home

Tuesday Morning Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 09:48:53 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Travel day for me.

This is an Open Thread.

< Defender Mickey Sherman's Book to Come to TV, With James Belushi | CO Board of Health Weakens Medical Marijuana Caregiver Rule at Stealth Hearing >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Tuesday Morning Open Thread | 172 comments (172 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    isn't today an election day? (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 09:54:35 AM EST
    I can't really tell because the terror alert has not been raised....

    I just asked in another thread (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 09:57:26 AM EST
    If anyone had any bets on Question 1 in Maine?  (The question whether to repeal recognition of gay civil unions)

    Parent
    Affirmative Action went away in WA (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:02:21 AM EST
    because of that tactic....make the people think they are voting in support of something. Truth was, they were voting against it.

    Parent
    I have a feeling (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:05:12 AM EST
    that's what those opposed to civil unions/gay marriage are counting on.

    Parent
    I think it's yes by a hair, and I'd rather not (none / 0) (#19)
    by andgarden on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:18:17 AM EST
    think about that until I have to look at the results tonight. BTW, I think everyone in Maine is pretty much aware of which side is which. The state has apparently been saturated with ads.

    Parent
    I predict comfortable to big win for gay marriage (none / 0) (#97)
    by magster on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:59:07 AM EST
    and squeaker in favor of Corzine in NJ.

    In other words, a great night within the realm of what is possible considering the latest polling.

    Parent

    I will cheer if that happens (none / 0) (#102)
    by andgarden on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 12:03:08 PM EST
    but I'm not counting on it.

    Parent
    Maine SOS (none / 0) (#113)
    by magster on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 12:57:48 PM EST
    revised projected turnout up to 50% from 35%, which those in the know say is great for No on 1.

    (from AmericaBloggay.com -- too lazy to link).

    Parent

    Interesting (none / 0) (#122)
    by andgarden on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:20:52 PM EST
    Of course, big turnout is not dispositive. I have not forgotten 2004.

    Parent
    OFA failed to provide any GOTV support (none / 0) (#141)
    by MO Blue on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 03:05:50 PM EST
    for Maine endeavor. link

    Parent
    Yep (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 03:07:36 PM EST
    More from another source.

    Tonight once again we will be forced to sit on the edge of our seats as the voters of Maine get to chose whether we get to be a free people in their state. The concept that a majority of voters in any state can decide if I shall have the same rights of all Americans is repugnant to me. We won't know the results until late in the evening, but there is one result that is overwhelmingly clear to LGBT citizens and their allies: President Obama and his team were zero help in this critical battle and in the last week might actually have hurt us. That is a fact.

    Despite repeated pleas for assistance from this community from the start of the campaign, he chose to ignore every opportunity to grant us such relief. At the recent Human Rights Campaign dinner he never said the word "Maine" once. The most we were able to get out of the White House office of communications was that he was opposed to such efforts. Try weaving that into a powerful ad or robo-calling!

    However, practicing benign neglect was not the end of it. This past week, Eric Holder, the Attorney General of the United States in the state of Maine said that this administration had no position on the ballot measure. Read that sentence again carefully. Our nation's chief law enforcement officer and the president's hand picked choice said that the issue was just not that important to this administration! Now don't be fooled by any rhetoric that presidents don't take stands on such issues. Going back as far as President Carter when he opposed Proposition Six, they have taken such stands.



    Parent
    Yep it is (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by eric on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:05:51 AM EST
    and here in Minneapolis we are using Instant Runoff Voting.  Should be interesting.  I think I am going to vote for a long-shot lefty as my first choice for Mayor just because I can.

    Parent
    LOL... (none / 0) (#7)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:06:02 AM EST
    The undocumented persons terror alert has been raised in Colorado, if the vehicle impound ballot initiative is any indication.

    They don't wanna kill ya, but they do wanna drive to rake your leaves...enough to make the hairs on the back of your neck stand up ain't it? :)

    Parent

    And so it begins (none / 0) (#16)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:16:55 AM EST
    Jake Tapper is tweeting:

    DNC already emailing around an analysis by rival network saying VA/NJ races say much more about those candidates than they do about POTUS
    .

    The message of the day is: "If there are Republicans who win in NJ/VA, it has nothing to do with Obama."

    Parent

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by eric on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:30:52 AM EST
    Deeds had almost no chance in VA, and Corzine's problems have nothing to do with Obama.

    Now, if Corzine wasn't surrounded by scandals and if the Democrats had run a viable candidate in VA, it would be a different story.  But as things are, these two races are irrelevant outside of their respective states.  BTW, I think Corzine is going to win, anyway.

    Parent

    Obama, Biden & co. (none / 0) (#129)
    by Upstart Crow on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:37:41 PM EST
    Surely some of this is being viewed as a reflection on POTUS because they sent out the troops to campaign heavily in NJ.

    Parent
    Deeds (none / 0) (#138)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:58:08 PM EST
    was leading most of the summer until about 6 weeks ago.

    Parent
    Looks to me (none / 0) (#143)
    by Steve M on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 03:14:18 PM EST
    like the race was tied for maybe the first two weeks of the summer, but otherwise McDonnell has enjoyed a pretty solid lead.

    Parent
    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by eric on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 03:20:36 PM EST
    Out of the 50 or so polls shown there, only ONE had Deeds ahead, back on June 10th.  All of the others had McDonnell ahead - and ahead by a lot.

    Deeds was essentially a non-starter.

    Parent

    My bad (none / 0) (#146)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 03:33:30 PM EST
    Listened to partial information.

    But Deeds was gaining ground and has not done well here in Northern Virginia, which should be his strongest area, since it's really the only "blue" section of the state (despite what OFA has touted for the last year).

    And it's still independents that are pulling away from the Dems....

    The races to really watch in Virginia are the races for the House of Delegates.  One poll I saw thinks Republicans can pick up 10 seats, besides the top 3 spots in the state.

    Parent

    Hmmmmm (none / 0) (#21)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:21:42 AM EST
    Will that one play next year?

