Go figure.

    Parent

    And you (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 07:39:34 PM EST
    know what? My personal take was more along the lines of what Dean himself said. Joe Trippi took a successful governor and turned him into an wild eyed insurgent.

    And yes, the narrative is set up that Bernie has to win Iowa and New Hampshire.

    But I agree completely with your last statement. However I think it's deliberate. Since there's really no drama on the Dem side let's create some since the GOP is such a mess.

    Their current love affair with Biden will only last he enters. The mere mention of him even running sent twitter aflame making fun of some of his statements.

    Parent

    Agreed. Joe Biden (none / 0) (#80)
    by KeysDan on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 10:33:45 AM EST
    does not need any encouragement to run for president, he has done that on other occasions and after being so close to the action the past seven years as vice president, he is likely eternally smitten with the idea.  

    However, others in the encouragement department, from media horse-racers to the diabolical Cheney, have other reasons. Similarly for the benign neglect, at the moment, for Senator Sanders.  Both, can serve the scenario that there is electability in them thar other hills. So, it is OK to go for your favorite candidate without regard to winning.  

    Biden may be riding high at the moment: that moment being when he is not running.  As soon as he does so, and after the drain on Clinton support, he will become unfair game.

    Also, for Senator Sanders.  a delightful  problem for Mrs. Clinton in the Republican eyes, and, hence,  all to the good.  Should Senator Sanders become the nominee, both he and we need to buckle up--it will be a bumpy ride.

     Those who think the electorate has become immune to "socialist" by its being misused and frivolously bandied about in the case of President Obama, have not been observing Republican tactics over the past 100-years.

    Look for Senator Sanders and Biden's strengths, not weaknesses, and that is will be the springboard for the assaults. And, of course, they will be rooted in hypocrisy. For example,  Sanders is too old, as is Biden, as is Clinton.  Trump is a spring-chicken.  Clinton is dynastic; Bush is different--he is the smart one.  

    Democrats need not concern themselves with which candidate will be least vulnerable to Republican attacks.  None will be. Half-truths are seen as a weakness in their attacks.  Go for the lie.  


    Parent

    I remember (none / 0) (#26)
    by lentinel on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:03:24 PM EST
    that Kerry, who had been behind Dean, announced that he was going to "lend" his campaign a million or two.

    That seemed to me to be a factor as well.

    Parent

    I think Dean nails it regarding Sanders (none / 0) (#44)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:32:16 PM EST
    But I had no problem personally seeing Dean as president. I don't think Sanders has the temperament for it however.

    Parent
    Why? What is his (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 09:13:05 PM EST
    temperament?

    Parent
    He just seems to me to not like the (none / 0) (#87)
    by ruffian on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 12:05:58 PM EST
    diplomatic parts of the job, the listening to viewpoints, studying issues he might not care much about, etc.  I think it is a job he would not like much once he had it. I think he is running to get focus on the issues he is passionate about, and if he had thought he might really win he would not have run.

    I could be wrong, I have not really followed him that closely.

    Parent

    I don't thnk (none / 0) (#8)
    by lentinel on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 06:59:38 PM EST
    that Bernie Sanders will be as vulnerable as was Dean.

    The media had been characterizing Dean as "angry", and unfortunately, he played into their hands when he was rallying his troops - and the media used his "scream" to definitely portray him as a psycho-nut.

    Although Sanders is passionate in the content of what he says, he is moderate in tone. The best the media can do to smear him is to label him a "self-described socialist". Oooooo.

    I may be way off, but I think that word, "socialist", has lost quite a bit if not all of its stigma - and Sanders' references to the quality of life in some "socialist" countries is having an effect - even with confrontational interviewers.

    I wish him well.

    Parent

    In (5.00 / 4) (#23)
    by FlJoe on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 07:55:37 PM EST
    my opinion the press has marginalized by not creating a narrative on Bernie....yet.

     They have been content to let him be a thorn in Hillary's side and that's really all they give him credit for.

    Lots of the reporting on  Bernie's steady gains resorts to almost gleefully pointing to reasons why Hillary is losing rather then why Sanders is gaining.

    They are practically begging Biden to get in the race so they can turn this into a dogfight between two "real" contenders and write crazy uncle Bernie out of the script.

    BTW: I don't consider Sanders in any way crazy, his economic philosophy is spot on, just musing on the possible, or sadly probable narratives that will be spun up as needed for this reality show we call politics.
     

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#11)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 07:07:11 PM EST
    this is from 2010 36% have a positive view of socialism

    And then I found one from 2012 that said 31% of the electorate has a positive view of socialism.

    So the numbers might have changed upward from sometime in history but it seems to most people it's still a negative.

    Parent

    Do you think Sanders will survive (none / 0) (#27)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:11:48 PM EST
    his opponents or the media pointing the tax rates in Germany, France, and the Scandinavian countries?  

    It is refreshing to read that Sanders will push for legislation permitting Medicare to bargain for prescription drug prices.

    Parent

    Depends (none / 0) (#30)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:15:12 PM EST
    Who do you consider to be Sanders' opponents?

    Guess that doesn't really matter. No I don't think it will ever be mentioned with regard to Sanders.

    Parent

    I do. Scare tactic. (none / 0) (#33)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:21:27 PM EST


    Parent
    No (none / 0) (#45)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:41:12 PM EST
    if he makes it to the nomination those tax rates are going to be deadly simply because look at the income problem already. So if you raise the minimum wage to 15 like he says but then put in those tax rates someone is going to be at 7.50 an hour. Being able to go to college for free is great but if you're a working class person who doesn't want to go there then all you're going to see is what you are going to be bringing home.

    Parent
    My reason for saying it won't ever come up (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:51:32 PM EST
    is I see no path for him to the nomination.

    Parent
    Jobs right about one thing (none / 0) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:51:23 PM EST
    Donalds tax increase is bigger than anyone's.   And it's on the richest of the rich.

    Parent
    With Matching... (none / 0) (#79)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 10:33:05 AM EST
    ...corporate rate decreases.

    It's a shell game that in the end will actually lower rates for the wealthy.  LINK

    Corporate inversions are another issue on which Mr. Trump's positions have been slippery. This practice -- companies acquire smaller overseas firms and move their headquarters to countries with lower taxes -- has become increasingly popular, costing the United States billions of dollars in lost revenue and drawing the ire of Democrats in Congress. In an interview with Time magazine, Mr. Trump called for a crackdown on inversions, but his solution also seemed to suggest giving companies a tax holiday in exchange for repatriating.
    LINK

    Cracking down to Donald Trump means giving tax dodgers a pass, aka a tax holiday to move the funds back to the US.  That is in no way taxing the richest of the rich, more.

    Think Romney/Bain being allowed to move the dollars sitting in the Switzerland and Bermuda back into the US at zero or very discounted tax rates.

    Parent

    Is that still a current Trump position? (none / 0) (#190)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 12, 2015 at 12:38:41 AM EST
    I think he may evolve on that.....too

    Parent
    Doesn't he first have to, well, y'know. . . . (none / 0) (#12)
    by Towanda on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 07:07:17 PM EST
    be a Democrat?

