home

Wednesday Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 12:56:30 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

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

< Electoral College Votes Today | Christmas Eve Open Thread >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Wednesday Open Thread | 200 comments (200 topical)
    From our "Boer, Boor, Bore" file: (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 03:20:59 PM EST
    Fox News star Bill O'Reilly channeled the ghost of the late Apartheid-era South African President P.W. Botha last night, going off on an epic rant in which he accused Democrats of wanting to strip power from the "white establishment."

    Well, speaking for myself only, I know that I certainly do, so O'Reilly's not necessarily wrong in that respect. Still, given his pretentious claims to being color-blind in all matters of race and ethnicity, it's pretty funny to see and hear him finally level with the public regarding where he really stands.

    How other people can stand to watch this pompous white-wing bullschitt artist on a regular basis, I'll never know.

    Aloha.

    Could an explicitly racist commentary (none / 0) (#10)
    by Peter G on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 05:05:31 PM EST
    be grounds for losing one's position as a commentator at Fox "news"? I would have thought that implicit was expected, while explicit was prohibited. Am I wrong?

    Parent
    It likely depends upon one's ratings. (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 06:31:25 PM EST
    "Times have changed since I first sat behind this desk. For example, I used to be the only pretty blonde woman reading the fake news. Now there's a whole network devoted to that."
    - Jane Curtin, "Weekend Update" (NBC's Saturday Night Live 40th Anniversary Special, February 16, 2015)

    And let's face it, Bill O'Reilly is pretty popular with the white-wingbat crowd, which eats this stuff up and then asks for seconds. If Fox News wouldn't fire him for promising to cover his executive producer with falafel while she's taking a shower, or for falsely claiming that he was a combat correspondent for CBS News during the Falkland Islands War when the closest he ever got to the war zone was 1,200 miles away in downtown Buenos Aires, I can't imagine him getting ever canned over this.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Yeah, (none / 0) (#16)
    by Peter G on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 07:39:05 PM EST
    I kind of knew that.

    Parent
    But of course! (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 08:35:39 PM EST
    If this rant had been done by the Fox News reader on the network's 12:00 mid-5:00 a.m., he'd be hustled out the door so fast by building security that bystanders in the immediate vicinity would stand a pretty good chance of catching cold in the draft.

    As Trump said, when you're a star, you can get away with anything.

    Parent

    ha ha. this is stupid (none / 0) (#28)
    by linea on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 11:02:16 PM EST
    Clinton won the popular vote by 2.8 million," but insisted the "hidden reason" behind calls to scrap the electoral college is actually the desire to marginalize and disenfranchise white working class men.

    the labourers in cities and urban areas are only african americans? you know... i was at a druggist tonight, after work, and the prettiest little french girl and her mother were there too.

    in my opinion, the electoral college... well, maybe i dont have the right. but NPR talked of a multi-state initiative to have eklectors vote in accordance with the national popular vote. perhaps we could endorse that idea?

    Parent

    Senators Cruz (R.TX) and (5.00 / 3) (#36)
    by KeysDan on Thu Dec 22, 2016 at 12:10:30 PM EST
    Lee (R, UT) will, once again, introduce legislation similar to North Carolina's Bathroom/anti-gay bill, and the failed attempt by Gov Pence (R.IN).  This anti-gay bill masquerading as a religious liberty law is called, with at least a sense of irony, "First Amendment Defense Bill."

    The Cruz/Lee bill prohibits the federal government from taking "discriminatory" action against any business or person that discriminate against LGBTQ people.  The act distinctly aims to protect the rights of all entities to refuse service to LGBTQ people based on (l) marriage is, or should be, recognized as the union of one man and one women, and (2) sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.

    The language is intentionally broad so as to cover any pseudo-religious reason for denial of any service to gay Americans outright, not just services related to same sex marriage ceremonies (e.g. refusal to bake a wedding cake).  And, the language does not target just gays.  Single parents, unmarried straight "fornicators" are included.

    Trump indicated during the campaign that he would sign a religious freedom bill,

    A national religious liberty law may lose the counter-balance that has happened in several states, such as Georgia (Coca Cola, Delta influenced the Governor's veto; NC. sporting events were moved to other states).  A Trump Administration could exert pressure or bully corporations (regulations etc), something states could not easily do.

    Anti-gay legislation may go a long way toward ameliorating the concerns of those angry rural white men who voted for Trump because they did not like that TPP trade agreement, and Trump is unable to get those good mining jobs reinstated.  And, it lines the US up better, culturally, with Russia.

    Well, we're flying out tonight to L.A. ... (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Dec 22, 2016 at 08:43:29 PM EST
    ... for the holidays. See you on the eastern side of the Pacific. Have a wonderful evening, everyone.

    The Florida Supreme Court has finally (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by Peter G on Thu Dec 22, 2016 at 10:11:14 PM EST
    admitted that the state's death penalty law has been clearly unconstitutional since 2002. Over half of the denizens of the state's death row -- more than 200, apparently -- were sentenced after that, illegally, and must be resentenced.  Either changed to a life term or given a new penalty hearing where the jury's decision cannot be overruled by a judge, as wrongly allowed previously.

    Metallica frontman had enough of elitists in (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by McBain on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 11:37:06 AM EST
    Marin, CA.
    "I kind of got sick of the Bay Area, the attitudes of the people there, a little bit," Hetfield says. "They talk about how diverse they are, and things like that, and it's fine if you're diverse like them. But showing up with a deer on the bumper doesn't fly in Marin County. My form of eating organic doesn't vibe with theirs."

    There's other places in the bay area that aren't quite as crazy but I understand where's he's coming from on this.

    I get where James... (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 12:12:43 PM EST
    is coming from too...you can be right as rain on any given issue/topic, but if you're smug about it all people remember is that you're an arsehole and the message is lost.  Sh*t I agree with liberal "elitists" on many if not most things but I still find it hard to stand them.  They're self-righteousness is often insufferable.

    It's clearly a current problem for liberal values and ideas...when we fail to deliver our message and ideas in an open-minded, kind, and relatable manner to those whose first inclination may be reflexive disagreement.

    Not to say we tolerate intolerance or bad ideas...but there is certainly room for improvement in our delivery.  

    Parent

    "showing up with a deer on the bumper" (none / 0) (#75)
    by linea on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 08:32:26 PM EST
    hunting is immensely popular with men in many many countries. as an aside, i feel a national federal handgun ban, while allowing hunting rifles, would be more effective than the current trend of restricting "assault style" rifles. in my opinion.

    Parent
    I (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by FlJoe on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 02:13:20 PM EST
    call BS on that failure of "elite messaging" meme. So many people are falling for  that propaganda from the right and their media enablers.

    One side deals in facts, pragmatism and inclusiveness, the other side deals in lies, demagoguery and bigotry. If pointing that out makes one smug, well so be it and we truly are doomed.

    We all know which side won, with nothing close to being open minded or kind in their playbook. Obviously the demagoguery worked pretty good on the relatable front but the left has always been loathe to go down that path and would certainly be harshly called out on it most likely by our own side and certainly by the media and the Republicans.

    We are living in a post-truth world where clinging  to empirical and historical facts makes one an elitist and thus someone not to be trusted, and the talking heads give it their best both sider grins.

    It is reported that Trump is (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by KeysDan on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 05:38:01 PM EST
    having some difficulty securing celebrity entertainment for his inauguration.  

    Maybe, Pussy Riot.  The feminist punk rock group is just what the Trump crowd is looking for. Trump should grab them.  And, there is the Russian connection to boot.  

    I am not ashamed to admit the perverse (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by vml68 on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 10:16:23 PM EST
    enjoyment I have been getting from all the reports of Tr*mp struggling to get A-listers to perform at his inauguration.
    Just the thought of how much this must be burning him up  makes me laugh out loud!

    Life's little pleasures :-)

    Parent

    Talk Radio (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by Lora on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 07:56:11 AM EST
    I believe talk radio, overwhelmingly right-wing, had a huge influence on the election. I think it is responsible for instilling disinformed beliefs in those multi-millions of Americans who listen regularly to it.

    I'm looking for ways to combat its destructive messages.  I hope to return to this theme in future open threads and maybe have it catch on as a theme and find some constructive approaches to dealing with it.

    Easy (none / 0) (#91)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 10:36:34 AM EST
    Just get rid of the First Amendment.

    Parent
    You mis-understand (5.00 / 3) (#93)
    by MKS on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 10:45:07 AM EST
    the First Amendment.  It prohibits governmental interference with speech.

    The First Amendment does not guarantee that people will not criticize your speech; it does not prohibit private action to protest your speech.

    Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes called it the marketplace of ideas.   The government should allow the people to decide what are good ideas and bad ideas; not all ideas are entitled to equal respect.

    Some ideas deserve to be ridiculed. You are not guaranteed an audience or the ability to spout offensive ideas without consequence.  You are only guaranteed that the government will not prohibit your speech.  What the people do on their own is the marketplace of ideas at work.

    Parent

    I didn't say that (none / 0) (#103)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 05:58:27 PM EST
    nor do I misunderstand.

    I just said the easiest way is to forbid it but first you need to get rid of the First Amendment, which would stop criticism of the government.

    Plus we can institute Hate Speech laws that won't let anyone criticize or say anything negative about religion...unless it is Christianity....or race...or whatever is popular at the time.

    And if you have enough money you can sue, claiming slander. That'll slow'em, down.

    But if you think the problem is all the Right Wing talk radio you can have the FCC re-institute the Fairness Doctrinewhich required radio station to insure balance in their broadcasts.

    Many Democrats have stated their support for that. Just Google "Left wants to re institute Fairness Doctrine..." I got 87,400 hits.

    I mean all you have is MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, PBS, NPR and all the print media except for the WSJ.

    Of course the reason that their are very few Left wing talk radio programs is that the market doesn't support them. Stations carry Beck, Limbaugh and Ingram because they have an audience and make the station money.
     

    Parent

    "Combat" is not "forbid" (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by Lora on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 07:31:05 PM EST
    I am looking for a way to combat, i.e. challenge, the evidence-free assertions, the inappropriate generalizations, the red herrings, the commands, the extreme ad hominem attacks, the vitriol and the hatred.

    How do you deprogram millions of people?

    Trouble with the democrats is that they are too slow on the uptake.  So much of the disinformation is so ridiculous, they couldn't believe anyone would fall for it. They were sadly, hugely wrong. This stuff needs to be challenged the moment it is out there.

    Parent

    not equivalent (5.00 / 3) (#120)
    by Lora on Sun Dec 25, 2016 at 09:49:56 AM EST
    There is nothing on the Left to compare with the right talk radio hosts who influence multimillions with their fact-free rhetoric.

    Parent
    et all (1.00 / 1) (#125)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Dec 25, 2016 at 04:39:45 PM EST
    Lora, some disagree.

    jondee, these patently false lies that Bush, and I, believed were pushed by the same organizations that now tell us Putin got Trump elected.

