home

Tuesday Open Thread

We all know Susan Sarandon is familiar with driving off a cliff. That's what she's advocating in her latest interview. The days of Thelma and Louise are long gone.

Skip her, and watch the CBS primetime time special tonight of James Corden and the Late Late Show's Primetime Karaoke.

Here's a screengrab of JLo from tonight's show. [More...]

Way better than watching a misguided, wealthy actress preach about poor people. Sarandon was a Nader supporter in 2000, the year the Supreme Court gave the election to Bush over Gore. Even though she reversed course in 2004, we all know leopards don't change their spots. She could care less about Democrats.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Sanders' Sarandon Problem | Friday Morning Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    RIP, Patty Duke (1946-2016). (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 06:38:30 PM EST
    The former child star, who won the 1962 Academy Award for Best supporting actress for her portrayal of Helen Keller opposite Anne Bancroft's Annie Sullivan in "The Miracle Worker," and later in life became an outspoken advocate for those afflicted with mental illness, died suddenly today at age 69 from sepsis caused by a ruptured intestine.

    At the height of her career in Hollywood, Ms. Duke starred in what's arguably one of the campiest melodramas (or worst, depending upon one's tastes in film) ever put to celluloid, "The Valley of the Dolls." While she admitted that she was hurt initially from the scathing reviews she received for her over-the-top performance as the pill-popping Neely O'Hara, she would later embrace that cinematic belly-flop as her own and earn the admiration of many of us who appreciate a good camp sensibility.

    Patty Duke also suffered from severe bipolar disorder, which went undiagnosed until she was in her 30s and led to bouts of extreme manic behavior, which included a marriage that lasted all of 13 days. Her experience led her to become an effective spokesperson for public awareness of mental health issues.

    Aloha, Patty.

    Don't know how that double-posted ... (none / 0) (#22)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 06:40:09 PM EST
    ... within one second of one another, but it did. My bad. Jeralyn, if you could delete one, I'd appreciate it.

    Parent
    Double Posted (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by CoralGables on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 07:32:38 PM EST
    for losing both Patty Lane and Cathy Lane.

    Parent
    Touché! (none / 0) (#30)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 08:07:15 PM EST
    "The Patty Duke Show" was a wee bit before my time; I was a toddler when it aired.

    Here's an interesting bit of trivia I didn't know about, until ABC's L.A. affiliate KABC-TV mentioned it this afternoon. At age 12, before she became a film and TV star, Patty Duke was a contestant on "The $64,000 Question," winning $32,000. She was later called to testify before the U.S. Senate, after it was revealed that the show had been rigged and her answers had apparently been provided to her beforehand.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Awwwww (none / 0) (#23)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 06:40:15 PM EST
    I feel the same way. (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 06:53:37 PM EST
    Unlike so many people in Hollywood, that lady kept it real. She'll be dearly missed.

    Parent
    Only 68 (none / 0) (#25)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 07:02:00 PM EST
    Wait (none / 0) (#26)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 07:04:50 PM EST
    I just saw a story that said she was 68 but your dates make her 70

    Checking that story...

    Parent

    Blurred vision (none / 0) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 07:06:36 PM EST
    The buzzfeed article said 69

    Parent
    That makes her 69 years, 3 months old.

    Parent
    The medications people ... (none / 0) (#33)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 11:44:33 PM EST
    take for bipolar disorder are very hard on the body.

    I wonder if they contributed to her early demise?

    Parent

    That's a good question. (none / 0) (#34)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 02:14:12 AM EST
    The younger brother of my best friend from middle and high school days was diagnosed with juvenile rheumatoid arthritis at age 7, and as severely bipolar when he was about 25. A virtual lifetime of pharmaceuticals has taken its toll and now at age 50, he looks over 70. I saw him last Thanksgiving at my cousin's funeral, and his gaunt appearance quite frankly shocked me. Your observation about bipolar medications has led me to wonder whether his own anti-psychotic meds have something to do with his prematurely aged look.

    Parent
    It's very possible that ... (none / 0) (#36)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 07:52:36 AM EST
    could explain your friend's appearance. But it also could just be the luck of the draw. There are a lot of actors, Gabby Hayes for one, who started playing old codgers in their early forties. So simply looking old may not have come from the medications.

    But they do play havoc with the system, and can result in strokes, organ failures and so on. Most bipolar sufferers accept the trade-off. Because the meds have allowed them to live normal lives.

    Parent

    That's so sad. (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 04:04:15 PM EST
    But honestly, you're right about the trade-off being one's ability to lead a normal life. My friend is completely dysfunctional when he's off his meds, with violent mood swings and crashes being his norm -- and he knows it. And as he said to me before, that's really no way to live.

    Parent
    Lithium is the drug (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by fishcamp on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 06:40:09 AM EST
    that many of my bi-polar friends are taking for the rest of their lives.  None of them show the effects mentioned above.  There must be other more debilitating drugs for this disease.

    Hillary and millenials and trustworthiness (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by Cashmere on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 02:30:33 PM EST
    Not sure if this was already posted, but a good read:

    http://tinyurl.com/zn6k9fz

    snip

    "As we all know, millennials don't care much for Hillary Clinton. That's okay. I'm on the other side of that particular fence, but there's plenty of room for honest differences about her views and whether they're right for the country--differences that I don't think are fundamentally rooted in age.

    But there's one issue where I suspect that age really does trip up millennials: the widespread belief that Hillary isn't trustworthy. It's easy to understand why they might think this. After all, Hillary has been surrounded by a miasma of scandal for decades--and even if you vaguely know that a lot of the allegations against her weren't fair, well, where there's smoke there's fire. So if you're familiar with the buzzwords--Whitewater, Travelgate, Vince Foster, the Rose law firm, Troopergate, Ken Starr, Benghazi, Emailgate--but not much else, it's only human to figure that maybe there really is something fishy in Hillary's past.

    But many of us who lived through this stuff have exactly the opposite view. Not only do we know there's almost literally nothing to any of these "scandals," we also know exactly how they were deliberately and cynically manufactured at every step along the way. We were there, watching it happen in real time. So not only do we believe Hillary is basically honest, but the buzzwords actively piss us off. Every time we hear a young progressive kinda sorta suggest that Hillary can't be trusted, we want to strangle someone. It's the ultimate proof of how the right wing's big lie about the Clintons has successfully poisoned not just the electorate in general, but even the progressive movement itself."

    unsnip

    'Twas excellent. (none / 0) (#91)
    by FreakyBeaky on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 02:44:06 PM EST
    And pretty objective. Don't always agree with Drum, but that I value.

    Parent
    Bernie (none / 0) (#148)
    by lilburro on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 10:28:04 PM EST
    speaks to pocketbook issues for millennials - free college. Whether you're in college or just out, you're probably frustrated with how much it cost. I've seen polling that suggests millennials also like Hillary, they just prefer Bernie. Perhaps their untrustworthy is less "she killed Vince Foster" than it is "I don't trust her to get done what I want to the way Bernie does."

    I'm 30 so I guess on the cusp of being a millennial. I am also a nerd, so I have good early memories of watching Bill Clinton's SOTU's and being impressed. As children's issues go, I really loved Socks the cat.

    It would be interesting to see if millennials also distrust Bill Clinton. I remember the 90s as good and stable, and she was there, so I extend that fondness to her. Maybe her Iraq vote is screwing her when it comes to trustworthiness among my generation. I dunno.


    Parent

    Remember (none / 0) (#155)
    by sallywally on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 08:45:13 AM EST
    When they put the wrong speech on the teleprompter for the SOTU and he gave the right speech anyway? Or am I dreaming?

    I didn't like his pivot to the center but it's clear why he did it. 😕

    Parent

    Donald just said (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by jbindc on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 02:44:43 PM EST
    On live TV, to Chris Matthews, that women who have abortions should be punished in some way.  He also said that, no, men should mot bear responsibility for abortions as well.

    Just watching this (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 02:46:35 PM EST
    Wow.
    News has been made. Officially.

    This will definitely improve his number with women.

    Parent

    To be accurate (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by jbindc on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 03:17:53 PM EST
    He said if abortion becomes illegal,  then women who have abortions should be punished.

    Parent
    Which is funny (none / 0) (#110)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 03:47:43 PM EST
    Because right after I typed   the comment about "would somebody please make some news" I thought, ok, countdown to the Trump.  

    Sorry, I forgot to be careful what I wished for and it went all Monkeys Paw.

    Parent

    Holy hell (none / 0) (#112)
    by ruffian on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 03:55:40 PM EST
    Will catch the replay later.

    thanks for motivating our base, Donald!

    Parent

    To be fair (none / 0) (#101)
    by CoralGables on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 03:21:05 PM EST
    I believe he said that in conjunction with, "if abortion is made illegal". If that was the case then what he said makes sense as all things illegal should lead to some form of punishment. Of course that's why no one should ever vote Republican.

    At least keep it in context so the disagreement is valid.

    Parent

    except back in the day (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by CST on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 03:29:08 PM EST
    when abortion was illegal - I'm 99% sure it was only illegal to perform an abortion, not illegal to have one.

    Parent
    It would depend on how the law is written (none / 0) (#106)
    by CoralGables on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 03:37:22 PM EST
    Again, a good reason to not vote Republican, not sit out the vote, or to vote for a sideshow party candidate.

    Parent
    He has now clarified (none / 0) (#125)
    by jbindc on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 04:39:45 PM EST
    To say he would punish doctors who perform abortions not women.

    Parent
    You are very generous, (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by KeysDan on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 01:29:30 PM EST
    What Trump said was pretty clear, no clarification necessary.  Better: Trump reversed himself or Trump backtracked--his great brain was not so great. Remember, his followers love him because he says what he means-- until he doesn't, and then they do not notice or care. Or, as Ben Carson said, as a malpracticing  Trump spin doctor, Trump did not know the question was coming and did not give it prior thought.