    Parent
    You mean (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 07:10:42 PM EST
    ... like Dianne Feinstein is a "Democrat?"

    If he were, there would be no reason to vote for him.

    Parent

    Nope. (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by Towanda on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 09:55:43 PM EST
    There are roolz in parteez.

    Feinstein meets the roolz.

    Sanders does not.

    Of course, we could get Prima Donna on it again, as in 2008, to just get the Dem Roolz Committee to change the roolz again for anyone without ladee partz. . . .

    Parent

    Yeah (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 07:12:40 PM EST
    not sure how that works.

    Parent
    If New Hampshire (none / 0) (#16)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 07:19:37 PM EST
    doesn't change their rules, then yes.

    Or he'll be stuck only winning Vermont.

    Parent

    New Hampshire (none / 0) (#77)
    by CST on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 09:18:54 AM EST
    Will almost certainly find a way to get him on the ballot.

    As they should.

    It will serve no one well, least of all Hillary, if he is kept off the ballot.  People need to be able to have their say.

    Parent

    But the question is (none / 0) (#99)
    by Towanda on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 02:59:18 PM EST
    on the ballot as a Dem or as a Socialist.

    Parent
    I would bet money (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by CST on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 03:02:23 PM EST
    That he is on the ballot in the Dem primary.  As he should be.

    Honestly this is one of those times where the fairness of the election trumps party rules IMO. He's running in the Democratic primary, he has the support to make the ballot, he should be on that ballot.

    And the worst thing for Hillary, IMO, would be if people feel like they don't get to have a say.

    Parent

    I've been wondering that myself (none / 0) (#109)
    by sj on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 04:02:56 PM EST
    In order to run the Dem primaries and caucuses he needs to be a registered Democrat. I know that early on he talked about changing his registration, but I haven't heard anything about that lately.

    Parent
    The columnist should start placing bets (none / 0) (#18)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 07:32:12 PM EST
    They can get 6-1 odds on Sanders winning the Dem nomination. That's the same price you can get on Marco Rubio winning the GOP nomination or Donald Trump being elected President.

    Parent
    James Bond (none / 0) (#124)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Sep 10, 2015 at 08:53:49 PM EST
    For Bernie!!!!

    http://tinyurl.com/pl2o9n9

    Read all the Bond books growing up

    Later switched to LeCarre for the more realistic view of espionage

    Loved the character George Smiley

    Parent

    Le Carre is a Leftist (none / 0) (#191)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 12, 2015 at 12:42:56 AM EST
    He hated Bush with an undying passion.

    Did you read his later novels?

    Parent

    More evidence in the Walter Scott case (none / 0) (#4)
    by McBain on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 06:13:33 PM EST
    could get Michael Slager out of jail.... says his lawyer.
    http://tinyurl.com/pq3tm8w

    "Slager's defense team believes his Taser was fired six times and that both the officer and Scott were each hit twice, suggesting there was more of a struggle than prosecutors have revealed."  

    Who ya gonna believe (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by Repack Rider on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 11:16:06 AM EST
    ... the defense lawyer or your lying eyes?

    Help us here.  What justifies shooting an unarmed subject who is running away, in the back?  No matter what happened before the shooting, when the shooting took place the subject was not attacking and was not armed.

    Other than being Black, of course.

    Parent

    I'm going to wait for more evidence (none / 0) (#84)
    by McBain on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 11:57:21 AM EST
    before reaching a conclusion.  It's the smart thing to do.  We don't know for sure if he was armed at some point or not.  We don't know if this is murder or manslaughter or something else.  

    Parent
    You will be sure to let us know (5.00 / 3) (#85)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 12:01:47 PM EST
    when this evidence arrives.

    Parent
    Of course you will. (5.00 / 6) (#89)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 01:04:57 PM EST
    After all, that video showing the man obviously being shot in the back is clearly not enough, nor is the police report that he was unarmed.

    Yes, by all means, wait for more evidence. But in the meantime, please feel free to enlighten us with more baseless speculation that maligns the deceased, who can no longer speak on his own behalf.

    :-(

    Parent

    It does not matter (5.00 / 2) (#91)
    by Chuck0 on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 01:07:15 PM EST
    if he was previously armed. At the time he was shot, he is clearly running away and not armed. No amount of evidence changes that.

    Parent
    Yeah, but... (5.00 / 2) (#112)
    by sj on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 04:18:45 PM EST
    It does not matter (5.00 / 2) (#91)
    by Chuck0 on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 12:07:15 PM MDT

    if he was previously armed. At the time he was shot, he is clearly running away and not armed. No amount of evidence changes that.

    ...it's also true that no amount of evidence is ever enough for McBain. Unless it feeds his "the victim deserved it... if you go far enough back in his life" bias.

    Parent
    That's not always true Chuck (none / 0) (#104)
    by McBain on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 03:36:50 PM EST
    Cops can shoot fleeing felons if they believe they pose a significant threat to others.  You don't have to possess a gun or knife to injure or kill someone.

    As I said earlier, I'm going to wait for more information before I make up my mind.  I'm not ready to convict Slager of murder or anything yet.  

    Parent

    Vehicle Code Violation = "Fleeing Felon" (5.00 / 2) (#106)
    by Repack Rider on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 03:57:00 PM EST
    Cops can shoot fleeing felons if they believe they pose a significant threat to others.  You don't have to possess a gun or knife to injure or kill someone.

    We have seen the video.  You are suggesting that a middle aged man in poor physical condition, "running" away at a speed just above a fast walk, posed more of a danger to the neighborhood than, say a police officer firing his weapon with no regard for anyone else in the area.  The victim was pulled over for a vehicle code violation.  Does that make him a "felon?"  

    He left his car at the scene.  Do you believe the police might have been able to employ enough investigative resources to discover whose car it was, and go to the house for the arrest?

    What "harm" would you suggest that the unarmed victim "might" have been able to inflict on a local resident, when it is clear that anyone in reasonable shape would be able to escape by walking quickly?  When a subject is being chased by police, does he often stop and attack a bystander?  Do you have an example of this?

    We have a recent example of an innocent man killed by police who were shooting at an actual criminal.

    Parent

    What kind of altercation did Scott have with (none / 0) (#110)
    by McBain on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 04:08:21 PM EST
    Slager before he was shot?  I'd like to know more about that before I start guessing about what Scott could have done to others.  That's what I'm suggesting, Repack.

    I take it you've made up your mind that it's murder?

    Parent

    He Certainly Didn't Tell Him... (none / 0) (#115)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 04:46:57 PM EST
    ...he was a dangerous felon, and since the cop probably isn't clairvoyant...

    Parent
    Double standards (5.00 / 3) (#189)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 12, 2015 at 12:33:28 AM EST
    You raise the bar so high, that no one could ever say anything (in this case of a white cop shooting a black man) against the white cop until .....hell freezes over....

    But then you have all kinds of judgments about blacks in all kinds of situations.....

    Different standards for different situations....you thus stack the deck.....

    Parent

    McPain this proves (5.00 / 7) (#121)
    by fishcamp on Thu Sep 10, 2015 at 06:56:14 AM EST
    you're never too old to learn something stupid.