    BTW - I never criticized Bush for invading...he acted on the information that he had. It was his wrong headed belief that he could make Iraq into a western style democracy that got us into trouble.

    The so called over the air networks get their viewers from entertainment. Network news viewership has been falling while cable news, which FNC leads, has been growing.

    The dearth of Left Wing radio is purely market based. When the station can make more money broadcasting Left wing stuff it will happen,

    FlJoe - A wonderful idea but unlikely to happen. More money to be made and power seized by telling people what they want to hear.

    Parent

    It (none / 0) (#126)
    by FlJoe on Sun Dec 25, 2016 at 06:31:17 PM EST
    must be a special day, I agree with you 100% here,  
    A wonderful idea but unlikely to happen. More money to be made and power seized by telling people what they want to hear.

    You seem to recognize (at least on some level) that this is wrong but brush it off as some kind of "market based" problem, as if the packaging is more important than the content.

    It is painfully obvious from history and human behavior that what people want to hear and what is true is often miles apart. Just because you can sell a lie doesn't in any way make it right and more often than not ends up in disaster.

    Paul Simon probably said it best:

    I am just a poor boy
    Though my story's seldom told
    I have squandered my resistance
    For a pocketful of mumbles
    Such are promises
    All lies and jest
    Still, a man hears what he wants to hear
    And disregards the rest


    Parent
    Propaganda by both sides (none / 0) (#129)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 09:03:52 AM EST
    has long been practiced.

    And that is what we now call "fake news."

    The question is always which side are you on??

    Dan Rather and his staff took a shot at Bush and got exposed.

    Brian Williams rewrote his reporting experiences and lost his job.

    Hillary told the parents that Benghazi was caused by an Internet video....and lost an election.

    The tail always follows the cat home.

    Parent

    If anyone owes the Benghazi parents an apology (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by mm on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 11:16:44 AM EST
    it is republicans for the despicable conduct of the GOP controlled House, using the tragic deaths of 4 American heroes in a nakedly partisan abuse of power.  

     

    In the rich history of Washington scandal mongering, we have seen few investigations more cynical and nihilistic than this one.
    LINK

    Truth.

    Parent

    Hillary is on video (none / 0) (#145)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 03:04:41 PM EST
    telling the parents that it was an Internet video.

    Parent
    Hillary is on video? (none / 0) (#155)
    by mm on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 05:03:17 PM EST
    I'm sure you've seen it and can provide a link?
    Or is this an example of your truth vs my truth?

    And nice little tap dance around the thrust of my comment.

    **
    General David Petraeus, testimony to the Benghazi Select Committee, March 2015.

    I'm still not absolutely certain what absolutely took place, whether it was a mix of people that are demonstrating with attackers in there, whether this is an organized demonstration to launch an attack, whether--because you'll recall, there's a lot of SIGINT [signals intelligence] that we uncovered that very clearly seemed to indicate that there was a protest and it grew out of the protest. ... And there is a video of what took place.  And they are just basically milling around out there.  So if this is an attack, you know, maybe they rehearsed it to look like a protest, but maybe it was actually a mix.  And so, again, I'm still not completely set in my own mind of what--and to be candid with you, I am not sure that the amount of scrutiny spent on this has been in
    the least bit worth it.



    Parent
    No, Jim, HIllary is not on video (none / 0) (#156)
    by MKS on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 05:19:51 PM EST
    In fact, of the four victim's families, two say Hillary did not blame the video; and the two who do are committed opponents.  In fact, the Ambassador's family says Hillary did not blame the video.

    Show and tell, Jim, post a link to the video.

    Parent

    Okie Dokie (none / 0) (#164)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 08:03:35 PM EST
    Ask and ye shall receive.

    Parent
    The comments from the drooling (none / 0) (#167)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 08:34:07 PM EST
    knuckle-draggers in the comments section give you an idea of the mentality that we're expected to place our hopes in for the next four years..

    I wonder who hoses out their enclosures?

    Let's make America Great Again: like it was in the late-Pleistocene period.

    Parent

    No, like it was in 1840 (none / 0) (#171)
    by MKS on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 09:52:37 PM EST
    That is the target era.

    Parent
    Oh that? (none / 0) (#170)
    by MKS on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 09:51:50 PM EST
    The GOP even gave up on those public comments.  What Hillary said is true even today.

     There were attacks on our embassies around the world because of the video.  Our embassy in Egypt was actually breached.

    She distinguished between the attack on Benghazi and the attacks on our embassies around the world.  She never said the attack on Benghazi was because of the video.

    You are behind the curve regarding the more recent GOP accusations, though.  I thought you were talking about those.  

    Parent

    Oh that? Yes that! (none / 0) (#177)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 08:34:07 AM EST
    De nile is the name of a river in Egypt.

    She said what she said and you can deny and run away but you cannot hide.


    Parent

    Quote the sentence that is false (5.00 / 1) (#184)
    by MKS on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 10:22:43 AM EST
    If you actually listen carefully to what she said, you will find that it is true even today.

    So, Jimbo, quote, verbatim, that means word for word, what she said that was false. Underline the words that were false.

    Can you do that, Jimbo?  Just try it--you'll see.

    Parent

    yeah, and figures don't lie (none / 0) (#198)
    by mm on Wed Dec 28, 2016 at 08:51:01 AM EST
    but liars do figure.

    You lied.

    Parent

    The fact that you can't tell .. (5.00 / 2) (#138)
    by Yman on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 12:46:15 PM EST
    ... the difference between actual journalists and wingnut CTs and lies days nothing about the state of journalism,  but a LOT about you.

    Parent
    fake news (none / 0) (#137)
    by linea on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 11:51:19 AM EST
    re: And that is what we now call "fake news."

    there is nothing on the left that is comparable to the right/alt-right FAKE NEWS stites that drove a man to brandish a gun in a misguided attempt to rescue abducted children (that these sites convinced him were) held hostage in a pizza restaurant.

    i did a search on the comet-abduction fake news item. the conspiracy sites i found were displaying the pepe-the-frog logo and guy fawkes mask; an odd nexus of delusional conspiracy theorists, neoreactionaries (pepe meme) and people covinced they are protesting against tyranny (fawkes mask).

    Parent

    The right would (none / 0) (#146)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 03:13:14 PM EST
    give you CNN and MSMBC...and if you want to see some alt-Left stuff, try this from Code Pink.

    And then we had all the media trying and convicting the Duke ruby...

    The list goes on and on the right can match you.

    Parent

    You have got to be kidding me (none / 0) (#149)
    by Lora on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 03:29:26 PM EST
    Another attempt at a "sting" by the, uh, person who produced B-roll for James O'Keefe.

    C'mon, Jim, this is total BS. You surely are aware that the people in the video were seriously encouraged to make outrageous comments about Clarence Thomas.  To their credit, most of them were very restrained.

    As you surely know, this is entirely different from a TV or radio host making similar statements.

    Not buying it.

    Again, you are proving my point.

    Parent

    They said what they said because they (none / 0) (#160)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 07:39:34 PM EST
    wanted to say it and felt they were in a congenial surrounding.

    Parent
    Because they are (none / 0) (#172)
    by MKS on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 09:54:54 PM EST
    demented misogynists.  Hateful, ugly people who are neither American nor Christian.

    Parent
    No (none / 0) (#173)
    by Lora on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 11:05:44 PM EST
    They said what they said because a friendly guy with a little humor in his voice kept saying,

    OK, after you impeach Clarence Thomas, what would you like to do to him?  What would you do next? what would you do? (with a little laugh in his voice, like, this isn't really a serious journalistic question).

    It would be like having a good old boy asking folks at a Trump rally what they would want to do to Hillary Clinton after she is arrested.  I have no doubt they would be far less restrained in their answers as most (but not all) of the people at the code pink rally.


    Parent

    Seriously? (5.00 / 3) (#128)
    by Lora on Sun Dec 25, 2016 at 10:22:12 PM EST
    Jim, from your link above:

    Last week, suspected lesbian, part-time exotic jungle dancer, and two-time failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton waddled like a postmenopausal penguin into DC and urged a captive crowd of lawmakers to beware of "fake news":

    So far you've proved my point.

    Parent

    Only a truly disgusting (5.00 / 2) (#141)
    by MKS on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 01:10:28 PM EST
    and demented human being would write that.

    Parent
    It's called the First Amendment. (none / 0) (#130)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 09:43:59 AM EST
    And no one said it had to be nice, or even true.

    And when you object to it then you are proving my point.

    Who will decide what is true? The government? Surely you jest. Did you read the entire article?

    Have you read "Animal Farm?"

    "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

    The best medicine for propaganda, and that's what fake news is, is sunlight.

    Ask Dan Rather what it cost him.

    Parent

    I beg to differ (5.00 / 1) (#132)
    by FlJoe on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 09:58:40 AM EST
    And no one said it had to be nice, or even true.

    It's called the 9th Commandment.  Have you read the Bible?
    "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor."
    why do you take God's word in vain?

    Parent
    But who is to judge (none / 0) (#134)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 10:24:58 AM EST
    what is false???

    Would you let me?

    Would I let you?

    No.

    Parent

    You (none / 0) (#135)
    by FlJoe on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 10:40:45 AM EST
    sit in judgement of your enemies every day, gleefully declaring Hillary a liar every chance you get(on the thinnest of evidence). You disavow God's words when it suits you. You are an hypocrite of the highest order.


    Parent
    Of course I do (none / 0) (#147)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 03:16:27 PM EST
    but I don't deny you the same.

    And the trick is...who but God shall decide what is false witness?

    You or me??

    Parent

    So (none / 0) (#152)
    by FlJoe on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 03:56:27 PM EST
    now you think that God was trying to trick us with the commandments. Maybe you are so morally corrupt that you don't know when you are lying, but I darn  sure know that I am doing so without divine guidance.

    Matter of fact, you and your craven cohorts have discovered that you can lie at will with no retribution whatsoever, divine or otherwise.

    Your words Jim

    And no one said it had to be nice, or even true.

    Personally, I did not need God to give me the message, my Mom took care of that quite nicely. I  am quite sure she would would find your words deplorable.

    Parent

    He's free to do anything (none / 0) (#157)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 06:22:29 PM EST
    as long as he doesn't get caught, because Jesus already took away all his sins for all time.

    Lying, cheating, stealing? No problemo -- as long as you keep spreading the word that Jesus took away all our sins.

    Besides, who's to say what lying and cheating and stealing are besides God?


    Parent

    Wow, really? (none / 0) (#169)
    by vicndabx on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 09:00:21 PM EST


    Parent
    Frankly, it is outrageous to conflate (none / 0) (#159)
    by Peter G on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 07:20:27 PM EST
    a difference of opinion with a flat out invention of untrue "facts." The First Amendment does sometimes have to protect intentional falsehood (a highly vexed area in the law of free speech), but that does not make lying a positive good in the marketplace of ideas that advances human knowledge and wellbeing.