    Parent
    I love ya man (none / 0) (#105)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 03:36:11 PM EST
    I'm a stickler for factual stuff (none / 0) (#108)
    by CoralGables on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 03:45:27 PM EST
    even when it pertains to those candidates I'd never consider.

    Many of this morning's headlines were "Trump discards pledge to support GOP Candidate". Anyone paying attention knows that was accurate but misleading as all three backed away from their stance. Same thing with the way the abortion stance is being reported. You can't leave out "if abortion is made illegal" and be making an honest argument.

    Parent

    As much as I loath him (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 04:02:50 PM EST
     Joe Scarborough has been a valuable translator for what is happening in this election cycle.   He is a smart republican who's primary job now is to improve the ratings of his show, which are very good,  so I think he out of self interest if nothing else offers very interesting insights into the whole sorry mess.  Often joking about being in the posse that ran Newt out of town and almost did the same for Bill.
    Anyway, this morning he was talking about this assault thing.  He very clearly and firmly explained why it's unacceptable and inexcusable and then went on to explain the hysterical media coverage of it is counter productive.    He said something like 'the media has lost all perspective when it comes to Donald.  They serve his purposes when they do this.  By exaggerating and raving about every single outrage the whole process of being dulled by constant outrage helps Donald"

    Or something like that

    Parent

    Like the old "crying wolf" (none / 0) (#198)
    by christinep on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 09:19:54 PM EST
    Today, husband & I were talking about the now over-the-top reporting on every Trump gaffe or supposed gaffe.  IMO, the media telecasts its own hysteria in an attempt to stop its targeted hysteria.  The problem for the media:  When everything is called a disaster/outrage, it becomes background noise.  The boy who cried wolf....

    Parent
    Also To Be Fair... (none / 0) (#114)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 04:03:51 PM EST
    ... it's on the same day he said he wouldn't punish Lewandowski over something so trivial, that in Florida is a possibly a crime.

    Parent
    Under Florida law (none / 0) (#117)
    by CoralGables on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 04:11:26 PM EST
    the reporter could also be arrested for simple battery. Believe it or not, the law says "touching".

    Parent
    It's a Florida thing (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by CoralGables on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 04:12:21 PM EST
    we can shoot you, we just can't touch you.

    Parent
    That's the definition of battery everywhere (none / 0) (#153)
    by jbindc on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 08:32:52 AM EST
    The criminal defense attorneys can correct me on specifics, but the legal definition of battery is:

    ... a physical act that results in harmful or offensive contact with another's person without that person's consent.

    In some jurisdictions, you can be charged with battery for purposely ramming your car into another occupied car, even if you never actually touch the other person(s).  (Battery is often used interchabgeably with "assault", even though in many jurisdictions, they are two separate and distinct  crimes.)

    Parent

    This is (none / 0) (#104)
    by Repack Rider on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 03:32:53 PM EST
    ...going to dominate the questioning of D'ump for a few cycles.  The sociopathy and narcissism is so far off the chart that we're gonna need a bigger chart.  

    There is a reason experienced politicians speak in vague aphorisms, which is the avoidance of statements without wiggle room. This fool does not have control of his own statements, does not realize he will have to hear this one again and in more detail.  Every woman who interviews him from now on will want a piece of this, and if there is anything D'ump can't stand it's an uppity biotch getting all up in his grill y'all.  

    I love the Calvin-Ball aspect of the GOP race, as rules are shuffled, changed or ignored to achieve the desired result.  A result desired by whom?  That's turning out to be a problem.  The Anarchy Club is having a hard time writing a set of rules, and the candidates say they won't obey them anyway.

    I was spending so much on Orville Redenbacher's that I had to switch to the bulk popcorn out of the bin.

    Parent

    Or as the GOP might say (none / 0) (#107)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 03:39:16 PM EST
    We have met the enemy.  And it is us.

    Parent
    CNN reporting (none / 0) (#121)
    by ragebot on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 04:27:56 PM EST
    Trump just tried to clarify that if abortion was made illegal the doctor, not the woman, should be punished.

    What is the over/under there will be more clarifications.

    Parent

    Yeah... (none / 0) (#132)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 05:28:52 PM EST
    ... whose fault is that, the guy who says insane things all the time or the reporters that here him say something insane and don't realize that after meeting with advisors he actually meant the complete opposite of what he actually said.

    Trump could could stop the crazy train by not saying crazy S every single day, which is his milieu, and by actually knowing something about the topics he pretends to know about.

    He's not been misquoted or misrepresented, the beef seems to be that they aren't going to publicize his backtracking with the gusto of his original words.

    The recap if abortion was illegal:

    Donald Trump scrambled to clarify his position on abortion and put out a firestorm of criticism Wednesday after he initially said women who obtain abortions should be punished.

    Several hours later, in a statement, he said that women who obtain abortions are victims and, if Congress passes laws outlawing abortion, doctors who provide them should be punished.

    Its almost like the guy has no idea about what he is talking...

    I think your beef is with Trump, not the people reporting the words coming out of his mouth.  Yeah maybe they should report on his total policy reversal, quicker, but this one is all Trump for saying something so idiotic to begin with.

    Parent

    Honestly, any person in the 21st century who talks in such apocalyptic terms about superseding another's right to reproductive freedom, is a jackass who ought to be:
    • Disqualified from holding public office;
    • Remanded immediately to the 4th grade; and
    • Compelled by the teacher to write 500 times, "I will learn to respect others and mind my own business."


    Parent
    Hillary's campaign just tweeted about it (none / 0) (#129)
    by ruffian on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 04:54:12 PM EST
    complete with video of him and Matthews.

    They rarely tweet anything that pointed. They must think it is gold.

    Parent

    Just like Trump, (none / 0) (#133)
    by KeysDan on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 05:39:40 PM EST
    to present an under-developed, ill-defined proposal. About that punishment--is therea criminal schedule?  Zygotes, 1 to 5; first trimester, 3 to 10, late-term, life?   Or, something more in line with Sharia, like stoning. His followers will love whatever it is, however. Make America Grate Again.

    Parent
    Fascinating (5.00 / 3) (#98)
    by Nemi on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 03:08:07 PM EST
    Loving Vincent a movie about Vincent van Gogh made like oilpaintings of his:

    Painting Animation Work Stations (PAWS) are the work stations, specially invented and patented by BreakThru Productions, to create an extraordinary work space that allows thirty painters to complete the 80-minute Loving Vincent movie in two years. The painters will hand paint 56,800 frames, inspired by the style and the hand of van Gogh.

    It looks absolutely stunning: Trailer.

    Virginia Governor (5.00 / 2) (#116)
    by KeysDan on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 04:06:14 PM EST
    Terry McAuliffe (D) vetoed SB 41, a so-called religious liberty bill, that would allow businesses and individuals to cite religious beliefs as a reason to refuse services to gay and trans people.

    The fight never ends.... (none / 0) (#168)
    by vml68 on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 10:55:04 AM EST
    Hardly have time to celebrate this bit of good news because it is followed by this cr@p.

    Parent
    Yes, and the (none / 0) (#174)
    by KeysDan on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 01:17:27 PM EST
    Mississippi bill is a real doozy. And, that bill is moving along in the legislature and will probably make it to the governor's desk.  Keeps Mississippi a back water.  

    Parent
    Yup - it's an election year (none / 0) (#175)
    by ruffian on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 01:23:21 PM EST
    They all want to have some catnip to throw to the 'base'.

    Parent
    Bernie as Socialist (5.00 / 2) (#150)
    by MKS on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 01:24:30 AM EST
    It is standard for Bernie supporters to say it is no big deal that Bernie is a Socialist because that just means he is in favor of Single Payer and raising the Minimum Wage.

    Well, Bernie was back in the day a hard Left Socialist.  This article by Slate shows him to be very hard Left.  He makes George McGovern look like a Right Winger.

    Bernie has been treated so nice by the press.  Hillary has refrained from hitting him on much of anything.  Bernie's polls would not remain so high if he ever got the nomination.

    I'm not reminded of McGovern... (none / 0) (#156)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 08:57:13 AM EST
    I'm reminded of the last good senator NYS elected, Pat Moynihan.  Abolishing the CIA was a good idea in the 80's, 90's, 00's...and today.  

    I would think you, of all people, would be down with some of that action.

    Parent

    No, abolishing the CIA has (5.00 / 1) (#165)
    by MKS on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 10:29:14 AM EST
    never been a good idea.  It is about the leadership at the top that dictates policy.  Under  Carter and Clinton the CIA did not run amok.

    Parent
    Agree to disagree... (none / 0) (#179)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 01:44:02 PM EST
    The CIA lacks the proper oversight for the letter after the current president's name to make any difference in regards to how they roll.  IMO they are a rogue agency since at least the late 1950's that should be abolished and replaced with a severely more limited intelligence service.

    Sanders & Moynihan were correct to advocate for same, regardless of what that means for the odds in a horserace.

    Parent

    And... (5.00 / 1) (#184)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 03:17:36 PM EST
    ... they are wrong way more than they are right.  They got WMD's wrong, and the had no idea Arab Spring was coming, they tortured people who did nothing wrong, they destroyed the evidence, and if I had some time, could probably list 1001 vastly important things they F'ed up, badly.

    I don't know that it needs abolishing, but the problem with the government right now, failure equates to not having enough dough, so every time the F up, they get bigger budgets.  How about they operate like the rest of the world, they F up, decrease their budget, and if they keep on track like the last decade, they will starve themselves to death.

    Seems like they are more worried about protecting the government with BS like Assange and Snowden than protecting it's citizens from foreign enemies.