    Parent
    Cash for Crash (none / 0) (#6)
    by Uncle Chip on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 06:35:05 PM EST
    Freddie Gray's family settles with city for $6.4M

    The deal announced Tuesday appeared to be among the largest settlements in police death cases in recent years and happened just two days before a judge is set to hear arguments on whether to move the trials for six officers charged in Gray's death from Baltimore.

    The proposed payment in the Gray case is more than the $5.7 million the city of Baltimore paid in total for 102 court judgments and settlements for alleged police misconduct between 2011 and last fall ...

    Even more unusual than the monetary amount, experts say, is the timeline: the city agreed to a settlement before the family filed a lawsuit.

    Experts say the city's willingness to pre-empt a lawsuit could have an impact on the officers' ability to receive a fair trial in Baltimore.

    The head of Baltimore's police union condemned the agreement.

    "To suggest that there is any reason to settle prior to the adjudication of the pending criminal cases is obscene and without regard to the fiduciary responsibility owed to the taxpaying citizens of the city," Lt. Gene Ryan said in a statement.
    Does Baltimore's action (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by ragebot on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 07:54:28 AM EST
    justify a request by the defense for a change of venue?

    Parent
    I'm sure the city (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 06:40:18 PM EST
    just wanted to be nice and were sure they could win any lawsuit.  Cities are like that.

    Parent
    Bad precedent (none / 0) (#35)
    by McBain on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:23:00 PM EST


    Parent
    You mean taking (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:28:15 PM EST
    "suspects" for nickel rides that somtimes end in death?

    I agree, very bad precedent indeed.  

    Parent

    I mean making decisions based on incomplete (none / 0) (#49)
    by McBain on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:45:44 PM EST
    information.... like you just did.

    Parent
    You mean there's still more information (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 09:07:06 PM EST
    to be had at this point?

    Look at it this way: that settlement is a miniscule payback for the sins of decades of fractured skulls, broken bones, unwarranted harassment, slurs and curses from bullying thugs operating under the shroud of relative anonymity.

    My suggestion is to suck it up.

    Parent

    Not very good risk mgt. (none / 0) (#56)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 09:16:47 PM EST
    to give all the $$ to one decedent' heirs though.

    Parent
    Are you inferring (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by Chuck0 on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 06:47:15 AM EST
    that Freddie Gray may not actually still be dead?

    Parent
    Funny... (5.00 / 2) (#81)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 10:45:47 AM EST
    ...that you think you know who has what information in regards to a lawsuit while claiming others are jumping to conclusions without all the information.

    Just another version of my media says all other media is bad.  But at least you are consistent.

    Parent

    It's remarkably easy to be glib about ... (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 09:14:57 PM EST
    ... such matters, when you're willing to roll the dice on someone else's dime, and it's not your a$$ that's on the line.

    "Bad precedent"? Hardly. City officials settled with the Gray family, because after some very sober assessment in consultation with their attorneys regarding their chances of actually prevailing at trial, those same officials concluded the odds were better than even that Baltimore would likely have the cleanest clocks on the eastern seaboard, once the plaintiffs' lawyers were through with them.

    This settlement was both a no-brainer and the right thing to do, from a standpoint of sound and responsible municipal governance. City officials decided to cut the city's losses, rather than its throat.

    Now, those same officials need to do likewise with the Baltimore Police Department, and reform the way the cops conduct themselves in their interactions with the public, so that the city doesn't ever again find itself in such a legal bind with no good options.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    If there was a (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Anne on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 09:27:32 PM EST
    Cash for Crass award, Uncle Chip would clean up.

    The reality is that the City was likely looking at a federal civil trial, where there are no caps on money damages.  So, rather than spend precious taxpayer dollars on a trial AND then have to pony up a likely cash award even larger than what the city has agreed to, they decided to stop the hemorrhaging.

    The City has accepted full civil liability for what happened to Freddie Gray that resulted in his death.  Whether the officers involved are criminally responsible is yet to be determined, but on a civil basis, the city has taken responsibility for its employees.

    But the timing, coming as it does in the immediate advance of a hearing on situs, and shortly before the first officer goes on trial, makes me that the City did not like its chances at a civil trial after the public had an opportunity to start hearing the evidence.

    Parent

    If Plaintiff (s) got (none / 0) (#61)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 09:49:11 PM EST
    a verdict in their favor in a federal civil rights violation case against the municipality, the jury could have also awarded punitive damages and the Court would probably award plaintiff's counsel costs and attorney fees. Still seems like an unnecessarily high settlement.  Also, the revelation of the settlement has an adverse effect on the officers' ability to have a fair criminal jury trial. Why settle b/4 the criminal jury has been sworn?

    Parent
    this was my thought as well (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by The Addams Family on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 09:58:07 PM EST
    . . . the revelation of the settlement has an adverse effect on the officers' ability to have a fair criminal jury trial. Why settle b/4 the criminal jury has been sworn?


    Parent
    Is it possible that the City (5.00 / 2) (#72)
    by Anne on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 06:43:36 AM EST
    believes that the totality of the evidence to be revealed in the criminal proceeding would make it more likely that it would either have to settle the civil case for an even higher amount, or that a federal jury would come in with an even higher award if it went to trial?

    Looks to me like they didn't want to bet the taxpayers' money on their chances of prevailing at a civil trial.

    As for why the award was so high, I don't know.  How much is spending a week looking at your child on life support, wondering if he really had to die, worth?  Whether it's $1 or $6.4 million, it's not bringing him back, and his family isn't ever going to have their memories of that week erased, are they?

    Parent

    Some thoughts: (none / 0) (#83)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 11:22:15 AM EST
    Freddie Gay's survivors have not yet filed a civil lawsuit, so no discovery has been done.

    According to an article in the Chicago Tribune, the State of Maryland  has a statutory cap of $400,000 on damages awards to persons injured by police, although the governmental entity may negotiate a higher amount.  

    Damages in a 42 USC section 1983 case:

    link

    Parent

    Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake was involved (none / 0) (#88)
    by McBain on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 12:43:09 PM EST
    in the payout...
    http://tinyurl.com/obolkpk

    "This settlement represents an opportunity to bring closure to the Gray family, the community and the city."

    Looks like another one of her bad decisions.  


    Parent

    That remains to be seen. (5.00 / 2) (#90)
    by Anne on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 01:07:10 PM EST
    The Board of Estimates has to approve it, so it's not like she can just decree the monies be paid all on her own.

    What this settlement says is, "your son was gravely injured while in the hands of city employees, and we are accepting responsibility for that, whether or not it is determined that any or all of these employees are criminally responsible."

    I think there are a lot of people, not just in the city, but across the state and in other parts of the country, who see this as affirmation that just because someone wears a uniform, that the city that employs them cannot close its eyes to or wash its hands of any responsibility.

    Isn't that the right thing to do?  And doesn't doing the right thing mean something?

    The City of NY settled with Eric Garner's family, too, for $5.9 million.  Was that wrong, too?  Was that another bad decision by the mayor?

    You don't live here, you don't work here, so from wherever it is you're reading about this, you just can't really appreciate what's going on.

