home

Tuesday Night Open Thread

I've been busy with work. But I am following a few things, mostly the transfer of Hector Luis "El Guero" Palma-Salazar (former compatriot of El Chapo) to Mexico upon completion of his U.S. sentence, but also, the murder of a 20 year old who worked as security at the prison Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman is being held, reports about the Orlando killer, and the ISIS-inspired attack on a French policeman and his companion in France. (The killer live-streamed his allegiance to ISIS with a child in the video (reports are he spared the child.)

Check out James Corden's latest carpool karaoke with the Red Hot Chile Peppers. It's really fun. Lily Tomlin and Jane Fonda were on his Late Late Show again last night. Lily said she's not keen on imitating heterosexuals (she's now married to her partner of 45 years.) Jane talked about whether she and Robert Redford ever got it on. Her story seemed very out of school -- a total kiss and tell.

I keep trying to write a post about Palma-Salazar since there is a lot of sloppy and erroneous reporting out there, but it's such a long story with so many different aspects (from his years at Supermax to the murder of his wife, whose head was sent to him in a box after she was killed by the Venezuelan trafficker who had run off with her, got her to withdraw millions of dollars from his accounts and then killed her in San Francisco, before taking El Guero's two small kids to Venezuela where he threw them off a bridge and killed them, filming the incident, to the 1995 plane crash in Mexico that resulted in his arrest) I never quite finish.

While I try again, here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Orlando: Another Lone or Looney American Wolf | Hillary Wins D.C. Primary >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    I know many of us are sick of OJ (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 14, 2016 at 11:03:41 PM EST
    But dang the ESPN documentary airing now is fantastic. It is just as much a history of sports culture, race relations and police relations in LA, celebrity culture...

    I love history and this is full of old footage of San Francisco and LA, and interviews I've never seen anywhere else.

    Highly recommend.

    ESPN documentaries have been awesome. (none / 0) (#5)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 12:03:29 AM EST
    The network recently re-ran one from 2014, "Hillsborough," about the tragic Sheffield stadium disaster in April 1989, in which 96 fans who were attending an FA Cup soccer match were crushed to death in the stadium end zone due to the failure of local constabulary to exercise even a modicum of crowd control.

    When an obvious tragedy started unfolding before their very eyes, the Sheffield police leadership simply froze like a deer on the headlights. Instead, it was the head referee who called a halt to the match six minutes in, when he saw hundreds of people pressed up against the iron fence by the overflow crowd who were in obvious distress. Only at that point did the authorities begin to respond.

    Afterward, the police endeavored to cover up their own culpability in having recklessly allowed thousands and thousands of fans to pour into the end zone / goal sections without ever really taking note of what was going on in those sections right in front of their noses.

    The officers had literally been sitting in a booth right above the growing maelstrom, monitoring the closed circuit security cameras on the outside of the stadium rather than bothering to look out the damned window to the sections below, until it was too late. The documentary recounted the tragedy in brutal detail, and then showed how it took the better part of 25 years before surviving family members could finally pry the truth out of the Sheffield police.

    While ESPN documentaries have nominally have the world of sports as their general theme, the stories themselves are often about tangential matters which become far more important than the underlying events themselves.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    "Believeland" (none / 0) (#6)
    by The Addams Family on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 01:22:12 AM EST
    another great ESPN documentary

    Parent
    Also 'Catching Hell' (none / 0) (#9)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 06:41:46 AM EST
    about a couple of baseball's most famous scapegoats - Steve Bartman and Bill Buckner.  You'll laugh, you'll cry. Mostly cry.

    Parent
    What they did to Bartman was terrible (none / 0) (#65)
    by McBain on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 11:10:25 PM EST
    Buckner got a raw deal too but at least he got to be a pro baseball player.

    Parent
    Yes, it was really bad - worse than I realized (none / 0) (#100)
    by ruffian on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 04:23:07 PM EST
    But on the other side of the coin they spend a lot of time talking to the very nice Wrigley security lady that got him out of the park incognito and even brought him to her apartment until the streets emptied because he did not feel safe. She is just the typical nice midwestern lady that I miss. That is who I prefer to think about representing my Cubs.

    Parent
    That's a nice part of a bad story (none / 0) (#104)
    by McBain on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 06:36:30 PM EST
    I didn't see the entire "Catching Hell" documentary but it's my understanding, Bartman hasn't returned to Wrigley and declines interviews.  

    Parent
    There's also Don Denkinger, ... (none / 0) (#102)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 05:23:38 PM EST
    ... the first-base umpire who famously blew the call on leadoff batter Jorge Orta in the bottom of the 9th inning of Game 6 during the 1985 World Series between the Kansas City Royals and St. Louis Cardinals, with the Cards nursing a tenuous 1-0 lead.

    Cardinal manager Whitey Herzog stormed onto the field in an apoplectic rage, and unfortunately his profanity-laced tirade at Denkinger likely rattled his own pitcher Todd Worrell in the process. The Royals caught an undue but lucky break and quickly took advantage of it, as the Cards subsequently lost both their composure and the game, 2-1. The next evening in Game 7, the listless Cards unraveled in an 11-0 blowout loss, completing one of the more spectacular World Series meltdowns in MLB history.

    As for Denkinger himself, he became the subject of death threats but dismissed it all as part of the game. However, to his credit, he later admitted that upon his own review of the Game 6 video, he did indeed blow that 9th inning call. He's since expressed regret for having potentially altered the outcome of the 1985 World Series with his mistake, which allowed the Royals' tying run to get on base.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    I enjoyed the first episode (none / 0) (#7)
    by McBain on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 01:24:08 AM EST
    I didn't know much about his early NFL days.  I assumed he had a great rookie year.  

    Parent
    I'm Not Watching (none / 0) (#10)
    by RickyJim on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 07:46:32 AM EST
    Even though I followed the trial closely when it was going on and read most of the major books about it afterwards, the descriptions given of the ESPN series made me decide it wasn't worth the bother.

    What I would want in an OJ Redux program would address the fact that it was a textbook example of what is wrong with American style justice, as compared with other first world countries.  It is really interesting that despite these obvious deficiencies, one never hears a peep about making meaningful changes.  Americans have been brainwashed to believe they live in the best of all possible legal worlds.

    Parent

    It is not focused on the trial (none / 0) (#13)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 08:20:20 AM EST
    It is basically his "life and times". I've watched the first 4 hours, and the murder has not even happened yet.

    If you think you know all about the history of college football, the early years of the NFL, race relations in LA, athletes in the civil rights movement,etc. or just plain are only interested in the trial, then by all means skip it.

    But you are missing out on something that is going to go down as a classic documentary, as much as any of the Ken Burns projects.

    Parent

    Fresh Air interviewed attorney Jeffrey Toobin (none / 0) (#17)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 08:41:09 AM EST
    and the series Director, Ezra Edelman.  Among other things, they discussed the "OJ effect," and contrasted that with the feelings about OJ engendered by viewing the crime scene photographs.

    Toobin:

    "It's the perfect perversity of the O.J. Simpson case that he was acquitted of the crime he was guilty of and convicted of a crime he's innocent of,"


    Parent
    One man's "perfect perversity" is ... (none / 0) (#103)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 05:27:10 PM EST
    ... another's well-deserved karma.

    Parent
    ME in Freddie Gray case caught in lie? (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by McBain on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 02:27:38 PM EST
    Link

    Assistant medical examiner Dr. Carol Allan ultimately ruled the death a homicide. She has stood by that ruling during Goodson's trial, testifying that she never felt Gray's death was an accident.

    "The word 'accident' never crossed my lips to anyone, other than to say, 'This is not an accident,'" she said on the stand last week.

    But the new evidence shows that, at a meeting last year, a police investigator noted that Allan suggested at one point that Gray's death was an accident.

    Somehow this doesn't surprise me.  

    i'm confused about the MURDER charge (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by linea on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 07:23:44 PM EST
    can somebody explain the prosecution's case to me? is it simply "the guy was injured in the van THUS WE ASSUME the van driver intentionally tried to cause serious injury" or something?

    Parent
    Pretty much (none / 0) (#58)
    by McBain on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 09:47:25 PM EST
    There was a rush to bring charges before a proper investigation.  The prosecution still doesn't know how Gray was injured. An honest judge would have thrown this case out long ago. All of the charges against all of the officers are absurd.  The decisions of Mosby and co. wreak of corruption.  

     

    Parent

    My god it's Trump right here at TL (5.00 / 4) (#63)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 10:34:12 PM EST
    update (none / 0) (#56)
    by linea on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 09:37:41 PM EST
    baltimoresun.com

    Prosecutors rested their case Wednesday in the murder trial of Officer Caesar Goodson Jr., after calling a police expert witness who testified about so-called rough rides but couldn't say whether the Baltimore officer gave such a ride to Freddie Gray.