    Parent
    It sort of depends (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Steve M on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:34:38 AM EST
    on what actually happens next year, I guess.  But I can't ever remember casting a vote for governor with the thought that "hey, party X is really screwing things up in Washington, so I'm not going to vote for the candidate from that party for governor!"  That would be weird.

    Most people who aren't committed partisans vote for the person, not the party.  There's this media attitude like the middle of the country constantly shifts back forth from calling themselves Democrats or calling themselves Republicans, and that's not really how it works.

    Parent

    From what I've been hearing (none / 0) (#39)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:40:45 AM EST
    Especially here in Virginia, it's the Independents (who gave Obama his victory last November) that have abandoned the Democrats this time around in droves.  We won't know for sure until tonight or tomorrow, but that is a huge factor.  

    I never bought the whole myth that "Virginia had turned blue".  Northern Virginia is veerrrryyyy different than the rest of the state, and I think the Beltway media forgets that sometimes.

    Parent

    Agreed entirely (none / 0) (#48)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:50:03 AM EST
    And the dips**t "analysts" relegate the quality of the individual candidates to a tiny afterthought.  But then if they concentrated on the actual dynamics of the race within the state, they'd have nothing to get all excited about and yap about for weeks.

    Parent
    Felt like a traditional Dem ... (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:07:23 AM EST
    today.  I voted for a Democrat who I know is going to lose.  Bill Thompson.

    Ah, memories.

    LOL (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:09:52 AM EST
    Those were the days :)

    Parent
    Bloomberg's a Democrat too, just ignore the (none / 0) (#13)
    by steviez314 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:15:42 AM EST
    label (and the 10 billion dollars)

    Parent
    At least Robot Porter... (none / 0) (#14)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:15:46 AM EST
    respects the will of the people regarding term limits....more than I can say for the mayor and his minions.

    Parent
    By definition (none / 0) (#30)
    by Steve M on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:31:07 AM EST
    if the people elect Bloomberg, then it was the will of the people that they didn't want him to be term-limited.  A majority vote can't frustrate the will of the people, a majority vote is the will of the people.

    I'm surprised that someone who is such a staunch advocate of freedom wants to take away people's right to vote for the candidate of their choice.  The people who voted for term limits may not even be around any more - why should they be allowed to tie my hands?

    Parent

    This I agree with (none / 0) (#32)
    by andgarden on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:32:43 AM EST
    term limits are undemocratic. A term limit is when the voters elect someone else.

    Parent
    It also seems undemocratic ... (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:36:08 AM EST
    for a Mayor to own a large news organization.

    Parent
    didn't he take himself (none / 0) (#54)
    by nycstray on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:00:12 AM EST
    out of the operational loop of his companies?

    Has Bloomberg News ever effected an election? Any election?

    Parent

    Bloomberg news hardly evern mentions (none / 0) (#94)
    by tigercourse on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:52:38 AM EST
    anything not directly related to the stock market and economy. I don't remember the last time they talked about Mike Bloomberg at all. For what it is, Bloomnberg news is much better then any of the major news outlets.

    Parent
    When Bloomberg's News talks up (none / 0) (#124)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:32:07 PM EST
    the stock market and economy
    Aren't they, de facto, also talking up Mike Bloomberg, the richest man in New York City?

    And lest we forget, his name is, literally, right there on the news, EVERY day 24/7 - isn't that an unfair advantage in more ways than one? i.e. especially in terms of the foremost element in politics: NAME RECOGNITION.

    Parent

    Well, by that standard (none / 0) (#127)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:55:45 PM EST
    You could never have anyone who was famous get into politics because they would have name recognition.  For that matter, no one with the same last name as someone famous could get into politics (Anecdote:  I worked for a circuit court judge in Michigan. Another judge kept her first husband's last name (even though she was remarried) to run for office.  The first husband's name was the same as that of a prominent local family that had several judges in it - but first husband was no relation!  So, she used the name of her ex-husband because it was the same as someone completely unrelated!

    Parent
    Do you know how many unrelated (none / 0) (#128)
    by andgarden on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:29:16 PM EST
    "Bob Caseys" have won office in Pennsylvania? Too many.

    Parent
    Heh (none / 0) (#137)
    by Steve M on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:54:49 PM EST
    It was always a running joke in Michigan that you shouldn't bother running for judge unless you had one of the approved last names.  I think at one point there were 4 different Hathaways on the Wayne County Circuit Court (including one notably lazy judge who was known as "Half-a-day Hathaway").  This is one of the many problems with electing judges.

    Ronna Romney also kept her married name after her divorce in an effort to run for Senate (she was married to Mitt's brother).  Didn't help her much, I guess.

    Parent

    Bloomberg isn't just a familiar name... (none / 0) (#171)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 04:16:01 AM EST
    Mike Bloomberg is the 17th richest man in the world and he owns a third of the world's media market.
    In March, Forbes reported Michael Bloomberg's wealth at $16 billion...he had the world's biggest increase in wealth in 2009...he moved from 142nd to 17th on the Forbes list in two years. [snip]

    Michael Bloomberg owns 92% of Bloomberg L.P., a financial software, news and data company. [Overall] it has a one-third share of the market, similar to Thomson Reuters. The company provides financial software tools such as analytics and equity trading platform, data services and news to financial companies and organizations around the world...it includes a global news service, television, radio, the Internet and printed publications.

    That's what I would call an obscene maximum advantage in any political race - past, present, or future.

    Parent

    Problem is with governors (none / 0) (#50)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:55:04 AM EST
    (and presidents and mayors) that the power gets more and more consolidated with one guy holding onto the office.  I like reasonable term limits for executive office, totally opposed to it for legislators.  Far more problematic than term limits for executives, IMHO, are two-year terms which give them absolutely no breathing room from campaign mode.

    Parent
    I think there's a fair distinction, but I don't (none / 0) (#56)
    by andgarden on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:02:22 AM EST
    think it's enough to support limits in either kind of office.

    Two year terms for governors is a very strange practice that apparently used to be more widespread. Now I think it's limited to New England. I don't think it's any more or less strange than bicameralism in the states, though. That seems almost totally pointless.