    Parent
    Depends on how the difference of opinion is (none / 0) (#162)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 07:53:40 PM EST
    pushed and if the "opinion" is factual.

    There is a difference of opinion on whether or not Putin hacked the DNC's server...

    But it is being pushed as if it were from the lips of God to our ears.

    And that isn't true.

    We are repeatedly told that man made global warming is settled science yet many scientists disagree including one Nobel Laureate, that I  know of..may be others...and you can follow the money trail.

    Parent

    Your response, Jim (#162), shows that you (5.00 / 3) (#168)
    by Peter G on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 08:45:24 PM EST
    do not grasp what is meant in serious discourse either by the word "fact" or by the word "opinion." Just for example, whether the Russian government was behind the hacking of the DNC server is a question of fact. It is either true, or it is not true. That not all the evidence in the hands of U.S. Intelligence agencies has been made public does not make it other than a fact, one way or the other. The assertion of a matter of fact by someone who is not in possession of all the evidence does not make that assertion one of opinion, rather than of fact. Two people may have a difference of opinion on the question of how much evidence is necessary to conclude that you know whether a fact is true, because that is a matter of judgment. But it doesn't alter what is or is not a fact. I learned at least this much epistemology as a philosophy major at an excellent college, albeit several decades ago. As between you and Aristotle, I'm sticking with Aristotle, if you don't mind.

    Parent
    Peter, please read what I said (1.50 / 2) (#179)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 08:51:04 AM EST
    There is, at this time, a difference of opinion.

    At some future time it may become a fact.

    Parent

    The suggestion that I wrote a detailed response (5.00 / 2) (#182)
    by Peter G on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 09:19:14 AM EST
    to your comment without having read what you wrote is (sadly) insulting. I did. I hope you can say the same for my response. If you did read it, you didn't understand it, since your rejoinder repeats the same fallacy -- confusing what a "fact" is with what you personally have seen the evidence for -- that I debunked in my own comment.

    Parent
    Yes Peter, I read it (1.00 / 1) (#186)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 03:02:04 PM EST
    And I still maintain that opinions do not become facts until proven.

    It is a fact that some intelligence agencies say the Russians interfered. That leads to some people having an opinion that the Russians have.

    But Russian interference has not been proven.

    We should remember that these are the same agencies that told us Saddam had WMD's.

    Bush took those opinions as facts and acted on them. He was heartily condemned.

    Parent

    And yet you claimed it had (5.00 / 1) (#188)
    by jondee on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 03:35:21 PM EST
    been "proven" that Saddam snuck his wmds into Syria just before the invasion..

    Which was an assertion based on much scantier evidence than there is for Russian interference in the recent election.

    No wonder you have so much difficulty differentiating opinions from facts.

    Parent

    jondee (1.00 / 1) (#189)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 06:28:38 PM EST
    I am merely pointing out that the Left refused to accept what the intelligence agencies said about Iraq and WMD's....when it met their political position.

    Now that the agencies make a claim that supports the Left's campaign to harm the Presidency they are embracing them.

    Just like they loved Comey for his first comments and then hated  him for his later comments.

    That is hypocritical.

    My position has not changed. I belief that Saddam had X number of WMD's hidden away and rushed them into Syria at the last moment as told by the Iraqi Air Force number 2 man. Plus satellite shots show extremely heavy truck traffic at that time. And the final question is...where did Assad get the chemical weapons he was used???  

    Parent

    I find it fascinating (none / 0) (#193)
    by jondee on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 07:44:58 PM EST
    that you've been doing the EXACT thing you're accusing "the left" of, while being too dense to even be aware that you're doing it.

    At one time, the Cherry-Picked intelligence regarding Saddam's WMDs was the useful lie you wholeheartedly subscribed to, and now that the intelligence agencies have raised questions about the legitimacy of the recent election, the intelligence agencies can't be trusted -- because they were so wrong about Saddam's WMDS!

    The word hypocrisy is inadequate to describe your clownish contortions.

    Parent

    Sigh.... (1.00 / 1) (#196)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 28, 2016 at 08:00:09 AM EST
    I haven't said the agencies that are claiming the Russians did it are wrong.....

    I'v said it hasn't been proven.

    It is not a fact.

    You want to accept it as a fact because you have TDS.

    Enough. Anyone can see my point, even you.

    Parent

    We see your point easily. (none / 0) (#202)
    by FlJoe on Wed Dec 28, 2016 at 11:09:29 AM EST
    Any "fact" that fits your world view is easily provable despite the lack of evidence (see Iraqi WMDs)

    Any "fact" that does not fit your worldview is impossible to prove (see Global Warming).

    I expect nothing less from a morally bankrupt charlatan. What's your excuse?

    Parent

    I thought Jim's idea (none / 0) (#203)
    by jondee on Wed Dec 28, 2016 at 01:17:08 PM EST
    that engineers are more trustworthy scientific researchers than actual scientists was worth delving into, and SURPRISE! found that the professional class most overrepresented in extremist religious movements was engineers.

    Chalk up another one for the up-is-down, black-is-white Jim chronicles.

    Parent

    memory hole (none / 0) (#199)
    by Lora on Wed Dec 28, 2016 at 08:58:24 AM EST
    We should remember that these are the same agencies that told us Saddam had WMD's.

    They also told us they didn't think so. Bush acted on the few who were basically charged by Bush to find them, whether they were there or not.

    Parent

    Yes Peter, I read it (none / 0) (#187)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 03:02:04 PM EST
    And I still maintain that opinions do not become facts until proven.

    It is a fact that some intelligence agencies say the Russians interfered. That leads to some people having an opinion that the Russians have.

    But Russian interference has not been proven.

    We should remember that these are the same agencies that told us Saddam had WMD's.

    Bush took those opinions as facts and acted on them. He was heartily condemned.

    Parent

    I fundamentally disagree (5.00 / 1) (#190)
    by Peter G on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 06:32:54 PM EST
    on what is meant by a "fact." It is a fact that I was born in July, and that my hair has turned from dark brown to gray, and that I live in a certain town, whether you have seen the evidence of it -- and indeed whether I have any evidence, or satisfactory evidence, of any of these things -- or not. But now that I know you don't accept the ordinary meaning of the word "fact," I will read (or skip) your comments in that light.

    Parent
    Yes you can follow the money trail (none / 0) (#175)
    by Lora on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 11:18:36 PM EST
    It is settled by nearly all scientists who are not in the pay of the coal/oil industries.

    Parent
    You mean like this? (none / 0) (#178)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 08:47:04 AM EST
    The White House reported....Global warming spending is estimated to cost $22.2 billion this year, and $21.4 billion next year.

    that is about about what we spent on border security.

    Roger Pielke Jr recently made the remarkable discovery that, in addition to his university salary from George Mason University (reported by Pielke as $250,000), Jagadish Shukla, the leader of the #RICO20, together with his wife, had received a further $500,000 more in 2014 alone from federal climate grants funnelled through a Shukla-controlled "non-profit" (Institute for Global Environment and Security, Inc.), yielding total income in 2014 of approximately $750,000.
    Actually, the numbers are even worse than Pielke thought.

    Link

    Parent

    Like this (none / 0) (#185)
    by Lora on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 10:51:23 AM EST
    Climate deniers

    (and this article might show a little "balance" in terms of strongly-worded prose from the left!)

    Talking about the faux hoax that NOAA fudged the temperature data:

    Nonetheless, whether Big Carbon's stooges have fallen for it or not, another climate change denier myth is quashed. Don't worry though. This one will be repeated anyway, and then another will most assuredly rise up in its place soon enough. And there will be enough Fox "News" dupes --- both viewers and "reporters" --- willing to both buy and sell it. All meant to continue delaying necessary changes that might help stave off our planetary climate crisis, just so that the fossil fuel industry and its supporters can continue to make ever more profits for as long as possible, cause [**] all of you liberal lefty tree-hugging science-loving communists who have fallen for the great "hoax" that humanity should live on a livable planet.


    Parent
    I read blogs with a great deal (5.00 / 1) (#191)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 06:35:27 PM EST
    of skepticism. And you show me talking heads on TV but you don't show me any scientists/university types.

    I give you a Nobel Laureate who has a very clear vision on the issue. Listen to him. It's only 29 minutes.

    Parent

    Wow! A "Nobel Laureate"?!!!!??!! (none / 0) (#192)
    by Yman on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 07:38:51 PM EST
    What's his field of expertise again?

    Heh, heh, heh ...

    Parent

    Physics, not climatology (none / 0) (#194)
    by jondee on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 08:07:35 PM EST
    and his other field of expertise is the subject of how to be a paid science advisor to a libertarian think tank.

     

    Parent

    You really wanna go there? (none / 0) (#195)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 28, 2016 at 07:53:57 AM EST
    Of course the MMGW proponents had their web sites. One that is often mentioned is Skeptical Science.... "Skeptical Science is a climate alarmist website created by a self-employed cartoonist, John Cook....
    Thanks to the Wayback Machine we can reveal what his website originally said,

    "I'm not a climatologist or a scientist but a self employed cartoonist" - John Cook, Skeptical Science'

    Link

    Parent

    Yeah - I'll happily "go there" (none / 0) (#197)
    by Yman on Wed Dec 28, 2016 at 08:33:28 AM EST
    He's the creator of the website.  Unlike you, no one is citing this non-expert as an expert on climate change.

    Try to make it a little harder next time,  please.   Sometimes,  it's just embarrassingly easy.

    Parent

    bradblog is very well sourced (none / 0) (#200)
    by Lora on Wed Dec 28, 2016 at 09:01:14 AM EST
    Follow the links.

    Skepticism is healthy.

    Parent

    Make Sure You Also Read This Reply to Giaever (none / 0) (#201)
    by RickyJim on Wed Dec 28, 2016 at 09:45:44 AM EST
    We often see scientists from non-climate fields who believe they have sufficient expertise to understand climate science despite having done minimal research on the subject; William Happer, Fritz Vahrenholt, and Bob Carter, for example.  As he admits in his own words, Nobel Prize winning physicist Ivar Giaever fits this mould perfectly:
    Link

    Parent
    Animal Farm is a great book (5.00 / 2) (#143)
    by Lora on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 01:30:26 PM EST
    To continue...

    Ask Breitbart and James O'Keefe what his deceptive editing cost them. But the real fallout was to ACORN. They wanted to bring ACORN down, and they did by "fake news." Same with the hurt to Planned Parenthood which was cleared many times over but lost funding anyway. Many people have been severely affected by these fakes.

    They don't care whether their news is real or not.  To them and those like them, the end justifies the means.

    Parent

    Didn't read the entire article (none / 0) (#140)
    by Lora on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 01:05:14 PM EST
    Couldn't get past the vitriolic ad hominem Hillary attack -- which again proves my point -- doesn't matter what comes next. The Hate Hillary machine is up and running and that's enough.