    The state concluded its presentation after calling 21 witnesses over five days. The defense then filed a motion for acquittal, arguing that there is not enough evidence for the case to go forward. Circuit Judge Barry G. Williams, who Goodson chose to decide his fate rather than a jury, will rule on that motion Thursday morning before the defense begins its case.

    [i'm sorry i didnt provide a proper link. i dont know how.]

    Parent

    Depraved heart murder (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by jbindc on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 11:37:24 AM EST

    Legal experts say it's murder without premeditation and intent.

    "Basically, what we're saying is, 'You acted in such an unreasonable way that we're going to say you're just as guilty as someone who committed outright murder.' That's what second-degree depraved-heart murder is," said Baltimore attorney Adam Ruther, who is not involved in the Goodson case.

    Ruther said depraved-heart murder can be considered when there's no evidence that a defendant had intent.

    "A normal murder requires the intent to kill, or the intent to do serious bodily harm," Ruther said. "So even though he didn't intend to actually kill anyone or actually harm anyone, but exhibited extreme disregard for human life in the way he acted, then that person can be found guilty of murder under the same theory as the intent to kill."

    Link

    And the defense ALWAYS (or almost always - criminal defense attorneys step in and correct me, please) makes a motion at the end of the prosecution's case for an acquittal by arguing the prosecution hasn't made the case. It's called a "directed verdict" and is pretty much pro forma, but rarely granted.

    Parent

    Judge Williams denied the motion to acquit (none / 0) (#88)
    by McBain on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 12:13:03 PM EST
    Link

    I bet the defense will include testimony from pathologist Dr. Vincent Di Maio in their case to explain how Gray's injuries were the result of an accident.

    Parent

    I wish this was televised (none / 0) (#66)
    by McBain on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 01:16:23 AM EST
    Doesn't sound like this witness, Neil Franklin, helped the prosecution much, but it's hard to tell just be reading articles.
    Franklin's testimony underscored prosecutors' difficulty in proving their theory of a rough ride. A previous state witness, Detective Michael Boyd, also testified under cross-examination that he saw nothing in the videos to suggest that the van took an abrupt path. And Donta Allen, who was arrested later and placed into the back of the van with Gray, told investigators last year that he had a "smooth ride," though prosecutors question the legitimacy of his comments.

    I'm not sure which would surprise me more.... the judge dismissing the case or him finding Goodson guilty of depraved-heart murder.  

    Parent

    The eighth grader who broke the internet (5.00 / 2) (#74)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 08:25:29 AM EST
    really funny

    8th Grader Jack Aiello impersonates Trump, Cruz, Obama, Hillary & Sanders (FULL)


    That kid is hysterical! (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by caseyOR on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 09:34:32 AM EST
    One of the funniest graduation speeches EVAH.

    Parent
    Serious timing (none / 0) (#82)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 09:42:57 AM EST
    All I can say (none / 0) (#75)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 08:36:33 AM EST
    Is I hope this kid closed the show because asking another eighth grader to follow that would border on child abuse.

    Parent
    That was (none / 0) (#76)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 09:13:46 AM EST
    hysterical but the funniest to me were his impersonations of Trump and Bernie. Free cinnamon rolls for everyone! We need a cinnamon roll revolution!

    Parent
    And now the crazy (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by jbindc on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 11:51:39 AM EST
    has moved across the Pond  as a British Member of Parliament was shot and stabbed, and rthen died, by a man who allegedly yelled "Britain First!" (The name of a far-right group that stages anti-Mislim demonstrations).

    Waiting for the gun nuts to say, "See!  They have strict gun control and look what happened!"  I'll help you out  -she was shot with a gun that was either homemade or an antique.

    Sadly reminiscent (none / 0) (#97)
    by Nemi on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 03:59:11 PM EST
    of the killing of Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh who was stabbed to death in an equally senseless attack back in 2003. Like Jo Cox she too left two young children.

    Parent
    Truant Senator Looks to (5.00 / 1) (#184)
    by KeysDan on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 02:42:26 PM EST
    another term.  Little Marco had some help in his quandary to spend more time with his family or to run, again, for the US Senate and spend more time with his family.  David Jolly (R. Fl) has dropped out of the senate race and will run for re-election to his congressional seat.

    Apparently, no gigs were on the horizon and grifting became harder without a Senate seat. Not even a commercial spot for Poland Spring. I think he is give those elevator boots a shine and picking up his empty suit at the cleaners.

     That Orlando massacre has weighed on him to the extent of making sure there are plenty of guns for Floridians.  Rubio is ready to give six years of silence to honor the gays.  

    Marco Rubio is all meringue and no filling. If his non-performance over the last year, both in the U.S. Senate and out on the presidential campaign trail, doesn't wise up your fellow state voters to that fact, I'm afraid that nothing likely ever will.

    Parent
    Little Marco (none / 0) (#198)
    by KeysDan on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 04:41:25 PM EST
    should not be re-elected to the senate--a job he said he hates.   But, then, think Rick Scott.

    Parent
    Hillary won DC (none / 0) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jun 14, 2016 at 10:06:19 PM EST
    by about 50 points.  The Clinton/Sanders meeting reportedly went twice as long as expected.  Good or bad news?

    There is an hour of election and meeting news on MSNBC starting now

    just started a new thread on this, please put (none / 0) (#2)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jun 14, 2016 at 10:26:24 PM EST
    comments there (not that you would have known that when you wrote this, it's not a criticism.)

    Parent
    Blackfish is dead and (none / 0) (#4)
    by ragebot on Tue Jun 14, 2016 at 11:47:08 PM EST
    Jamie seems to be doing well but Cersei looks to be in trouble with no more trial by combat.  Kevan Lannister seems to be moving up in the world as Hand of the King who seems to have an in with the Seven.  Daenerys Targaryen has returned home and Kinvara seems to be preaching Daenerys is "The One Who Was Promised".  But as Varys has pointed out Melisandre had proclaimed Stannis Baratheon to be the one who was promised, and we all know how that ended up.

    Looks like the two religions and their followers are going to wind up butting heads.

    The story has taken some surprising turns (none / 0) (#11)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 07:48:04 AM EST
    Cersi seems to be in trouble but I think Jaime may have numbered days too.  And I worry for Tommen.  Well, not that much.  I think the queen is using the Faith Militant and no Lannister is safe.  Not even Kevan.  And when see I'd die with the Lannisters it will be the Faith Militants turn.  Remember Grandma I'd on the sidelines with the second largest army in Westerous.  I like this development.  Kings Landing can only be better off with less religion and less Lannisters.   I really loved the look on the wild religion boys faces when that thing ripped off one of their heads and said "next".

    I can see the cagey queen joining with the Dragon Queen and Jon Snow in the war to come.  As to which one of those three is "the prince who was promised" stay tuned.

    Parent

    Damn spell correct. (none / 0) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 07:49:24 AM EST
    Still mostly readable.

    Parent
    The Queen (none / 0) (#14)
    by ragebot on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 08:23:35 AM EST
    still has a brother who is captive of the Seven and it will be a problem to free him while getting the Faith Militants to do her bidding.  Margaery was able to get her grandmother out and I am betting she will be heading out once Loras is free or dead; or perhaps she will leave sooner if she is found to not be a true believer.

    While I understand wanting the Seven and Lanisters out of Kings Landing I am not sure how to get rid of them.  Margaery seems to be the second most powerful faction there; but only because she seems to be hiding her true allegiance.

    What ever plotting is going on with the Lanisters and the rest of the houses don't forget the words of House Stark, "winter is coming".  Unless all the houses pull together my money is on the white walkers.

    Parent

    I'll take that bet on the queen (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 08:29:41 AM EST
    Varys still has a concealed Targaryen (none / 0) (#68)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 06:45:38 AM EST
    Or Targaryen bastard. Is that where he went? To fetch that character? Or will that character be left out?

    Tyrion Lannister is in my Facebook feed. He has hinted twice that the season will end with Starks and Boltons doing their best to kill each other.

    Parent

    That's sort of known (none / 0) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 07:16:45 AM EST
    Next weeks episode is called the battle of the bastards and they have been talking about the battle scenes all season.

    This Sunday is the battle for Winterfel

    Parent

    Are you watching Joe this am? (none / 0) (#71)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 07:35:24 AM EST
    Great show :)

    Parent
    DVRing it has many advantages (none / 0) (#73)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 07:44:24 AM EST
    I can watch it when I wake up.  It's my favorite thing to skip through on the StairMaster.  And I can skip Scarboroughs sillyillouqes.  Just staring now.

    They have been doing this for weeks.  They (he) has been right about Trump for a year when everyone else was totally wrong.

    Parent

    I thought he might be (none / 0) (#125)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 07:46:39 AM EST
    Since he said "friends were needed in Westeros, and ships". He might be thinking of asking the Queen of Thornes.  They had a conversation or two in past episodes.