    Parent

    Colorado (none / 0) (#88)
    by sj on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:40:41 AM EST
    has two-term term limits for Governor.

    weirdly formatted link

    Parent

    That's different (none / 0) (#100)
    by andgarden on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 12:02:11 PM EST
    I mean two year terms, like the House of representatives.

    Parent
    Oh! I see (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by sj on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 12:59:45 PM EST
    Need to read better.  Such an alien concept my mind just slid right over it.

    Parent
    Term limits... (none / 0) (#41)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:42:22 AM EST
    were uphled by the people of NYC in '93 and '96...we're not talking 100 years ago here bro.  I think most are still around.

    It is because of my freedom extremism that I support term limits...yeah it sucks when you actually have a good leader you'd like to keep around, but power corrupts, and by a third term I think elected officials get a little too comfy.  I wish we had 'em in the US Senate.

    If it was put to a vote by the people I could live with it...the backdoor way Bloomberg got it done is very unsavory, imo.

    Parent

    Term limits (none / 0) (#43)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:43:53 AM EST
    Were passed in Michigan in the 90s and have been an utter disaster ever since.

    Parent
    term limits in Virginia for governor - one term! (none / 0) (#118)
    by DFLer on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:11:39 PM EST
    surely Tim Kaine could have been re-elected

    Parent
    Tim Kaine (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:21:17 PM EST
    Will be lucky to get his phone calls taken (or returned) if this is as bad a day for Dems as is anticipated.  He's head of the DNC!

    Parent
    My thoughts . . . (none / 0) (#58)
    by nycstray on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:06:20 AM EST
    He kept a Republican off the ticket  ;) I think we did pretty good with the term limits, kept Rudy from sticking around, lol!~

    I'm not seeing the term limits jiving with freedom. If we can't keep around a good leader and all. We need a more engaged voting population is what we need. Leaders need to be kept in line or tossed out if they get too comfy/corrupt.

    Parent

    I would suggest (none / 0) (#64)
    by Steve M on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:11:22 AM EST
    that if you think politicians get too corrupt by their third term, you should vote against them for a third term.  But you don't have the right to tell me whether or not I can vote for them.  Democracy means we each get to have an opinion.

    If a majority of the voters still felt there should be a two-term limitation, then Bloomberg would lose this election, obviously.

    Parent

    His bankroll... (none / 0) (#67)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:13:52 AM EST
    plays no part in his re-election chances?  

    Parent
    Not really (none / 0) (#78)
    by nycstray on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:24:56 AM EST
    If he were doing a really sh*tty job, there is another Dem running to vote for.

    On second thought, his bankroll says we don't have to figure out who bought him off . . . so maybe it does give him an edge?  ;)

    Parent

    I will say... (none / 0) (#80)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:29:30 AM EST
    I do like that he works for a buck a year...thats pretty cool.  Its not so much Bloomberg I'm worried about, but another Guiliani down the road.  I guess I don't have much faith in the voting populace...we need a fail-safe.

    Parent
    I can't remember (none / 0) (#86)
    by nycstray on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:37:40 AM EST
    did we waive it for Bloomberg, but we still will be voting on term limits again or did we perm wipe it from the books?

    I like some of the 'projects' Bloomberg is working on and would like to see them continue to move forward. Thompson didn't really address much in that manner. He spent too much time on term limits and NYC being expensive (hello! it's always been and always gonna be, just like a few other places around the country) imo. The part of the debate I watched was fairly pathetic (again, imo). I just didn't get 'competent' from him.

    Parent

    I think he is ... (none / 0) (#91)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:44:56 AM EST
    doing a crappy job, but he has most everyone else snowed.

    The NY press was very hard on him during his first term.  But did a strange 180 when he ran for re-election.  Suddenly, he was the best Mayor ... evah!

    It sure looked like the fix was in.  Because this attitudinal change seemed to happen overnight.  And it didn't seem to be tied to any accomplishment.

    Parent

    Newsweek seems (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 04:09:52 PM EST
    miffed at Obama.

    Krugman sez:Obama Might Be Playing 11 Dimensional (none / 0) (#2)
    by Dan the Man on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 09:56:59 AM EST
    chess.

    "when I'm going to "blow my top" over Obama's statement that now is the time to "get serious" about reducing debt. Um, never?

    Look, it has been obvious since the primary, if you were paying attention, that Obama -- who has many excellent qualities -- has an unfortunate tendency to echo "centrist" conventional wisdom, even when that CW is demonstrably wrong. Remember when he bought into the line that Social Security is in crisis, stepping on one of the biggest progressive victories in decades?

    And right now, deficit-phobia has quickly congealed into the latest CW. [...]

    And Obama, being who he is, apparently feels compelled to give at least rhetorical obeisance to the CW. We can only hope that his economists, who know better, can convince him not to act on it."

    Maybe Obama is a true believer (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by MO Blue on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:10:52 AM EST
    of "centrist" conventional wisdom. Seems that is the path he has been walking, just not talking.

    Parent
    I doubt he'll ever change ... (none / 0) (#20)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:20:34 AM EST
    on this front.  He believes it's gotten him where he is.

    And as long as it remains just rhetoric, it doesn't bother me too much.  I'd prefer he didn't say this stuff, but I can live with it.

    Parent

    It's like the 'strong dollar policy' talk I've (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by steviez314 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:25:20 AM EST
    heard for 30 years.

    The U.S. politicians don't mean it when they say it, the Chinese and Japanese don't believe it when they hear it, but everyone's happy and can go on doing whatever they need to do in terms of economic policy.

    Parent

    Or Ethanol support ... (none / 0) (#37)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:36:57 AM EST
    when you're running in Iowa.

    Parent
    But PK says BHO's bad at it: (none / 0) (#31)
    by Pacific John on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:31:28 AM EST
    Remember when he bought into the line that Social Security is in crisis, stepping on one of the biggest progressive victories in decades?