    It just seems to me that no matter what the case, you're always there to find some reason why it was okay for someone to die at the hands of police.

    You pretty much define the reason for the Black Lives Matter movement.

    Parent

    I don't think it was the right thing to do (none / 0) (#92)
    by McBain on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 01:25:11 PM EST
    And I said she was involved in the decision.  I didn't say she made it herself.  
    I thought the Garner settlement was excessive.

    Black Lives Matter is doing more harm than good.

    Parent

    to whom (5.00 / 3) (#93)
    by CST on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 01:29:26 PM EST
    Are they doing harm?

    They've certainly got people talking about a subject that has been under the radar for years.

    And people are listening.

    "Tough on crime" was the mantra my whole life and now it's changing.  I think it's too early to say definitively but a lot of the people complaining about BLM seem to be missing the point, IMO.

    Parent

    I believe BLM (none / 0) (#101)
    by McBain on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 03:20:09 PM EST
    is partially responsible for some of the riots and violence we've seen in the past few years.  They're responsible for some of the misinformation that gets spread around causing gullible people to believe it's 1960 and racism is a big problem.  

    I'm not a big fan of "tough on crime" either.  

    Parent

    here's the thing about those riots (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by CST on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 03:32:37 PM EST
    They worked.  If they hadn't been necessary they wouldn't have worked.

    Complaining about black people complaining about racism has got to be the most condescending thing I've read all day.

    Parent

    That's in your mind (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by McBain on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 03:39:27 PM EST
    Not what I wrote

    Parent
    "Looks like another one of her (5.00 / 3) (#94)
    by Anne on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 01:43:18 PM EST
    bad decisions" is what you wrote.  One of "her" bad decisions.

    Just own it, will you?

    As for BLM doing more harm than good, a good deal of the perception that it is harmful is being driven by people who would really just rather not disturb a status quo that has suited them just fine.  

    It's long past time for institutionalized brutality to come out of the shadows, and for those engaging in it to be held accountable.  You simply cannot look at reports like the Baltimore Sun did on the payouts the city has made to those brutalized and tell yourself it's just a fiction, that it doesn't really happen all that much.  You can't read about the black site-style interrogation facility in Chicago that people were just disappearing into and keep making the case that there's no need for anything to change.  You can't keep pointing the finger at those with swollen eyes and split lips and those lying in caskets and keep making the case that if someone "like that" has been injured or killed, it's their own damn fault.

    And that's where you come in.  There hasn't been one of these cases where you haven't worked your little fingers to the bone trying to excuse and justify police action, while providing all kinds of irrelevant reasons why the person had it coming.

    You are the reason why there's even a need for a Black Lives Matter movement.

    Parent

    Punish people, including cops, appropriately (none / 0) (#102)
    by McBain on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 03:26:11 PM EST
    Don't overcharge to appease a mob.   Don't charge someone because of past crimes they had nothing to do with. Don't rush to judgement before the facts are available.  That's where I come in, Anne.  

    Parent
    Please identify (5.00 / 2) (#97)
    by Repack Rider on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 02:38:01 PM EST
    Black Lives Matter is doing more harm than good.

    ...an example of "harm" done by BLM.

    Rhetorical question: do you believe that police started beating up and shooting unarmed Black men only when people started carrying video cameras in their pockets, or do you believe the videos only revealed what had already been going on?

    Parent

    McBain... (5.00 / 2) (#98)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 02:46:43 PM EST
    ...why do you hate black people so much ?

    Never seen a post form you that wasn't, in some way, bashing black people.  Well except for your ones bashing women, I suppose.

    We get it, you think black people suck, no need to keep posting each time as to why any particular one deserved what they got and/or have political motives for everything they do.

    If you were anymore transparent I wouldn't read the endless drivel coming from your fingers.

    Parent

    Should you not withhold judgment? (none / 0) (#192)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 12, 2015 at 12:45:53 AM EST
    But, no, the withhold judgment standard only applies to whites....

    Parent
    McBain, why (5.00 / 1) (#195)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 12, 2015 at 01:06:51 AM EST
    don't you use the same standard of withholding judgment about white cops shooting black men, and apply that standard across the board?

    That way you would have to withhold judgment on everything.....and would finally be quiet......

    Parent

    I think it has to do with the riots, (2.00 / 3) (#69)
    by McBain on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 02:10:54 AM EST
    Black Lives Matter, and public opinion in general.  The city is afraid of more bad publicity.  However, decisions made out of fear are often bad ones.

    Parent
    Oh, for the love of Jesus, Mary and Joseph! (5.00 / 2) (#70)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 05:31:29 AM EST
    McBain: "I think it has to do with the riots, Black Lives Matter, and public opinion in general. The city is afraid of more bad publicity. However, decisions made out of fear are often bad ones."

    Do you ever bother to first think about what you're about to say beforehand, before posting such overtly racist pronouncements on a liberal blog?

    And yes, you're being racist when you reflexively presume that (a) African Americans are prone to rioting, violence and other acts of intimidation; and (b) the police are the innocent / aggrieved party in most any and all adverse encounters with people of color.

    Maybe your friends are okay with you peddling that sort of appalling and baseless bigotry in public. But speaking for myself only, I'm not okay with it because it sets my teeth on edge, and makes me want to hunt down your inner child so I can kick its little a$$, take its lunch money and give it to the NAACP.

    So just stop right now.

    Parent

    The Gray family's lawyer in these negotiations, (none / 0) (#59)
    by Peter G on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 09:27:21 PM EST
    Billy Murphy, is one of the best.  The City did not want to go up against Billy - a former Baltimore city judge - in front of a Baltimore jury on these facts, that's for sure. Billy would not have recommended the family settle for this large sum, and the City would not have agreed to pay it, unless the facts that have become known to all of them would support a verdict of that size or larger.

    Parent
    Stephen Colbert's Late Show starts tonight (none / 0) (#28)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:15:06 PM EST
    I may even stay up and watch it instead of taping for tomorrow , I miss him so much. In listening to his podcast about the show it seems clear to me he is focusing on entertainiment and comedy rather than a 'talk show'. His bandleader Jean Batiste seems like a great guy - Stephen knew he wanted to work with him when Jean was on the Report and gave Stephen a hard time about using cards and not improvising. They have similar attitudes about entertainment as a 'joy machine' and are not abashed about describing it that way. Makes me realize why I typically had a permanent grin while watching the Colbert Report- the combination of smart and silly hits me just the right way.

    So good luck to Stephen and his team. I am expecting much joy door many years to come.

    Is that from Alice in (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:23:51 PM EST
    Wonderland?  "Joy door"!

    Parent
    There's always joy (none / 0) (#40)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:28:41 PM EST
    behind Door #3

    Parent
    Not always. (none / 0) (#58)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 09:23:52 PM EST
    LINK.

    Parent
    Naaaa...door=for....iPad typing.. (none / 0) (#42)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:29:27 PM EST
    But that is good!

    Parent
    Stephen's Mick Jagger impression (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:44:43 PM EST
    Not bad!

    Parent
    Having lived through 8 years of Jeb Bush (none / 0) (#34)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:21:51 PM EST
    in Florida, I'll have to pass on opening night with Stephen. The less I have to see of Jeb, the happier I am.