    Parent
    Did you seel all the ships (none / 0) (#144)
    by ragebot on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 10:48:21 AM EST
    at the end of the show when Grey Worm seemed to hear a noise when drinking with the Imp and ran from the room to an overlook.  The Imp looked at all the ships as Grey Worm said the Masters have come for their slaves.  Then more noise at the door and the Unsullied seem to be getting prepared to fend off an attack when who should walk in the door but the Mother of Dragons who has a history of burning the Masters to death with her dragons and taking what the Masters had owned.  Not sure but it would not shock me if Daenerys winds up with those ships.

    Parent
    No (none / 0) (#151)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 11:59:13 AM EST
    I did not mean those ships.  As I said, they probably already burned them before she walked in.  In any case I meant ships supplied, possibly, by the Queen of Thornes.  They are very rich and I can see her partnering with Varys.   Which was an idyl guess.

    As far as cable.  Could be.  My hate is currently past tense.  I love my current cable company.   The have been amazing.  Speaking as a person with a long history of hating media customer service.  

    Parent

    That said (none / 0) (#152)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 12:02:01 PM EST
    It was a lot of ships.  And I guess a monsterous circling dragon might well be enough to convince to to give up the ship.

    Parent
    The show doesn't do a very good job (none / 0) (#175)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 02:03:30 PM EST
    Of making clear that the best ships of the Iron Islands....which are now headed to Meereen, are three times larger than the ships in any other fleet. The series has in a way done a poor job of demonstrating their sea superiority.

    Parent
    The Drowned God (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 02:27:02 PM EST
    Does not really inspire confidence

    Parent
    I googled, it looks like the Iron Throne fleet (none / 0) (#185)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 02:43:55 PM EST
    Does have some ships that are larger than the Iron Island longships. And Queen of Thorns has 200 warships at her disposal. The Iron Islanders have great ships, but not enough men to fight well.

    Parent
    From one of the GOT sites (none / 0) (#186)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 02:52:07 PM EST
    Which plan did Varys discuss with Tyrion?
    In Episode 8 `No One,' before the slaver's siege, we saw Varys leaving for a dangerous secret mission. The most likely scenario is that Varys is traveling to Dorne to forge an alliance between Daenerys, Ellaria Sand and the Tyrells.The combined strength of the Dornish and Tyrell armies would provide Daenerys a significant help in Westeros, allowing her to land her Dothraki soldiers in King's Landing. If Varys succeeds, Daenerys can sit on the Iron Throne, after killing all the evil Lannisters.



    Parent
    Also interesting (none / 0) (#187)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 02:59:56 PM EST

    In the previous episode Cersei asked Qyburn if he looked into a rumor she heard. He responded, saying it's true and there's more, much more.

    This rumor has to be the massive stockpile of wildfire set to explode under King's Landing. Remember that the Mad King rigged the city with the explosive chemical after it was certain he lost the war to Robert causing Jaime to kill him in order to stop the detonation.

    Now the Mad-ish Queen has a similar idea. Cersei's not going to let the fate of her trial be in the hands of the High Sparrow who clearly wants nothing more than to see her downfall. She would rather burn it all to the ground than get humiliated again.

    Cersei's relative and ex-lover Lancel (now an acolyte of the High Sparrow) may have a role in the plot. In season 2 he was the one who told Tyrion that Cersei was planning to use wildfire against Stannis' army. He already knows of Cersei's access to the substance so he may be the only one to stop the plot.



    Parent
    I keep going back and forth (5.00 / 1) (#190)
    by CST on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 03:11:32 PM EST
    on whether I want Cersei to die.  For a long time the answer was "Of course she needs to die! She's the worst!"  Lately it's been more like "the enemy of my enemy is maybe a person who should live".

    Plus, who doesn't want to root for true love and twincest.

    Parent

    when you start hoping she does not die (5.00 / 1) (#191)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 03:20:31 PM EST
    thats when she is doomed

    Parent
    Just because a (none / 0) (#202)
    by ragebot on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 05:21:58 PM EST
    GOT character dies, or is near death and expected to die does not mean they are gone.  In an earlier thread I mentioned followers of the Lord of Light had brought others back to life; Jon Snow being the most recent example.  Also wonder about what I will call reanimated dead characters like what the White Walkers do to create an army.

    And I am still up in the air about Jorah and the mess with Greyscale.  While it is suppose to be fatal almost always some of those with it seem to be quite old.

    But, again as I posted earlier, I am betting on Bran.  Bringing back the dead is one thing, but at least to me time travel is more powerful.  You can always go back in time and fix any death.

    Parent

    I assumed they had used most of the (none / 0) (#201)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 05:05:21 PM EST
    Stored wildfire by pouring it into the sea to blow Stannis to smithereens.

    I don't know what she's going to do, but I know she isn't going to go quietly. And Tommen, what is a mum to do about that?

    Parent

    DNC Trump data hacked (none / 0) (#8)
    by ding7777 on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 05:49:09 AM EST
    Life Animated (none / 0) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 08:28:48 AM EST
    I  am pretty jaded and cynical.  As you know.  But this really is pretty cool.  

    TRAILER

    A doc about an autistic kid who learned to join the world with the help of Disney movie characters.

    Half of me shudders at the inflation this is going to give the egos of some of the people at Disney who already take themselves far to seriously but the look on this guy face at graduation is almost worth it.

    ---

    As an after thought.  I have absolutely no idea what this is about but I love the trailer.

    Cosmos.


    I was going to tell you about an audiobook (none / 0) (#22)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 10:17:19 AM EST
    I am listening to:  James Stewart's 'Disney Wars', his telling of the corporation in the Eisner era, starting iin the early 80s.

    It is fascinating on many levels, but hard to listen to. It details the corporate goings-on, egos, backstabbing, and outrageous amounts of money payed to the '1%'.

    Interesting to see the decisions that went into some creative projects I truly love, like Beauty and the Beast.

    But you are not kidding about the egos. What strikes me is that these bullies are not afraid to stomp on their underlings, but will do anything to avoid having to confront eachother about uncomfortable topics.

    I can't say I recommend it to you since it would probably trigger some PTSD.

    Parent

    Funny (none / 0) (#25)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 11:22:18 AM EST
    I've written here before about our FaceOff with management when we forced them to take CG people into the union.  And about our confrontation with the team of Disney lawyers led by this guy who really thought he was the bees knees.  I will never forget the suit he wore but I did not get it until recently when I saw the OJ series.  Since I paid no attention and saw almost none of it at the time the suit he wore for effect was totally wasted on me, the person elected by the group to speak for the workers (I requested this because I was so pi$$ed I wanted to be fired and they knew me and as you can imagine they knew if you need a mouth.....) anyway I finally got it 20some years later when I saw the OJ series.

    He was wearing a turquoise Johnny Cochran suit.  I laughed heartily.

    Parent

    I'll pay aspecial attention to that part when (none / 0) (#26)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 11:37:19 AM EST
    I come to it!

    So far in the book the guy that seems to be the ultimate head of legal is the biggest back stabber.

    Parent

    I honestly don't know (none / 0) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 11:53:54 AM EST
    What his title was or even his name.  I think I might have, once.  But he was the head of the legal team, of about 6-7, who were sent to deal with the revolting CG artists.  This would have been about 96-97 I guess.   The complaint was brought against Disney by the union very soon after I started in 95.  I was one of two, I don't know what you call it, examples.   Me and my (still) friend Greg were hired at almost the same time.  We sat next to each other at identical work stations.  We did the same things.  But because he was hired as an animator and I was hired as a technical director he was a member of the union with all the attendant benefits including the pension i am about to start enjoying and I was not.  We fixed that.  There was four people elected to be the council.  They selected me to be the hatchet man.  Still FB friends with all of them.

    I have said many times that facing down that legal team was the most fun I ever had with clothes on.

    Parent

    I do remember your posts about that (none / 0) (#28)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 12:27:58 PM EST
    Nothing more fun than face offs where you have nothing to lose!

    If it weren't an audio book I would page ahead to those years and see if he writes about it. Drawback of the medium.

    Parent

    Buckle up (none / 0) (#19)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 09:17:42 AM EST
    The Donald has just announced he's meeting with the NRA about not allowing people on the no fly list and on terrorist watch lists to buy a gun.

    I have no idea what he's unleashed. Can he ride it for 8 seconds?

    If he persuades the NRA to advocate (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 09:38:19 AM EST
    for barring people on that list (which the Orlando murderer no longer was) from legally purchasing firearms, that will be an amazing "get."

    Parent
    His base will lose their freakin minds (none / 0) (#21)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 09:46:16 AM EST
    Because Obama would have put them all on a terrorist watch list if it meant taking away their guns, now Hillary will. Donald has miscalculated drastically.

    I know these guns nuts. There can be no restrictions because those restrictions are like a virus that is going to spread.