    Parent
    Yankees lost. Deafening silence. (none / 0) (#9)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:07:42 AM EST


    You better root for the Yankees: (none / 0) (#12)
    by steviez314 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:14:43 AM EST
    How did the economy do one year after Philadelphia won the World Series the last 4 times:

    1929,
    1930,
    1980,
    2008.

    Parent

    Well, the Yankees certainly do spend (none / 0) (#15)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:16:05 AM EST
    lots of $$$$.  

    Parent
    I'd rather... (none / 0) (#18)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:18:05 AM EST
    stand on a bread line than root for the Yankees:)

    Sh*t the Knicks won a game last night...I'm surprised the sun came up today.

    Parent

    I'm with you ... (none / 0) (#33)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:33:54 AM EST
    and I'm a NYer.  But my grandmother would roll in her grave if I rooted for the Yankees.  She grew up just a few blocks from Ebbets Field.

    Parent
    Phillies won. Town breathes sigh of relief. (none / 0) (#53)
    by vicndabx on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:59:39 AM EST
    and was quite thankful last nite for the fact that baseball is only 9 innings.  See yous Wednesday.

    Parent
    So, one HCR bill recommends insurers (none / 0) (#17)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:17:41 AM EST
    consider payment for Christian Science prayers.  But big brouhaha about paying for abortions, natch. LAT

    I saw this too (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:25:07 AM EST
    And thought it best to shut my abortion loving mouth, sponsored by Hatch and the late Kennedy.

    Parent
    Please don't ever shut your (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:41:56 AM EST
    "abortion-loving" mouth.  Public support for a woman's right to choose is diminishing.  Make noise!

    Also, who knew it cost $20 to receive a Christian Science prayer treatment?  My Protestant minister dad never received an extra penny for all those hospital and home visits he made for 40 years.

    Parent

    May I suggest... (none / 0) (#45)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:46:09 AM EST
    "freedom and choice-loving mouth" instead?...I'm as pro-choice as they come but I got no "love" for abortions....that sounds pretty cold.

    Parent
    You're a guy, right? (5.00 / 3) (#47)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:49:14 AM EST


    Parent
    Sorry... (none / 0) (#57)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:02:34 AM EST
    forgot I can't have an opinion on this due to my plumbing...my bad:)

    Go ahead and love abortion...I'll love choice and bodily sovereignty regardless of sex.

    Parent

    What's so cold (5.00 / 2) (#51)
    by lilburro on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:58:14 AM EST
    about a choice a woman is (or should be) free to make?

    I say this because saying its "cold" plays into the "zomg abortions are so horrible, only when necessary, actually let's make them illegal..." progression of thought.

    Parent

    Choice is great... (none / 0) (#59)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:06:49 AM EST
    bodily sovereignty is great, individual freedom is great...I won't go so far as to say abortions are great.

    Parent
    A safe, (5.00 / 2) (#62)
    by lilburro on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:08:29 AM EST
    legal abortion is a great thing.

    Parent
    Meet you in the middle... (none / 0) (#65)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:11:27 AM EST
    the prohibition of abortion is a terrible tyrannical thing.

    "Abortion-loving" conjurs an image of the irresponsible couple who gets one abortion a year...maybe its just me, I'll drop it....we're all on the same side:)

    Parent

    Why is that irresponsible? (none / 0) (#72)
    by lilburro on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:16:47 AM EST
    Or is there a cap on the number of choices you can make?

    Do you watch The Sarah Silverman Show?  She did an awesome episode on abortion - it was hilarious.  She had multiple abortions in the ep, and the point (to me) was to push back against the idea that abortion is some kind of necessary evil, when really, it isn't, and probably TONS more women than you would believe have had an abortion.

    Parent

    I think it better... (none / 0) (#79)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:25:51 AM EST
    to stop the seed from fertilizing the egg in the first place, or at least making an attempt to prevent the spawning of a life...after fertilization it gets a little dicey ethically, at least for me, but reasonable people can disagree.

    I'm sure it was a funny skit, Sarah cracks me up...but I don't know that it helps the noble pro-choice cause to ignore the obvious ethical questions.

    Parent

    Perhaps we shouldn't (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by lilburro on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:34:27 AM EST
    ignore the obvious ethical questions, but why exactly must we obsess over those that involve a women's health?

    What about the obvious ethical questions of someone who chooses to buy illegal drugs?

    What about the obvious ethical questions of the culture of shame that accompanies abortions?

    (some linkies from RH Reality Check)

    Parent

    I like the drug addiction comparison... (none / 0) (#93)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:47:59 AM EST
    But the ethical questions of drug use aren't ignored, its the basis of our tyrannical prohibition policy.  Addiction is troubling and hard to stomach, make it illegal.  Abortion is troubling and hard to stomach, make it illegal.

    We need honest discussions...yes, drug addiction is troubling, abortion is troubling, on this we can all agree...but we need to make the prohibitionists see that prohibition is more troubling, and you still have tall the addiction and abortions under their respective prohibitions, as well as a slew of other troubling problems like prisons overflowing and back-alley abortions.

    Parent

    I don't think (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by lilburro on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:57:24 AM EST
    it's fair to compare abortion to drug addiction.  Not all abortions are happening in the offices of such very admirable men as the late Dr. Tiller.

    Parent
    No... (none / 0) (#101)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 12:02:44 PM EST
    they aren't comparable...but the arguments of prohibition vs. choice, and legislated morality that interferes with inalienable rights apply to both issues.

    Parent
    True (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by lilburro on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 12:28:40 PM EST
    I guess my point is that it would be great if we could be aboveboard about abortion.  Part of the reason I support the legalization of drugs is that we can then talk about them more rationally.  Get rid of the taboo.  Same with abortion.  I don't think someone who misses their period and goes to the clinic should feel any sense of shame at all.  And I think the frequent subtext of the "obvious ethical questions" line re: abortion is that one should in some way feel guilty for having one, or at the very least to codify the process by which women make that decision.  So I don't like encouraging that as the dominant backdrop of the abortion debate.

    That's the basic point I'm trying to make here.  Unlike drug use, abortions aren't pleasurable - but as much as possible we have to make sure they aren't made deeply unpleasurable.