    Parent
    I feel sure Jeb will be a useful way (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:27:25 PM EST
    to get more Trump jokes in there. If not I will brush my teeth during that segment and wait for George Clooney.

    Parent
    Ha- like I do every night! (5.00 / 3) (#38)
    by ruffian on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 08:27:55 PM EST


    Parent
    In our dreams. (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 09:19:16 PM EST


    Parent
    I, too, like Stephen Colbert. (none / 0) (#75)
    by KeysDan on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 08:01:47 AM EST
    Liked his Comedy Central Show--and should have liked his new network show, in place of David Letterman.  But, I didn't.

    The transition of the bloviating character to the real Colbert  was not evident, and the usual fast-paced Colbert became a frenetic copy.  Maybe, the hour-long,  time period does not lend itself to easy transport.

    George Clooney was not up to par.  The banter seemed dull and rehearsed. If so, they needed more rehearsal time.  And, something seemed off-- his appearance, maybe.  Something difference and distracting.

    Speaking of something off, Jeb! tried to keep up with Colbert with a ready-to go joke about how he is younger and better-looking than his brother, George.  But, did not realize that he was being set up by Colbert for a policy differentiation--which he subsequently made by blasting President Bush's spending.  Nothing about trickery, deceit and wars. And, all that bickering in Congress (by Republicans) which he will fix, proceeding to state divisive policy.  Jeb, boasted about vetoing spending bills in Florida, being referred to as "Veto Corleone."  To which Colbert reminded him that Vito was actually the anti-hero.

    The best, maybe only good comedy, was Stephen's jokes about Trump, an easy target, of course.  But, even then, Stephen tried to be more clownish that his subject matter, which is impossible.  So, these otherwise good jokes suffered at the hands of silliness in repeatedly stuffing himself with Oreo cookies in a tiring slap at Trump's ire at Nabisco moving to Mexico.  

    It may have been that Colbert tried too hard on this first nighter. I will stick with him, for a while, but my suggestion is that he tighten it up a bit.  And, decide what kind of show he wants.

    Parent

    I just had to skip (none / 0) (#107)
    by lentinel on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 03:57:30 PM EST
    the first show.

    I don't want to see Jeb in any context.
    I can't figure out what the programming wizards at CBS were thinking...

    Parent

    They were thinking (none / 0) (#111)
    by CoralGables on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 04:17:58 PM EST
    They were going to crush the Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon last night and they did drawing more than twice as many viewers.

    Although like you I took a pass for the same reason.

    Parent

    If they (none / 0) (#114)
    by lentinel on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 04:40:40 PM EST
    thought that Jeb would be a ratings bonanza, they're dumber than I think it is possible for anyone to be.

    Colbert's ratings had to do with the event itself imo. Clooney and Jeb couldn't draw flies.

    Parent

    Biden is on tonight. Sigh. (none / 0) (#125)
    by ruffian on Thu Sep 10, 2015 at 08:58:14 PM EST
    Wonder how long in advance they made these bookings? I'm sure the sitting VP was considered a 'get', even before the potential candidacy rumors. I'm afraid the crowd will be too encouraging.

    Parent
    Wow, very moving segment (none / 0) (#126)
    by ruffian on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 05:40:11 AM EST
    Sure haven't seen a conversation like that on a late night show lately. Two Irishman talking sincerely about their faith and passed love ones. Made me remember I was not always so cynical/clinical.

    Still don't want Biden to run, but yes, he is a human being.

    Parent

    Agreed. Colbert (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by KeysDan on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 11:37:23 AM EST
    was a pastoral interviewer, leaving his bloviating pundit-character behind.  It did seem to go on a bit too long, tipping from heart-felt to sentimental.   Biden seemed to be sensitive to this by pointing out, on a few occasions, that he was not alone in coping with personal tragedies, and others,  possibly some in the audience, had similar experiences.  

    I hoped  that the interview should have ended with this human and humanizing personal story.  But, it didn't. Colbert moved in a less than seamless manner to politics, urging Biden to run for president (despite the fact that there are  good people running already on both sides--in a nod to network viewership).  The later somewhat spoiled the former.

    Parent

    agree. The subtext of Biden being the only (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by ruffian on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 12:21:11 PM EST
    decent person candidate did not go down well with me either. Maybe I read too much into it.

    More and more I sense  a backlash to the perception of Hillary having it locked up. I get the feeling that people think she thinks she is entitled, and I don't get that vibe from her at all. She has always worked harder than anyone for anything she has achieved. If Biden wants to run,ok, but no reason to beg him.

    Parent

    Or... (none / 0) (#146)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 12:49:43 PM EST
    ...people are just burned out from the republican insane fixation on anything Clinton, and maybe if you remove the nexus of their fixation, you keep the lunatics at bay.

    Maybe I am projecting, but I think what HRC did was beyond dumb, it makes absolutely no sense and handed the republicans something to focus on that is not going away anytime soon.

    It's the backlash IMO from people like me who think she should have known better, I mean seriously, clintonemail.com is almost beggin' for a republican inquiry.  

    And while I don't think it's worth a hill of beans, it's getting so old, and there is always a chance they find something, then what, President Donald Trump ? 50,000 emails is lot of email to not uncover something a that could look really bad, even to democrats.

    It's also not helping that she keep caving to republican pressure, first with the email release, and now the apology.  GD, if you are going to take a stand, stand, don't take it then next week/day give in.

    Parent

    Yes, it may well have been (5.00 / 3) (#147)
    by KeysDan on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 01:18:50 PM EST
    politically unwise because Republicans.  And, Clinton.  Now, Mrs. Clinton has apologized for how she emailed. She had to, or what would Andrea and her ilk say.   But, I am not sure why or what she apologized for, other than being sorry that this is a source of distraction.  And grist for the mill and millers.

    The Washington Times, that right winger gazette, has reported that DOJ lawyers stated in federal court that Mrs. Clinton had the legal right to use her own email account and broke no laws in how she handled those messages.

    A good way to knock down Mrs. Clinton.  But, wait, what about Senator Sanders?   Well, he has served his purpose.  Or will, after he finishes his approved role of St. George slaying the dragon-lady.  And when he has succeeded in dividing the Democratic party.  Then, riding to the rescue, and relegating Sanders to the role of crazy uncle kept in the attic,  will be a unifying candidate--a non-Clinton, non-Sanders Democrat.

     One that Cheney likes, and the media feels will work well with others.  Nice guy Joe Biden, or John Kerry, or a nice centrist like Evan Bayh. And, of course Biden has nothing in his background that the Republicans could possibly latch onto.  He will get a free ride, just like Kerry did last time around for him.

    Parent

    Scott, the email release is the result of ... (5.00 / 1) (#163)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 05:13:15 PM EST
    ... a court order to the State Dept. per media FOIA requests, and not due to "Republican pressure" upon Mrs. Clinton. She had earlier complied with the State Dept.'s request to the last four Secretaries of State that they turn over all work-related emails in their possession for archival purposes. It should also be noted that to date, she is the only one of the four to have done so. It's the State Dept. that is presently releasing her emails to the public in batches due to the judicial directive, and not Mrs. Clinton.