    Parent

    One example of why (none / 0) (#183)
    by MKS on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 02:32:05 PM EST
    the top leadership makes a difference.

    In 1952, The CIA had a plan to topple the Arbenz government in Guatemala.  Secretary of State Dean Acheson put the kibosh on it.

    In 1954, with the Republicans in control, the Dulles boys now in power at State and the CIA, the coup in Guatemala was approved and went forward.  Ike specifically approved the coup.  It was not a below the radar, rogue operation.  Who heads the government makes a big difference.

    Under Carter, military aid was effectively cut-off to Guatemala.  Reagan re-instituted it.  The CIA involvement in torture etc. came under Republican administrations as far as I can tell.

    Under Bill, the CIA did not go rogue, at least from what is generally known.

    Btw, Carter had nominated Ted Sorenson, the brilliant speech writer and poet laureate of Camelot, to head the CIA.  But his past conscientious objector status as a youth and other problems led to the conclusion he could not get through the confirmation process.  And you should know, he also worked for big law firm.

    Parent

    Was he able to do that? (none / 0) (#157)
    by jbindc on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 09:07:51 AM EST
    Abolish the CIA?

    And interesting choice, since he hand-picked Hillary Clinton as the person he wanted to get his seat when he retired....

    Parent

    Nobody's perfect ;) (none / 0) (#177)
    by kdog on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 01:37:57 PM EST
    He did get this right (none / 0) (#182)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 02:29:42 PM EST
    But was called a racist at the time, but history appears to have proven his report accurate, too bad it was never acted upon at the time.

    http://tinyurl.com/nj283dy

    http://tinyurl.com/hd4kszp

    N

    early 50 years after the release of the U.S. Department of Labor report "The Negro Family: The Case for National Action," which was highly controversial and widely criticized at the time, the new Urban Institute study found that the alarming statistics in the report back then "have only grown worse, not only for blacks, but for whites and Hispanics as well."


    Parent
    If Senator Sanders (none / 0) (#185)
    by KeysDan on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 03:26:30 PM EST
    is to be tagged as a socialist radical etc, his 1974 position on the CIA doesn't make it.  The wisdom of a separate and, essentially, autonomous spy agency was questioned by no less of a cold warrior than Dean Acheson, and even,  Harry Truman,belatedly, came around; John Kennedy was also a critic after the Bay of Pigs.

    Many abuses were uncovered by Senator Church and oversight measures were put into place as a result of his investigation, but we have seen continued problems along the way. And, recently, the oversight of the Senate Intelligence Committee staff was undermined by spying to the extent that Senator Feinstein, who has never heard or seen CIA evil, took to the floor of the senate to upbraid the agency. Not heard much since; no discipline for the spy guys either.  Nothing here to see, just move along.

     When Senator Moynihan suggested that we thank the CIA for its work, and then proceed with elimination and relocation within the State Department, I would only take issue with the thank you part.  

    Institutionally, it always seemed to me to be inherently beyond control, just by virtue of doing its business. When capabilities for being reigned in are administration-dependent, it is an indicator for, at least, reform.  The functions of the CIA, such as gathering of information and analysis should be teased out for assignment to the many other sectors of intelligence--if for nothing else, reducing duplication, increasing communications, and spreading authorities. A decent idea in 1974 and not a bad one in 2016.

       

    Parent

    I'll wait for Donald to give a detailed write up (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by CoralGables on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 09:42:38 AM EST
    but for now I say congratulations to Carli Lloyd, Becky Sauerbrunn, Alex Morgan, Megan Rapinoe and Hope Solo.

    The US Women's Soccer Team (5.00 / 2) (#172)
    by caseyOR on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 11:59:16 AM EST
    is more successful and more popular than the Men's National Team. The women actually win things like the World Cup and the Olympics. And yet, they make less money when they win than the men do when they lose.

    Additionally, the women frequently are expected to play on substandard fields, risking injury. They are often scheduled on fields with artificial turf, a much inferior surface to natural grass, dangerous to players. Last year's women's World Cup, played in Canada, was played on artificial turf. Scrapes, abrasions and burns were just some of the daily injuries suffered by the players. Additionally, artificial turf is a hard surface, no real give. A fall can cause serious injury. Men get natural grass.

    Since last summer's women's World Cup, which the US women won, the women have had to flat-out refuse to play a match because of the conditions. And this extends to the professional league as well.

    I expect US Soccer to try to throw the blame on FIFA because FIFA hands out more money for men's football than for women's. Hopefully, one outcome of this move by the women will be a change in how FIFA funds women's football.

    Parent

    On The News... (5.00 / 1) (#173)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 12:57:22 PM EST
    ... they make 40% less than men, draw larger crowds and TV viewers, and have a far better record, including many championships and gold metals.

    Can't remember who put out a press release, FIFA or US soccer that basically said we have do a lot for women and will continue to do so.  Which seems more like, they should be grateful for what they get.

    When I first read about this I went in thinking, like most female athletes they get paid less because they aren't as popular, but that is simply not true, if anything they should be demanding more pay than the men, equal pay is selling themselves short IMO.

    I forget how many million they will pulled in, I want to say $18M, but don't quote me, but it was a yugely terrific number, for 2016.

    Women's World Cup Final is Most-Watched Soccer Match in U.S. History

    Found link with all the numbers:
    U.S. Women's Soccer Team Stars Allege Pay Discrimination

    U.S. Soccer estimates that the women's national team will generate $17.6 million in event-based revenue between April 2016 and March 2017 based on a slate of up to 27 matches, according to the budget it proposed at February's Annual General Meeting. (Those include a post-Olympics tour and an end-of-season tournament.) Over the same period, it expects the men's team to bring in $9 million for up to 12 matches.


    U.S. women's soccer team gets $2 million for World Cup win; German men got $35 million in 2014

    That last link is apples to oranges since they are claiming discrimination is the US only.

    Parent

    Not a fan of soccer (none / 0) (#201)
    by ragebot on Fri Apr 01, 2016 at 10:49:13 AM EST
    but have read the respondents position.

    They are claiming the the numbers the women are using are cherry picked.  For most years the men's team brings in bigger crowds and more bucks, by a lot.  But for the few years used it was reversed.

    Bottom line is:

    "A USSF spokesman added that any revenue numbers from the players that showed otherwise were "inaccurate, misleading or both." The spokesman went on to add that the average attendance for U.S. men's national team games from 2011 to 2015 was 29,781, while games for the U.S. women's national team over the same period averaged 16,229 fans per game."

    Not sure about this since it was in the comments section to the story but if true it explains a lot.

    That is cherry picking though. It's the one SINGLE year that it's been like that. A world Cup year for the women while the men didn't have much going on. Wanna compare the revenue each team brought in with sponsors for their prospective World Cups? Women 18mil, Men....529mil. Yeah, it should be equal. On top of having less TV revenue and way less attendance. Okay, yeah it all makes sense.....

    Parent

    Comparing attendance at a Mens USMNT game (none / 0) (#202)
    by CoralGables on Fri Apr 01, 2016 at 11:07:05 AM EST
    is quite a bit flawed. Men's Soccer in the US draws the biggest crowds when the USMNT doesn't play. Soccer fans in the US attend a USMNT game dependent on who they are playing. Put them against Colombia they draw a big crowd. Take USMNT off the field for the same game and replace them with Brazil and the crowd doubles.

    Parent
    The numbers I just saw for this election cycle (5.00 / 4) (#197)
    by CoralGables on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 08:37:54 PM EST
    Money raised for the DNC and State Dem Parties:

    Clinton $22 million
    Sanders $0

    And Sanders expects superdelegates to vote for him? He must be smoking some good stuff.

    My tivo is set! (none / 0) (#1)
    by ruffian on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 03:10:53 PM EST
    I'm going out tonight  - the touring company of Broadway's 'Dirty Dancing' is in town and my boss gave me tickets she can't use. Should be...uh, interesting? I confess I had never even seen the movie until over the Xmas holidays.

    I will have Corden and the OJ series on Tivo when I get home.

    Jeralyn, any thoughts on Trump's ... (none / 0) (#2)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 04:53:54 PM EST
    campaign manager Corey Lewandowski being arrested and charged with battery?

    If (3.00 / 2) (#3)
    by ragebot on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 05:13:09 PM EST
    every time someone touched someone else against their will charges were filed the criminal justice system would fall apart.

    Trump said look at the video and make up your mind.  Don't forget you only need one out of six jurors voting not guilty and the case is a loser.  Even if there is a guilty verdict misdemeanor battery charge for a first offender would likely result in no jail time and maybe a fine.  Sometimes there would be restitution for medical expenses but from what has been released I doubt that would be anything but Tylenol and ice.  Did she even see a doctor?

    As a rule unless there is some type of injury that requires medical treatment or a long standing friction of some type LEOs and SAs don't like this type of case.

    Looks political to me.

    Parent

    The purpose of a charging decision like this (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by Peter G on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 04:33:50 PM EST
    is deterrence, not punishment. In a free country, you cannot allow politicians to manhandle (i.e., intimidate) the press without consequences.

    Parent
    But (none / 0) (#136)
    by TrevorBolder on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 05:47:55 PM EST
    Now it appears political as the charges are being brought by a supporter of the presumed Democratic nominee for President.

    If there is no reasonable expectation of conviction, no charges should be brought.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#143)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 08:31:21 PM EST
    I don't know about Florida but here in GA if someone wants the charges to be made they have to be made no matter how stupid the case may seem.

    Parent
    Don't worry (none / 0) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 05:26:40 PM EST
    He will never get to 50%

    2016 National Republican Primary - Trump 48%, Cruz 27% (NBC News/SurveyMonkey 3/21-3/27)


    Parent
    If that poll (none / 0) (#5)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 05:52:08 PM EST
    is right the Elders in the GOP are going to have to blow up the party.