    And if there are indeed obvious ethical questions, then maybe men should defer to women on the subject, since it is a choice that men are never, ever going to have to make.

    Parent

    speaking of seeds, does the HCR have any (none / 0) (#119)
    by DFLer on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:14:56 PM EST
    prohibitions against the Feds paying for E.D. meds?

    Parent
    I agree, they (none / 0) (#71)
    by Wile ECoyote on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:16:36 AM EST
    should be shown on TV.  

    Parent
    Oh no (5.00 / 2) (#74)
    by lilburro on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:19:53 AM EST
    you're so right, they should definitely be done in alleyways with clothes hangers, cos that's good for everyone involved.

    Parent
    I just finished listening to the audio of (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:32:13 AM EST
    "Revolutionary Road."  Thank gawd abortion is legal at present.  What a depressing story.

    Parent
    Winslet (none / 0) (#90)
    by lilburro on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:44:39 AM EST
    won a libel suit (via Gawker):  

    She sued the U.K.'s Daily Mail when they said she was lying about not working out before the Academy Awards, and she just won a $40,000 payout from the newspaper. She actually wants people to think she doesn't exercise! She looks good, doesn't go to the gym, and is a bad*ss. Amazing.


    Parent
    I thought the movie was (none / 0) (#140)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 03:00:16 PM EST
    incredible.  My youth identified with the Winslet character so much, I had such a desire to breakout and be free and actually to have been some place that challenged me to grow.  My husband hated the film.  I think because he loves women who are ambitious and self actualized, and the young Winslet character ended up dead, and a husband and children were left forever without her.

    Parent
    Spoiler alert... (5.00 / 1) (#147)
    by lilburro on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 03:44:28 PM EST
    :P

    Parent
    Not sure I will see the movie. DiCaprio isn't (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 03:58:14 PM EST
    who I envision as Frank Wheeler.  Winslet is a wonderful actress.  

    Parent
    I was surprised at how well (none / 0) (#154)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 04:08:15 PM EST
    DiCaprio did in the role. I can't say that he did the character full justice though without having read the book.

    Parent
    Frank was entirely aggravating (none / 0) (#157)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 04:10:33 PM EST
    in the audio book.  April seemed to want to please him, even with the planned move to Paris.  Not for her--for him to find himself. She seemed to have a rude awakening near the end of the book as to how shallow and manipulative he was.  

    Parent
    He comes off well in that respect (none / 0) (#159)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 04:15:06 PM EST


    Parent
    Meaning what? Did DiCaprio portray (none / 0) (#160)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 04:16:46 PM EST
    Frank as a sympathetic character?

    Parent
    No.....he was self absorbed (none / 0) (#166)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 04:40:24 PM EST
    felt sorry for himself, unambitious, and a cheater on his spouse.  He liked the idea of Paris though because it sounded like he was headed to something more wonderful and grand and liked talking about it.

    Parent
    You know what irks me FOREVER (none / 0) (#163)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 04:32:52 PM EST
    People who see me with Joshua or my granddaughters can't imagine that I'm fiercely pro-choice, and some of the people around here who have known for some time that I'm fiercely pro-choice act shocked whenever I'm toodling around with Zoey tending to my daily responsibilities while playing with her at the same time.  It's called choice.  My daughter has told me that she could not ever consider an abortion.....and that is her choice.  And my heart is always full of love for kids and grandkids now too because nobody was forced into this constant daily needs of the little people.  My daughter was a little frightened that she wouldn't love Naomi as much as Zoey.  She said that she loved Zoey so much she couldn't imagine being able to do that again, but I told her that it happens again unless something physiologically damaging has occurred.  BUT.....one of the things that I KNOW to be a fact is that for biological reasons some women never feel this way about their children.  Do I need to force anyone into a daily labor that will leave you drained and exhausted every night if done properly when if done in a damaging way will destroy a human being and maybe others in the path?  And this was my debate argument that made someone begin to cry.

    Parent
    And on the day of that debate (none / 0) (#165)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 04:35:33 PM EST
    long ago, I think it helped ME in my argument that I was about seven months pregnant at the time too :)  I forget about that sometimes when I think back.

    Parent
    ruh roh (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by vicndabx on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:00:52 AM EST


    Parent
    Kdog (none / 0) (#89)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:42:50 AM EST
    You will faint.  I agree with you.  (pauses while kdog picks himself off the floor).

    "Abortion-loving" sounds very radical. At least, it sounds like something Rush Limbaugh would say, and while I in no way am comparing oculus to Limbaugh (I LOVE her insight and opinions, whereas Rush, well, that's better left unsaid), I think a better choice of semantics would have been better.  Planned Parenthood and NOW (and the Clintons!) made the argument that abortion should be "safe, legal, and rare". I don't think anyone REALLY loves abortions.

    JMHO

    Parent

    Please note the quotation marks in my (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 12:13:49 PM EST
    original comment.  The phrase in quotes was in Military Tracy's comment.  She is much more inclined to radical language than moi!

    Parent
    Realized that (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 12:24:11 PM EST
    After I hit "post" (wish we had an edit feature).  And I love MT too, so I knew what she meant!

    Parent
    Who doesn't love... (5.00 / 2) (#110)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 12:49:45 PM EST
    the one and only MT?  Speak now so I can clock ya:)

    Parent
    I am radical with language (5.00 / 2) (#136)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:52:20 PM EST
    It's a gift and a curse.  I always have been for whatever reason too.  I had to debate a woman in college on the abortion issue, we both chose the side we believed in too so I guess it was personal.  I intended to win, she cried, I only got a B grade on it......I think I was docked for making people cry :)

    Parent
    Thanks jb... (none / 0) (#98)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:59:59 AM EST
    and I didn't fall down...you may be way to law and order for my taste but I always respect your opinion, and we disagree civilly...if often:)

    I don't think anybody really loves abortion either...they love freedom and control over their bodies and lives, as we all should.

    Parent

    Kdog (none / 0) (#107)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 12:25:01 PM EST
    I've said it before - if everyone here agreed with everyone else, then it would be a boring echo chamber!  Besides, it's fun to have someone to disagree with!