    Parent
    Honestly, Scott, if it wasn't (5.00 / 3) (#200)
    by caseyOR on Sat Sep 12, 2015 at 02:17:29 AM EST
    this email kerfuffle they would have found another molehill to make into a mountain. Let's say Hillary had maintained two email accounts, one at state.gov for work and the other at clintonmail.com for personal business. My money says the Republicans and all the Hillary hters would have gone ballistic over a personal account.

    They would be demanding to see all the emails from that personal account, certain that Hillary used that personal account for work related email. Surely all the real Benghazi emails would have been stored on that personal account.

    It's the Clinton rules, my friend. It maks no difference that Powell and Rice used personal email and trashed their emil. And so, when the State Dept. asked former SoS for their work emails only Hillary had them to provide.

    The only way Hillary could have avoided these attacks would have been to not run.

    All of this nonsense has me thinking seriously about throwing my support to Hillary, sending her money. It infuriates me that the media has decided that they will be the ones to determine who runs for president. They will stop at nothing to destroy Hillary.

    I hate this crap. i hate it, hate it, hate it.

    Parent

    Did you see him offer $100 to a lady in the (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by ruffian on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 12:25:57 PM EST
    audience if she could identify a picture of what turned out to be Jim Gilmore? I had no idea either. That was great .

    Parent
    I would have won. Have a knack (none / 0) (#148)
    by KeysDan on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 01:23:30 PM EST
    for faces, but a knack unlike Trump's for Fiorina's.  But don't feel too bad, that $100 bill looked like Monopoly money.  Colbert just threw it under his desk afterward.

    Parent
    Charlie Pierce likened it to (5.00 / 3) (#141)
    by Anne on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 12:25:57 PM EST
    ...watching a man having his blood drawn with a turkey baster, one drop at a time.

    And went on to say this:

    Joe Biden shouldn't run for president because he shouldn't do it to himself. He has earned a unique place in the country's heart, which is a far warmer place for him as a human being than shivering in some cornfield outside Ottumwa in the cold winter winds. A presidential campaign is a soulless mechanism designed to grind the human spirit into easily digestible nuggets. Moments of profound personal pain and loss are as unavoidable as are concussions in the NFL. It was almost unbearable to watch him speak of his son's death even to someone as profoundly compassionate as Colbert. I would hate to see him coin that grief into political currency, or fashion it into a portion of a stump speech that would become banal the second time it was delivered. I think, at some level, he would come to hate himself for having to do that.  It's not that I wouldn't vote for Joe Biden, though I probably wouldn't. It's that I don't want to see him hurt any more.

    Link

    And as an aside, whoever is now floating the name of John Kerry as Dudley Do-right, to come in and wrest the Democratic Party off the train tracks Hillary Clinton has tied it to, needs to consider voluntary commitment to the nearest mental health facility.

    Parent

    Pierce quote says a lot (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by christinep on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 02:14:43 PM EST
    Watching the interview almost felt like going to the scene of an accident.  Joe Biden appeared broken by grief ... horribly hurting.  He may want to pick himself up and do something great in honor of his good son, but moving through grief takes time. Biden's slumped body posture, his fallen face, his watering eyes ... all the saddened tracks of the deepest grief.

    Politics and deep grief really cannot mix well. Putting aside for the moment my own political commitment to Hillary Clinton, I do respect very much VP Biden's clear commitment and dedication to the country as Senator and as Vice President.  That is no small matter.  Sometimes, however, even a strong (or, especially, the strongest) of civic personages may need to spend time with themselves. To tend the soul; to recharge.  That the wolves of Washington may be baying for him to charge into and abet whatever their current game-plan may be should be set aside.  In the interview with Colbert, Mr. Biden mentioned that he feels an aloneness in the crowd. Perhaps, he is seeking peace rather than presidency.


    Parent

    Kerry (none / 0) (#155)
    by Politalkix on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 03:50:46 PM EST
    has been a stalwart SoS. He negotiated the Iran deal. I will not have to worry too much about foreign policy if Kerry is President.

    My first preference will still be Bernie. However, I would definitely prefer Kerry over HRC. If Kerry is on the ballot, I can definitely vote for him in the GE. If HRC is on the ballot, I will have a strange predicament and may have to leave my choice for President as a blank.

    I have zero faith in HRC's foreign policy and at the end may decide that the Supreme Court is not worth it if it means that I will have blood in my hands by getting a war hawk elected that always seems gleeful about getting America involved in wars.

    Parent

    Too bad for you, politalkix (none / 0) (#170)
    by christinep on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 07:26:24 PM EST
    that you find it so difficult to support the strongest WOMAN candidate possible for President of the USA.  Too bad.  While many other factors precede that choice that we all will make sooner or later, I find it interesting when a so-called liberal finds it so difficult to go beyond feminist or progressive TALK.  Experience, background, total Senate votes, progressive positions ... everything.  Yet, ABC ... Anybody But Clinton OR Anybody But the Top-Qualified Candidate, The Actual Woman.  

    Scratch around, dear politalkix.  I'm sure that you will find an ABC.  The Boys always do.

    Parent

    I have (none / 0) (#174)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 08:30:32 PM EST
    basically determined that there are two kinds of Democrats. There are the Stevenson/Carter/Obama types and the Truman/FDR/Truman/Clinton kind of democrats. The irony is that the stronger types are more likely to keep us out of a war.

    Parent
    Whither JFK? (none / 0) (#193)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 12, 2015 at 12:48:10 AM EST
    He stood up to the Joint Chiefs when they wanted war and save us all from annihilation....

    Parent
    Kix does have a point (none / 0) (#196)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 12, 2015 at 01:12:27 AM EST
    I support Hillary over Biden and Bernie...but I am going on faith on her likelihood of using military force....She has been more willing to use force--not just Syria but also Libya.

    Biden on foreign policy has recently at least been really hitting the mark....He wanted to get out of Afghanistan before Hillary and Obama and wanted to stop the nation building there and just have the ability to strike at camps there without occupying the whole country.

    And his proposal to divide Iraq in three....was clearly prescient....we have that as the current de facto result.....

    Parent

    Yes, fully understand. (none / 0) (#113)
    by KeysDan on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 04:20:12 PM EST
    Suffered under Jeb for 8 years as a Florida resident  If it is any consolation to you (it was to me, a little), the audience applause was greater for Colbert's recognition for his new set, particularly his desk, than for the introduction of Jeb.  

    Parent
    I agree it was too frenetic for me too (none / 0) (#123)
    by ruffian on Thu Sep 10, 2015 at 08:36:41 PM EST
    Hope just opening week excitement.

    The guests on both of the two shows so far seemed like they did not know quite what to make of the whole thing, which is to be expected I guess. I think Colbert is best the closer he gets to having a real conversation with some give and take, hope he relaxes into that soon.

    I'm just happy to have him back, and I think the monologue and pre-guest stuff has been fine.  if I have to ff through the guests I don't care about, I will.

    Parent

    Bridgegate (none / 0) (#67)
    by CoralGables on Tue Sep 08, 2015 at 10:35:54 PM EST
    moves to the air, and ultimately takes down the CEO of United Airlines.