    Parent

    Yes, it would be (none / 0) (#23)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 10:51:04 AM EST
    a sign of his great negotiating skills.  The other part of the deal: Trump/LaPierre 2016.

    Parent
    You really just want me to throw a brick (none / 0) (#24)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 11:14:10 AM EST
    through my TV, don't you? that would be the creepiest ticket in history.

    Parent
    Trump/Duke? (none / 0) (#29)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 12:28:17 PM EST
    last night (none / 0) (#31)
    by The Addams Family on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 12:53:20 PM EST
    i dreamt that The Donald's running mate was Monica Lewinsky

    nothing would surprise me this year

    Parent

    That's quite a dream, good REM sleep :) (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 01:36:22 PM EST
    Or Trump/Scott (and Florida's 29 EV) (none / 0) (#33)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 01:13:57 PM EST
    The risk (none / 0) (#32)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 01:11:20 PM EST
    Clearly, Donald T. needs to deflect from all the bad incoming in the past days & weeks.  What better way to get attention than to go after & achieve a concession--any concession--from NRA during their most vulnerable time in this cycle. Plus: he will get positive, extensive good-guy coverage in the media if he can pull it off. He can then claim that this style would reap all kind of negotiation successes in the world at large ... blah, blah, blah ... and that his wiliness to take a "risk" will help us all ... blah, blah, blah.

    The only thing is: I wonder what the risk really is and what "deal" could he make behind closed doors? What apparent "give" from NRA could he get that is so falsely portrayed that it isn't worth even the claimed words that he will say?  Call me cynical on this one.

    Parent

    I think this blows up in his face (none / 0) (#35)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 01:40:45 PM EST
    He loses 10 pts. in the next 3 days for even bringing up any sort of gun regulation when the Libertarians begin to get air time and address their core beliefs.

    Anyone remotely sane about guns is voting Hillary. A big slice of the Duck's base is only voting for him because they firmly believe 2nd amendment means 0 regulation.

    Parent

    MT: I really hope that (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 02:07:15 PM EST
    your take is accurate on this one.

    In the meantime, the Democrats--led by Sen. Chris Murphy (Conn)--are now beginning a timely publicized filibuster about a very specific, limited aspect of new gun regulation that the Democrats are trying to move forward.  The legislation relates to deterring gun purchase(s) by individuals identified on terror watch-list and expanding registration.  

    Especially considering the timing, the urgency of now--before returning to the everyone in polarized place scenario--this filibuster and related could become compelling.  (If anything, it provides a demonstration of the usefulness of the filibuster.)

    Parent

    Makes me wonder how bad Trump's internal (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 02:36:58 PM EST
    Polling must have been, that he hopes to peel off Clinton votes in the wake Orlando through proposed gun legislation. Either that's what he hoped to do or he's not the best, the greatest tactician who ever lived that everyone loves.

    Parent
    Finally the filibuster works for me (none / 0) (#38)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 02:32:50 PM EST
    I am proud of the Democrats discovering some procedural plays lately.

    Parent
    Topic jump (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 03:24:51 PM EST
    Digital cable.
    Seriously.  Think about it.  When your deal is up with yout satt company.   Maybe this is a fluke but my experience so far has been just great.   No one on earth hated cable companies more than me.  I was literally one of the first DirecTV customers.  My first DirecTV box cost 1200 bucks.  It was years before they started giving them away with an installation.

    Mine is a small local cable company.  The customer service, I think because cable has had such an awful reputation, has been amazing.   It took a little adjustment.   Fewer HD channels.  That bugged me at first.  Every regular channel has an HD version but fewer permium channels..  Only a couple in each package.  Like 2 HBO, 2 MAX etc.  they have all the extra channels but they are SD.  this really bugged me at first until I realized all the HD channels they have are real 1080 HD.  Not true with satt.  All but a few PPV channels on DISH are 720.  Haven't had DitecTV for a couple of years s can't say for sure but I'm pretty sure that's the case with them too.

    Anyway, cable lives.  And unlimited downloads is amazing to have again.  I've been living on NETFLIX and OnDemand.

    Parent

    Sorry Capt (none / 0) (#145)
    by ragebot on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 10:58:34 AM EST
    but I am claiming I hate cable companies more than you.  Gotta call them like I see them.

    I was one of the first volunteers at Tallahassee FreeNet which for years was the largest FreeNet in the world.  I had many fights with both the phone company and the local cable companies about how TFN was stealing money from them.  TFN got no funds from any source except donations.  It was run by Prof Duke of FSU computer science department and volunteers like me who were mostly grad students at FSU.

    I would go on to say every TFN volunteer hates cable companies more than you do.

    Parent

    If the gun nut vote... (none / 0) (#49)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 07:27:54 PM EST
    aka the south and wild west are reminded their boy is a real estate shyster from New Yawk for christs sake, that can't be good for their boy.

    Parent
    kdog dear, you think everyone else (none / 0) (#60)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 09:49:37 PM EST
    Has an IQ similar to yours. And I love you because you instead of looking down on others lift them up. Most of the Conservative base though, they cannot see or comprehend the grift. Even though it's deep and obvious. And they believe WWF wrestling is also real and that the climate and beauty of Talladega make it a desirable vacation spot :)

    Parent
    I think Trump is (none / 0) (#41)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 03:54:41 PM EST
    Possibly shrewdly, trying to get on the train before it leaves the station.

    Rumors started flying around the interwebs yesterday that McConnell and Cornyn and others were saying they were open to closing the terrorist watch list hole.  At least.

    I thnk they understand that democrats are going to beat them with this every day until Election Day and it's a totally indefensible position.

    Parent

    Yes (none / 0) (#44)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 05:00:29 PM EST
    even the NRA is starting to cave on this issue. Like I said the other day this is the GOP/conservatives worst nightmare, a Muslim that got a gun due to GOP/conservatives doing the bidding of the NRA.

    I remember when Hillary first came out against the NRA last fall and all the nervous nellies started wagging their tongues about it. Hmm, well, who looks like the smart one now? She's the only one that has seemed to have the guts to go up against the NRA.

    Parent

    hot air (none / 0) (#45)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 05:34:18 PM EST
    yesterday

    McConnell: I might be open to "serious suggestions" on gun control after I meet with the FBI


    Parent
    The NRA is not caving. (none / 0) (#46)
    by caseyOR on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 07:05:54 PM EST
    They have attached a number of poison  pill conditions to their acceptance any potential legislation, conditions that, one can be sure, will make the legislation meaningless.

    The NRA will never cave.

    Parent

    they may keep it from passing the house (none / 0) (#47)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 07:09:07 PM EST
    i believe something will happen in the senate.  how effective or meaningful it will be is another matter.  although i think it could be said that anything at all happening on guns is meaningful.

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#53)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 08:39:15 PM EST
    then they can own it all the way to November and every candidate that took money from them can explain to every voter how they thought giving mass murders access to weapons is a good thing.

    Parent
    i thought... (none / 0) (#54)
    by linea on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 09:09:43 PM EST
    i didnt have the impression the NRA was a huge funding source for republican politicians. it's not a group of billionares or multinational corporations. i thought it was more of a grass-roots special-interest group that endorses candidates. three million individual people who get a bumper stick and a monthy magazine?

    Parent
    30, 40 (none / 0) (#59)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 09:48:33 PM EST
    years ago yes, that actually is the way the NRA was. Now they've become a completely unhinged apocalyptic organization much like the rest of the GOP. And yes, they give a lot of money to Republican candidates.

    Parent
    thank you!! (none / 0) (#62)
    by linea on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 10:01:39 PM EST
    Not true (none / 0) (#79)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 09:29:56 AM EST
    a Muslim that got a gun due to GOP/conservatives doing the bidding of the NRA.

    He got a gun because the FBI didn't do their job and likely because FICA was squashed...

    And likely because his wife, and others, didn't call attention to what he was doing.


    Parent

    The FBI did their job correctly (5.00 / 2) (#90)
    by Peter G on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 12:24:24 PM EST
    This is the real world, not "Minority Report." The FBI is not -- and cannot be -- expected to anticipate which few adherents to extremist ideologies (assuming that turns out to be true) will later act out with violence. And even if there were such a category ("future terrorist murderers"), there is no subsection in section 922 of the Gun Control Act of 1968 (thanks to the NRA and their lackeys) that would bar such a person from acquiring or possessing a firearm, including a semiautomatic assault weapon.

    Parent
    I should add that I am not one (5.00 / 2) (#95)
    by Peter G on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 02:33:00 PM EST
    to easily assume that the FBI was in the right about something controversial or affecting an individual's constitutional rights.

    Parent
    Peter, that they may not have had (none / 0) (#105)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 06:52:15 PM EST
    the resources they needed may or may not be true.

    But the fact is they failed.

    And if it is a resource issue, are we all, Left Right and in between, ready to revisit revise and expand the Patriot Act?