    Parent
    Okay, but don't claim to be well informed (none / 0) (#148)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 03:24:03 PM EST
    about false news if a bit of nasty towards Hillary runs you off. Try these:

    The New York Times is a highly regarded American daily newspaper. While Joseph Stalin was purposely starving millions of Ukrainians to death, a Times reporter won a Pulitzer for denying that it was happening. More recently, the paper was forced to fire a reporter for "routinely" fabricating his articles. And during the presidential campaign, a Times scribe wondered out loud about whether reporters should dispense with normal constraints such as "objectivity" when dealing with the Rising Orange Monster Named Donald Trump.)

    snip

    You blind field mice have gullibly swallowed every hate-crime hoax from Tawana Brawley to Duke Lacrosse to the Phantom Klansman of Mizzou--fabricated mass hysteria which has severely damaged American race relations, if you're actually concerned about such things--and suddenly you're worried about "fake news"?

    snip

    At this late date, anyone who fails to realize that the US government and its media accomplices generate fake news as a matter of course is a dim bulb indeed. The heroic Church Committee of the mid-1970s revealed that the CIA's Operation Mockingbird had purposely infiltrated and manipulated hundreds of American media outlets.



    Parent
    "You blind field mice.." (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 03:55:39 PM EST
    What a tell.

    Oh woe to ye sons of men whose eyes have not been opened as mine have been!!

    As if no one ever heard of Operation Mockingbird -- even though Carl Bernstein wrote extensively about all that thirty years ago.

    Another tell is the writer's fixation on Tawana Brawley and media stories about the Klan and how they "damage race relations."

    Typical wingnut boilerplate, straight from the palette of every talk radio jackdaw who ever puked into a microphone for three hours a day..

    How about a link to the the illustrious writer of that screed, Mr Snip?

    I'd be curious to read what else he has to say.

     

    Parent

    Give us Blind Field Mice (none / 0) (#153)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 04:12:44 PM EST
    a link, Jim.

    Who knows? Maybe some of us might want to order one of the Don't Tread On Me or Stars and Bars flags he sells at his site.

    Parent

    Thanks for proving my point that (none / 0) (#163)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 07:55:53 PM EST
    the Left can't stand criticism.

    Parent
    Still no link (none / 0) (#166)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 08:16:45 PM EST
    What's the problem?

    Is it another site two links away from the Aryan Nations?

    Parent

    I make no such claims (none / 0) (#150)
    by Lora on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 03:36:44 PM EST
    I have plenty of issues with the NYT, believe me.

    As for the government, The term "credibility gap"  gained popularity during the Nixon years.

    I have no problem keeping close tabs on the media and the government.  In fact I highly recommend it.

    Quite different however from Rush last Thursday: [wording may be very slightly different as this is from memory]

     "AP? Don't believe it. Washington Post? Don't believe it. NYT? Don't believe it. USA Today? Don't believe it."

    Only believe Rush and the stations he's on, was the message. NOT GOING TO!

    Parent

    Who asked you to believe Limbaugh?? (none / 0) (#161)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 07:46:19 PM EST
    He is an entertainer. Period.

    And when he no longer entertains he will be gone.

    But thanks for listening for me. I was busy doing other things.

    And "credibility gap" sprung up from LBJ who told us if we voted for Barry we'd be engaged in a land war in SE Asia.

    I didn't but many of my friends did...and they were forever noting how right LBJ had been.

    Right then and right there thousands of skeptics were born.


    Parent

    The credibility gap.. (none / 0) (#165)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 08:12:56 PM EST
    and yet you think of the time when we were teetering on the edge of nuclear war as The Good Old Days.

    Go figure.

    How about removing the credibility gap from between your ears?

    Parent

    entertainment (none / 0) (#174)
    by Lora on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 11:16:23 PM EST
    People listen to Rush and believe him, even while they are being entertained.

    OK on LBJ and credibility gap.  Also used with Nixon.

    I expect thousands of skeptics have been born at numerous times and during various administrations, both Democratic and Republican.

    Parent

    Sorry (none / 0) (#176)
    by FlJoe on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 06:18:50 AM EST
    Millions of Rush's followers consider him an unimpeachable truth teller and he never lets them forget it either.

    How is it that even main stream Republicans participate in this "entertainment", either willingly or unwillingly, and none dare call him out

    Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele says he has reached out to Rush Limbaugh to tell him he meant no offense when he referred to the popular conservative radio host as an "entertainer" whose show can be "incendiary."

    "My intent was not to go after Rush - I have enormous respect for Rush Limbaugh," Steele said in a telephone interview. "I was maybe a little bit inarticulate. ... There was no attempt on my part to diminish his voice or his leadership."

    (my bold)

    Parent
    Are you surprised (none / 0) (#180)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 09:00:00 AM EST
    that millions of people believe Podesta? Hillary?
    Read Daily KOS?

    I'm not and don't even consider it worth discussing.

    Why do you find it usual that Repubs like Rush?

    Parent

    Not surprised in the least (none / 0) (#181)
    by Yman on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 09:15:10 AM EST
    Repubs love them some blatant lies, smear, tinfoil conspiracy theories and hypocritical attacks.  Oh, ...

    ... and false equivalencies.

    Parent

    Nice (none / 0) (#183)
    by FlJoe on Tue Dec 27, 2016 at 10:09:21 AM EST
    try at deflection, name one lie as big as birtherism (just to name one) that as been  consistently promoted by someone that is considered a "leader" among Democrats or the left.

    It is you who have consistently defended lying using every excuse in the book. First amendment rights, it gets ratings, it's only entertainment...yadda, yadda, yadda.

    Facts that don't fit your worldview are dismissed as mere opinions or outright agenda driven hoaxes. Then you treat opinions or even wild eyed speculation as fact as long as it fits into that worldview.

    Do Hillary, Podesta and Kos stray off the path of pure truth on occasion? Certainly, but they never get as deep in the weeds as your leaders and pundits do while you and your morally corrupt cohort cheer them on, and when they do go beyond the pale with a lie that is too outrageous, you shamelessly brush it off as "just entertainment" or some other equivalent BS, then quietly send it down the memory hole, until it needs to be resurrected, zombie like, to use in future attacks.


    Parent

    No problem with the 1st amendment (none / 0) (#142)
    by Lora on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 01:19:58 PM EST
    Our airwaves used to have more protections to help preserve the first amendment by allowing multiple voices to be heard.

    Link FCC

    Parent

    Oh yeah, and about Dan Rather (none / 0) (#158)
    by Lora on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 07:05:35 PM EST
    This may actually be an example of reporting.

    And yeah, I read the whole thing.

    Parent

    The thing is.... (none / 0) (#111)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 07:50:57 PM EST
    The other side makes the same type claims.

    And have enough evidence from the Left's nut cases to have a point.

    I say just let everyone have their say and the public will sort it out.

    Parent

    How (none / 0) (#122)
    by FlJoe on Sun Dec 25, 2016 at 12:43:22 PM EST
    about not lying to the public in the first place?

    Parent
    No point arguing with someone (none / 0) (#123)
    by jondee on Sun Dec 25, 2016 at 01:24:17 PM EST
    who cheered the home team when they were pushing patently false wmd stories and then cheered the home team when they attacked those very same wmd stories.

    Obviously the priority for folks like that isn't a well informed public; the priority is the personal validation involved in the home team chalking up a victory.

    Parent

    Not that potion of the public ... (none / 0) (#139)
    by Yman on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 12:51:33 PM EST
    ... that can't be bothered to find out the facts or WANTS their FB friends and others to buy their silly CTs and lies.  They want people to believe their false equivalencies so they can sell their less about Benghazi, emails, etc.  If you muddy the waters enough,  the ignorant and uninformed will throw up their hands and just give up.   That's how Trump won.

    Parent
    Why do you want to get rid of the First Amendment? (none / 0) (#107)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 06:33:24 PM EST


    Parent
    I don't (none / 0) (#110)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 07:48:27 PM EST
    I just said it would be the easiest.

    Parent
    The "left" (ie, not-Fox) major networks (none / 0) (#121)
    by jondee on Sun Dec 25, 2016 at 11:40:50 AM EST
    wouldn't exist for a day if they couldn't sell audiences to the advertisers.

    So your thesis about there being no market for liberal perspectives is either wrongheaded in regard to there being no audience for it, or wrongheaded about NBC, ABC et al being particularly liberal in the first place.

    Parent

    Look up the word "dearth" (none / 0) (#131)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 09:47:35 AM EST


    Parent
    Look up Rush + scat muncher (none / 0) (#154)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 04:38:04 PM EST
    for ongoing lively discussion centered around Limbaugh's proclivities and those of his fans.

    Parent
    Today's factoid: (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 05:50:18 PM EST
    It's colder in Big Bear, CA (23°F) right now than it is at the North Pole (32°F) in the Arctic. And while that's great news for skiers in the L.A. metro area, it's likely not very good news long term for the rest of us.

    More cold days (none / 0) (#133)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 10:02:20 AM EST
    Link

    Parent
    Merry Xmas everyone (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 07:54:28 PM EST
    and may Santa bring you what you wish for.

    And may you enjoy what you get!

    NYPD claims they are hot on the trail... (none / 0) (#1)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 01:29:11 PM EST
    of the suspected Pot of Gold Bandit...say he's in Los Angeles with his gold flake laying low after a pit stop in Orlando.

    Santa, if you can hear me, all I want for Christmas is for you and your reindeer to give this guy and his bucket a lift to Ecuador before The Abominable Patrolmen find him.  

    Run, Run Rudolph!

    Wish he had dropped some gold on me (none / 0) (#2)
    by ruffian on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 03:16:20 PM EST
    on his way through Orlando! Did he go to Disneyworld?

    Parent
    Does Mickey accept gold flake (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 04:00:15 PM EST
    for admission to the parks?

    Sh*t to take a family of 4 to Disney World these days, you better stumble upon a pot of gold in an unattended open armored car.

    At least until Trump makes it rain money and jobs on the common folk, as promised.  I can't wait to be sick of money because we all have so much of it;)

    Parent

    I wonder how exactly one sells gold flake? (none / 0) (#8)
    by ruffian on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 04:24:21 PM EST


    Parent
    Sign painters use gold flake (none / 0) (#9)
    by fishcamp on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 04:42:53 PM EST
    on doctors and lawyers names on doors.  It would be great Christmas tree tinsel for The Donald.

    Parent
    Would that be the same old growth cedar tree ... (none / 0) (#15)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 06:51:01 PM EST
    "Our city parks aren't Christmas tree farms. An old growth tree from a city park for backdrop? Insane."
    - Email from angry constituent to Mobile Mayor Sandy Stimson (December 20, 2016)

    ... they poached from a Mobile, AL city park to use as a stage backdrop for Trump's grand victory tour stop? Anyway, don't give him any ideas. Otherwise, next thing we know, we'll see the  White House porticos painted with gold flake in February.