    Parent
    None of you are ... (none / 0) (#6)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 05:57:58 PM EST
    named Jeralyn.

    ;)

    Parent

    I know math is hard ... (none / 0) (#8)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 06:05:20 PM EST
    for you poorly educated Trumpkins.  But 48 is below 50.

    But, don't worry, he loves the poorly educated!

    The RCP averaged is currently 42.3%.  And one recent poll had Cruz within the margin of error.

    Parent

    Don't worry (none / 0) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 06:11:18 PM EST
    He will NEVER go pet to 50%

    Parent
    His pet may ... (none / 0) (#10)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 06:13:24 PM EST
    get to 50%.

    Does he have a pet?

    You must know. Probably have the Trump pet merchandise.

    Parent

    The (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by FlJoe on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 06:18:58 PM EST
    creature that resides on his head is already polling @ 60


    Parent
    How about the one that resides on his head? (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 06:20:40 PM EST
    Sh!t (none / 0) (#19)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 06:25:08 PM EST
    See I told you .   Vodka.

    I thought you commented about the creatures IN his head so I commented on the creature on his head.....

    I should take a nap

    Parent

    I'm really enjoying (none / 0) (#11)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 06:15:53 PM EST
    This obsession thing you have

    Parent
    Just making fun ... (none / 0) (#12)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 06:17:44 PM EST
    of your obsession.

    It's comedy gold!

    Parent

    Yeah... (none / 0) (#46)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 10:24:25 AM EST
    ... he just touched her, same with the other person they caught him on video 'touching'.

    Your entire comment is silly, your issue seems to be with the law.  And anytime a celebrity and video are involved, the police are going to charge someone with a crime if it appears that they committed one.

    He will get a fine, no way is he going to ask for a trial over something they want gone, like yesterday.  Hopefully Florida has deferred adjudication and this will disappear in a year.

    Lewandowski needs to stop putting his hands on people, he is a campaign manager, not security, and he needs to stop lying about stuff that is on video.  And Trump, well, his response was yugly terrible in that he clearly doesn't have a clue about anything.  He is not wavering even with the video and he's got a bunch of idiots convinced their eyes are liars and he, who didn't see jack, know exactly what went down.

    I would also suggest he file charges if he is going to claim she assaulted him.  But I do love the pen could have been a bomb shtick, seriously funny.  But not the kind of BS I would expect from anyone who is over the age of 12.  

    A pen bomb, GD, billy bad-@ss Trump scared for his life from a 110lb female reporter armed with a pad & pen.

    Parent

    Well this is whatshe FIRST said (none / 0) (#59)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 11:58:46 AM EST
    Trump acknowledged the question, but before he could answer I was jolted backwards. Someone had grabbed me tightly by the arm and yanked me down. I almost fell to the ground, but was able to maintain my balance. Nonetheless, I was shaken.

    The Washington Post's Ben Terris immediately remarked that it was Trump's campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, who aggressively tried to pull me to the ground. I quickly turned around and saw Lewandowski and Trump exiting the building together. No apology. No explanation for why he did this.  

    Link

    And since the video was released she has changed her story.

    Here's why.

    Pure politics.

    Parent

    Missing the Part... (none / 0) (#71)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 01:02:59 PM EST
    ... where her version changed.

    Parent
    Read the police report (none / 0) (#90)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 02:43:51 PM EST
    which is available in PDF on several sites. Here's what it says:

    ".....she felt someone yank her left arm. She added that she fell back but caught herself from falling..."

    This is what she previously said.

    "Someone had grabbed me tightly by the arm and yanked me down."

    Here's a shot of the crime of the century.

    And this is what that Far Right publication, "Mother Jones" had to say.

    A few things are obvious here. First, Fields didn't hallucinate anything, as both Lewandowski and Trump have implied. Second, Lewandowski did indeed grab Fields by the arm, just as she says. Third, Trump was already walking away from her at the time. Fourth, it doesn't really look very serious. Fields is obviously a little nonplussed, but otherwise fairly unscathed.

    Link

    I have viewed this MJ video and several others and I have not found one that shows Lewandowski grabbing her. In Frame 3 you can see him starting to lean forward. In Frame 4 he is obviously coming forward. In Frame 5 Fields has her left arm up but I see no visual of Lewandowski touching or grabbing her. In Frame 6 he is past her and behind Trump. No place do we see her being yanked. And no place do I see her almost falling.

    So did he touch her? Perhaps. Did he yank her? No.

    Did she almost fall? No.

    If he did, should he have?? It looks to me like a scrum. People pushing and shoving. Maybe being a reporter isn't supposed to be a contact support but in this instance it was.

    The really bad thing here is that the candidates will just put a bigger and tighter wall around themselves and we will have "boy in the bubble" candidates and presidents.

    "It's Chinatown, Jake."


    Parent

    That quote from the police report... (none / 0) (#161)
    by unitron on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 09:28:32 AM EST
    ...seems to be someone else speaking about her, not her speaking about herself.

    Unless she had an attack of the Bob Doles and was talking about herself in the third person.

    Parent

    Read the report (none / 0) (#167)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 10:53:04 AM EST
    which is the PD officer writing what she said. Of course I'm sure you will claim he lied.

    But no matter. The video speaks. She clearly wasn't pulled down. It doesn't show her loosing balance.

    Plus the PD Incident Report shows weapons as "Hands Feet Fist Teeth" If the report is real. Link

    But this video shows Lewandowski sliding by her. He may have touched her arm but she was not grabbed and yanked.

    Parent

    In Other Words... (none / 0) (#191)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 05:22:35 PM EST
    ... her version of events has not changed.

    Yeah, if you have to ask if your link is reliable, maybe not you shouldn't post it.  Why does every republican here have links to obscure websites, Fox News can't bend the fact far enough for you guys ?

    Parent

    Because, Scott, only by ... (none / 0) (#195)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 07:48:08 PM EST
    ScottW714: "Why does every republican here have links to obscure websites, Fox News can't bend the fact far enough for you guys?"

    ... hiding in the bushes, treetops, storm drains and bedroom closets can one finally realize and know the truth. All they want is the truth. Just give 'em some truth.

    ;-D

    Parent

    Interesting (none / 0) (#123)
    by ragebot on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 04:33:23 PM EST
    Lewandowski prosecutor outed as Hillary supporter
    Put on Florida Democratic Party's campaign-endorsing council

    SAs in Florida are elected and historically have been accused of being political in bringing some charges.

    Parent

    Anyone Eklse Find It Odd... (none / 0) (#159)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 09:23:52 AM EST
    ... the right's knee jerk reaction to charges being filed is to check the prosecutors party affiliation even though they are generally the party of law & order.

    I think that is called projecting.

    Parent

    In this particular case (none / 0) (#162)
    by CoralGables on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 09:33:56 AM EST
    If the prosecutor is anything but an avid Trump supporter it's obviously political. There are always a handful of nuts out there that see everything in life as, "you're either with us or against us".

    Parent
    I Was Thinking More Like... (none / 0) (#169)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 11:16:24 AM EST
    ... them actually politicizing the justice department, then assuming because they are capable of such depravity, all D's prosecuting R's are political in nature.

    This is like one step above a speeding ticket, they are enraged by something that will be a fine and maybe a little probation.  Trump won't fire him, so what is the problem, really ?  They want Lewandowski to be able to put his hands on anyone at any time.  They are acting like this is the Zimmerman redux.

    What would have been a real quagmire, if Fields had shot Lewandowski.  If someone wouldn't get hurt, that would be a real treat, the gun toting Breitbart reporter vs. the (wo)manhandling Trump Campaign Manager.

    I would also imagine if Lewandowski had apologized and not taken it to twitter and called the reporter 'totally delusional', the cops would have been involved.

    Parent

    Alabama Gov Robert Bently (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 06:02:31 PM EST
    May or may not be able to hang on to his office by his fingernails after his lurid phone sex thing went public.
    But his sorry ass just got booted from his church

    .LINK

    I Had No Idea... (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 10:26:57 AM EST
    ... that one could get booted from their church.

    Gots to love those compassionate christians.

    Parent

    It happens all the time (none / 0) (#62)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 12:07:57 PM EST
    For all kinds of reasons.  I was just yesterday laughing with some friends about this local hypocrite who got the boot from the flock for cooking meth.  Again.

    Parent
    That's not very forgiving of them. (none / 0) (#75)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 01:18:18 PM EST
    Was it for insufficient tithing?  Entrepreneurs usually don't get the boot.  I'm guessing that they weren't followers of the prosperity gospel.

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#76)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 01:25:36 PM EST
    It wasn't very good meth, so....

    Parent
    You need to understand that (none / 0) (#69)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 12:58:33 PM EST
    removal from fellowship usually happens  only happens after the person involved has made a public confession, asked for forgiveness and pledged to not repeat the "sin" and then does it again.

    Publicity also plays a role. It should be obvious that a well known church member is expected to not be engaged in prohibited acts.
     

    Parent

    you were never more right, Jim... (none / 0) (#79)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 01:28:49 PM EST
    "prohibited acts" are to be kept appropriately closeted and the guilt monetized.

    Hate the sin but love the sinnin'



    Parent

    ;-) Indeed (none / 0) (#94)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 02:47:19 PM EST
    And when I want to really po some of my brethren I ask them the difference between a hetrosexual couple living in sin and a gay couple living in sin.

    Fortunately the people where I attend have learned to mostly tolerate me.

    Parent

    Forgiveness... (none / 0) (#80)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 01:37:01 PM EST
    ... for bawdy words ?  I guess he should have called her a fat pig or a disgusting animal and all would be forgiven without the public apology and evangelics/baptists will want that person to be their president.