    Parent

    As a follow up (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 07:54:07 PM EST
    Gun shop owner confirms that he reported the killer the FBI 5 weeks ago.

    So the issue remains. Now, assume we change the laws and he couldn't purchase. Would the FBI act when reported?

    Parent

    They certainly failed no more (none / 0) (#107)
    by jondee on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 07:17:53 PM EST
    than did the treasonously clueless fools that for some unfathomable reason want to make military-style assault weapons readily available to even the most unstable and predisposed to violence.

    Parent
    Uh, I know it is useless to try and educate (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 08:08:09 PM EST
    you but assault weapons have been illegal to own without special licenses since '34. And the AR-15 is not an assault weapon.

    And neither is the Sig Sauer MCX the radical islamist used in Orlando.  

    So what is your point? That semi-automatic weapons should be banned? No. You and GA want all weapons seized.

    You want the Watch List expanded?? Well, the killer was reported to the FBI 5 weeks ago and nothing happened.

    Parent

    As a follow up (none / 0) (#110)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 07:54:50 PM EST
    Gun shop owner confirms that he reported the killer to the FBI 5 weeks ago.

    So the issue remains. Now, assume we change the laws and he couldn't purchase. Would the FBI act when reported?

    Parent

    I followed your link, and found (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by Peter G on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 08:02:08 PM EST
    (a) that your source is Breitbart; and (b) that's not what the story says. No further comment.

    Parent
    The gun shop owner says (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by jondee on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 08:21:00 PM EST
    "he alerted the authorities, though he didn't say which authorities"

    Because..sometimes people forget whether they talked to the FBI or not?

    Well, if Breitbart says that's what happened, that must be exactly what happened.

    Parent

    Mateen must've been running around (none / 0) (#119)
    by jondee on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 09:19:13 PM EST
    inside the store when he was asking all those questions about weapons and body armor; the gun shop owner says all the surveillance footage is too "grainy" to be able to ID Mateen.

    Parent
    Just another guy trying to get attention (none / 0) (#120)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 09:35:34 PM EST
    There is an update on the post that says (none / 0) (#116)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 08:14:39 PM EST
    he did.

    Guess we'll wait for MSNBC...

    :-)

    'Nuff said. Have a nice night.


    Parent

    The FBI did not fail, and as far as I can see (none / 0) (#111)
    by Peter G on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 07:56:05 PM EST
    did not lack resources. They interviewed the guy,  investigated him, and determined that he was not engaged in criminal activity. Which for all we know was entirely true at the time. I don't know of anything else they can or should have done. And I certainly don't agree that the solution to the problem -- which will be forever with us -- that we cannot prevent all terrible crimes is to deprive Americans of their civil liberties. Kind of confused that you are so adamant that so-called Second Amendment rights are not subject to reasonable regulation, yet so willing to suggest that First and Fourth Amendment rights should be abridged whenever a terrible crime is committed.

    Parent
    Serioulsy (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 12:30:11 PM EST
    Jim the GOP voted for people on a terror watch list to be allowed to get a gun. So even if the FBI had put him on a watch list he would have been able to get an arsenal. It's what happens when you do the bidding of the NRA.

    Secondly, what Republican is publicly calling for Comey's head over this? None that I know of. So apparently even Republicans don't believe that FBI didn't do their job or either they are too afraid to say something.

    Own it Jim. This is what you have been supporting. You scream about Muslims all the time yet you think they should be allowed to legally buy an arsenal. Common sense has left the room with you and most other conservatives.

    Parent

    Well.. (none / 0) (#96)
    by jondee on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 03:39:22 PM EST
    the terrorists finally got around to targeting gays, which is probably what the NRA and the rest of the right wing were holding out for.

    Parent
    Finally got around to it (none / 0) (#98)
    by Peter G on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 04:02:36 PM EST
    in the USA. Gay folks have suffered terribly at the hands of religious zealots in fundamentalist-run countries - both Muslim and Christian - for some time now.

    Parent
    yes yes in the U.S.A.. (none / 0) (#101)
    by jondee on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 04:24:58 PM EST
    Right after Orlando (none / 0) (#99)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 04:05:56 PM EST
    I made what I thought at the time was a bad joke about the "Pat Robertsons of the world finding it a dilemma"

    The next day he said this-

    "The left is having a dilemma of major proportions and I think for those of us who disagree with some of their policies, the best thing to do is to sit on the sidelines and let them kill themselves," he said.

    So not such a dilemma I guess

    LINK

    Parent

    No, that's not correct (none / 0) (#106)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 07:15:30 PM EST
    The question is, shall we take the rights of Americans away from them?

    You certainly didn't want to take suspected terrorists rights away when Bush just wanted to listen in on foreign calls.

    Parent

    Not All Rights are Created Equal (none / 0) (#108)
    by RickyJim on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 07:36:07 PM EST
    The right of an ordinary citizen to possess an assault rifle is way down on the list.

    Parent
    Gee thanks (none / 0) (#112)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 07:57:12 PM EST
    RJ. And just in case you missed it they were made illegal to own in 1934.

    The AR-15 is not an assault weapon. It just looks bad.

    Parent

    Absolutely what is meant today by (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by Peter G on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 10:12:57 PM EST
    "assault weapon." Not fully automatic (i.e., a machine gun), as prohibited in 1934, but still an assault weapon, because it is semi-auto, uses a large capacity magazine, and shoots high velocity ammo which by design causes maximum damage to human bodies.

    Parent
    Well, there I was in 1952 (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 08:45:58 AM EST
    with a semi-automatic assault weapon...AKA 22 rifle with the capability to fire 20 times without reloading rim fire LR hollow points.

    It is a wonder the government didn't lock me up.

    The AR-15 is essentially a 22 caliber with a larger necked down casing center fire bullet. It has greater range and hitting power but the LR hollow points do more damage because they expand and fragment when used.

    Go out and use one to shoot a fair size melon. The entry wound will be like a No. 2 pencil. The exit wound as big as your fist..or bigger.

    The point being is that it is all optics. The AR-15 looks bad but isn't any worse than what I had when I was 14 or other more conventional looking rifles available today. If your intent is to get close in and massacre as many people as you can when you have them unarmed and trapped in an enclosed space a conventional looking looking one will do the job.

    Now the anti-gun forces know that so what they want is to ban all semi-automatic weapons today and then move on to registration and eventually confiscation.

    Of course the problem is the criminals/terrorists won't follow the rules and all you will do is disarm the good folks.

    Parent

    I hear this all the time (none / 0) (#141)
    by mm on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 10:27:17 AM EST
    the problem is the criminals/terrorists won't follow the rules and all you will do is disarm the good folks.

    If that is the case, how come the use of machine guns in the commission of crimes has been virtually eliminated since the 1934 ban?

    Parent

    I don't think your comparison is valid. (none / 0) (#158)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 12:29:07 PM EST
    Automatic weapons (machine guns) were the weapons of choice of criminal gangs in the 20's and 30's which prompted the passage of the 1934 ban.

    The vast majority of these criminal gangs were running illegal liquor.

    Automatic weapons are still the weapons of choice of today's criminal gangs running illegal drugs, despite the ban.

    Parent

    So (none / 0) (#159)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 12:30:26 PM EST
    Sorry Jim (none / 0) (#143)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 10:40:16 AM EST
    if you think your 22 varmit pad shooter is anyway comparable to the ar-15 style infantry weapon, you are sadly mistaken.

    Parent
    In case you don't understand (none / 0) (#178)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 02:13:59 PM EST
    FlJoe, the AR15's standard is .223. It uses a center fire vs the old 22's rim fire and has a bigger hit.

    But when used as a crowd killing weapon the 22 LR hollow point is just as deadly... perhaps more so as the AR15 is a sold slug and will go through rather than expand and tear a huge hole.

    Have you any actual experience with rifles?

    Parent

    Enough (none / 0) (#197)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 04:39:40 PM EST
    to know that no one expects to take out medium sized mammals with .22's, the heavier and faster .223 rounds are specifically designed for doing that with ruthless efficiency.

    Parent
    I'm not sure that Jim's distinction will ... (none / 0) (#124)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 12:16:45 AM EST
    ... provide much comfort to the families and friends of those who've lost their lives at the hands of enraged crackpots wielding AR-15s and related semi-automatic firearms. And to paraphrase Charles Dickens' Mr. Bumble from Oliver Twist, if the law presumes there to be a logical, valid and moral reason for anyone not in law enforcement or the military to possess such high-powered weaponry, then the law is an a$$.

    Parent
    Since you like Dickens (none / 0) (#126)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 08:00:35 AM EST
    allow me to quote another character of an English author.

    'And only one for birthday presents, you know. There's glory for you!'
    'I don't know what you mean by "glory,"' Alice said.
    Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. 'Of course you don't--till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'
    'But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument,"' Alice objected.
    'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean--neither more nor less.'
    'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
    'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master--that's all.'