    ;-D

    Parent

    not for anything (none / 0) (#31)
    by nyjets on Thu Dec 22, 2016 at 07:18:11 AM EST
    That is a horrible Christmas wish. If he is a criminal, he should be caught and prosecuted.

    Parent
    Whaddya mean? (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by kdog on Thu Dec 22, 2016 at 09:53:42 AM EST
    A couple more artful deals like that, the Pot of Gold Bandit will be qualified to be president!

    Anyway...a Merry Christmas to you and yours, Inspector Javert ;)

    Parent

    Relaxing politics break TV (none / 0) (#4)
    by ruffian on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 03:35:10 PM EST
    Amazon's 'Mozart in the Jungle' is so good!  Finally got around to starting to watch it a couple of weeks ago. Enjoyable characters, beautiful music and photography,outstanding performance by Gael Garcia Bernal as an eccentric orchestra conductor (probably they are all a little eccentric). He manages to walk the line between endearing and just a little too precious. I'm almost through the latest season and have totally enjoyed it.

    Funny politics break audiobook (none / 0) (#5)
    by ruffian on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 03:43:56 PM EST
    'Nutshell' by Ian McEwan, read by actor Rory Kinnear. This is basically the story of Hamlet, transposed to London, as told by Hamlet...from the womb. He is a fetus with the most acerbic British wit you can stand. Wickedly funny, and Kinnear is a fantastic reader.

    Modern day London I should add (none / 0) (#6)
    by ruffian on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 03:44:33 PM EST


    Parent
    Speaking of London oddities... (none / 0) (#34)
    by kdog on Thu Dec 22, 2016 at 10:02:10 AM EST
    my literary distraction has been Phil Collins' memoirs..."Not Dead Yet".  

    Fun fact...only 3 artists have sold 100 million records both in a group and solo.  Michael Jackson, Paul McCartney, and Phil Collins.  Peter Gabriel sold 100 million solo, but Genesis did not reach that mark in the Gabriel era.

    I have a new appreciation for Genesis post-Gabriel.

    Parent

    Well if you ever (none / 0) (#11)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 05:09:53 PM EST
    wondered why Republicans are silent on everything that has been going on your answer is here

    We're dealing with Vichy Republicans who cannot bring themselves to defend any institution as long as they get a deal from Trump.

    i feel (none / 0) (#25)
    by linea on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 09:01:23 PM EST
    "vichy republican" is a bad analogy.

    the republican are worse than trump. many parts of trump's (disingenuous) platform are better than the republican platform. the republicans are religious fundamentalists, anti-democratic corporatists, liberatarian utopianists, and anti-feminists. trump is simply an unpredictable oaf (a stupid, uncultured, or clumsy person) who, i personally feel, is contempous of women and from my understanding engages in business flimflam.^

    im including the definition because this is an obscure word:
    ^ dishonest behavior meant to take money or property from someone.


    Parent

    Seriously, Linea (5.00 / 6) (#26)
    by Peter G on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 09:12:11 PM EST
    Your refusal to accept friendly criticism designed to help you express your opinions more persuasively is downright bizarre. These suggestions have (repeatedly) included: (a) don't harp constantly on how you "feel" when what is important (and what you are often actually trying to say) is what you "believe" or "think" or "have concluded"; (b) use capital letters to show you are beginning a new sentence; and (c) don't assume that each time you learn a new word to add to your expanding English vocabulary you need to publish a definition of that word, in order to be understood by the other members of the TalkLeft community.

    Parent
    im sorry (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by linea on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 09:36:29 PM EST
    i hope you realize i am adding redundant caveats such as "who, i personally feel" and "from my understanding" to these posts to avoid violating Jeralyn's rule of defamation vs personal opinion.

    i am fully commited to stop adding definitions. im not sure why it's irksome to so many. i did it at university all the time.

    i stopped using "i feel" (which is how i speak and i never recieve criticism for it) several weeks ago and instead used "my sense" or "my understanding" and similar phases. nobody was any nicer to me. so i decided to go back to how i speak.

    does that help?

    Parent

    And (d) (4.20 / 5) (#29)
    by Peter G on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 11:12:39 PM EST
    Don't apologize all the time when someone disagrees with you or appears to criticize you (by saying "I'm sorry"). You haven't hurt anyone's feelings, offended or insulted them; no need to apologize. To repeat, these are suggestions designed to help you participate more effectively as a respected member of this community.
       The use of footnoted definitions is "irksome," as you put it, because the words you are marking are all safely within the vocabularies of the readers of this blog, so you are not teaching us anything, nor is there any need to prove that you are using the word correctly (if you are using it correctly), nor any reason to broadcast that you just learned that word (which is distracting). If you genuinely believe the word is one the rest of us wouldn't understand, then don't use that word, unless there is no simpler and equally effective alternative. At least, that would be my suggestion as a professional editor of persuasive written work.

    Parent
    ok (none / 0) (#30)
    by linea on Thu Dec 22, 2016 at 12:49:13 AM EST
    i'll do better. i'll try harder. i'm actually very educated.

    Parent
    Peter G and Jeralyn (none / 0) (#38)
    by MKS on Thu Dec 22, 2016 at 12:55:47 PM EST
    reinforce the idea that lawyers practicing criminal are more civil than lawyers practicing civil litigation.

    Patient, and less prone to outburst, as for example, ahem our one and only lovable Armando.

    Lordy, what patience.

    Parent

    practicing "criminal law" (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by MKS on Thu Dec 22, 2016 at 12:57:02 PM EST


    Parent
    I caught the Rogue One... (none / 0) (#12)
    by desertswine on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 06:10:07 PM EST
    Star Wars movie the other night.  My question is - how did they manage to make Peter Cushing seem so, so, well, alive?  Amazing, we don't need living actors anymore.

    The Star Wars movies lost me with Jar-Jar Binks. (none / 0) (#14)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 06:39:04 PM EST
    I haven't seen one since 1999. We saw "La La Land" the other night. The Spouse really wanted to see it, and I relented because she went with me to see "Manchester by the Sea," which I really liked while she found it long and tedious. Anyway, I didn't think I'd like "La La Land," but it honestly surprised me and turned out to be quite enjoyable.

    Parent
    i was supposed to see Rogue One (none / 0) (#18)
    by linea on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 08:17:04 PM EST
    last weekend.

    but was taken to FANTASTIC BEASTS AND WHERE TO FIND THEM instead.

    the plot was weak. i wanted to see the members of the fundamentalist "Second Salem-ers" (religiously anti-wizard believers with a soup kitchen for children) to be more fully developed but they were not. the movie was mostly... look how odd and unique these curious imaginary animated creatures are.

    Parent

    Will the scandal-plagued leadership of ... (none / 0) (#19)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 08:29:15 PM EST
    ... the Honolulu Police Department and the Honolulu City Prosecutor's office finally receive the long overdue shake-ups which both agencies really and truly deserve?

    Civil Beat | December 21, 2016
    Honolulu Police Chief Placed On Leave During Corruption Probe - Honolulu Police Chief Louis Kealoha has been placed on paid leave for 30 days after being named as a target of a federal grand jury investigation that involves allegations of corruption and abuse of power. Deputy Chief Cary Okimoto will take over as acting chief, and Kealoha will have no involvement with department activities. Honolulu Police Commission Chairman Max Sword made those announcements Tuesday during a press conference at department headquarters, just hours after Kealoha had said he was taking the lesser step of voluntarily placing himself on 'restriction of police authority' status."

    Because of the rather incestuous nature of law enforcement in Honolulu, this case was assigned by DOJ to the U.S. Attorney's office in San Diego for investigation. It looks as though that office is about to bring a federal indictment against Chief Kealoha, as well as four other members of HPD.

    To summarize the story thus far, it has been alleged that Chief Kealoha and his wife, Deputy City Prosecutor Katherine Kealoha, abused the authority and power of their respective offices in what now looks to be an extraordinarily ham-handed effort by the couple to settle a private family matter involving money and property.

    Katherine's uncle Gerard Puana was subsequently arrested and charged in federal court with the theft of the Kealoha's mailbox, after Puana had filed suit against Katherine alleging fraud and financial elder abuse, regarding the disposition of a house belonging to 95-year-old Florence Puana, Gerard's mother and Katherine's grandmother. Following Gerard's arrest, the lawsuit was dismissed and the Kealohas were $695,000 richer, thanks to the receipt of proceeds from the sale of Grandma's house.

    It's to Gerard infinite luck that the 30-year career federal public defender who was assigned as his attorney, Alexander Silvert, was a criminal lawyer with sufficient experience to sense that something was inherently amiss about this case, which lead him to suspect that his client may have been framed.

    Silvert refused to pleas his client out, and instead aggressively and doggedly pursued the matter, eventually and almost single-handedly uncovering the plot involving an elite unit of HPD, which allegedly acted on Katherine's behalf to set up her uncle at the direction of her husband the police chief. The federal charges against Gerard Puana have since been dismissed with prejudice by a federal judge.

    This has been as ugly and sordid a story of public corruption as I've ever seen occur in any big-city police department. And because Katherine Kealoha is a high-profile official in City Prosecutor Keith Kaneshiro's office, it's now involved that department as well, because Kaneshiro adamantly refused to investigate the allegations which Mr. Silvert first leveled against Chief Kealoha two years ago. And of course, Kealoha and Kaneshiro are longtime friends, as are their wives.

    (I told you that law enforcement was rather incestuous out here. Kaneshiro's former No. 2 is currently the U.S. Attorney for Hawaii.)

    Things out here should be getting really interesting very shortly.

    how interesting (none / 0) (#23)
    by linea on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 08:36:03 PM EST
    but isnt it called nepotism not incestuous? i read that china has a serious blatant nepotism problem too.  

    Parent
    It's a figure of speech. (5.00 / 3) (#24)
    by Chuck0 on Wed Dec 21, 2016 at 08:52:22 PM EST
    He did not mean actual incest.

    Parent
    Trump bringing in foreign workers (none / 0) (#32)
    by Yman on Thu Dec 22, 2016 at 09:41:30 AM EST
    His son just applied for H-2 visas to bring in 6 foreign workers for his winery (so much joke potential),  one of 263 applications for Trump businesses just since his campaign began.

    Make America grape again!

    Too funny... (5.00 / 3) (#35)
    by kdog on Thu Dec 22, 2016 at 10:07:08 AM EST
    Surely the job starved white men of rural Virginia would be happy to pick Trump's grapes for $ 10.72 an hour.  There's even an unpaid lunch break in the benefits package!

    This must be some kinda mistake.