    That's too bad. (none / 0) (#71)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 05:46:39 AM EST
    I was hoping that Jeff Smisek would be canned for running a lousy company that ranks at the bottom of the 2015 J.D. Powers North America Airline Satisfaction Study.

    But since we're talking about the Chris Christie scandals, here's the article about Smisek's ouster in New York magazine.

    ;-D

    Parent

    Wow. (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 10:38:48 AM EST
    Per David Lazarus of the Los Angeles Times, because he resigned his position rather than be formally sacked by the board, now-former United Chair/CEO Jeff Smisek gets a severance package worth nearly $5 million in cash, plus other financial compensation which could top $20 million. And then, there are the fringe benefits:

    "In case he's ever in the mood to travel, no problem. Smisek gets free first-class tickets on the airline for the rest of his life. He also gets free airport parking for life, health insurance until he's eligible for Medicare in about four years and, oh yes, the keys to his company car. This is a mighty sweet deal for an ex-CEO whose company's stock is down 15% this year, who is seen as having bungled United's merger with Continental, who hasn't been able to make nice with labor groups and whose airline is rated last for customer satisfaction among big carriers by J.D. Power."

    Too bad that the rest of us can't all fail like this guy.


    Parent

    There is a Catch... (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 11:47:29 AM EST
    If Smisek gets in trouble with the law, he might have to give a lot of this stuff back. See the clawback clause.
    Clawback. The Companies may terminate and require repayment of certain severance payments and benefits provided to Mr. Smisek (including the Separation Payment and the Vested Restricted Shares) if (i) the Companies determine that Mr. Smisek has failed to comply with the cooperation provisions of the Separation Agreement, and Mr. Smisek has failed to remedy any such failure within five days of his receipt of written notice from the Companies of their determination that he has failed to so comply or (ii) Mr. Smisek is convicted or pleads guilty or nolo contendere to any felony or any crime involving moral turpitude which conviction or plea relates to or arises from Mr. Smisek's service with the Companies.
     LINK

    Bribing a state/city official with flights to South Carolina most certainly qualifies.

    Parent

    That's provided that ... (none / 0) (#149)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 01:29:21 PM EST
    ... Smisek is indicted and convicted, which I'm not at all confident will happen. If he strikes a deal with the government and receives immunity in exchange for turning on David Samson, he'll no doubt be laughing all the way to the bank.

    Parent
    Agreed... (none / 0) (#150)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 01:47:57 PM EST
    ...but at least there is some stipulation, and most certainly an incentive to cooperate.

    When was the last time a CEO a major corporation was convicted of a job related felony, Ebbers ?

    Parent

    I don't know. (none / 0) (#158)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 04:33:19 PM EST
    When was Tyco International's Dennis Koslowski convicted? I know he was just paroled from prison a couple years ago.

    The only other one that immediately comes to mind is Qwest's former CEO Joseph Naccio, who was convicted 10 years ago of falsely inflating the company's revenue estimates and then profiting personally from the resultant run-up in its share prices. He also went to prison, and is now out after completing his sentence, unrepentant to this day. We owned stock in Qwest at the time, so that's why I remember him. Fortunately, we sold before it tanked.

    Other than that, there has been any big fish going down recently, that's for sure.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Martha Stewart... (none / 0) (#159)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 04:43:16 PM EST
    ...but that wasn't related to her work.

    Lay got his convictions tossed when he died.

    Parent

    Well, if you're going to fail, you (none / 0) (#131)
    by Anne on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 10:52:15 AM EST
    might as well fail up instead of down, right?

    Parent
    on the Seattle anti-voyeurism law (none / 0) (#68)
    by zaitztheunconvicted on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 12:06:53 AM EST
    I filed a complaint with the King County Superior court today.

    If any of you wish to read the complaint, which is  improved compared to what I wrote a month ago.

    I copied a lot of the form from the complaint filed against Seattle on their new gun tax . . . and a lawyer gave me 30 to 45 minutes of a free visit out of the goodness of his heart and to be nice . . .

    You folks helped me in a mild way, because somehow I stumbled into reading Cohen v California . . .

    Yippee! (none / 0) (#95)
    by lentinel on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 01:52:45 PM EST
    Clinton's message to the Iranians was clear: "The U.S. will never allow you to acquire a nuclear weapon," she said Wednesday. "I will not hesitate to take military action if Iran attempts to obtain a nuclear weapon."

    That'll learn 'em.

    So Mr. Obama (none / 0) (#96)
    by Repack Rider on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 02:16:33 PM EST
    ...managed to resolve the situation without military action?

    That will disappoint people who wanted Americans to die over it and the taxpayers to get on the hook for a few more trillions.

    We used to call those people "traitors."  Now we call them "Republicans."

    Parent

    Those concerned about how (5.00 / 2) (#108)
    by KeysDan on Wed Sep 09, 2015 at 03:59:26 PM EST
    Mrs. Clinton emails, should take a look at some real law-breakers: 47 US Senators, all Republicans, led by a newbie Senator from Arkansas, who wrote an open letter to the Ayatollah Khomeni in the midst of sensitive international negotiations with Iran.

     A violation of the Logan Act which forbids any US citizen acting without US official authority from influencing disputes and controversies.  And, then, once again, Senator Cotton (R. AK) recently met with a foreign leader, Bibi Netanyahu, to plot ways and means to undermine the president of the US authority.   This is a case of insurrection--treason.  

    Parent

    Republicans have been violating the Logan Act ... (5.00 / 1) (#166)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 05:32:21 PM EST
    ... for partisan political purposes with impunity since at least 1968, when Richard Nixon successfully undermined the Johnson administration's peace negotiations with the North Vietnamese in Paris.

    Parent
    Carson, Trump (none / 0) (#122)
    by KeysDan on Thu Sep 10, 2015 at 01:30:45 PM EST
    and Fiorina.   The Republican non-politician rising stars: : Trump said Carson doesn't know about job creation, being a doctor and all; Carson, the Seventh Day Adventist, responded by attacking Trump's faith; Trump responded to that response by wondering aloud, and loudly, about just how recent Carson's beliefs are or how long they have been shown on his sleeves,  and, in an apparent reference to Carson's "eyes wide shut" demeanor, said Carson makes Jeb look like the Energizer Bunny.

    Trump said Carly Fiorina can't be president because of her face: "Look at that face" Trump tells a Rolling Stone reporter, "Who is going to vote for that?"     Fiorina retorts that she does not know what Trump means about her face.

    Meanwhile, the other members of the clown car are rising like unleavened bread.   As they should.    

    9/11 (none / 0) (#127)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 08:02:02 AM EST
    they are rerunning the live coverage on MSNBC.  Have mixed feelings about that tradition.  But I usually watch some of it.

    It's one of the mysteries of my life why I missed the actual events.

    Regular readers here know well what a media addict I am.   For most of my adult life I wake up and turn the TV on.   It's as much a part of my morning routine as stopping the the bathroom or feeding the dogs.  That morning 14 years ago.  For whatever reason and for literally the only time in my life that remember I did not turn on the TV.