    Parent
    Actually I think it was a Jimmy Carter thing (none / 0) (#95)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 02:54:17 PM EST
    that got him booted.

    You know, lust in my heart....

    ;-)

    I guess Jimmy never went to a strip club.


    Parent

    It somewhat depends... (none / 0) (#163)
    by unitron on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 09:39:29 AM EST
    ...on the kind of church.

    Some have stuff imposed on them from outside because they're part of a hierarchy, the Roman Catholic church being a very good example.

    Others are more independent, such as the Baptist church which I attended during the first couple of decades of my life.  It was affiliated with the Southern Baptist convention, but no one outside that specific church had any say about who we voted in as a member (or voted out, theoretically), or who we hired and fired as the preacher.

    Parent

    The poor governor (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by KeysDan on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 12:58:16 PM EST
    did say that he did not have text with that woman. Seems so judgmental, if Ben Carson can stab his cousin, only to be saved by a belt buckle and hit his mother on the head with a hammer, and find redemption, what about poor Bentley?

    Parent
    Do you think he was (none / 0) (#70)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 01:02:01 PM EST
    Funny... (none / 0) (#82)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 01:49:51 PM EST
    ... but don't forget this is republican governor and a christian deacon.  I think it's silly, but it is fun to watch the right meltdown over words, but next week will be demonizing those dirty muslims and their idiocy over banishing people for words.

    Just waiting for him to tell everyone he has first amendment rights.

    Parent

    Uh, Islam doesn't banish (none / 0) (#97)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 03:02:43 PM EST
    If possible the radical islamists kill.

    A difference of some magnitude...don't you agree??

    Parent

    Not Really... (none / 0) (#111)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 03:51:30 PM EST
    It didn't say radical anything, that was your interpretation.  I meant regular muslims & christians, and how they treat people over what I would consider a pretty minor stuff.

    Parent
    I'm unaware of how (none / 0) (#122)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 04:29:15 PM EST
    "moderate" Muslims dis fellowship someone from the mosque, or even if they have a formal membership in a specific mosque. I would assume they do.

    But a quick Google finds a transgender woman being kicked out of a mosque in airzona.

    And since they hang gays in some Muslim countries I assume they aren't welcome in US mosques.

    And a   Christian being kicked out of a mosque.

    But I didn't find an answer to "Can a muslim be banished from a mosque?"

    I did find where Angola is in the process of banning Islam and this how they do it in Germany.

    Parent

    Like I Said... (none / 0) (#139)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 05:54:05 PM EST
    ...one in the same.  One big cycle of dead bodies for nothing more than a need to not be alone.

    Parent
    Are you willing to admit (none / 0) (#152)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 08:31:18 AM EST
    who the killers are?

    Hint: Today is 3/31/16

    Parent

    I Don't Know... (none / 0) (#192)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 05:27:23 PM EST
    ... what was the Iraqi civilian body count ?

    Parent
    Dude (none / 0) (#73)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 01:04:38 PM EST
    You gotta listen to the tape.  It was Norman Bates level creepy

    Parent
    Well, (none / 0) (#83)
    by KeysDan on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 01:59:26 PM EST
    Bentley needed to listen to Jeebus.  Same sex marriages were said to be a threat to traditional marriage. And, sure enough, we can see why Bentley was beside himself about it all--the next thing he knew, was that he got divorced from his wife of 50 years.  This, in his circles, would be cause and effect.

    Parent
    I'm bettin (none / 0) (#84)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 02:01:12 PM EST
    He has a wide stance

    Parent
    Well, Bentley (none / 0) (#96)
    by KeysDan on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 02:58:20 PM EST
    is what used to be referred to as a "skin man."  He is, professionally, a dermatologist.

    Parent
    ... just as He does the personal transgressions of all right-wingers. It's liberal Democrats and their related homo-lovin', pot-smokin' heathen which He'll forever smite to the bowels of Hell for reasons beknownst only unto Him -- as well as, of course, His self-styled confidants, The Revs. Pat Robertson and Franklin Graham.

    ;-D

    Parent

    How odd. (none / 0) (#32)
    by linea on Tue Mar 29, 2016 at 08:24:07 PM EST
    Do people usually get kicked out of a Baptist church for phone sex? Or whatever this is.

    Parent
    How far behind is Sanders? (none / 0) (#37)
    by CoralGables on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 09:21:32 AM EST
    To catch up to Clinton just in pledged delegates, Nate Silver went deep into what can best be classified as mental m@sturbation to find a path for Sanders.

    With 22 places remaining to vote (18 states plus Guam, the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico and Washington DC), Silver projects that Sanders will have to win all but Maryland, Delaware, and Washington DC to take the lead.

    He also (none / 0) (#39)
    by jbindc on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 09:28:53 AM EST
    states that Puerto Rico has a caucus, but ot is actually a primary, and as Armando has pointed on on Twitter, it's held the same day as some important local elections.

    Parent
    Apparently (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 09:51:42 AM EST
    Bernie's campaign is hoping to get 40% in NY. So they're conceding that they are not going to win there. I seriously doubt they'll get even that much though.

    Parent
    That (none / 0) (#43)
    by FlJoe on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 10:10:52 AM EST
    will be conceding about 50 pledged delegates, of course he will still be making the case that he deserves all of the super delegates because all of them love them some revolution.....or something.

    Parent
    I wonder (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 11:19:53 AM EST
    if anybody has asked him or his campaign why any super delegates would switch to him when he seems to hold the party in disdain and has done nothing to help with down ticket races.

    Parent
    When it comes to choosing delegates (none / 0) (#40)
    by CoralGables on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 09:46:57 AM EST
    All sites I've viewed agree in part with Silver on this one and disagree entirely with BTD.

    NYTimes - Caucus
    USPresidentialElectionNews - Caucus
    Wikipedia - Closed Caucus
    Green Papers - Proportional Caucus/Convention


    Parent

    It changed on March 11 (none / 0) (#44)
    by jbindc on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 10:16:58 AM EST
    Here is the link Armando provided me.  It's in Spanish, but I put the translation below.  (I used a computer-generated translator, so if someone sees a glaring error between the link and my translation, please correct.)

    President of the Democratic Party in Puerto Rico, Roberto Prats, reported today that they will be calling today, the Executive structures of the Local Committee of the Democratic Party to discuss amendments related to the Plan of action of selection of delegates that will be representing Puerto Rico in the National Convention to be held in the city of Philadelphia next month of July.

    "This decision is similar to the process used in the primary of the 2008 Hillary Clinton and President Obama. Our desire is that this selection is a participatory and wide. It is for this reason that we are proposing the holding of a primary instead of making the selection of delegates by the mechanism of "Caucus", said the President of the Democratic Party in Puerto Rico.

    Prats recalled that in 2008 the island remained an international visibility by the celebrated process. "At that time Puerto Ricans could do a democratic weight expression as was held a primary to choose 58 delegates from Puerto Rico. The selection of our delegates are would be carried out the day of the primary, candidates for elective posts in the island", he said.

    To coincide the dates for the celebration of the primary candidates for elective positions in PR with the presidential Democrats, "we will have a process cost effective consistent with the best democratic tradition of Puerto Rico, because that would be being used the same polling stations which will be being used by the EEC to the June 5 primary".

    "With this determination to replace a Caucus by a primary, the Democratic Party of Puerto Rico will dramatically increase turnout and place Puerto Rico back in an important position to impact the presidential nomination process," he concluded Prats Palerm.



    Parent
    That doesn't say it is a primary (none / 0) (#50)
    by CoralGables on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 10:38:13 AM EST
    It says Roberto Prats is trying to switch it to a primary.

    But I'm happy to say everyone but BTD is wrong should the switch take place.

    Parent

    Here you go. From March 12 (none / 0) (#53)
    by jbindc on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 11:10:07 AM EST
    Again, the oroginal link in Spanish and my computer-generated translation below.

    Local democratic Committee approves primary to choose delegates for the President of the Democratic Party in Puerto Rico, Roberto Prats announced Saturday that held after the meeting of the Local Executive Committee of the Democratic Party unanimously approved Friday make the selection of delegates from Puerto Rico with the holding of a primary such as performed in the primary of 2008 between Secretary Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama.

    "To coincide the dates for the celebration of the primary candidates for elective positions in PR with the presidential Democrats, we will have a process cost effective consistent with the best democratic tradition of Puerto Rico since would be being used the same polls that are being used by the EEC for primaries from June 5", said Prats Palerm in a part of press.

    He continued Prats who in 2008 the island remained an international visibility for the process held here. At that time Puerto Ricans could do a democratic weight expression as was held a primary to choose 58 delegates from Puerto Rico. The selection of our delegates would be going on the day of the primary, candidates for elective posts in the island.

    "With this determination to replace a Caucus by a primary, the Democratic Party of Puerto Rico will dramatically increase turnout and place Puerto Rico back in an important position to impact the presidential nomination process," he concluded Prats Palerm.

    The local Democratic Party shall without delay notify determination to the Committee on rules and calendar of the DNC for approval of the same. Once this happens, work will begin jointly with the State Commission of elections in Puerto Rico for coordination of the centres of voting and everything related to the voting for this event.



    Parent
    Armando on Puerto Rico (none / 0) (#109)
    by MKS on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 03:46:28 PM EST
    versus the others?  I think I take Armando on that one.

    Parent
    Is it just me (none / 0) (#38)
    by ragebot on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 09:25:44 AM EST
    or does there seem to be some mix up in the order of posts.  Some of the responses seem to be related to posts well above or below them and not responsive.

    IF They Get Rated... (none / 0) (#48)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 10:30:29 AM EST
    ...bad or good, they move up the thread.