    Parent

    Time (none / 0) (#37)
    by FlJoe on Thu Dec 22, 2016 at 12:53:59 PM EST
    to stop worrying and learn how to love the bomb.
    Trump, Putin both seek to boost their nuclear capability

    Insanity is the new normal... (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by desertswine on Thu Dec 22, 2016 at 01:17:55 PM EST
    "The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes," Trump tweeted late Thursday morning.

    Parent
    The tweet might have come from Tr*mp's (5.00 / 3) (#44)
    by vml68 on Thu Dec 22, 2016 at 09:43:26 PM EST
    account but he definitely did not write that sentence.

    Parent
    Yes... Trump doesn't write (5.00 / 3) (#64)
    by desertswine on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 02:51:17 PM EST
    complete sentences.

    Parent
    Yes, that is what I meant :-) (none / 0) (#81)
    by vml68 on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 10:09:35 PM EST
    n/t

    Parent
    Today (none / 0) (#41)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Dec 22, 2016 at 04:49:37 PM EST
    in the bread section at Publix I ran into a Trump supporter. She regaled me of tales of how the Rothschild's run all the money in the world and how it's a good thing Putin is getting stronger and Trump is helping him.

    I envy that woman. (none / 0) (#42)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Dec 22, 2016 at 08:39:01 PM EST
    Most of us would have to drop acid to reach her super-attuned level of awareness.

    Parent
    A touch of class (none / 0) (#46)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Dec 22, 2016 at 11:10:27 PM EST
    Ivanka Trump and children were harassed on a commercial flight today.

    The man was tossed off the plane but allowed to take another flight.

    Reports are he was physically shaking when he approached within 15 inches of her.

    He was a total a$$h*le. (5.00 / 3) (#47)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 04:22:22 AM EST
    Look, as far as I'm concerned, Donald Trump, his wife Melania and his three eldest adult offspring are fair game. But 10-year-old Barron Trump is not, and neither are Trump's grandchildren. Everybody in this game called politics needs to recognize and accept that children under age 18 are strictly off limits for any sort of public criticism or targeting, and we all especially need to police our own sides in such matters.

    That clown on the JetBlue flight saw Ivanka Trump's children with her, and yet he proceeded to publicly insult and harass their mother anyway. That was totally uncalled for and is unacceptable. Children's boundaries need to be respected by strangers in public, and those boundaries include their mother and / or father when one or both accompany them.

    Further, he ought to consider himself lucky that the plane was still on the ground and not airborne when he pulled that stunt, or else he'd have been facing potential arrest and federal charges for interfering with a flight crew's duties.

    Some people really need to get a grip. Aloha.  

    Parent

    Oh, put a sock in it, Donald. (4.00 / 4) (#62)
    by caseyOR on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 01:32:42 PM EST
    There is nothing I like better than when privileged straight white people lecture LGBT people and People of Color on the "correct" way to express their anger and fear. It always centers on "do not upset the privileged straight white people."

    Ivanka and her children were in no danger from this man. None. Secret Service agents were on the plane to keep Ivanka and her family safe from harm. The Trump-Kushners were just fine.

    Thanks to Trump, Muslim and Latino/a and African American and LGBT schoolchildren are now living in terror in our country. Terrorized by both their white classmates and the incoming President. Fearful of what Donald Trump and his people, including Ivanka and her husband, will do to their families.

    This gay father, who dared to raise his voice to Ivanka, is scared and angry, worried about his family's survival. I seriously doubt Ivanka and Jared are worried about the survival of their family.

    In case you haven"t noticed Marquess of Queensberry Rules no longer apply in the politics of the Trump Era. It is open season on everyone except privileged white people. Trump and his followers are bare-knuckled brawlers who are armed to the teeth. To paraphrase the immortal Sean Connery, we would be fools to bring knives to this gunfight.

    For many of us a Trump residency puts our very survival in jeopardy. So, excuse me if I cannot get all that exercised about a father, babe in arms, who raised his voice to a Trump, even a Trump with children.


    Parent

    This incident isn't about LGBT rights, casey. (none / 0) (#66)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 03:22:57 PM EST
    Nor is it about the Trump family. Rather, it's about have the simple common decency as an adult to accept and respect minor children and their boundaries. That jackass abused a mother in front of her children in public. That's unacceptable. .

    I've long and very much appreciated the significant challenges and often extraordinary hurdles which members of the LGBT community have faced in their everyday lives.

    But honestly, I truly fail to see how an adult gay man publicly melting down on board a full plane, yelling at a mother in front of her own children not for anything she did personally to either him and his husband or even the gay community in general, but rather because HER FATHER so happens to be a major royal a$$wipe, accomplished anything even remotely noteworthy to advance the cause of LGBT civil rights.

    Rather, this guy's temper tantrum was performance theatre, the hysterical queen clamoring for public applause. And it didn't even accomplish that, because Ivanka Trump and her kids are being seen by many people as the victims here, and rightly so. His behavior came off as both self-absorbed and immature.

    Look, gay people simply don't have the weight in numbers to play politics by right-wing rules and shout other people down. If they want to cement their hold on their own recently hard-won political status as everyone else's social equals, then they need to both think and act strategically regarding when and where to engage in confrontation, whether as a collective or as individuals.

    And in a campaign for civil rights, that means one must sometimes rise above one's own self-righteousness over often petty indignations, no matter what the perceived provocation, to instead become the true adult in the room in the face of injustice and prejudice. As difficult as it might be to hold one's tongue, discretion is often the better part of valor.

    Far better instead from that aforementioned strategic and tactical standpoint, to give the homophobes amongst us enough rope on this issue, so that they'll eventually hang themselves in the court of public opinion. Let them self-characterize publicly as a$$holes and they'll correspondingly self-marginalize, as just happened again with the North Carolina legislature's failure to repeal the anti-LGBT measure HB 2.

    In short, grow a pair, and learn to fight the battles that really matter on a ground that's of your own choosing, and not somebody else's.

    Nuf ced. Aloha.

    Parent

    It is clear as to what side (5.00 / 2) (#68)
    by KeysDan on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 05:10:38 PM EST
    you come down on regarding the burning question of the day: "Yelling at Ivanka on a plane: should you do it?"

     However, it is not as clear as to why you have boiled your umbrage down about the passenger (who either "started screaming" (TMZ) or "said" (TPM)) to being an "hysterical queen." It could be that this passenger is just taking Trump's cue to tell it like it is, to heck with all that politically correct stuff we have been so smothered by.

    But, those offended can rest assured that this passenger and many others like him will get their comeuppance for being impolite to this innocent private citizen.

    Consistent with Trump's penchant for teaching a lesson, it is entirely within the realm of possibility that Dad will retaliate not only against this dastardly yeller, for his energetic protestation to his Jet Bluing daughter, but also, against the human rights of this passenger's entire class.

     Watch for its announcement in 140 characters, followed by Republican legislation and Attorney General Session's enforcement.

    Parent

    You just don't get it, Donald. (5.00 / 3) (#71)
    by caseyOR on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 05:41:01 PM EST
    Once again you have chosen to lecture a minority, in my case a lesbian, on the proper way to act with regard to straight white privileged people. Did you even read my comment?

    I am quite well- versed in the workings of our political system. I was working for progressive/liberal policies/politicians when you were a child. I hardly need you to tell me how and when and where to express my beliefs.

    That you insist on the rest of us being polite in the face of oppression, and everyone working with Trump is the face of oppression, speaks volumes about your inability to see the world through any lens but your own life experience.

    And seriously, buddy, grow a pair? That's your advice?

    Parent

    The Gay and Lesbian Activists taught me (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by MKS on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 10:21:24 PM EST
    the proper approach to politics:  fight now, fight hard, and do not keep your powder dry.  I thought the marriage equality movement was moving too fast, that they should keep their powder dry for a more opportune moment, that the trial to invalidate the anti-equality laws was a fool's errand--you could not prove by facts what was basically a value judgment, or so I thought.

    But, the activists had it right.

    So, confronting people to make them uncomfortable has a good track record.  Perhaps this is too meandering and diffuse, but I get what you are saying to Donald.  

    Parent

    and you! (3.00 / 3) (#73)
    by linea on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 08:06:35 PM EST
    have chosen to attack a WOMAN and mother with her children while a potentially dangerouse MALE agressively rants on an aircraft where people are trapped. your political ideologies are blinding you. in my opinion.

    Parent
    No, casey. YOU don't get it. (none / 0) (#115)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 08:41:13 PM EST
    What exactly is to be gained by confronting Ivanka Trump on an airplane in front of her kids, and then getting thrown off the flight for your trouble? Martyrdom only earns points in religion. In real life, most of the time you end up looking misguided, foolish or worse.

    You don't own a monopoly on morality and truth, casey, and the LGBT community doesn't have the numbers to shout everyone else down. That is a fact of life which you and other gay men and lesbians need to wrap your heads around. You need political allies in the hetero community. And to gain and then retain those allies, you need to start respecting where WE'RE coming from, and not always make everything all about you.

    I'm tired of having to defend bellicose liberals (not just LGBTers) who walk around with great big chips on their shoulders, who mouth off with abandon in the hope that some right-wing moron will try to knock that chip off, and who thoughtlessly pick fights with their perceived adversaries merely for its own sake, in order to call attention to themselves.

    You want to defend Mr. Goldstein's actions, fine. You go ahead and do that, and watch right-wing media turn their guns on you and your friends. Further, you can watch public opinion walk away from your side as I do, because you're choosing to defend an action which most decent people are going to see as indefensible.

    By essentially manufacturing a controversy out of whole cloth, Mr. Goldstein got the Andy Warhol-allocated 15 minutes he craved and in the process, he allowed Ivanka Trump and her family to gain the political high ground by needlessly making her look sympathetic. And all she had to do to accomplish that was to refuse to rise to that silly drama queen's bait.

    And now, you're doubling down on stupid because you're refusing to play or even consider the long game, and are instead pressing a confrontation with the right over an issue which you cannot possibly hope to win. Are you even bothering to watch how all this is playing out in the media? The fckng optics here alone render this story a sure-fired loser for Democrats and progressives.

    And that's what you and the other defenders of Mr. Goldstein here don't get. It doesn't matter what YOU as individuals think about Ivanka Trump and her family personally. Rather, what matters here is what everyone else thinks about some angry queen who decided to public confront a young(ish) mother in a most inappropriate manner, in front of her own very young children -- and right now, public opinion on this particular matter is definitely not on your side.

    And yeah, I AM offended at that, and disgusted, as well. You are self-marginalizing, and for what? You need to stop and think, take some deep breaths, and regain your moral compass before you act further on our ostensible behalf as part of the liberal community. As for this issue, you guys are entirely on your own here, and you can find your own damned way out.

    Merry Christmas.

    Parent

    What's Baron's middle name, "Von"? (none / 0) (#124)
    by jondee on Sun Dec 25, 2016 at 02:02:35 PM EST
    I agree completely that children shouldn't be punished and potentially traumatized for their parent's errors.