    I was in the process of renovating my first house.  I was in LA.  I had taken an equity loan and several months off work to do this.  On that day I was working in the yard.   I took my coffee and went straight out to the yard.  Around 12 or 1 pacific time one of my neighbors popped up over the fence and said "can you believe it?"  

    That was the first I knew.  Try for a moment to imagine how it felt for an honest to god news addict to have completely missed one of the biggest news events of my life.

    It was so strange.  I spent the rest of the day coming to grips with what had happened AND how and why I missed it.

    More emails should be released. (none / 0) (#138)
    by KeysDan on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 11:53:41 AM EST
    Why the reluctance.  Cover-up of embarrassing chaos?  National Security?   National Security it is. .

    Emails released by the George W. Bush Library in response to an NYT open records request are incomplete, the vast majority of messages sent on Sept 11, 2001 are being withheld ,citing exemptions under the law like national security.  

    However, based on those emails made available, it may be advisable to release more if for no other reason to provide some balance between staff concerns for spiritual comfort and temporal responsibilities.  

    The email interchanges show concerns for one another, friends and family.  And, pastors sending notes from Psalms.  The business of the day was canceling routine meetings,, worrying about the fate of political agendas, and preparing a speech for the president, which was "extraordinary" given the time given to knock it out.   Surely, there is something about concerns for the country lurking among those embargoed emails.

    And, you are not even talking about (none / 0) (#153)
    by christinep on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 02:23:36 PM EST
    Benghazi.  We did have a few hearings after 9/11, of course ... but, now how many hearings have we had about Benghaziii?  

    'Sorry I was thinking about the gut-real horror of that 9/11 day and time this a.m. ... and, meandering in the mind of the events since then.

    Parent

    Today I learned... (none / 0) (#143)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 12:33:07 PM EST
    what it takes for a black man brutalized by the NYPD to get an apology....a wicked backhand.

    Speaking of takedowns, can we hire somebody to tackle and detain Officer James Frascatore?  Cuz this piece of sh&t is a regular crime spree.

    P.S.... (none / 0) (#144)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 12:46:17 PM EST
    Magic Number 16, Mets 7 Braves 2 in Wetlanta...the ageless wonder Bartolo Colon sees his scoreless innings streak reach 31 before surrendering 2 runs in the 7th, and also pitched in at the plate with a rip RBI single to center in the 4th.  Super-subs Juan Uribe and Kevin Plawecki plate 3 RBI's a piece to round out another strong offensive performance.

    Nats avoided another loss by help of the schedule, lead stands at 7.5 games.

    Parent

    Kdog, I have friends (none / 0) (#169)
    by Zorba on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 07:04:17 PM EST
    in this area who are Nats fans, and are eating their livers out over the losses to the Mets.  I just laughed at them.  Which wasn't appreciated.   ;-)

    Parent
    There's also the laughter ... (none / 0) (#176)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 09:05:42 PM EST
    ... that's likely resonating all the way down to D.C. from Montreal about now.

    Parent
    Watched that video - holy hell (none / 0) (#175)
    by ruffian on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 08:37:34 PM EST
    Amazing to me that they can just do that to people, especially an undercover cop like that. Lucky for him some concealed carry dude wasn't in the lobby, because it sure looked like a random assault on Blake.

    Loved the little lady pointing out that he had dropped his phone, or taser, or whatever that was. Very helpful ma'am, thanks.

    Parent

    It's very cool here today (none / 0) (#145)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 12:47:02 PM EST
    70 and breezy.  I have all the windows open and I'm making pot roast and oatmeal cookies.

    My house smells like Vahalla.

    100s and no rain for 2 years (none / 0) (#197)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 12, 2015 at 01:33:11 AM EST
    and gawdawful humidity....we turned into Phoenix....

    Parent
    Serena Williams Loses Grand Slam Bid (none / 0) (#154)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 03:47:15 PM EST
    In a stunning upset, Serena Williams was bounced from the U.S. Open on Friday and lost her bid for the first Grand Slam in tennis in 27 years.

    Roberta Vinci, an unseeded Italian ranked No. 43 in the world, beat Williams 2-6, 6-4, 6-4 in the semifinals.

    Williams was aiming for her 22nd major title, which would have tied her with Steffi Graf for the most in the Open Era. She had won the Australian Open, the French Open and Wimbledon and needed only the U.S. Open to clinch the Grand Slam.

    Vinci, 32, had never made it past the quarterfinals of a Grand Slam. In four previous matches against Williams, she had never even won a set.

     LINK

    Unbelievable.  She was a 300-1 underdog to beat Williams.

    Oh, well. (none / 0) (#164)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 05:23:16 PM EST
    It's still been one helluva ride for Serena Williams these past 12 months, winning four Grand Slam events in a row dating back to last year's U.S. Open. Nobody's done that in 27 years, woman or man. That she didn't win them all in the same calendar year of 2015 is a distinction without a difference, in my opinion. She's proved herself to be one of the all-time great tennis players, and she's got nothing to be ashamed of.

    Parent
    Actually (none / 0) (#165)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 05:31:27 PM EST
    You are selling Serena short.
    This was her second "Serena Slam", in 2002 /2003 she also won 4 consecutive Grand Slams, just not in the same year.

    Would have liked to have seen the match, Serena rarely plays competitive matches, she is head and shoulders above any other woman tennis pro.

    Parent

    I gladly stand corrected. (none / 0) (#167)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 05:36:39 PM EST
    Nobody else has accomplished that, though, since Steffi Graf in 1988. And who was the last man to win four Grand Slam events in a row -- Rod Laver in 1969?

    Parent
    Believe (none / 0) (#172)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 08:03:16 PM EST
    You are correct. Laver.
    I first started playing tennis around then, remember watching Newcombe, Ashe, Stan Smith, Rosewall. A different era.
    The men today have a more competitive environment, they actually now have a stat called a career slam, where someone wins all four Slams in their career. And that is difficult also, especially with Nadal playing on clay at the French

    Parent
    Stan Smith was from my hometown ... (none / 0) (#177)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 09:25:03 PM EST
    ... of Pasadena, CA. When he became the runner-up at Wimbledon in 1971, it was like everyone in the city was following his march through the tournament. Every single day he was on the front page of the Pasadena Star-News, the local San Gabriel Valley paper. Then he won the U.S. Open one month later, and took Wimbledon the next year.

    Parent
    Vinci was brilliant... (none / 0) (#180)
    by desertswine on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 09:54:30 PM EST
    She played the game of her life.

    Parent
    One Clown (none / 0) (#157)
    by FlJoe on Fri Sep 11, 2015 at 04:21:30 PM EST
    Down, Perry just "suspended" his campaign.

    the news for climate change unbelievers . . . (none / 0) (#201)
    by zaitztheunconvicted on Sat Sep 12, 2015 at 01:11:10 PM EST
    Saturday in Seattle has a chance to notch No. 51 with forecasted highs right around 80, but will it be the last 80 degree day of the year?

    Friday, Seattle hit 80 degrees for the 50th time this year, not only extending the record that had been 47, but has now doubled the average amount of 80 degree days in a year here (25).

    Tuesday Afternoon Open Thread | 201 comments (201 topical)