    Parent
    I know that (none / 0) (#49)
    by ragebot on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 10:37:45 AM EST
    But there is a thread asking about Corey Lewandowski being arrested and charged with battery.  My response was what I would call on point and all the rest of the responses seem to be about Trump's poll numbers, not really what I would call on point.

    Parent
    I think sometimes (none / 0) (#87)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 02:07:36 PM EST
    People intend to reply and end up just posting

    Parent
    Check your "preferences" (none / 0) (#102)
    by oculus on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 03:23:22 PM EST
    re comments.

    Parent
    Sarandon and Silverman (none / 0) (#42)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 10:05:25 AM EST
    Plenty of non-actresses find him appealing too (5.00 / 3) (#45)
    by ruffian on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 10:21:35 AM EST
    Why should actresses be any different? They just get more press for it.

    Parent
    Silverman's a comedian, first. (none / 0) (#52)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 11:05:34 AM EST
    When they're good, comedians do something useful - they beat up our biases with cognitive dissonance.  

    Actors are just cheap imitations.


    Parent

    Carol Burnett explains it all to you: (none / 0) (#119)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 04:12:38 PM EST
    Just another way (none / 0) (#51)
    by CST on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 11:04:36 AM EST
    we break people and then throw them away when they are no longer of use.

    "The report for the first time compared 70 years of data from the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs. It found that veterans who served after 2001 were nearly twice as likely as those who served during Vietnam to be barred from benefits, and four times as likely as men and women who served during World War II.

    "We separate people for misconduct that is actually a symptom of the very reason they need health care," said Coco Culhane, a lawyer who works with veterans at the Urban Justice Center in New York.

    About 6.5 percent of all Iraq and Afghanistan troops have bad paper discharges, the report said. The highest rate is found in the Marine Corps, where one in 10 is now ineligible for benefits."

    "The rising proportion of ineligible veterans is largely due to the military's increasing reliance on other-than-honorable discharges, which have been used as a quick way to dismiss troubled men and women who might otherwise qualify for time-consuming and expensive medical discharges.

    The G. I. Bill instructed the veterans agency to care for veterans if their service was "other than dishonorable." The agency interpreted this as excluding "other than honorable" discharges."

    Gee, that's not a very nice way to talk (none / 0) (#54)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 11:12:46 AM EST
    about Obama's legacy, the one President Clinton is [penciled in] to assume.

    Parent
    I didn't realize (none / 0) (#56)
    by CST on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 11:33:46 AM EST
    Obama has been president since 2001.

    Not that he's off the hook.  Or congress for that matter.  Or Hillary who voted for Iraq.  Certainly not the Bush administration that got us into this mess.  Or the military officials who actually make these decisions.  Or the veterans affairs agency who decided to exclude all these people from benefits, despite not being legally required to.  Or the NYTimes who beat the drum for war back in 2001, even if they are the ones reporting this now.  Or the American people for supporting an unnecessary war but not supporting the people who would be willing to pay for it.

    Now that we've placed enough blame to go around - maybe we should consider what should actually be done about it.  I certainly haven't seen any candidate get asked about this, no one is talking about it, no one seems to care about veterans anymore unless it's a convenient excuse for Donald Trump to skip a debate.  I guess kudos to the NYTimes for actually still reporting on it.  But it feels a bit like whistling past the graveyard.

    Parent

    The Problem is Bad... (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 11:49:06 AM EST
    ... and using bad discharges to meet budget requirement is just about the most fricken up thing we can do.

    They can take away all benefits, but anyone who has been in a war zone should be medically cared for for the rest of their life, even if they were physically injured.  We owe them that much and if a couple bad apples get benefits, so be it, they still fought for us.

    Just one more reason single payer should for all should be top priority.

    Parent

    Not (5.00 / 4) (#60)
    by FlJoe on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 11:59:18 AM EST
    to mention the Senate Veteran affairs committee, on which purity boy Sanders serves, there is plenty of blame to be shared by everyone. I am sick and tired of all of the purity trolls laying the entire sins of our country on to Obama and Hillary.

    Parent
    Not only does he serve (5.00 / 2) (#61)
    by jbindc on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 12:04:25 PM EST
    Is It Humanly Possible... (none / 0) (#160)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 09:26:20 AM EST
    ... for you to discuss people that don't agree with you without name calling or really stupid comments.

    I already know the answer, but it needs pointing out.

    Parent

    More Like GWB's Legacy... (none / 0) (#58)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 11:53:45 AM EST
    ... that Obama and Congress didn't fix, but should have.  It is a stain on his presidency. And it's a little early to predict what Clinton will do, but I feel confident the number of injured veterans will increase.

    Parent
    I don't think (none / 0) (#78)
    by CST on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 01:28:27 PM EST
    that a single person running for president right now even has this on their radar.

    And the military industrial complex will continue to churn out bodies no matter what.  It's not like Sanders is anti-war even if he was anti-Iraq.

    Single payer healthcare would help.  Hell, Obamacare helped a bit.  But in the meantime, if the VA system is the one we've got - it should be one that actually works for the people it's supposed to work for.  Maybe they could've taken all that F-35 money...

    Parent

    Even if He Was... (none / 0) (#193)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 05:32:48 PM EST
    ...antiwar, we got plenty to take care of for decades, which seems unlikely.  If videos of vets in squalor at the VA Hospitals didn't change anything, I don't know what will beyond us trying not to be so GD blood thirsty, which seems even more unlikely.

    Parent
    From another point of view (none / 0) (#89)
    by ragebot on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 02:41:02 PM EST
    Back in WWII there was the famous story of Patton slapping a guy and accusing him of being a coward.  My Dad was in WWII and used the term shell shock.  Even in the Vietnam era that term was still somewhat in use.  Not sure when I first saw PTSD used, but certainly not right after the Vietnam conflict ended.

    Another point is that relatively few WWII vets applied for disability.  More vets applied after Vietnam, and Agent Orange spotlighted disability was not only from combat.  After Desert Storm the number of vets applying for disability increased even more.

    Not saying the vets now applying don't have real issues.  Rather we are more aware of just how much being in combat changes folks.

    Parent

    PTSD or "shell shock" ... (none / 0) (#126)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 04:40:31 PM EST
    ... was not recognized as a disabling malady until fairly recently. As a result, far too many of our veterans have carried with them enormous and sometimes crippling mental and emotional burdens over the course of a lifetime, which with few exceptions have gone almost completely unaddressed.

    Thankfully, we're much more enlightened about such matters now.

    Parent

    I volunteer at the local (none / 0) (#131)
    by ragebot on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 05:24:57 PM EST
    VA clinic doing simple IT work,or I did in the past.  The mental health guys were trying to set up a database illustrating the different problems and treatments for vets from different eras.  The majority of WWII mental health issues were alcohol related, Vietnam era was heavy alcohol but pot as well.  Post Vietnam saw a huge increase in coke.

    A lot of folks like my Dad who was a WWII vet thought "shell shock" was an immediate reaction to artillery or gunfire and went away rather quickly.  My understanding is that PTSD is a stress disorder that occurs post trauma.  

    The biggest problem I had setting up the database was explained to me by the doctor who headed up the mental health unit.  I kept trying to classify problems the vets were having.  What the doctor told me is that while the DSM was nominally the list used by the VA there was not complete agreement on how well it described all the problems.  As an example at one time being gay was considered a mental health issue, something that has since changed; at least in the US.  Another consideration is while most of us are US/European centered the CCMD is what is used in China.

    Bottom line is the doctor said a lot of his patients did not fit neatly into the classifications of any of the systems designed to classify them.

    Parent

    I Think Shell Shocked... (none / 0) (#135)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 05:44:24 PM EST
    ... was used to describe any mental health issues related to combat.  Patton was relieved of duty for slapping shell shocked guys on the battle field , but also people at home were also described as being shell shocked or battle fatigued when they most likely had PTSD.  It is also my understanding that PTSD can occur on the field of battle as well.

    I think all of it kind of follows the medical field and their understanding of the brain, especially in WWI where behavior couldn't be diagnosed for an issue they didn't know about.  People who had mental issues were considered weak for not being being able to 'get over it'.
    ----------------------------

    Is it true that the VA doesn't have specific female codes, like ovarian cancer, and that prosthetic are all designed for men, meaning that if a woman loses a limb, she would end up with a prosthetic with one that has a man(large) hand/foot ?

    Parent

    When people are in pain, they medicate. (none / 0) (#144)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 08:45:59 PM EST
    Getting a Korean War combat vet into rehab for alcohol abuse, or doing the same for an Iraq War vet who's now a heroin addict, is treating the symptom. Unless VA doctors and counselors also address the root cause of that substance abuse, the problems of the afflicted aren't going to subside.

    Given from your description that so many of VA patients appear to defy ready categorization, perhaps the VA professionals likely need to re-examine their entire approach to the problem, rather than continue to try to pound square pegs into round holes.

    It is impossible to reform a system without first comprehending it as a whole. Further, we cannot hope to achieve quantifiable improvements at scale, when the problem has been improperly defined and / or has no relevant baselines upon which we can determine goals, set objectives and measure results.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Maybe my wording was poor (none / 0) (#188)
    by ragebot on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 04:23:31 PM EST
    The VA doctor was not limiting pounding square pegs into round holes to just vets.  His position was that mental health professionals in general have patients of all flavors who are not simply OCD or what ever.

    I had a recent discussion with a friend about the new movie on Nat Turner.  By all accounts Turner had mental problems.  Just before his ill fated "revolution" he had escaped twice from his owner.  Both times he spent a month or so living in the forest, lacking food, water, good sanitation, and in fear of being caught.  As fate would have it during both of his escapes there were solar eclipses, something not as well understood as today.  Turner took this as a sign from God.  To complicate matters even more there had been a volcanic eruption which caused even stranger atmospheric conditions associated with one of the eclipses. Without thinking I said to my friend to make matters even worse slavery can't be good for a person's mental health.