    Not that the Reich doesn't do that all the time, when they do things like push for food stamp cuts and guns for anyone with a pulse, or when conservative heroes like Jared Kushner turn off their tenant's heat in the winter time..

    Parent

    My final words to you, Donald (for now) (none / 0) (#144)
    by caseyOR on Mon Dec 26, 2016 at 01:36:33 PM EST
    ACT-UP

    Parent
    "In short, grow a pair" (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by linea on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 08:09:54 PM EST
    that"s actually a horrible gender insult that implies all women are "lesser than" men. i realize it's a common phrase, but really.

    Parent
    "Says who!?" (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by Nemi on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 07:28:19 AM EST
    That jackass abused a mother ...

    an adult gay(!) man publicly melting down ...

    yelling at a mother in front of her own children ...

    this guy's temper tantrum ...

    the hysterical queen (really!?) clamoring for public applause ...

    gay people simply don't have the ... [right!?] ... to shout other people down

    It's not quite what this eye witness, observing the episode from literally 15 inches away saw or heard!

    He didn't accost her directly.
    ...
    He said "they ruin the country now they ruin our flight!" (Context: Boarding and therefore the flight was delayed because they needed to get on first through some other way)
    ...
    He did not yell. He was also not what I would describe as calm. Agitated for sure.
    ...
    If he screamed, I didn't hear it.
    ...
    Honestly, if I was her security I would have made the same call. I don't think the man was capable of violence, sure. But I would worry that he would leave his seat or cause a scene in some way.
    ...
    Both sides vilify others just for liking or disliking candidates or representatives. Ivanka and Jared look to play major roles in our new administration and so they have to be prepared to answer for the actions of Donald even if their views differ.
    ...
    The energy spent on this one blip in the news cycle could better be spent trying to figure out how we can work together to create a better life for everyone in the US ...


    Parent
    Let me ;play Perry Mason (none / 0) (#48)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 09:33:58 AM EST
    Cornell Edu

    Assault

    1.  Intentionally putting another person in reasonable apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact.  No intent to cause physical injury needs to exist, and no physical injury needs to result.  So defined in tort law and the criminal statutes of some states.

    Yet Security let him walk away.

    Don't be surprised when an attack becomes assault and battery.

    Parent

    Keep your day (non)job (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Yman on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 10:04:42 AM EST
    There is no evidence she was in fear of harmful or offensive contact, nor that any such fear was reasonable.  But hearing a Trump supporter express concern about assault is funny. Seriously, ... SERIOUSLY ... Funny.  

    Parent
    Come on (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by FlJoe on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 10:08:38 AM EST
    Yman, this is the royal family we are talking about, the guy should have been summarily executed, with his head placed on a pike in front of the White House as a warning to the rest of us.

    Parent
    Let me play Perry again (2.00 / 1) (#55)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 11:06:02 AM EST
    1.  Intentionally putting another person in reasonable apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. No intent to cause physical injury needs to exist, and no physical injury needs to result.

    Your honor, I rest my case.

    Parent

    You're fired (5.00 / 4) (#56)
    by Yman on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 11:12:59 AM EST
    Even a TV lawyer would be embarrassed by this argument.  But I'll sPell it out in terms even a fake "lawyer" can understand.  For an assault to exist,  the victim must be in actual fear ("apprehension") AND that fear must be reasonable.  There was no evidence to support assault charges.  Bedwetting and hypocritical concern is not evidence.

    Parent
    Are you telling (none / 0) (#90)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 10:24:33 AM EST
    the court that being screamed at by an adult man who is almost touching you didn't invoke fear in the victim and her children?

    And have you not read the Twitters that show intent??

    Sir, even Della Street would know better.  ;-)

    Parent

    I am telling you that ... (none / 0) (#92)
    by Yman on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 10:41:34 AM EST
    ... your bedwetting is not evidence that she was in fear.  But I have no doubt that you would've been scared out of your wits,  even with the Secret Service agents protecting you.  :)

    Parent
    Well, counsel (none / 0) (#100)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 04:35:50 PM EST
    are you telling us that a reasonable person confronted in with very close quarters would not have been fearful??

    And yes, I would have been concerned. After all, Reagan was surrounded by Secret Service agents and was almost assassinated.

    BTW - I am sure MKS will be by any moment to chastise you for insulting me.

    Parent

    You can read, right? (5.00 / 2) (#101)
    by Yman on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 04:47:14 PM EST
    Yes.  I'm telling you a reasonable person would not be scared of someone who made no threats,  was not yelling and who merely said some unkind words to you.  Moreover,  terrified as you would have been,  there is NO evidence she had any fear,  and eyewitness statements to the contrary.

    BTW - The Reagan analogy was spot on.  Well, if Hinkley had just gone through airport security.   :)

    Parent

    As best I can tell, Goldstein said nothing (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by Peter G on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 07:54:27 PM EST
    that would put a reasonable person in fear. But I will say that I think Jim is right to the extent that he suggests that the law would not take into account, in its "objective analysis" of how a "reasonable person" would react, that Ivanka had Secret Service protection at the time. Oh, and Merry Christmas and a Happy Chanuka to all.

    Parent
    i would be frightened of a ranting, (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by linea on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 08:40:13 PM EST
    as described by winesses, VISIBLY AGITATED man if i was on an aircraft. but then, im frightened of groups of drunk twenty-something males loudly screaming "Wooo! Fvck yeah! Fvck! Wooo!" outside of bars while you wouldnt give it a second thought. guess we have different ideas of "person."

    have we also decided nothing is rude or obnoxious unless it meets the statutory level of assault?

    also, nobody knew who this guy was. "You ruined our country. Now you're ruining our flight." could have been some anti-jewish rant for all anybody knew at the time.

    Parent

    The expression of a strong opinion against (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by Peter G on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 09:39:24 PM EST
    the person hearing the comment (and against her father, whom she closely advises) definitely cannot suffice to make that comment the basis for a charge of simple assault, given the First Amendment. There would have to be at least a true threat.

    Parent
    Being "agitated" .. (5.00 / 2) (#127)
    by Yman on Sun Dec 25, 2016 at 08:32:16 PM EST
    ... and saying words you don't like does not make someone guilty of assault, even if you're a man.  He never made any threatening comments or gestures toward her, never approached her or "attack" her as you claimed.   Unlike your comparison,  he was ONE person (not 25), was not yelling or cursing,  and he wasn't drunk.  Whether you or anyone else feels he was "rude or obnoxious" is irrelevant to Jim's claim that he committed an assault.   He didn't.

    Parent
    This is TalkLeft (none / 0) (#117)
    by MKS on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 10:14:43 PM EST
    Not TalkRight or TalkTrump.

    I wish you would go somewhere to be with your own kind.

    Parent

    Your continued belief (1.00 / 1) (#51)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 10:44:51 AM EST
    that two wrongs make a right shows your maturity, or lack of.

    I could show the video of Hillary supporters attacking Trump supporters in San Jose, breaking the nose of a man and pinning a young woman against a hotel'a glass doors...or the riot in Chicago and the riots after the election...or the video showing plans being made....

    FlJoe...Yman...Is that what you really want? Do you think ChuckO's call for Trump's "elimination" would be good?

    There are other ways to get rid of Trump other than impeachment. It has been my hope that there is a cabal of realists

    That's third world stuff, folks. That's the end of democracy. Be careful what you ask for.

    Parent

    Don't pretend to speak for me (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Yman on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 11:01:00 AM EST
    You have enough trouble forming your own arguments.

    "Third world stuff"?  You mean like the candidate you supported?  The candidate who personally incited violence at his rallies?  The one who called for a "revolution" when Obama won?  We won't even discuss the 13+ women and your sudden concern for "assault(s)".

    "Third world stuff" is your candidate.   It's what you support.

    Parent

    The one is for the insullt (none / 0) (#52)
    by MKS on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 10:50:34 AM EST
    stating that Yman (I think that is who you were talking about) "lacked maturity."

    Remember, this is a site for the Left.  Insulting people here is not good form.  You are really pushing the limits....

    Parent

    Is (none / 0) (#53)
    by FlJoe on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 10:55:59 AM EST
    Puckering up for Putin and Sucking up to Sachs what you asked for?

    In the not too distant past you considered Putin a bad actor who was taking advantage of Obama and Goldman Sachs were the leaders of a worldwide evil cabal who held the puppet strings of the wicked Hillary.

    Now you cheer them on, hypocrite.

    Parent

    I don't condone Daniel Goldstein's behavior (none / 0) (#57)
    by vml68 on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 11:20:57 AM EST
    towards Ivanka but I am cutting him some slack. From the reports he is a gay man with young children. I would imagine he is afraid and stressed out about how the new administration is going to affect his rights and the rights of his family.
    He should have addressed her calmly but It looks like his emotions got the best of him.

    Parent
    Our beef is with Ivanka Trump's father. (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 03:51:03 PM EST
    Look, I understand that many people are stressed out. A lot of us justifiably fear what the future may hold with Donald Trump in the White House, myself included. But being an adult means keeping your emotions in check in the face of perceived provocation, and your responses tempered, measured and duly proportionate.

    That man's tantrum yesterday was none of the above. He served only to needlessly victimize Ivanka and her children, and further annoy most everyone else on board for having caused an otherwise avoidable delay in the plane's departure during the busy holiday season, as the flight crew was obliged to remove him.

    As a grandparent of a toddler myself, I'm absolutely appalled at this silly man's behavior. And from a political standpoint, I refuse to defend him. I'm keeping my powder dry for more worthy and important battles.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Ivanka is not Barron. (5.00 / 4) (#80)
    by vml68 on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 10:06:07 PM EST
    Ivanka has been right there by her father's side during the campaign, is part of his transition team and is moving to D.C. to be close to daddy. They are planning for her to have an office in the East Wing. Her husband was behind the idea of bringing the 4 women from Bill Clinton's past to the second debate to confront him/ embarass Hillary.
    Sorry, but I have absolutely no sympathy for her.

    While, I was on the fence about Goldstein's behavior earlier,  I was leaning towards him talking to her calmly rather than raising his voice, I have changed my mind. While it is unfortunate that her minor children had to witness their mother getting yelled at, for all we know, it might seem like completely normal behavior to them, if they have watched any of their psycho grandfather's rallies.


    Parent

    Agreed. (5.00 / 2) (#85)
    by KeysDan on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 07:59:09 AM EST
    Right wingers have grabbed the opportunity to bait some liberals in the name of "think of the children," seizing an opporutinty to delegitimize protest and dissent of Trump.

     The passenger did not, nor was he charged with causing physically harm to the Ivana Kushner-Trump family or children.  Nor, did he criticize the children with personalized insults, such as John McCain saying the reason that the teenage Chelsea Clinton was so ugly was because her father was Janet Reno.