    Through The Looking Glass - Lewis Carrol

    Parent

    Actually Jim (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by jbindc on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 08:29:53 AM EST
    The AR-15 was classified an "assault weapon" under the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 (the one that unfortunately expired).

    Parent
    Yes, and it was a phony based on optics (none / 0) (#133)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 08:53:13 AM EST
    not capabilities.

    Of course let us agonize and talk about guns...not the radical islamist who killed 49 and wounded 53 folks who were just enjoying a night out....

    I mean sooner or later a radical Sig Sauer MCX or AR 15 would have got'em.

    You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before. Rahm Emanuel

    Now the mayor of Chicago...which had 75 shot over Father's Day weekend.

    I'd laugh if it wasn't so sad.

    Parent

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by jbindc on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 09:11:27 AM EST
    The creator of the AR-15 never intended it to be for civilian use, bevause it eas for the MILITARY and he didn't even own one.

    Parent
    No.. (none / 0) (#171)
    by jondee on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 01:57:05 PM EST
    you'd still laugh, because it gives you and the other knuckle walkers over at not-so-Breitbart another opportunity to obsess about "Obama's Chicago" while ignoring what goes on in New Orleans and Hattiesburg and Myrtle Beach.

    Parent
    Rahm is so right about that. (none / 0) (#194)
    by Peter G on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 03:39:17 PM EST
    About a crisis being an excuse to do legislatively what you wanted to do already but couldn't get done in non-hysterical times. Exactly how we got the terrible "Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act" of 1996 (Clinton I) on the anniversary of Oklahoma City, and the PATRIOT Act (Bush II) less than a month after 9/11.

    Parent
    Jim (5.00 / 2) (#148)
    by ragebot on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 11:39:40 AM EST
    it has been my experience that unless someone can off the top of their head explain the terms direct impingement, gas operated, and piston operated it is pointless to discuss small arms with them.

    The most widely accepted definition of an assault weapon is one with a switch to select the rate of fire.  Such weapons can only be legally bought with special permission from the feds.

    Not sure how much history anyone here has but I served in the US Army when the AR-15 first came into wide spread service.  It was designated as the M16 and replaced the M14.  For some time both the M14 and the M16 were in us by the US military.  When I said history earlier the point I was trying to make was that the M16 was not well accepted; in fact many (probably most, myself included) thought the M14 was superior to the M16 as a combat weapon.  For bonus points explain how the direct impingment operated M16 differs from the short piston operated M14 and why one might choose one over the other.

    I know this is a rather long rant.  But it in part might explain why the infamous assault weapon ban was allowed to expire.  The 1994 ban only applied to weapons made after 1994.  There were literally millions of weapons many weapons experts would rate superior to the M16 that were not included in the ban.

    Many critics of weapons bans point out writing such legislation requires a good knowledge of weapons; something few folks who are in favor of weapons bans have.  Not to mention technology is moving so fast that definitions quickly become outdated.

    Even now drug laws do not prohibit many "popular" drugs because their use has become wide spread as a result of previously popular drugs being outlawed.  I can still remember Owsley producing legal LSD.

    We often hear generals are always preparing to fight the last war; my take is many pols are passing legislation for problems of the past.

    Parent

    Your broad brush of those in favor (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 12:02:54 PM EST
    Of weapons bans generally having poor understanding of current weapon tech is not true.

    David Petraeus, Stanley McChrystal, NASA's Mark Kelly, and of all people Michael Hayden have formed a Veterans group fighting for gun control.

    Parent

    I think you just proved his point. (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 12:09:21 PM EST
    Really smartass? How? (none / 0) (#155)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 12:15:03 PM EST
    "weapons bans?"

    Compare that number with the number of people you just mentioned.

    Look up the definition of the word "generally."


    Parent

    National leaders starting a Veterans group (none / 0) (#164)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 12:56:49 PM EST
    They've just started. You might want to consider that fact and the reality it generates.

    Parent
    What claim? (none / 0) (#170)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 01:41:51 PM EST
    Here, try this ONE on for (none / 0) (#156)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 12:25:53 PM EST
    Size. Retired military, knows more about weapons most likely than all of us commenting here put together.

    I'm on THIS GUY's team though.

    Of all things, assuming that people arguing for bans don't really understand the weapons, what a crock.

    Parent

    "Weapons control" is about (none / 0) (#174)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 02:02:01 PM EST
    politics, not weapons.

    Many police want guns off the street because they think it will make their job safer.


    Parent

    I don't think military leaders (none / 0) (#177)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 02:11:11 PM EST
    See this as about politics anymore. I think they tried, but nope.....it's about weapons. And these people spent their lives being responsible for lives and deadly weapons every single day.

    Nope, I think we may have turned a corner I never thought we would. The common sense coalition can no longer look the other way, engage in conversations of parse, nope....I think we are done now.

    Parent

    It's a political issue (none / 0) (#179)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 02:17:18 PM EST
    has nothing to do with weapons or they would be naming the weapons.

    And supposedly they were responsible for winning wars...At least that's the way it use to be.

    Parent

    Pointless to converse here with you (none / 0) (#183)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 02:38:15 PM EST
    I will save my time and energy on the task. Not blathering at you

    Parent
    And many gun dealers, NRA stooges (none / 0) (#192)
    by jondee on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 03:28:58 PM EST
    and firearms executives and shareholders want guns on the street because it'll make Their jobs safer.

    Parent
    Well my experience was long ago (none / 0) (#172)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 01:57:35 PM EST
    and us aviation types, once we got through training was pretty well limited to rockets, bombs, depth charges, mines and air drop torpedoes so I don't claim to be any great expert. And yes the M16, which replaced the M14, is the basis for the AR15. The major difference being the AR is semi-automatic. Something the doves don't understand. A good assault weapon allows the attacker to burst through an opening and just spray the room with a long burst of bullets. Or so I have been told by some folks who were in that business.
    They also point that a grenade is preferred if possible.

    The M14 replaced the M1 and was essentially an improved M1 and fired .308 vs the M16's smaller .223/5.56MM. I've heard/read a lot of discussion over the merits/problems of both by some buds who used both. According to some the high velocity smaller caliber .223 M16 bullet would fragment/deflect if it hit anything fairly solid. It was also known to overheat if used on full automatic which led to the "tap 3" technique.

    I've only fired the M1. I have fired several AR15's owned by some buds and it is an easy weapon to handle with minimum recoil and noise. My  first weapon was a 22 caliber bolt action single I got at age 12. I got a semi-auto at age 14. Wish I still had it. I keep a short barrel 20 gauge pump...autos do jam no matter what they say..loaded with buck. Light, deadly and puts about a 14 in diameter pattern at 30 feet and won't kill somebody next door.

    I heartily agree that people who don't know the difference between a clip and a magazine should be smart enough to have all proposed legislation review by someone who does.

    Parent

    Yes, they look bad.. (none / 0) (#118)
    by jondee on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 08:43:45 PM EST
    also because they've been the weapon of choice of domestic terrorists who've murdered dozens of people.

    Talk about bad pr.

    Parent

    And here I thoight (none / 0) (#127)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 08:02:53 AM EST
    it was kerosene and fertilizer..

    And box cutters and airplanes...

    The things I do learn...

    Parent

    Box Cutters (none / 0) (#128)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 08:25:29 AM EST
    and fertilizer are old school weapons, almost all major attacks in the west over the last several years have been committed using assault weapons.

    PS, Box cutters on airlines and fertilizer sales have been severely restricted to reduce the threat from those vectors.

    Parent

    Box cutters and bombs (none / 0) (#135)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 08:59:51 AM EST
    were banned before 9/11. The security people just missed the box cutters.


    Parent
    Stupid argument (none / 0) (#137)
    by jbindc on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 09:15:12 AM EST
    Box cutters, knives, axes, fertilizer, automobiles,  hammers, etc. all have actual purposes other than to harm or kill people. Guns do not.  To try and compare them is ridiculous.

    (And please do not try and give us the bs about "target practice" - what are you practicing for?  To have better aim so you can harm or kill someone).

    Parent

    I don't think they were Jim (none / 0) (#150)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 11:53:26 AM EST
    If they were it wasn't enforced. What security people? We all used to travel with some pretty good weapons in our carry on. And I had a small can of mace on my keychain. After 9/11 I had to dismantle my keys at the TSA check, and my mace was confiscated because I didn't want to walk all the way to my car and secure it in my vehicle.

    Parent
    Uh, the security people (none / 0) (#165)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 01:03:26 PM EST
    at the airport checkpoint.

    I had a pocket knife taken from me mid 92. It was thoughtfully packaged by the security folks and given to the pilot who gave it back as I departed the airplane at my destination.

    Security started to be ramped up years before 9/11.