    Turner is clearly an extreme example but I doubt he would fit into any nice DMS classification.  The same is true for a lot of folks with mental health issues.

    Parent

    Then what I'm saying still applies. (none / 0) (#203)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Apr 01, 2016 at 11:34:19 AM EST
    Among other things, the VA likely needs to re-address its criteria for patient classification to better account for mental health issues. There have been profound advances in that field over that past four decades. Has the VA system of classification kept pace with those changes?

    The VA certainly hasn't with basic IT support technology. I think most of its recent and highly publicized failures can be attributed to bureaucratic obsolescence and inertia and the consequent inability to modernize accordingly with the times. That's a capacity issue which is likely rooted in the department's perpetual underfunding by Congress.

    We have an obligation and promise to our nation's veterans that we're simply not meeting and fulfilling. And that's on ALL of us.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    PTSD or "shell shock" ... (none / 0) (#127)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 04:40:31 PM EST
    ... was not recognized as a disabling malady until fairly recently. As a result, far too many of our veterans have carried with them enormous and sometimes crippling mental and emotional burdens over the course of a lifetime, which with few exceptions have gone almost completely unaddressed.

    Thankfully, we're much more enlightened about such matters now.

    Parent

    I think my wireless mouse is failing. (none / 0) (#128)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 04:42:03 PM EST
    That's the second double post since yesterday.

    Parent
    HA World Nut Daily (none / 0) (#63)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 12:26:24 PM EST
    LEWANDOWSKI PROSECUTOR OUTED AS HILLARY SUPPORTER

    Eye roll
    Could someone somewhere please make some actual news happen?  Anything.  A bear bouncing on a trampoline, anything.

    Didn't you get your news last night (none / 0) (#64)
    by CoralGables on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 12:33:55 PM EST
    Cruz, Kasich, and Trump all reneged on their SC purity pledge to support the GOP Presidential candidate.

    Parent
    Yeah ok (none / 0) (#65)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 12:43:31 PM EST
    There's that

    Parent
    Corporations... (none / 0) (#66)
    by jbindc on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 12:48:35 PM EST
    ...Grow Nervous About Participating in Republican Convention

    Some of the country's best-known corporations are nervously grappling with what role they should play at the Republican National Convention, given the likely nomination of Donald J. Trump, whose divisive candidacy has alienated many women, African-Americans and Hispanics.

    An array of activist groups is organizing a campaign to pressure the companies to refuse to sponsor the gathering, which many of the corporations have done for both the Republican and Democratic parties for decades.

    The pressure is emerging as some businesses and trade groups are already privately debating whether to scale back their participation, according to interviews with more than a dozen lobbyists, consultants and fund-raisers directly involved in the conversations.

    Apple, Google and Walmart are among the companies assessing their plans for the convention, which will be held in Cleveland from July 18 through July 21.

    SNIP

    A reduction in support from major corporations would be worrisome for Cleveland, which celebrated the awarding of the convention last year as a symbol of the city's rebirth. The host committee is seeking to raise about $64 million for the event.

    "I have talked to several people at companies who have said, `I've always gone to the convention, I've always participated at some level, but this year we're not putting it in our budget, we're not going, we're not going to sponsor any of the events going on," said Carla Eudy, a longtime Republican fund-raising consultant.



    Guess it will be up to (none / 0) (#67)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 12:55:07 PM EST
    Oil and gas and gun manufacturers

    Parent
    Ooh (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 02:05:39 PM EST
    combined with all the guns they want to have there one spark might cause an explosion!

    Parent
    What, they don't want the big Trump stamp on (none / 0) (#72)
    by ruffian on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 01:03:52 PM EST
    their brand?

    Honestly I did not know there was direct corporate participation in the political conventions.  I did not know that non-delegates attended. Hardly surprising I guess.

    Parent

    I've an idea (none / 0) (#74)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 01:08:43 PM EST
    Donald could just fully sponsor it with all his many different products.  Ads for steaks and wine and Trump Magazine.

    It might also improve his overall chances at prevailing.

    Parent

    TRUMP ENTERPRISES (none / 0) (#77)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 01:26:53 PM EST
    PRESENTS THE REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION.

    the more I think about it.....

    Parent

    Fresh off the presses (none / 0) (#81)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 01:49:42 PM EST
    From Trump to Hillary to Myopic Voters to POTUS, 2016 is Now Officially Abhorrent - Mediaite

    "Political television ratings are completely off the charts, at least in the cable news world: Fox is now the #1 network not just in cable news, but all of cable (up 50 percent in the demo in prime for the first quarter of the year compared to 2015). CNN has exploded, up 139 percent in prime and is nipping at Fox's heels in this category (483k to 462k), while MSNBC is up 69 percent after a year of major changes in dayside.

    Election year numbers always shoot up, but never to this extent. People are paying attention, as reflected in ratings as well as polling. Example: 69 percent of those surveyed (Gallup) say they're following the election "very closely" or "somewhat closely" (nearly double of 2012 at this time) while only eight percent say they're not following it at all."

    Real Lives.  Real Effects on our Real Future.  Debased into Reality TV.

    It's interesting tho (none / 0) (#85)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 02:05:32 PM EST
    Forever we have said we want people to pay more attention.  To be more involved.  And yet reading that all that I can think of is, go back to sleep.  Please.

    Parent
    To capt howdy: I am on a long flight (none / 0) (#100)
    by oculus on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 03:19:14 PM EST
    watching the 2015 Star Wars sans sound. To me, the most interesting portions involve the robots. Carrie Fisher looks pretty damn good. The black British actor isn't very skilled at his craft.

    Awsum (none / 0) (#120)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 04:24:11 PM EST
    I often watch films with no sound or different sound.  That little rolling thing honestly bugged me.  Carrie looks great.  I assume you have seen one woman show.  Everyone should.  And no he was not.
    But he was hot.

    Parent
    Enjoyed the solo show. (none / 0) (#141)
    by oculus on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 06:15:33 PM EST
    Next movie:  Luke Owen @ Google. Funny.

    Parent
    Carrie does look great. (none / 0) (#134)
    by caseyOR on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 05:40:55 PM EST
    Start the conspiracy theories! (none / 0) (#130)
    by jbindc on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 05:10:38 PM EST
    Bernie Sanders' name will not appear on DC ballot due to late filing by DC Democratic Party.

    Looks hinky, but I imagine this will be quickky resolved.

    Easily resolved (none / 0) (#145)
    by CoralGables on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 09:10:13 PM EST
    because the ballot isn't even finalized until late April.

    Parent
    That, and (none / 0) (#154)
    by jbindc on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 08:39:56 AM EST
    An emergency vote by the DC City Council.

    Parent
    Oh dear, (none / 0) (#137)
    by sallywally on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 05:51:19 PM EST
    I'm afraid my cousin's wife, one of my best friends over the years, has crossed over to Bernie. If he wins, it will not be the end of the world, of course, but I just am not comfortable with it....she has begun "liking" everything on Facebook (my family keeps in touch via Facebook) that is complimentary to Bernie.

    I sent something through a day or two ago re: Hillary, and she said she saw that I sent it but hadn't read it. And she did say that we would all vote for whoever wins the Dem nomination, after all, to which I assented.  And it is true.

    I just have a bad taste in my mouth about Sanders.

    Whoopi Goldberg: Ganjapreneur (none / 0) (#138)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 05:51:48 PM EST
    Whoopi Goldberg is lending her name and financial backing to a new line of medical marijuana products designed specifically for women.

    so what if it's a puff piece...

    For the (none / 0) (#140)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 05:56:45 PM EST
    ... then that's her own self-inflicted problem, as well as Pip's. Despite your best intentions, sometimes things can happen and your pet can get outside and / or become lost.

    We had that happen once about ten years ago, when Younger Daughter came inside and forgot to close the screen door, and our housebound cat -- who's been declawed (by the prior owner) and still residing with Elder Daughter and family on Oahu -- walked out and went exploring. Thankfully, she wandered back later on her own, no worse for wear.

    I don't know if I'd go so far as to make it the law, but microchipping your feline or canine buddies for ready identification can save both you and them a lot of potential grief, should the two of you somehow become separated for whatever reason or circumstance. In fact, we just had our cat over here on the Big Island microchipped last week.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Sigh (none / 0) (#151)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 08:27:23 AM EST
    I'm sorry, but it's the straw that has broken this particular camel's back. I'm fed up of being a model citizen. After a lifetime of meekly filling in forms, ticking boxes, registering, de-registering, paying taxes, declaring duty-free, respecting speed limits, answering pointless questions, complying with authority and generally behaving like a goody goody in every single way, however senseless the request, I've reached terminal legislation. Enough already.

    snip

    And I'm cynical about the real reasons for this law. It's more about feeding the addiction which politicians and civil servants have for making rules. Controlling us in a thousand trivial ways. Forcing us to register to continue doing what we have always done, peacefully, harmlessly. Governments seem to have reached the state where if anything moves, it must be legislated, exploited, regulated, chipped, and the data stored.

    That defines you, Donald.

    Parent

    Dumb... (none / 0) (#158)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 09:13:50 AM EST
    ... give me a break, it's cheap, takes about 2 seconds, and no offense to this lady, but the reason it's a law is because all the dog owning nitwits, myself included, who think their dog will never stray, end up being the state's problem because they cannot locate the owner when they stray, break free, or get stolen.  It also helps the vet know what shots the dog has had.  It's a low-jack for pets.

    Next year she will be whining that the state put her dog down because they couldn't locate the owner, and by some miracle, her dog like millions others, got out and couldn't find it's way home.

    All four of my ASPCA adopts where chipped, I believe that might even be law, but not positive.  I would imagine, some vet probably provides at home service for people who are disabled for free.