    The passenger called out Trump, the president-elect, in fear of "ruining the country" and said it to Trump's top aides when he found he had direct access.  The passenger paid a price for his protest, removal from the plane.  

    In other news, somewhere in the back pages:  Trump says he wants to expand our nuclear capabilities and welcomes an arms race. All in 140 characters or less.  

    Parent

    A time and a place (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 08:50:34 AM EST
    I am sure if Michelle Obama and her children had to address this very same issue, all here would agree the "protest " was out of place.

    And as the tweet from the partner made clear, the husband was out to harass Ivanka. I find that disagreeable , no matter which side partakes in it. And, it doesn't paint your cause in a positive light either. The net result is the perpetrator get some personal satisfaction ( I told them), make everyone on the plane uncomfortable, and become a caricature of what their movement is about.

    Parent

    When you (5.00 / 3) (#87)
    by FlJoe on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 09:00:20 AM EST
    reap what you sow, you can't complain about the time and place where the noxious seeds sprout.

    Parent
    And, what is this: (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by KeysDan on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 09:14:15 AM EST
    "your cause?" being painted in a bad light? Good manners?  Protests?

      It was a personal protest to Trump advisors, which may have painted him, personally, as boorish. The passenger's verbal protest  was "you are ruining the country,"  which, I take it, he means America. Protests do make many people uncomfortable.

     And, of course, it was not the wife of Trump, Melania, it was his top presidential advisors, Mr. and Mrs. Kushner traveling on public transportation with their children. The protestor had his own child with him.

    If we all take our cues from our new leader, all norms and rules are out the window, anyhow. Decorum, conflicts interest, attacks on SNL parodies, Jet Blue passengers sitting in on foreign calls and selling jewelry used in meetings.  I find all this disagreeable.

    Parent

    You don't berate a mother in front of her kids. (none / 0) (#99)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 03:32:08 PM EST
    You either ask to speak with her to discuss your differences in a more private setting, away from those children. Or if that's not possible, you let it go until a later time. That's the right and decent thing to do.

    To insist upon doing otherwise is to effectively hold yourself captive to your own anger and ego. And that's never a good thing, because then you've rendered yourself vulnerable to its potential consequences -- in this instance, getting both you and your family kicked off a commercial flight.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Read what I said again, carefully. (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 03:15:23 PM EST
    I said Ivanka Trump is fair game, and are her brothers Eric and Donald Trump, Jr. But their minor children are not fair game.

    And when Ms. Trump is traveling on a commericial flight with her two young children, then you have absolutely no business confronting and berating her publicly over what you think about her father and their grandfather. That should be a battle best left for another time and day.

    Minor children, regardless of their family pedigree, should never be viewed as acceptable collateral damage due to our own need to justify our rage and gratify our ego. Would you appreciate it if some stranger came up to you in public while you're with your own kids, and started raging at you in front of them about what a couple of jackwagons your own parents are? I think not.

    I don't know why this is apparently such a hard concept for people to grasp these days. But then, given the anything-goes political climate which has enveloped us, I really shouldn't be surprised.

    But I must say that I am very disappointed, if not disgusted.

    Parent

    in what mind (none / 0) (#108)
    by linea on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 07:27:29 PM EST
    would donald trump"s wife be "fair game" other than the sin of taking on the role of supporting the man she is married to and with whom she has a child with?

    Parent
    the guy is a LAWYER (2.00 / 4) (#77)
    by linea on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 08:46:13 PM EST
    and he goes off on an agressive rant TOWARD A WOMAN AND HER CHILDREN trapped on an aircraft with him!

    seriously?!

    Parent

    Yes, seriously! (5.00 / 5) (#78)
    by vml68 on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 09:40:31 PM EST
    Princess Ivanka has been by her father's side every ugly step of the way.  You would think the delicate flower is very accustomed to aggressive rants. Is it only an issue for you because it is being directed her way instead of at the rest of us?  Or are you upset because someone was rude to the object of your fantasy..... Ivanka in the posh dress at a bar with her manly bodyguards?!!

    P.S - No one ranted at her children.

    Parent

    You're right, Nobody ranted at her children. (5.00 / 2) (#105)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 06:24:50 PM EST
    Instead, the guy proceeded to berate Ivanka Trump in their presence. These are three kids who are under the age of 5! There is no justification whatsoever for doing that a mother in front of her own young children. They didn't get to pick their parents. Do you really think that sort of stuff doesn't affect them - or do you simply not care because of their lineage?

    Well, whatever it is that you and others here think of Ivanka or her father, that's entirely beside the point here. I think I've made it more than clear that I really don't care for any of the Trumps, either. But as liberals and progressives, we like to think of ourselves as better than that. In fact, we never miss an opportunity to point out that we can be tough and resolute, without casting aside longstanding principles of basic common decency.

    This jackass just proved otherwise. And as a result, one day not to far in the future, Mr. Goldstein's own kids can go online and read this flattering headline and story about their daddy.

    Bravo! Good job, sir! Mission accomplished. Whatever that mission was supposed to be, I have no idea.

    Oy.

    Parent

    Another new normal (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 09:51:31 PM EST
    http://tinyurl.com/gu64s4f

    Parent
    It was one person (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by Yman on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 09:12:45 AM EST
    ... not the "new normal".

    But the candidate himself and his supporters at his rallies created new lows and a "new normal" on a regular basis this year,  which they'll no doubt continue as he assumes office.

    Parent

    one person (1.00 / 1) (#95)
    by linea on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 02:10:38 PM EST
    with the TL cheerleaders endorsing.

    from the article by Karol Markowicz:

    Lunatic men badgering women on planes in front of their kids apparently is fair play -- if that mother is related to a Republican you don't like.

    The Trump hate has gone around the bend when the family of the president-elect is gleefully harassed.

    Parent

    That's nice you and Karol think so (5.00 / 2) (#97)
    by Yman on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 03:18:43 PM EST
    Meanwhile,  in the land of reality, being a woman or Trump's adult daughter doesn't exempt you from criticism.

    Parent
    BTW - "Lunatic"??? Heh (5.00 / 2) (#98)
    by Yman on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 03:25:31 PM EST
    Marc Scheff, the passenger sitting in front of Trump in the photo, described the incident differently, telling BuzzFeed News that Goldstein did not "get up in her face," but rather "spoke from where he was standing."
    "He did not approach her seat or speak to her," he told BuzzFeed News, providing his boarding pass to prove he was on the flight. "He did not yell. He was visibly shaking. I would say he was agitated."


    Parent
    You trust TMZ, a pro-Trump site (5.00 / 3) (#65)
    by Towanda on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 03:02:10 PM EST
    rather than reports of witnesses. The man did not yell, he was not shaking, etc.

    And where was your outrage at the pro-Trump guy who harassed women on a flight?  His profane outburst is on video, so TMZ couldn't counter it with its cr@p.

    Parent

    TMZ (none / 0) (#76)
    by linea on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 08:40:20 PM EST
    is a pro-trump site?

    Parent
    Yes, and proper nouns (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by Towanda on Sun Dec 25, 2016 at 12:39:08 AM EST
    are capitalized.

    Parent
    Me too. I think James (none / 0) (#60)
    by KeysDan on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 01:21:33 PM EST
    has a point.  Democrats should have the good sense to shed their bay-area type crazy, and consider picking up the non-elitist messaging of the winning Republican team.

    For guidance, these tiresome, politically correct Democrats can learn a thing or two from Carl Baladino, co-chair of the NY Trump campaign and member of the Buffalo School Board.

     Carl publicly provided his wish list of most liked to see in 2017: 1. President Obama dies from mad cow disease after having relations with a Herford, 2. Michelle Obama returns to being a a male and lives with a gorilla in Africa, and 3. President Obama dies before trial and is buried in a cow pasture next to Valerie Jarret.....

    After this School Board member (who has advocated for photos of Trump to hang in every school in the nation) was called on his message delivery, he offered his brand of season's greetings: "go f**k yourselves." He seems nice.

    That's what I'm saying... (none / 0) (#69)
    by kdog on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 05:19:58 PM EST
    Don't be that guy...don't be in the same ballpark as that guy.

    Not claiming an equivalence, just an existence.

    Parent

    Sounds to me that he moved (none / 0) (#61)
    by fishcamp on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 01:25:56 PM EST
    to Vail because his wife grew up there.  It's definitely not a super quiet place at all. In fact it rivals Aspen as a wild and crazy place to live.  Vail was quiet until they built and opened in 1962 for skiing.  I raced in the first Vail Cup that year, and its grown huge since then, with Beaver Creek just down  the Interstate, and part of the Vail Corporation.  It is nestled in the Rocky Mountains with many deer and elk to hunt close by.  Everything is new and newer there, lacking the historic old buildings built during the silver mining days in Aspen.  I don't like it much over in Vail, but they do have a very speedy World Cup downhill race every year named Birds of Prey.

    Obama (none / 0) (#72)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Dec 23, 2016 at 06:13:25 PM EST
    Is going out with no holds barred.
    The "forever" banning of oil exploration in the Arctic and Atlantic.
    That one might not be constitutional, considering the law it is using as a basis. But the point is, why is Obama even considering stretching the boundaries of executive action, knowing The Donald is right behind him. You really want The Donald making some executive action "forever"?

    And the stunt with Israel today , I do not like that one either. Now Samantha Power allowed the vote to proceed  by the US abstaining, but she gave a statement afterwards that may lead one to believe she herself didn't agree with the abstention. Her statement afterwards...  
    "For the simple truth is that for as long as Israel has been a member of this institution, Israel has been treated differently from other nations at the United Nations," Power said. "And not only in decades past...but also in 2016, this year. One need only look at the 18 resolutions against Israel adopted during the UN General Assembly in September or the 12 Israel-specific resolutions adopted this year in the human rights council, more than those focused on Syria, North Korea, Iran and South Sudan put together."

    Associated Press (none / 0) (#94)
    by linea on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 02:00:05 PM EST
    Federal authorities warned local law enforcement authorities across the US on Friday that Islamic State sympathizers were continuing to call for attacks on churches and other holiday gathering sites.

    The federal US warning was issued after a publicly available list of US churches was posted on a militant social media site.

    Separately on Friday, police in Australia detained five men suspected of planning a series of Christmas Day attacks using explosives, knives and a gun in the heart of Melbourne
    trump's NY co-chair... (none / 0) (#104)
    by desertswine on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 06:09:05 PM EST
    said that Michelle Obama is a male and should be living with gorillas in Africa.

    And this clown was the republican candidate for governor a few years ago  Typical neo-republican behavior.

    Caarl Paladino also wished that the president ... (none / 0) (#106)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Dec 24, 2016 at 06:30:59 PM EST
    ... would die of mad cow disease. But that's probably not going to happen, given that Obama isn't likely to be eating a Trump steak or dining at a Trump hotel restaurant any time soon.

    Parent
    Wednesday Open Thread | 200 comments (200 topical)