    Parent
    Hey that's what they tell me down here (none / 0) (#130)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:41:07 PM EST
    I must be one cold blooded abortion addict.  Apparently some of us are addicted to the high you get from abortions, but like all addicts we are in denial until we recover.

    Parent
    Hi. My name is MT, I am an abortion addict. (5.00 / 2) (#132)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:42:29 PM EST


    Parent
    God bless that yap of yours.... (5.00 / 2) (#135)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:51:28 PM EST
    and never shut it for nobody...I know you really mean freedom addict...I'm hooked on the stuff myself, and may we never fail to get our fix:)

    Parent
    What all bills are lacking (5.00 / 5) (#38)
    by MO Blue on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:39:31 AM EST
    None of the bills emerging from the House and Senate require insurers to cover all the elements of a standard gynecological "well visit," leaving essential care such as pelvic exams, domestic violence screening, counseling about sexually transmitted diseases, and, perhaps most startlingly, the provision of birth control off the list of basic benefits all insurers must cover. Nor are these services protected from "cost sharing," which means that, depending on what's in the bill that emerges from the Senate, and, later, the contents of a final bill, women could wind up having to pay for some of these services out of their own pockets. So far, mammograms and Pap tests are covered in every version of the legislation. link

    Priorities?

    Parent

    Unconscionable. (5.00 / 2) (#149)
    by Anne on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 03:50:24 PM EST
    Shameful.

    Ugly.

    Maddening.

    Backward-thinking.

    Repressive.

    Regressive.

    Chauvinist.

    One-step-from-barefoot-and-pregnant.

    If the Democratic Party does not think I am worth essential health care coverage because I have two X chromosomes, then I have no use for, no time for, no money for, no respect for, no reason to support, the people responsible for this, or those who vote for it.

    Screw them and the a$$es they rode in on and tried to pass off as ponies; this just cannot and will not stand.

    Parent

    ummmmmm... (5.00 / 2) (#152)
    by Upstart Crow on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 03:57:18 PM EST
    You mean the treatment of women during the election last year didn't convince you that the Democratic Party cares squat for women?

    Parent
    I'm pretty sure that most aware (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 04:26:22 PM EST
    women realized that face scratching event in NC was aimed at them.


    Parent
    I guess I'm just appalled that (5.00 / 1) (#170)
    by Anne on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 06:12:41 PM EST
    they're actually thinking about codifying their disrespect in this way, which takes it beyond "just words" and forces women to live with the gender bias in a tangible way - this goes beyond feelings and attitude and takes it all the way to "you are not worth health care coverage for your essential self."

    I mean, how do they justify this?  How do they claim to be expanding access to and affordability of health care and then allow the insurance companies a free pass to deny coverage just because I'm female?

    But, meanwhile, I'm sure Vi*gra's all kinds of covered, and no one's going to deny coverage for gettin' the ol' prostate checked, are they?  

    Maybe Obama will ride to the rescue with the bipartisan solution: we can be covered as long as we have the approval of a spouse, a religious advisor or a male family member.

    Parent

    The Women in Congress right now (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 04:18:49 PM EST
    need to be watched for how they vote. Those who vote YEA on any HCR bill that cuts women's health benefits with such disregard need to find themselves subjected to the new HCR bill. Out of their protected, cushy little jobs in congress and back out with the rest of us living with their ignorant decisions.

    I'm writing to the females who represent me.


    Parent

    Why just the women? (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by cawaltz on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 04:34:31 PM EST
    I intend on starting with the men myself. Frankly, they've been given long enough to discover an empathy gene. I'm through with anyone who treats women as if they deserve to be second class citizens.

    Parent
    Because the men don't (5.00 / 1) (#168)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 04:50:09 PM EST
    have to worry about living with the lack of benefits for themselves. They get Viagra covered.

    Men, too often, will view the letters from women as whining.

    Parent

    Guess our elected representatives think (none / 0) (#42)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:43:09 AM EST
    the birth rate in the U.S. is too low?  Social Security fix?  

    Parent
    This doesn't mean (none / 0) (#46)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:47:20 AM EST
    that insurers WON'T cover these things.  Seems to me that e.g. birth control would be a primary cost saver for insurance co's(but I could be wrong).

    Parent
    Could cover them in a different manner (5.00 / 2) (#75)
    by nycstray on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:20:05 AM EST
    I noticed in CA, a couple of the lower cost plans ($260+ premiums) only cover Ob/Gyn after your deductible of 2,500-3,500 is met. I'm pretty darn sure this is new since I last checked late summer. I wasn't minding a high deductible plan too much as they seemed to cover preventive care with a waive of the deductible. Now . . . not so much.

    Is that even legal? Should I have to pay an extra 100 bucks or more to get proper care as a woman? And I'm out of baby having age for the record :)

    Parent

    Can single men, or men who are (none / 0) (#116)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:01:31 PM EST
    proven to be the father of a baby being born out of wedlock access their insurance benefits to cover the costs of the birth of their child if the mother is uninsured, or under-insured?


    Parent
    You can in the military under Tricare (none / 0) (#155)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 04:09:50 PM EST


    Parent
    Not sure (none / 0) (#167)
    by nycstray on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 04:47:33 PM EST
    but for starters, they would have to pay more for a plan with maternity care coverage . . .

    Parent
    Thanks for the link (none / 0) (#92)
    by nycstray on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:45:32 AM EST
    Why aren't we hearing more about this?!

    Parent
    Woo boy (5.00 / 3) (#95)
    by lilburro on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:52:53 AM EST
    thank god women on average make more than men, otherwise we wouldn't be able to afford all these expenses!!!!

    And in the bills' defense, it does take a while to convene your parents, your doctor, your religious leader to make such choices...

    Tell me that the bill ignores genital care across the board, male and female, and I can promise that I won't scream quite as loudly.

    Parent

    Hee hee (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by cawaltz on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 12:00:34 PM EST
    Just be grateful for that 76 cents on the dollar that you get wench!(tongue firmly in cheek. Don't hit me I'm a PO'd chick too)

    Parent
    On the plus side (none / 0) (#117)
    by lilburro on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:06:44 PM EST
    at least I can afford the rock I want to crawl under right now.