    Shortly after the Southern flight was hijacked to Cuba I was on my way from Memphis to Seattle with a change in Denver. The Memphis/Denver flight was late and it was obvious that we wouldn't make our Denver Seattle flight. So we sat in the bar and waited for the announcement for boarding. The dummy I was traveling with commented as we went through that we would just tell'em to fly direct Seattle.

    Joke, right? Security didn't think so. He was pulled aside, didn't make the flight and was threatened with arrest.

    Parent

    There was no security (none / 0) (#169)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 01:39:54 PM EST
    When I flew to Korea for the summer of 2001. I experienced light security entering Canada. But box cutters were allowed. I thought any pocket knife under 4 inches was allowed prior to 9/11?

    Parent
    A brief history (none / 0) (#193)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 03:37:59 PM EST
    Uhhhh, I guess you are (none / 0) (#200)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 04:59:33 PM EST
    Forgetting that smaller regional airports had no X-ray equipment and were waived from having to comply. And nothing about knives in there Jim.

    Parent
    Not a military assault weapon.. (none / 0) (#188)
    by jondee on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 03:06:48 PM EST
    ..from the guy who said waterboarding wasn't torture and that Mission Accomplished only celebrated Bush's safe landing on an aircraft carrier..

    And now that a 1950s .22 has the same "capability" as an AR 15..

    You do know that the word capability has more shades of meaning than simply the ability to kill, don't you Humpty Dumpty?

    Parent

    What? The trial court failed (none / 0) (#30)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 12:40:51 PM EST
    to read the jury instruction re the standard of proof?  Unlikely. And what the heck do you mean by "comparative law"?

    Does anyone think OJ (none / 0) (#42)
    by jondee on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 04:03:11 PM EST
    would've gotten off if the Rodney King incident and it's aftermath had never occurred?

    Then we had OJ's best defense attorney Mark Fuhrman giving an interview in which he dropped n-bombs all over the place and laughed about cops brutalizing suspects and planting evidence and generally making the LAPD sound like a bunch of corrupt racist thugs..

    Who needed a Dream Team?

    Parent

    It was absolutely a factor (none / 0) (#43)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 04:06:15 PM EST
    But not just that.  It was years of abuse of power by the LAPD.  

    Parent
    You Prove My Point (none / 0) (#51)
    by RickyJim on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 08:02:02 PM EST
    You mention issues having nothing to do whether or not Simpson committed the murders and assert they correctly determined the outcome of the trial.

    Parent
    I wouldn't say correctly (none / 0) (#52)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 08:05:44 PM EST
    But they certainly helped determine the outcome.   I think it was a travesty but there it is.

    Parent
    Jurors Comments After the Trial (none / 0) (#50)
    by RickyJim on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 07:45:58 PM EST
    indicated that they were hung up on the criterion that the prosecution needed to answer all the questions raised by the defense (no matter how silly) rather than whether or not it was reasonable that OJ didn't commit the murders.
    Comparative law studies how legal, procedure, penalties, etc differ between countries.  I think it is impossible to seriously discuss the defects in the OJ trial without knowing what the alternatives are.

    Parent
    No matter who says what (none / 0) (#80)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 09:34:03 AM EST
    O.J. was set free by jury nullification.

    And I don't blame the jury.

    But if he had been tried by a jury of his peers he would have been convicted.

    Parent

    He WAS tried by a jury of his peers (5.00 / 2) (#130)
    by jbindc on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 08:42:56 AM EST
    "Peers" means fellow citizens.  There is no right of a criminal defendant to be tried by a jury of people who are exactly like him/her in sex, race, socioeconomic standing, education levels,  etc.  In fact the Sixth Amendment only says a criminal defendant is entitled to "...the right to a speedy trial, by an impartial jury..."

    The Supreme Court has weighed in on several cases that discusses jury makeup, but a "jury of one's peers" doesn't mean what you think it does.

    Parent

    Nobody Knows (none / 0) (#146)
    by RickyJim on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 11:00:38 AM EST
    "What Jury of His Peers" means.  It did make sense back when Mary, Queen of Scots, was on trial but now it means nothing.

    Parent
    Not really (none / 0) (#162)
    by jbindc on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 12:39:18 PM EST
    The process of selecting a jury for a trial begins with creating the "jury pool" - the group from which jurors are actually drawn to weigh evidence at trial. Federal law requires jurors be selected from a "fair cross-section of the community in the district or division wherein the court convenes." As the Supreme Court noted over a century ago in Strauder v. West Virginia, the jury should be drawn from a group "composed of the peers or equals [of the defendant]; that is, of his neighbors, fellows, associates, persons having the same legal status in society as he holds."

    Even the ACLU doesn't really say that it's in dispute.

    So, like I said, a defendant does not have the right to a jury of people who are exactly like him/her.  It's a pretty simple idea.

    Parent

    That is Not What Peer Means (none / 0) (#199)
    by RickyJim on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 04:50:58 PM EST
    There is no such thing as a peerage in the US. If we had dukes trying dukes, knights judging knights and commoners judging commoners, then the phrase would make sense.  Except for felons, we all have the same legal status so saying it means "persons having the same legal status in society as he holds" has no content.  I think using it now a days and saying that it means you get a fair jury is just so much obfuscation, like pompously using Latin instead of English for concepts not part of Roman Law.

    Parent
    jb, to Jim it likely means ... (none / 0) (#166)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 01:07:06 PM EST
    ... a jury of his own self-perceived peers. I don't think I have to say what THAT probably entails.

    Parent
    OJ's peers would (none / 0) (#180)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 02:23:36 PM EST
    have lived near around Brentwood in million dollar homes with no financial woes with the ability to obtain legal aid and political favors...

    Not in South Central LA or close surrounding areas.

    His trial gave LA blacks the opportunity to stick a thumb in the LA police's eyes and as I wrote I don't blame them.

    Parent

    I'm not going to relitigate the OJ trial. (none / 0) (#195)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 04:01:59 PM EST
    I've made my opinion well known in the past. Suffice to say that the 1990s were not L.A.'s finest hours.

    Parent
    An (none / 0) (#182)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 02:28:00 PM EST
    angry old men (none / 0) (#189)
    by jondee on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 03:10:36 PM EST
    with 1950s squirrel rifles.

    Parent
    the comment you are replying to (none / 0) (#67)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 02:43:09 AM EST
    was deleted for name-calling. Ricky Jim, you may not call people, including reporters, derogatory names here or personally attack them.

    Also, we aren't interested in comparing the U.S. system of justice as applied to American cases to systems in other countries. I've told you this repeatedly -- for years -- when you have made such comments in other cases. No one cares how some country in Europe would have prosecuted OJ.

    There was no international connection to the OJ case that would make it even marginally relevant how another country might handle it. If you want to discuss comparative international law, I suggest you get your own blog.

    Parent

    Jeralyn, This is an "Open Thread" (none / 0) (#78)
    by RickyJim on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 09:18:31 AM EST
    What other subjects besides Comparative Law are off limits in an open thread? Is using the term "ignoramus" also forbidden when discussing Donald Trump?

    Parent
    It's Wednesday....sigh (none / 0) (#55)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 09:19:34 PM EST
    Everyone is either asleep or partying like it's 1999.

    {{hugs}} (none / 0) (#61)
    by linea on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 09:58:19 PM EST
    That oculus needs to call (none / 0) (#64)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 10:46:48 PM EST
    I'll pick up my driver license this morning-- (none / 0) (#85)
    by oculus on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 11:13:35 AM EST
    thanks to MT.

    Parent
    Sorry I'm such a worry wart (none / 0) (#93)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 01:53:33 PM EST
    At least I didn't call the police ;)....yet

    Parent
    The filibuster continues (none / 0) (#57)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 09:43:04 PM EST
    And Bernie Sanders is still MIA.

    Got up too early (none / 0) (#70)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 07:31:17 AM EST
    Had coffee with my husband, it's soaking wet outside, I'm  going back to sleep for a few hours.

    Four years ago Morning Joe had me so angry I was awake every day at 6:00. My husband would turn it on and go shave, by the time he was done I was so enraged I was out of bed and full speed.

    He tried this morning though and Morning Joe is a hot mess. The Royal Joe They say that Donald Trump is destroying the Republican Party. In his speech yesterday he told all other Republican leaders to hush, he's going to do this alone. Joe says down ticket races are being destroyed. Conservative voters are talking about not even voting. Feeling content and groggy

    Honestly (none / 0) (#77)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 09:15:54 AM EST
    in a lot of ways I find it funny. Scarborough has been part of the problem in creating this Frankenstein. It's been years in coming and yet no Republican that I know of ever stood up and said hey, stop it. Now that it's just become way obvious what the GOP has become to everyone not living in a cave they are just NOW saying something.

    Parent
    It's the culmination of years (none / 0) (#83)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 10:30:53 AM EST
    Of watching Conservative voices championing and doing everything your grandmother told you not to do, while saying, "It's okay as long as it's in the name Republican."