    Announcing to the world you are going to break the law is the most sure fired way to get a visit form the police.  And they will simply issue a fine and require the chip or lose the dog, dumb.

    If you are gonna fight the 'man' at least pick something that isn't a really good idea.

    Parent

    Sighhhhhhhh (none / 0) (#170)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 11:30:48 AM EST
    The issue isn't the dog chip. That is just, in her case, the last straw.

    Parent
    ... for whom her personal concerns both begin and end with the first person singular. And what does that say about you, since you're agreeing with that self-absorbed twit? There really is no "us" in either you or her. It's just "me, me, me, me, me."

    And that, Jim, defines YOU. Have a nice day.

    Parent

    Heh (none / 0) (#189)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 04:28:57 PM EST
    Given the snot that has been slung and the tears shed over the NSA's collection of telephone numbers I would have thought her complaints regarding the databasing of our lives would have found a friendly home.

    But I forgot that the NSA is about national defense and microchiping  your dog, along with government issued for everything except voting is about is just about social conformity.

    Parent

    Go Home... (none / 0) (#190)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 04:36:37 PM EST
    ... like seriously.

    Responsible dog and cat owners get them chipped.

    You are the biggest conformist I know, goose stepping with Fox News like you trying to win a gold metal for it.

    Save your non-sense for Tall Cotton, where the single reader, you, agrees with you most of the time, but not always.  Like we don't get enough of your inanity, you think we need a link to more of it, is there a link for less, maybe one for no Jim whatsoever, that would be the most clicked link ever at TL.

    Parent

    Double sighhhhhh (none / 0) (#194)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 06:43:48 PM EST
    One more time.... The issue isn't the fact that the government wants the dog mnicrochipped./..It's all the other stuff.

    But thanks for proving my point.

    Parent

    We get the issue you're raising, Jim. (none / 0) (#205)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Apr 01, 2016 at 11:52:25 AM EST
    And as far as compelling issues go, your opposition to the UK's requirement that pet owners microchip their dogs and cats is one that's entirely trivial and silly. It's a directive that's based on common sense, and most certainly not one over which someone draws the proverbial line in the sand unless that person is an unreconstructed right-wing ideologue.

    You've wasted enough time on this matter. Move on.

    Parent

    My perspective... (none / 0) (#196)
    by linea on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 08:00:46 PM EST
    It's a non-issue because it's a dog.

    Parent
    Why is this even an issue to you? (none / 0) (#200)
    by Chuck0 on Fri Apr 01, 2016 at 10:29:51 AM EST
    It is happening in the UK. Not the US. Who freaking cares?

    Parent
    The UK our mother country. (none / 0) (#204)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Apr 01, 2016 at 11:41:21 AM EST
    And judging from that article, it appears that Pip's right-wing owner has blown a few intercranial gaskets -- probably not unlike her U.S. counterpart who sought to inform us of her struggles with her "oppressor."

    ;-D

    Parent

    Seems fine to me. (5.00 / 1) (#149)
    by linea on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 10:55:54 PM EST
    We let dogs deficate on the sidewalk, urinate in grocery stores, and let them run riot biting and attacking childfen. Though I suppose that last one is mostly the fault of sociopathic pit bull owners. A completely innocuous micro chip seems profoundly reasonable to me.

    Parent
    Some people I know need a chip... (5.00 / 1) (#171)
    by fishcamp on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 11:52:03 AM EST
    Jeralyn, site violator wty123 (none / 0) (#146)
    by caseyOR on Wed Mar 30, 2016 at 09:44:18 PM EST
     has hit several threads.

    I know, I know (none / 0) (#166)
    by jbindc on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 10:35:36 AM EST
    "Snitching" is bad.  (Well, no, it isn't really).

    Case in point.

    Officials at an elementary school in Anchorage said they uncovered a plot among three first-grade students to kill a classmate using poison, according to news reports.

    The conspiracy was foiled when another student overheard the alleged plotters discussing their plan and alerted a teacher, Anchorage School District spokeswoman Heidi Embley told CBS affiliate KTVA.



    And the teacher alerted the principal, ... (5.00 / 1) (#180)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 01:55:06 PM EST
    ... who alerted the school resource officer, who called the police and alerted the school district, whose spokesperson ran to the local news media.

    When I was in first grade way back when, school officials would have called the parents to come get their kids, and perhaps suspended them at most. Nowadays, it seems like everybody's got to get their Andy-Warhol-allocated fifteen minutes.

    Depressing.

    Parent

    In Case Anyone Cares (none / 0) (#181)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 01:56:57 PM EST
    Trump's most famous backtracks, policy changes, or just plain doesn't know what he is talking about.
    ABORTION
    • 1. Criminalize women who have abortions.
    • 2. Let the states decide what to do about criminalizing abortion.
    • 3. Never mind. Don't punish the women.
    • Current position: Ban abortions. But women won't be criminalized.

    DEFEATING ISIS

    • 1. Maybe send troops in. Definitely go after the oil fields.
    • 2. Bomb the oil fields. Send some troops in.
    • 3. Send troops to defeat ISIS. Don't forget about the oil fields.
    • 4. Destroy the oil. Let our regional allies send ground troops. If they don't, stop buying their oil.
    • Current position: To defeat ISIS, Trump would destroy the oil fields controlled by the militant group. U.S. allies in the region must commit ground troops to defeat the Islamic State.

    VIOLATING US AND INTERNATIONAL LAWS WITH REGARD TO TORTURE, TERRORISM
    • 1. The military will obey potentially illegal orders.
    • 2. The military shouldn't break the law, after all.
    • 3. The laws forbidding torture should be changed so no one has to break them.
    • Current position: Trump says he's against violating international laws or ordering others to do so, but wants to change the laws to legalize, at minimum, waterboarding.

    IMMIGRATION
    • 1. Build a wall, deport all undocumented immigrants.
    • 2. Deport all undocumented immigrants but bring the `good' ones back legally. Dreamers can maybe stay.
    • 3. Dreamers cannot stay.
    • 4. Trump might be flexible on actually deporting 11 million undocumented immigrants.
    • Current position: As far as the public knows, Trump still wants to deport millions, including the Dreamers.

    VISAS FOR HIGH-SKILLED WORKERS
    • 1. H-1B visas are bad for American workers.
    • 2. H-1B visas are good.
    • 3. H-1B visas are still bad, according to Trump's unchanged website.
    • 4. H-1B visas are necessary:  'I'm changing.'
    • 5. H-1B visas are definitely bad.
    • Current position: Back where he started -- against the H-1B visa program.

    BORDER CONTROL AND THE REFUGEE CRISIS
    • 1. The US has a `humanitarian' obligation to take in some Syrian refugees.
    • 2. The US cannot and should not accept Syrian refugees.
    • 3. Close the border.
    • 4. Don't close the border, just be careful.
    • Current position: Against closing the borders entirely. Against accepting Syrian refugees in the United States.

    PROPOSED MUSLIM BAN
    • 1. No Muslims should be allowed to enter the United States --as immigrants or visitors.
    • 2. Ban Muslims from entering but make an exception for his friends and Muslims serving in the US military.
    • Current position: Ban Muslims from entering the country --except service members, his friends and those already here.

    KU KLUX KLAN AND DAVID DUKE
    • 1.  'I disavow, OK?'
    • 2. `I don't know anything about David Duke. OK?'
    • 3.  'I disavow, OK?' -- part two.
    • Current position: Trump has disavowed Duke, despite a lengthy back-and-forth about whether he knows about him or not.

    THE IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL

    • 1. Keep the current deal with Iran, police it.
    • 2. Renegotiate the nuclear deal with Iran.
    • Current position: Renegotiate the deal.

    HEALTH CARE
    • 1. Repeal Obamacare. Look to Canada for inspiration.
    • 2. Repeal Obamacare. Cover everybody.
    • 3. Repeal Obamacare, but `I like the mandate'
    • 4. Repeal Obamacare. Replace it with something.
    • 5. Repeal Obamacare. Not everyone will be covered.
    • Current position: Repeal Obamacare. Replace it with something.

    NBC has the quote or statement for each switcheroo at this LINK.

    The good news, he is less popular than he was in January:

    How bad are Trump's image ratings? The HuffPost Pollster average of recent national polls puts Trump's favorability at only 31 percent, while 63 percent view him unfavorably.

    That's a notable decline from late January, on the eve of the first votes in the GOP nominating process, when Trump's average favorability rating was 37 percent, with 57 percent viewing him unfavorably.


    March 29th article.

    The Trump Supporter: (none / 0) (#186)
    by KeysDan on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 03:51:25 PM EST
    I like his flexibility; I like his steadfastness; He tells it like it is.  He is willing to reverse himself when he misspeaks; He says all the terrible things I think but am afraid to say because political correctness; He says what what needs to be said and sticks to it; I am a die hard Trump supporter because of his unyielding positions; If he does not get the nomination, I will bolt; Or, if he does not get the nomination, I will try to resuscitate Scott Walker; if Walker has a DNR sign around his neck; I will write-in Reagan.

    Parent
    I Guarantee... (none / 0) (#187)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Mar 31, 2016 at 04:11:20 PM EST
    ... that is a hunter from Wisconsin, Walker and the DNR(Dept of Natural Resources), that is so funny, some hunters hate them because they weld a lot of power in WI.

    Reagan... jesus, mary, joseph.

    This is the modern day republican party, he's going to bolt, presumable from the party, then try to get Walker on the ballot, and when that fails or Walker doesn't shut down the DNR, he will write ole Ronnie in.

    I cannot wait for the convention.

    Parent

    New thread perhaps? (none / 0) (#199)
    by smott on Fri Apr 01, 2016 at 08:31:56 AM EST
    ?