    Parent
    Now I'm just pissed (none / 0) (#131)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:42:17 PM EST


    Parent
    Next to be included (none / 0) (#28)
    by MO Blue on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:28:19 AM EST
    will be coverage of donations to televangelists for  faith healing prayers. :-)

    Parent
    Talking about scams, and other (none / 0) (#22)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:23:22 AM EST
    frustrating things. Why is it that cell phone companies are allowed to go "exclusive" with telephones? The phones I want aren't available through the service I want...so, we get a very expensive piece of electronics, a ridiculously high priced service, and a mandatory 2 year contract, and at least one major element is something we are unhappy with.

    Major appliance manufacturers are mandated on what colors of enamel they must provide so we can buy a stove in one brand, a refrigerator in another, dishwasher in yet another and all match. Why can't we have the same for cellular phones?

    About those appliance colors: (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:28:09 AM EST
    who "mandates"?  

    Anecdote ahead:  when I went to Sears years ago to purchase a new coppertone frig. to replace the one in the house when we bought it, the appliance salesman laughed at me.  No more coppertone.  How old was that frig, lady?  

    Parent

    Whoever it is who oversees (none / 0) (#114)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 12:58:56 PM EST
    fairness :) I don't know, and don't think it's worth the time to research, but I do remember when it happened....way back in the '70s. My mom was delighted.

    I am sure that they can all retire a color, though. Must agree with the salesman, how old was that refrigerator? My mom's exciting purchase of the new coppertone fridge was early '60s.


    Parent

    House was built in '68. I probably (none / 0) (#126)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:40:44 PM EST
    was at Sears 15 years later.

    Parent
    French Door Fridge.. (none / 0) (#133)
    by athyrio on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:44:14 PM EST
    Just got a new french door fridge and love it...has the sliding drawer on the bottom for a freezer..Highly recommend it to anyone...

    Parent
    Strange linkage: (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:47:19 PM EST
    French Door Refrigerator
    Wide open spaces & kid friendly
    storage     with Kenmore® Refrigerators

    www.Kenmore.com

    Parent

    coppertone joins (none / 0) (#120)
    by DFLer on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:16:53 PM EST
    avocado, wheat and coral in the appliance color palette graveyard.

    Parent
    You forgot . . . (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by nycstray on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:33:33 PM EST
    Harvest Gold!

    Parent
    Yes...harvest Gold...not wheat, thanks (none / 0) (#172)
    by DFLer on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 07:15:03 AM EST


    Parent
    Coppertone, I believe (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 03:29:06 PM EST
    was introduced after that modern turqouise blue and before avocado green & harvest gold.

    I don't remember wheat or coral...I'll have to go exploring the internet to see if there are any photos of those. They sound lovely :)


    Parent

    Yep, harvest gold was mid-'70s (none / 0) (#150)
    by Cream City on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 03:54:10 PM EST
    when I built my first house and bought my first brand-new fridge.  And every other kitchen appliance in harvest gold, too.  Yow, did it get ooooold fast.  But it was ubiquitous and followed me for decades, when I moved from apartment to apartment and flat to flat . . . and all still had those #@@%!##%!~ harvest gold appliances.

    Btw, you still can match the fronts of any appliances in the old colors -- there are kits to do so.  I've got an old fridge now that looks great in my remodeled kitchen, because I fronted it with a kit that let me match the cabinet wood.

    Parent

    Polanski. This article describes a (none / 0) (#23)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:24:03 AM EST
    Russian who temporarily got bail in Switzerland while he fought extradition to U.S.  The Wrap

    And, according to AP, French lawyer (none / 0) (#104)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 12:15:13 PM EST
    representing Polanski is no longer talking about substantial cash offer.

    Parent
    According to The Wrap via CBC, (none / 0) (#139)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:58:24 PM EST
    Polanski's third proposal re bail has been rejected also:  The Wrap

    Parent
    Is this the start of a trend? (none / 0) (#24)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:24:27 AM EST
    swine flu fist fights?

    Better that than calling 911 on somebody who doesn't cover their mouth..I'd bet the law is being written as we speak mandating mouth coverage.

    seriously (none / 0) (#60)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:07:03 AM EST
    how much of a ignorant tool do you have to be to NOT cover your mouth when you cough.
    however I remember living in NY and riding the D train so I am not at all surprised.

    Parent
    I think it's worse (none / 0) (#61)
    by andgarden on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:08:14 AM EST
    to cover your mouth with your hand than to not cover it at all. However, I think the inside of your elbow or shoulder is best.

    Parent
    "with your hand" (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:15:34 AM EST
    this is why god made hand sanitizer

    Parent
    I thought... (none / 0) (#73)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:17:41 AM EST
    god made hand-sanitizer so little kids can get drunk.

    Parent
    if that was true (none / 0) (#84)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:36:33 AM EST
    they would be having a lot more trouble keeping those things filled.

    Parent
    Just read an e mail from a friend who (none / 0) (#105)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 12:17:29 PM EST
    is teaching ESL in a huge elementary school in China.  Over 3000 students.  Each is checked on the forehead w/an electronic thermometer each morning before admitted to school.  If kid has a temp.--home.  If three kids in same class have a temp. entire class is sent home.  My friend sd. same procedure at church she attended.  Temp.--no church for you today.

    Parent
    Leave it to China... (none / 0) (#111)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 12:52:09 PM EST
    to make this joint look like paradise:)

    I'm getting nervous that cops will be issued thermometers if this swine flu thing doesn't fade soon.

    Parent

    actually, I thought, given the school had (none / 0) (#158)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 04:12:32 PM EST
    over 3000 students, it was a good idea.  Espec. since there is not sufficient vaccine.  

    Parent
    That's what (none / 0) (#68)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:14:33 AM EST
    Kleenex (TM) is for.  Or when people (especially men) used to carry handkerchiefs.

    And hand sanitizer.