    Parent
    Even if Lily Tomlin isn't too keen on ... (none / 0) (#72)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 07:36:24 AM EST
    ... imitating heterosexuals, she can do a marvelous job channeling them. Two years off her recurring role on TV's "Laugh-In," she received a very well-deserved Oscar nomination as best supporting actress for her surprising dramatic turn in Robert Altman's critically acclaimed "Nashville" (1975), in which she's a married mother of two hearing-impaired children who allows herself to finally succumb to the determined charms of a womanizing singer (Keith Carradine.) It's an amazing scene during which she never says a single word.

    Putin has been inside the DNC servers (none / 0) (#84)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 10:36:16 AM EST
    For a year? Perhaps he's studying how to be more Liberal since he has been trying American Conservatism on but that seems to eventually self destruct :)

    Kos says (none / 0) (#89)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 12:14:35 PM EST
    The Clinton campaign is now retooling the DNC with Clinton peeps, and DWS is almost gone.

    Brandon Davis from the SEIU (none / 0) (#94)
    by christinep on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 02:27:09 PM EST
    I'm expecting the DNC transition--as is traditional in support of the presumed nominee--to be rather smooth.  Coincidentally, it should take the DWS issue off-the-table.  (Of course, look for the central vis-à-vis state issue to surface in some manner after the election.)

    Parent
    DWS (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by jbindc on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 10:37:30 AM EST
    Will still be the Chair until her yerm expires in 2017 (or if she decides to step down) and is standard protocol, not because of Sanders supporters' complaints.

    Davis will be the general election chief of staff dealing with day to day operations.

    Parent

    Thanks, jbindc, for clarifying (none / 0) (#147)
    by christinep on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 11:17:18 AM EST
    the formal positions.  I would suggest, tho, that Davis would be expected to be the direct link to the Clinton campaign & the general election ... and the person with a large recognized authority.  (I'm told that Howard Dean was mentioning on a TV interview the other day that in his latter days as DNC chair, the transition point was quickly made as soon the Democratic victor was known.)

    What I'm guessing is that DWS will gracefully complete her duties at a mutually convenient point as chair, and step aside for the next chair ... as usually happens.  

    Parent

    3 US babies born with Zika birth defects (none / 0) (#92)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 01:42:12 PM EST
    234 US pregnant women known to have contracted Zika at this time. Money the Republican Congress allotted to the CDC to head off the Zika epidemic?

    RIP, Jo Cox, M.P. (1975-2016). (none / 0) (#122)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 11:26:38 PM EST
    The popular Labour MP, who was also the mother of two young children ages 3 and 5, was assassinated today as she was departing a community meeting in West Yorkshire, where she had been campaigning in opposition to her country's pending "Brexit" referendum, which will determine whether or not the United Kingdom remains a member of the European Union.

    Reportedly, Ms. Cox's assailant shouted "Britain First!" as he stabbed and shot her. He was apprehended, and she died at the hospital an hour later. Her death is having a reverberating effect on Britain at the moment, as citizens from across the political spectrum shudder in revulsion.

    Alex Massie of the conservative The Spectator magazine, who's nominally a mouthpiece for the Conservative Party and whose employer has endorsed the Brexit referendum that MP Cox opposed, didn't mince any words in laying the blame for Ms. Cox's assassination at the doorstep of the country's radical right, which has also been pushing for voter approval of the referendum:

    "When you encourage rage you cannot then feign surprise when people become enraged. You cannot turn around and say, `Mate, you weren't supposed to take it so seriously. It's just a game, just a ploy, a strategy for winning votes.'

    "When you shout BREAKING POINT over and over again, you don't get to be surprised when someone breaks. When you present politics as a matter of life and death, as a question of national survival, don't be surprised if someone takes you at your word. You didn't make them do it, no, but you didn't do much to stop it either.

    "Sometimes rhetoric has consequences. If you spend days, weeks, months, years telling people they are under threat, that their country has been stolen from them, that they have been betrayed and sold down the river, that their birthright has been pilfered, that their problem is they're too slow to realise any of this is happening, that their problem is they're not sufficiently mad as hell, then at some point, in some place, something or someone is going to snap. And then something terrible is going to happen.

    "We can't control the weather but, in politics, we can control the climate in which the weather happens. That's on us, all of us, whatever side of any given argument we happen to be. Today, it feels like we've done something terrible to that climate."

    "Sad doesn't begin to cover it. This is worse, much worse, than just sad. This is a day of infamy, a day in which we should all feel angry and ashamed. Because if you don't feel a little ashamed - if you don't feel sick, right now, wherever you are reading this - then something's gone wrong with you somewhere.

    "Jo Cox was, by all accounts, a fine parliamentarian and a fine woman. She has been taken from her family and her constituents but her death strips something from all of us as well. I cannot recall ever feeling worse about this country and its politics than is the case right now.

    "Events have a multiplier effect. So do feelings."

    Sage words, to which we might similarly pay heed, given our own volatile political climate.

    Aloha.

     

    How bad are things right now in the GOP? (none / 0) (#123)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 11:39:29 PM EST
    Apparently so bad that party elders have thawed out George W. Bush from the political deep freeze to campaign for endangered Republican senators, including John McCain of Arizona, Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin.

    It is great to see (none / 0) (#132)
    by KeysDan on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 08:50:06 AM EST
    both President Obama and Vice President Biden honor the victims and console the families and friends of the Orlando terrorist.  However, it gives me pause to see both of them there together. Yes, the Secret Service provides extensive protection, but it seems unwise to take an unnecessary risk.  

    With all the overt Obama hate (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 08:54:24 AM EST
    Out there I'm willing to bet you could not get to them with an army.

    Parent
    Hope so. (none / 0) (#149)
    by KeysDan on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 11:39:55 AM EST
    With all that hate, and their mourning for dead gay people, it  is unnerving.  The Secret Service did permit a gate jumper to enter and run the length of the White House.  So, yes, I,too, hope no one could get near them with an army.

    Parent
    Stipulating of course that a a violent event (none / 0) (#173)
    by ruffian on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 02:01:30 PM EST
    at a joint appearance that resulted in the ascent of President Ryan would add tragedy upon tragedy....

    What an amazing GOP convention it would be - Trump running to replace Ryan?  I don;; think so!

    Parent

    This sounds like (none / 0) (#176)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 02:05:24 PM EST
    A military assessment :)

    Parent
    What to make of this (none / 0) (#138)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 09:18:07 AM EST
    They are using the "Dissent Channel" (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by christinep on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 09:48:38 AM EST
    set up some time ago in recognition of the reality that in a department as extensive as State, disagreement by mid-level and other employees is inevitable.  BTW, these kinds of differences by career employees are more usual than one might think ... tho this one, with a channel to the WSJ, seems more organized than most.  

    A side note: In my longtime agency, EPA, differences from Administration actions would occur under very different leaders from time to time.  The biggest career employee opposition--many times larger than the 50 reported at State--occurred (and is well-documented) during the Reagan years when Anne Gorsuch as EPA Administrator and James Watt as Interior Secretary set about to carry out what many (such as myself) considered an attack on environmental regulations and enforcement thereof, etc. Later analysis in books and in other media can be said to verify that contention later.

    Back to State: I'm guessing that this is a situation where some long-timers (with established channels/leaks) decided to play a card after chafing with an Administration that didn't accord with their more militaristic approach.  As always, it will be interesting to see how the press plays this one ... for conflict or for a simple report.

    Parent

    WaPo might have a paywall (none / 0) (#139)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 09:23:59 AM EST
    A side problem caused by (none / 0) (#157)
    by jbindc on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 12:27:10 PM EST
    Link does not work, jb. (none / 0) (#161)
    by caseyOR on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 12:35:35 PM EST
    Sorry, try this (none / 0) (#163)
    by jbindc on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 12:40:26 PM EST
    Uber (none / 0) (#167)
    by CST on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 01:19:05 PM EST
    Is having a huge impact on traffic in the city.  Although at the same time it does free up parking spaces, which in turn creates some prime real estate for other development or transportation (bike lanes, etc...).

    We're definitely rethinking what the "new" transportation needs are, and I suspect there is no putting the uber cat back in the bag.

    I also wonder if drone delivery would help with the freight traffic issue in any significant way, but that's still fairly limited in scope.

    Parent

    RickyJim (none / 0) (#203)
    by jbindc on Mon Jun 20, 2016 at 07:21:12 AM EST
    I think you're arguing with me even though you agree with me about juries.  Since we have no peerage, the right to a "jury of one's peers" (which is not mentioned in the Constitution) just refers to the right of having ordinary citizens from the community sit in judgment - it does not mean a defendant has the right to a jury of people who are exactly like him - racially, educationalky, professionally, socioeconomically, or even by gender ot sexual preference. Jimakappj stated that OJ was not tried by a "jury of his peers" and I disagreed with that, because he most certainly was.