    Parent

    I thinking (none / 0) (#69)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:15:06 AM EST
    Coughing and sneezing in your elbow is gross.

    At least you can (and should) wash your hand.

    Parent

    The reasoning is pretty straightforward (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by andgarden on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:22:09 AM EST
    What do you touch with the inside of your elbow? Nothing. Your hands are a different story.

    Parent
    lets not make it TO (none / 0) (#85)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:37:24 AM EST
    complicated for the challenged.
    just cover your freakin mouth.  with whatever is handy.
    I can take care of my end.

    Parent
    Maybe (none / 0) (#87)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:37:51 AM EST
    But there's still hand sanitizer and good old fashioned soap and water.

    When you sneeze on your sleeve, the germs are still there and if I'm sitting close to you, or bump up against you, guess where the germs are going?

    Here's a photo to real hit the point home (sorry if you're eating).

    Parent

    Rock the Vote (none / 0) (#35)
    by Carolyn in Baltimore on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:34:40 AM EST
    They need to refine their email software. I got an email yesterday telling me to go vote today. I went to the elections board website to make sure and I was right: no elections till fall 2010 in Baltimore. There may be elections in pockets of MD but this is an off-year for the state.
    I'm looking forward to our next Mayoral elections though. I bet Dixon gets primaried if she's still in office. She's been a better Mayor than I expected but there are those indictments still looming. Petty stuff but corruption nonetheless.

    Reid (none / 0) (#44)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:45:18 AM EST
    assures the left that Lieberman is on board and will not block a final vote on healthcar (cough) reform.

    are you coughing in your sleeve there? (5.00 / 4) (#121)
    by DFLer on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:18:26 PM EST


    Parent
    Both claim this is false (none / 0) (#77)
    by MO Blue on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:24:27 AM EST
    Democratic leadership and Senator Joseph Lieberman's office are both denying a report that the Connecticut Independent had pledged that he would not obstruct the passage of health care reform by backing a Republican-led filibuster.

    "The Leader is speaking with Sen. Lieberman and all members of his caucus," a leadership aide told the Huffington Post. "To say that there is some 'understanding' about votes at the end of this process is preposterous." link



    Parent
    Re: Travel day for me. Don't I wish!!! (none / 0) (#49)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:50:13 AM EST


    Completely traveled out. (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Dr Molly on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:10:56 AM EST
    Been on 4 work trips to New Haven, Chicago, Durham, and Long Beach in the space of the last 3 weeks.

    It will be a miracle if I don't get sick after all that airplane time.

    Parent

    Oh, I wasn't wishing for work travel!! (none / 0) (#83)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:34:31 AM EST


    Parent
    Greenwald on U.S. support of Israel. (none / 0) (#52)
    by oculus on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:59:06 AM EST
    Will the comments be as cut throast as re I/P diaries at DK?  Can't look.

    Conventional Wisdom one can reflect on (none / 0) (#66)
    by joze46 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 11:13:17 AM EST
    One of the huge curiosities, to me is that, only slight mentioned is that the fifth largest bank in America has filed for bankruptcy CIT, it failed. We only hear of the "what" that is involved in this failure, the who, when or how is totally oppressed. Genuinely insane not to wonder why all departments involved, such as the IRS, Federal Reserve and the Treasury get reviewed for this colossal breach in public service. The banking failed mission.  

    The other Conventional Wisdom one can reflect on is the hours and hours of talk about the current deficit. A deficit is money that is owed, not phobia, not dream, but, real paper money that must be given to someone very soon. Or eventually real money, our tax dollars, today, or tomorrow, taken out for something done before. Taken out of the system to fulfill contractual commitments. Hopefully not to the Republican contract with America which I personally think is nothing than these deals in Derivatives cooked by Newt the hoot Gingrich. Now enjoying secret trillion dollar deals.

    Ladies and Gentleman of America I am not an economist, plus not to sure of what is the conventional wisdom. However from what the definition of a depression is out in the financial wisdom of things, a deficit is closely linked to how the deficit will affect our economy.

    In the first real declared depression America lost "thirty percent" of real money circulation. Notice I said real money circulation. O.K. that defined the depression of the twenties. Notice how it is hard to get loans; circulation money is in short supply.

    Now, today, America has published through hate cable and hate radio trillions of dollars in deficits. The value is anywhere from ten to several hundred trillion dollars, no one has the courage to pin it down, but they know. That means real money needs to move out of the system to somewhere else because of mismanagement gambled to extremes, not because of to big to fail types. They are just failed ideas that secretly get free money from the Federal Reserve essentially our tax money.  

    Where, likely those secret little dirty deals, Obama became to know,  that is so called legal, but can be changed by immediate legislation. Here is the snarl, and argument between Republican and Democrat which is the insider influence that is intuitive to me. All built in the Health care plan. This is not only going to bring in Universal health care but may very well remedy this unbalanced deficit.

    Yes I am suggesting that America is and has been in a managed depression at every turn having to reset operations in different areas to keep in balance so the system does not fail severely. Obama has a tough job, its one thing to be on the side line then another to be in the driver seat. And believe me America, and Obama is getting absolute road rage from the Republicans now.

    It's pretty clear the Republicans would have shut down the government if they did not get what they wanted from Bill Clinton years ago. Today its worse this whole fiasco was planed. Or we could say they are operating in the dimension "even of nine."    

    Status of Weiner and Kucinich amendments (none / 0) (#109)
    by lambert on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 12:31:35 PM EST
    Here.

    Some fun for Tuesday (none / 0) (#112)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 12:55:23 PM EST
    Link

    Gee thanks jb... (none / 0) (#148)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 03:49:57 PM EST
    the look on that poor lady's face whose being pressed into the pavement by the merc on her back is gonna haunt me all day...light sabers or no light sabers.

    Parent
    I thought it was a dude.... (none / 0) (#151)
    by jbindc on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 03:54:50 PM EST


    Parent
    I still say female... (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 05:08:33 PM EST
    on second look, but far from a lock, I hear ya.

    Parent
    Tuesday Morning Open Thread | 172 comments (172 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment