home

Tuesday Open Thread

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals announced today it won't review its decision on Prop 8. Backers will seek Supreme Court review.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Zimmerman: No Imminent Filing of Motion for Bond | Dershowitz Says Angela Corey Threatened to Sue Harvard for Zimmerman Criticism >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Bill Clinton (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by lilburro on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:29:52 PM EST
    WTH is he talking about defending Romney and Bain Capital?  Ugh.  Extremely dumb.

    Or maybe (none / 0) (#14)
    by Mr Tuxedo on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:34:50 PM EST
    he is signaling to the Obama campaign that it's time to discontinue a Romney-bashing re-election strategy and instead talk about the Obama administration's real accomplishments to date and about what the administration plans to accomplish if granted a second term?

    Parent
    Yep (none / 0) (#17)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:38:14 PM EST
    Bain is not a winning topic for the Dems.  Equity captial is not easy enough a topic to put on a bumper sticker, and since members of Obama's team currently WORK at Bain, Dems take money from equity captial firms, and some of Bain's largest investors are public employee union pensions, it's kind of a hard sell to say they are evil.

    Focus on the craziness of the Republicans.

    Parent

    Thought I saw a poll that said otherwise.... (none / 0) (#198)
    by magster on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 06:59:49 PM EST
    like 39 % of independent voters said less likely to vote for him. 11 % of independent voters more likely and the balance no change. Think I saw it on DKos, but can't remember.

    Parent
    can't walk and chew gum (none / 0) (#21)
    by CST on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:44:06 PM EST
    at the same time?

    Honestly though, while I agree with this statement that they should talk about what Obama wants for a second term, I don't see it as an either/or proposition.

    Either way, why on earth do Dems feel the need to run around and defend Romney on this?  It's obsurd the amount of deference they give to private equity.  All hail our corporate overlords.  Heaven forbid people start talking about the adverse affects of capitalism.

    Parent

    Like most large foundations, ... (none / 0) (#29)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:59:23 PM EST
    ... the Clinton Foundation depends upon the philanthropy of wealthy donors in order to do its good work.

    I work with charitable foundations and not-for-profit organizations, and while I do agree with you, to be honest, I think this is probably a case of not biting the hand that feeds you.

    Still, speaking as a Democrat, I think it would be better if Bill Clinton simply declined to comment on Bain, rather than step on his party's message.

    There are times when I can't say anything as a Democratic district chair given my professional position as a consultant, and during those times of conflict of interest, when I really can't say something nice about something or someone I otherwise have to work with, I just keep my mouth shut.

    Parent

    Apparently (none / 0) (#30)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:02:04 PM EST
    one of Obama's own people used to work for Bain so it's kind of hard to go that route.

    Anyway, I don't know if it was working or not but probably not working that well.

    Parent

    my point remains (none / 0) (#33)
    by CST on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:07:58 PM EST
    Let Romney bring that stuff up if he wants to.  Then he is still on the defense about Bain.

    Why on earth all these Dems feel the need to go running around defending him is beyond me.

    Parent

    Exactly (none / 0) (#38)
    by lilburro on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:15:18 PM EST
    Why on earth all these Dems feel the need to go running around defending him is beyond me.


    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#41)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:22:53 PM EST
    I can't speak for all of them but apparently Corey Booker got money from Bain so that's why he thought Obama attacking Bain was a bad idea.

    I understand what you are saying but darn how does the Obama campaign have so many people going rogue on them? I've always thought they were overrated but they've been bordering on incompetence lately.

    Parent

    See Jonathan Lavine (none / 0) (#42)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:25:33 PM EST
    Huge bundler for Obama (one of the biggest).

    Managing Director at Bain Capital LLC.

    Parent

    The problem remains (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by NYShooter on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 06:13:50 PM EST
    "O" still doesn't know how to make use of the bully pulpit. He, especially doesn't know how to use it in response to attacks, an art perfected by Bill Clinton and "Snakehead," (J. Carville)

    Re:  Bain Capital; He could have easily said, "there are good Private equity companies, and Bad Private equity companies, and Bain Capital was Baaad!"

    Bingo!  


    Parent

    And how do you tel;l the difference between the (none / 0) (#63)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 06:20:25 PM EST
    good, the bad and the ugly??

    Parent
    Simple, (none / 0) (#65)
    by NYShooter on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 06:27:51 PM EST
    those that smile, and have their picture taken with "O" are good, and....you know the rest.

    Parent
    I thought you could tell by looking at (none / 0) (#102)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 11:16:51 PM EST
    his enemies list....

    Nixon must be laffing and laffing.

    Parent

    Obama just (none / 0) (#66)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 06:30:50 PM EST
    isn't a very good politician.

    Parent
    shh... (none / 0) (#107)
    by sj on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 11:22:17 PM EST
    Don't let BTD hear you say that :)

    Parent
    Perhaps Bill Clinton (none / 0) (#46)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:49:35 PM EST
    was deputized to reach out to Bain and equity groups to re-assure them.  Sort of like the Obama campaign did in 2008 in having Austan Goolsbee reach out to the Canadian Ambassador not to take seriously the fiery anti-NAFTA rhetoric.  As for being nice to Romney, if Romney were not running for president, it would not be outside the realm of possibility that he would be a contender for Tim Geithner's job.

    Parent
    Perhaps (none / 0) (#92)
    by lilburro on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 09:27:45 PM EST
    it strikes me that I may just be waiting for a populist campaign that will never arrive.  Or if it does, for a two week period, close to the election.  Bleh.

    Parent
    You should listen to BC's (5.00 / 0) (#108)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 11:22:46 PM EST
    speech at the NY fundraiser last night.  Nobody makes Republicans look as ridiculous as BC can.

    Parent
    Of all the public speakers I have ever heard (5.00 / 2) (#150)
    by Peter G on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 11:20:50 AM EST
    I think Bill was very nearly the best. Hillary was even better, though, when I heard her speak on Bill's behalf for about a half hour, from a single note card it seemed, during the 1992 campaign.

    Parent
    What a shocking amount (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by sj on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 11:37:48 AM EST
    of intelligence, charisma and other abilities have been granted to these two people.  

    Parent
    Which is probably why (5.00 / 2) (#152)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 11:43:35 AM EST
    Despite all the nonsense, they have stayed together all these years.

    Why the Democratic Party sought for many years to marginalize them is beyond me.

    Parent

    Imagine if they used.... (none / 0) (#154)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 12:50:36 PM EST
    their powers for good instead of squandering them on 10% less evil pursuits! ;)

    Parent
    Clinton wasn't worthy to sip (none / 0) (#157)
    by jondee on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 01:08:42 PM EST
    out of Mario C's muddy footprints, imho..

    But as we heard early on in '90, folks down there ain't gonna vote for someone named Coo-mo..

    Parent

    I love Coumo (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by sj on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 01:20:23 PM EST
    (although something has gone horribly wrong with his sons) ... and I think he can be brilliant speaker for issues that are important to me.  But I don't think he is nearly as good as either Clinton when it comes to dissecting and discussing complex issues.

    Parent
    Not only that... (none / 0) (#142)
    by masslib on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 09:24:18 AM EST
    today he is out there breaking with Obama on taxes.  Everything on the table.  Has he become stupid or is he just seriously screwing with Obama?  He claims he had no idea that going after Bain was a big deal deal to the Obama campaign!  Unreal.  Again, suddenly stupid or screwing with Obama?

    Parent
    Does it have to be one or the other? (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by Anne on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 09:42:02 AM EST
    Clinton told Brian Williams last night that he doesn't work for the campaign - he's got his own opinions, and one of them is that Obama should be re-elected.

    I see some of what Clinton is saying as serving as a kind of stalking horse for Obama - that he's saying things Obama can't, and which might be giving a preview of what Obama intends to do should he get four more years in the WH.

    I would pay attention to how much and how often we see Clinton in the coming weeks, and under what circumstances - campaign events, his own initiatives, etc.; if the campaign continues to trot him out, even as he's off on his own making seemingly contradictory statements, I'd be more worried about what Obama's eventual agenda is.

    Parent

    One thing Bill Clinton is not (none / 0) (#144)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 09:35:23 AM EST
    is stupid.

    Parent
    the problem with this (none / 0) (#146)
    by CST on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 09:48:09 AM EST
    stuff is not so much that it's bad for Obama, but that it's bad economic policy.

    That's what really p*sses me off about all of it.  Why on earth are prominent Dems running around trying to sell Republican economic policy to the masses?  This is not what any of us need right now.  You have a bully pulpit.  Use it apropriately.

    Parent

    It seems that these are no (none / 0) (#147)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 10:11:09 AM EST
    longer Republican economic policies, they are Democratic ones--Leader Pelosi is on a similar page, moving the $250,000 (middle class) to $1 million (I guess I better check my pay-stub for my new raise). Only middle class incomes under $1 million per year would be continued under the the Bush tax cuts.  So, these days the difference is that the Republican policy is to extend all Bush tax cuts permanently, as contrasted with the Democrats who want to extend the Bush tax cuts just  for the new middle class and, maybe, only temporarily,"  And, that's the new bully pulpit message.

    Parent
    Speaking of movies: just saw (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by oculus on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 07:38:45 PM EST
    "Monsieur Lazhar."  In French.  Montreal  Reminiscent and just as wonderful as the French film "To Be And To Have" (2002.)  

    No car chases or shootings.  

    So glad to find something (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by Peter G on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 08:25:53 PM EST
    we agree on, Oculus.  Monsieur Lazhar is a wonderful movie. It works on many levels.

    Parent
    Peter, in real life I am a film critic! (none / 0) (#90)
    by oculus on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 09:21:03 PM EST
    Oh where (5.00 / 0) (#124)
    by kmblue on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 06:43:23 AM EST
    is BTD with his analysis?  I miss the hell out of him.

    Yes. (none / 0) (#130)
    by Towanda on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 07:32:00 AM EST
    But then, I've been involved in exciting events -- and in more than one story on the nooz agenda.

    Parent
    The Site Meter (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by DebFrmHell on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 09:11:18 AM EST
    WOW!  I just clicked on it and was amazed to find there have been over 38m page views since installing that meter.  And all of the stats.  That is just awesome.

    Thank you for your site, Jeralyn! I appreciate all of your hard work and dedication.

    Same goes for all of the commentors who never  cease to amaze me with their breadth of knowledge.  Many thanks to all of you, too.

    Matt Stoller, former Obama booster, (5.00 / 1) (#166)
    by Mr Tuxedo on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 02:14:20 PM EST
    is calling for a robust debate within the Democratic Party about the future of the Democratic Party.

    Stoller today, after the Wisconsin recall results:

    If Obama loses [in 2012], the recriminations will start, and liberals will take the blame for not allowing Obama to be centrist enough.  At this point, the Democratic Party is hopelessly broken and overrun by the same interests that are running the Republican Party.

    Stoller last fall, after nearly three years of the Obama administration:

    Obama has ruined the Democratic Party. The 2010 wipeout was an electoral catastrophe so bad you'd have to go back to 1894 to find comparable losses. From 2008 to 2010, according to Gallup, the fastest growing demographic party label was former Democrat. Obama took over the party in 2008 with 36 percent of Americans considering themselves Democrats. Within just two years, that number had dropped to 31 percent, which tied a 22-year low.

    It would be one thing if Obama were failing because he was too close to party orthodoxy. Yet his failures have come precisely because Obama has not listened to Democratic Party voters. He continued idiotic wars, bailed out banks, ignored luminaries like Paul Krugman, and generally did whatever he could to repudiate the New Deal. The Democratic Party should be the party of pay raises and homes, but under Obama it has become the party of pay cuts and foreclosures. Getting rid of Obama as the head of the party is the first step in reverting to form.


    Well (5.00 / 1) (#170)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 02:37:56 PM EST
    that might be a positive if Obama loses. We should have had that debate this year not next year.

    Anyway, it's too late now and you go into the election with the candidate you have.

    Parent

    Just forget about Hillary Clinton for (none / 0) (#1)
    by oculus on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 02:20:59 PM EST
    Pres. in 2016. Jill Biden

    I don't think the (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by brodie on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:20:05 PM EST
    then 74 yo Joe Biden will be much of an obstacle for Hillary if she decides to run.

    And lots of people might need to be reminded who he is, if this recent survey of eastern seaboard area Miss USA contestants is any indication.  A majority couldn't name the Vice President of the USA.  Although all the contestants (from the South) answered correctly as to what the "FBI" stands for ...

    Parent

    Please remember that ... (none / 0) (#10)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:29:17 PM EST
    ... she's only six years younger than him.

    Parent
    Not just the most senior (none / 0) (#25)
    by brodie on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:53:55 PM EST
    citizen of the contenders, but also the most frequent contender by far.  2016 would make, by my count, his fourth run for the nomination.

    And Ds will be asked to vote for someone who will be in his eighties if he gets a second term.  

    I like Joe and his wife, but I don't see the presidency in the cards for him this lifetime.  The first three very unsuccessful tries should have sent him that signal.

    Parent

    Agreed. (none / 0) (#31)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:02:49 PM EST
    I'm just sayin', Hillary Clinton is no spring chicken herself. She'll be 68 in 2016.

    I'll happily support her if she decides to run, but right now, I'll take her at her word when she says that she's done with electoral politics.

    Parent

    Right you are, but (none / 0) (#39)
    by brodie on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:18:18 PM EST
    having Joe in the competition actually helps her beat back the charges of Too old! which would be directed at her.

    Also helping her on this issue would be her opponent in the general, as (I predict) incumbent Romney would also be in his late sixties by then.

    There.  The age argument against her disappears.

    Parent

    Yes, but (none / 0) (#40)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:19:55 PM EST
    Hillary is a woman.  Can you imagine what her critics will be saying as far as her looks when she's 68?

    Parent
    Yes but given the competitive (none / 0) (#50)
    by brodie on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:59:23 PM EST
    backdrop I've just outlined, her critics who harp on her age or try to do so by other means will be more easily called out for rank sexism.

    And we'll see what Romney looks like after four years in office.  Usually people age quickly in the WH.

    Meanwhile with the quiet, behind the scenes application of the tools of modern medicine, if needed, she should be able to look nice enough.  From what I've seen lately as SoS, all she needs is a more regular workout schedule for those extra few pounds, take some of the fullness out of the face and hips.  Minor stuff.

    Parent

    After 4 years of Mittens... (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by Thanin on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 05:20:55 PM EST
    The Dems could run Kucinich and they'd win, so Hillary will be a cake walk, regardless of looks.

    Parent
    Unless Mittens (none / 0) (#113)
    by lousy1 on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 11:55:09 PM EST
    and a republican congress restore fiscal discipline and economic growth.

    Thise who are willing to drop the blinders have to admit that is at least a possibility.


    Parent

    Fiscal discipline in a fiat economy (none / 0) (#148)
    by Dadler on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 10:37:22 AM EST
    In case you're not aware, what you really mean is that human beings should continue to be enslaved by and controlled by the inanimate object of their own creation.  Why not say we need to protect ourselves from an attack of rabid tennis balls?  Money and fiscal discipline are NOT the problem -- human beings USING money and finance to treat other human beings like sh*t is the problem, and ALWAYS is when you are using trinkets with no intrinsic value for money.  

    Everything else is commentary.  And it never ceases to amaze me how many people really have no conception of how fake money is.  It doesn't grow on trees, indeed, it's better than that. We create and control it and can do ANYthing we want with it for the betterment of the nation as a whole.  But we're too dumb and selfish to care, I suppose. We'll keep treating money like it's a living thing, as we will definitely continue considering it as more important than the human beings who created it.

    When it comes to the relationship of humans to their financial Frankenstein, we are so far gone we're all but doomed.


    Parent

    Because it will be sexism (5.00 / 2) (#119)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 03:08:56 AM EST
    I really can't stand "the critics" concern trolls on this issue, they are pretty despicable.  Margaret Thatcher was no raving hottie, Sadly Great Britain beats the pants off of us in emotional intelligence.  It will always be what comes out of Clinton's mouth and her actions as well as ability to take them that define her, not her wrinkles.

    Parent
    After 4 years of Mitt (none / 0) (#72)
    by rickroberts on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 08:13:08 PM EST
    Demographics will be even more in favor of the Democrats. Hillary will be elected. The country will get a chance to correct a mistake.

    Parent
    Won't matter in the slightest (none / 0) (#99)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 11:12:48 PM EST
    So what?  The GOPers sneered at her looks, her sexuality, her honesty and everythign else when she was first lady.  Look who got the last laugh on that.

    Parent
    The GOPers?? (none / 0) (#123)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 06:12:40 AM EST
    It was "DEMOCRATS" who were doing that in 2008!

    Parent
    gryfalcon (none / 0) (#128)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 07:27:26 AM EST
    said "while she was first lady". It was the GOP that went after her full force when she was first lady.

    Parent
    What I do not understand, (none / 0) (#48)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:54:14 PM EST
    it the talk of a Democratic ticket in 2016 (any possibilities) during the 2012 election  Does this help the 2012 Democratic campaign?

    Parent
    Because 2012 is (5.00 / 2) (#58)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 05:45:53 PM EST
    sucky therefore people are looking to 2016 for some possible excitement.

    We already know that 2012 is going ot be decided by a handful of voters in a swing state. 2012 is kind of like watching paint dry.

    Parent

    Well, a recent poll (none / 0) (#15)
    by NYShooter on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:36:38 PM EST
     reported that 46% of Americans believed that humans appeared on the earth, fully formed, 10,000 years ago. When asked to explain how cave drawings depicting humans & animals dating back hundreds of thousands years got there, they responded it was trick by God to test our faith.

    46% ! Almost half all Americans; goes to show you the pool of voters we have going for us.


    Parent

    Well I think the oldest (none / 0) (#34)
    by brodie on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:08:54 PM EST
    cave drawings only go back 35,000 years (Chauvet, France).  

    But, yes, religious belief causes people to engage in all sorts of illogical thinking, and no amount of confirmed evidence can convince them otherwise.  

    Sadly too it will probably take several more centuries before mankind will be able to rid itself of the crutch of religious belief.  And I dont see religion letting go of its stranglehold on this country unless the current Union of states dissolves into regional rule -- which, the way things are devolving politically, may not be that far off.  Maybe a few decades.

    Parent

    Religion itself isnt the problem... (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Thanin on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 05:24:00 PM EST
    It's the little boys pretending to men that run the churches, they're the problem.

    Parent
    Both are the problem. (5.00 / 0) (#69)
    by brodie on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 06:48:24 PM EST
    Organized religion and most of their leaders.  The former keeps people from thinking for themselves and thinking logically while it gives them permission to avoid individual responsibility.  The latter are mostly power seeking types with greed and deception involved in many cases.  Not all but far too many leaders are of this type.

    Organized religion hinders our personal and collective evolution and tends to divide rather than unite humanity.  

    Of course I feel only slightly more positive about organized politics these days.  In that sphere too we seem to be going backwards.  But I don't know what to replace it with.

    Parent

    I get where you're coming from... (none / 0) (#176)
    by Thanin on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 03:08:21 PM EST
    So, regarding the problem, all I'd ask is -- and since you used the term -- religion organized by whom?

    Parent
    A little more (none / 0) (#161)
    by jondee on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 01:38:34 PM EST
    Leaves of Grass..a little more Bach, Miles and Edgard Varese..

    The forces of conservatism - probably rightly - percieve these as threats and, also rightly imo, as better alternatives to traditional religion, which is why "the arts" are so often downplayed or attacked outright..

    A little more cave painting maybe..:-)

    Parent

    Does this mean (none / 0) (#44)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:47:19 PM EST
    cave drawings only go back 35,000 years

    That there is a second group of uninformed people?

    ;-)

    Parent

    Yeah, those people who (5.00 / 3) (#53)
    by ZtoA on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 05:22:49 PM EST
    painted cave walls were so uninformed that they did not even realize they had not been created yet! :)

    The earliest known paint making tools are dated at 100,000 years old found in the Blombos cave in South Africa. Here's a cool article on it. What it doesn't say, tho, is that this was an extremely sophisticated set of paint making tools equipped to make two different kinds of paint. First a paste is made with the pigment and fat, then either more oil/fat is added to thin to make a paint suitable for body painting, or a mastic resin is added to make a paint suitable for surfaces like stone.

    Also there is good reason that red (and yellow) were very early colors. They were available. Black was - carbon from animal bones or fires, and white - chalk. After that it was colorful dirts. It is reflected in language also as words for different colors were added over many centuries. It goes up the color wheel too (which I find interesting) starting with red then yellow, green, and blue came much later - much later with egyptian blue used as a paint pigment which was a copper frit. Last was purple, very rare and hard to control and evidently (according to most of the color specialists...tho I do not agree) people actually could not see purple until a couple of thousand years ago.

    Ha, probably more than anyone wanted to know...tho I could go on forever.

    Parent

    Well, you got me confused now (none / 0) (#60)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 06:15:27 PM EST
    brodie says 10,000... you and shooter go for a `a 100,000 or so... I mean who's a guy gonna believe???

    ;-)

    Parent

    can't even believe myself... 35,000 (none / 0) (#61)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 06:16:28 PM EST
    Well, you were there, (none / 0) (#64)
    by NYShooter on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 06:25:34 PM EST
    how long ago was it??

    Parent
    OUCH!! Jim isn't that old. (none / 0) (#68)
    by Angel on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 06:43:09 PM EST
    Close to it... (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 11:14:01 PM EST
    I'm so old I can remember radios that ran off batteries.... BIG batteries and shows such as.... The Shadow (knows.....)

    Parent
    Do you remember (none / 0) (#110)
    by NYShooter on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 11:34:16 PM EST
    "Gunsmoke" on the radio, before James Arness & TV?

    I do.(remember, that is)

    Parent

    Nope (none / 0) (#135)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 08:07:26 AM EST
    I remember Sky King, Dick Tracy, Tennesse Jed, Sgt Preston (On King! On big fellow!), Lum and Abner, Charley McCarthy, Superman, Amos and Andy, The Shadow (Who knows what evil lurks in the minds of man...) but not Gun Smoke..

    And the calender the local barber shop had on the inside of the closet door that, if you were lucky, would be opened briefly while you were having your hair cut.

    Parent

    You don't remember (none / 0) (#143)
    by Zorba on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 09:28:40 AM EST
    Gunsmoke on the radio???  William Conrad was Matt Dillon.  It was geared more toward adults than to kids, but I discovered it when I was about 10 years old, and I loved it.

    Parent
    Shooter (none / 0) (#165)
    by jondee on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 02:07:41 PM EST
    do you, by any chance, remember Long John Nebel?

    Parent
    Yes! Oh my Lord (none / 0) (#168)
    by NYShooter on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 02:32:06 PM EST
    I was too young to grasp the basis of the topics very much, but I remember the distinctive, authoritarian voice, even when the subject was flying saucers or voo-doo.

    Now. Don't ask about any older programs; this is as far back as I'll admit to. lol


    Parent

    lol it was USUALLY flying saucers (none / 0) (#172)
    by jondee on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 02:43:35 PM EST
    and voodoo..and abductees, spirit mediums (talking to Bisop Pike), second gunman speaking from an undisclosed location, and of course, his wife Candy Jones, who was brain-washed and turned into a Mancurian Candidate by the CIA..

    Though the prank phone calls from listeners and Long John's cranky, fly-off-the-handle responces  were the really the most entertaining aspect of the show..

     

    Parent

    LOL (none / 0) (#181)
    by NYShooter on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 03:48:46 PM EST
    What a memory! Thanks.

    Parent
    Sophisticated paint making (none / 0) (#67)
    by brodie on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 06:33:31 PM EST
    tools?  Elementary chemistry?  I thought early man of 100,000 years ago was supposed to be a cave dwelling, knuckle dragging, club-wielding brute, sorta like their modern-day GOP descendants.

    This represents some awfully early advances in the tools of civilization for man of that period, at least according to the traditional version of human evolution mist of us learned in school.  But if the evidence is there to upset the old paradigms, then it's time to rewrite some things about early man, or perhaps unusual ways he might have "evolved", or whether we need to push human history back a little further in time.

    Parent

    It appears they were cognizant (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by Rojas on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 08:03:23 PM EST
    Wich appears to me a few steps up the evolutionary scale as their partisan decendants.

    Parent
    I must admit to a similar prejudice about (5.00 / 2) (#79)
    by ZtoA on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 08:37:00 PM EST
    early humans as being rather stupid. Apparently I was wrong. Geez, even animals are smart (altho I don't want to lessen your dig at the gop!)

    Did you ever read Diamond's Guns Germs and Steel? He outlines three human - what does he call it? - ways of life. Hunter/gatherer, agrarian, and herders. Each has a prejudice about the other. Agrarians think the hunter/gathers are stupid, the hunter/gathers think agrarians are ignorant (of the simplest of things like the phase of the moon and edible plants nearby) and the herders simply hate all the others.

    When you think about the raw intelligence it must have taken to control fire, and that was (disputed times) 250,000-1.5million years ago, and the raw intelligence it took to cultivate crops, make clothing, pottery, weapons of course, the wheel and so on! I love my laptop and iphone but even the Minoans had flush toilets. And, from an artist's pov, the cave paintings were, and still are, wonderful.

    Parent

    Great book (none / 0) (#101)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 11:15:20 PM EST
    absolutely revelatory.

    Parent
    Did you see Herzog's "Cave of (none / 0) (#105)
    by oculus on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 11:19:07 PM EST
    Forgotten Dreams"?

    Parent
    Yes, it was great (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by ZtoA on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 01:42:26 PM EST
    also a BBC film on prehistoric art, painting, small sculptures (venus of wildendorf) and monumental stone construction (stonehenge). Loved that too. Its called How Art Made the World.

    Parent
    Here's another documentary I enjoyed (5.00 / 1) (#187)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 05:22:42 PM EST
    Loved it (none / 0) (#120)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 06:03:39 AM EST
    what did Picasso say? (none / 0) (#160)
    by jondee on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 01:32:27 PM EST
    we've learned nothing. Or words to that effect.

    Parent
    Yes, something like that (none / 0) (#163)
    by ZtoA on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 01:45:59 PM EST
    I still have not had the chance to see any Gaudi in person, but he was obviously inspired by the entire cave experience. Those glittering stalactites and stalagmites also look like pipe organs. All very moving experiences.

    Parent
    poems are made by fools (none / 0) (#164)
    by jondee on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 01:58:28 PM EST
    like me, but only god can make a cave..;-)

    Parent
    in the days when Rome was at it's (none / 0) (#167)
    by jondee on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 02:30:29 PM EST
    height, a pound of Tyrian purple, made from crushed snail shells, cost the equivalent of something like a hundred thousand in today's dollars..

    Parent
    I heard that. (none / 0) (#169)
    by NYShooter on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 02:36:40 PM EST
    Amazing, the minutia our archeologists come up with.


    Parent
    Minutia?? (5.00 / 2) (#196)
    by ZtoA on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 06:39:25 PM EST
    First truly purple light fast dye used for and by royalty as a status symbol. OK, might be a bit of bias on my part. But look at how the Egyptians adorned their royalty, and look at the attention in present day for a royal wedding.

    Speaking of expensive pigments.... several years ago I visited the Sistine Chapel having seen it before it was cleaned. I can't really describe the impact of the experience, but I did have a random thought about the blue color of the background on the large wall. It had a hue of a ultramarine, but I thought "nah, couldn't be" since ultramarine was lapis imported from the caves of Afghanistan - over the water=ultramarine - and hugely expensive. This was a very pure hue too which means a high quality. Later I found out that indeed it was lapis! A whole wall of it. Of course the patron purchased the expensive pigments so it was the Pope's display of status, altho I'm sure michelangelo was happy to have great materials to work with.

    Parent

    It does, indeed (none / 0) (#55)
    by Yman on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 05:24:36 PM EST
    I love Dr. Jill (none / 0) (#4)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 02:56:18 PM EST
    Clinton/Biden (Jill) 2016 (none / 0) (#5)
    by Angel on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:00:45 PM EST
    Are there no limits... (none / 0) (#2)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 02:54:16 PM EST
    to police powers still in place?  Check out the lengths some cops in Colorado went to to catch a suspected bank robber.  Unreasonable search and seizure anyone?  What is "civilization" coming to?

    Hey! If you haven't robbed any banks, ... (none / 0) (#8)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:28:13 PM EST
    ... then you have absolutely nothing to worry about -- except for the weed and pipe you stashed in the glove compartment of your car. And please, don't ask me to smuggle anything back from Asia.

    ;-D

    Parent

    C'mon man... (none / 0) (#18)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:39:22 PM EST
    I hear the hop is to die for over in 'Nam!  Some friend you are...;)

    Parent
    Well, I'm outa here. (none / 0) (#95)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 09:40:00 PM EST
    We're at Honolulu Int'l Airport, waiting to board our flight to Tokyo. Talk to all of you later from Vietnam.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    DK radio is on air from Wisconsin. (none / 0) (#3)
    by oculus on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 02:56:04 PM EST


    . . . where turnout is amazing (5.00 / 5) (#43)
    by Towanda on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:35:36 PM EST
    Turnout is projected to hit records in both blue and red areas, though, and in a state that already has one of the highest voter turnouts of any state.  So we still cannot figure out a d*mn thing about what it means, other than that . . .

    This is what democracy looks like.

    Parent

    YES! Just heard turnout was around 95% in Dane Co. (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 08:20:41 PM EST
    Very proud of my former neighbors. No matter the result, the issues were as clear as they could be, and the people have spoken.

    I have a feeling we will go to bed happy with the results.

    Parent

    I so (5.00 / 2) (#77)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 08:29:11 PM EST
    hope you are right because this really is more than just Walker. It's about beating back Citizens United.

    Parent
    Yup. I think it is meaningful on many levels (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 08:31:47 PM EST
    Taking one away from the Koch Bros in theirn own back yard would mean a lot.

    Parent
    My friend here made about 500 calls. (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by oculus on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 08:44:43 PM EST
    My friends in Eau Claire (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by DFLer on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 08:51:03 PM EST
    probably got 100 of those!  ;o)

    Parent
    She did say people, mostly men, (5.00 / 0) (#89)
    by oculus on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 09:19:19 PM EST
    are not as polite as during run up to 2008 election.  

    Parent
    The turnout and effort for the turnout is great (none / 0) (#80)
    by DFLer on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 08:38:03 PM EST
    Looking at KOS as I am jonesing for news and don't have all news tv channels, I found this comment resonated:

    5:34 PM PT (kos): Remember that we've been subjected to years of whining from Beltway hacks about our "polarized" politics, and how horrible it was for voters. Many an organization has sprouted aiming to tap into this supposed voter frustration.

    Yet here we are, in the middle of summer, about to hit (and perhaps exceed) presidential-level turnout in a recall election.

    People want choices, and when they get them, they respond.



    Parent
    NBC seems to be calling it for Walker (none / 0) (#83)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 08:59:31 PM EST
    Very disappointing.

    Parent
    Good (none / 0) (#84)
    by BTAL on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 09:01:54 PM EST
    Interactive county by county map at Politico

    This is looking like a healthy double digit win for Walker.  Axelrod must be reaching for the Pepto.

    Parent

    Exit polling asked about the potus race and (none / 0) (#86)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 09:11:14 PM EST
    Obama is up 53% to 43.

    Parent
    On the economy, Obama over Romney, (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 09:14:05 PM EST
    44% to 36.

    I think any extrapolating to November is a waste of time in the pure horse race sense.

    Parent

    I find that totally baffling (none / 0) (#103)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 11:17:28 PM EST
    too.  I don't know what possible dynamic connects this to the next presidential election in any significant way.

    Parent
    Nate Silver agrees with us (none / 0) (#111)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 11:40:37 PM EST
    "But one thing that the recall is unlikely to do is tell us much about how the presidential contest in Wisconsin is likely to evolve in November. The politics for a governor's campaign are often subject to different currents than presidential ones, and historically the party identification of a state's governor has said little about how presidential candidates will fare there."

    Here.

    Parent

    Was this the same exit poll that predicted a draw? (5.00 / 2) (#114)
    by lousy1 on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 11:57:12 PM EST
    That lots of Republicans like Obama (5.00 / 6) (#126)
    by Towanda on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 07:14:17 AM EST
    should not be regarded as a win.  That the same mean-spirited, women-hating, homophobic, union-hating enemies of the middle class who like Walker also like Obama should be worrisome -- at least for those of us who think politics is more than a horse race.

    Nor is it a win when we wake up to a new morning for the Citizens United States of America.

    But we did what we needed to do:  We stopped what Walker represents; we stopped right-to-work and privatizing of our public employee pensions and more, because we won the state Senate in stage two of the recalls (after tieing it up with the recalls last summer that naysayers called a loss, not understanding what we needed to do. . . .).

    And now, the DA is freed from the ex officio ban on acting within 60 days of an election, and the John Doe investigation goes forward, and we resume the countdown to the day when we see Perp Walker in handcuffs and an orange jumpsuit, joining his 13 former aides under indictment and his donor already convicted of crimes against the state.

    And now we know -- you must have missed this here -- that Perp Walker also is facing the feds, in a concurrent investigation, not just for when he was county exec a la the John Doe but also for illegal (RICO? it seems) activities as governor.

    The Koch Bros. are gonna have to kick in a lot more to that legal defense fund for Perp Walker.

    But that still leaves lots of billions of their big bucks to spend in targeting your state next.

    Parent

    Exit polling (none / 0) (#88)
    by BTAL on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 09:19:13 PM EST
    is not votes.  Wouldn't hang my hat on exit polling this far out.

    Polling predicted a 50/50 tight race, not a 20% blowout.

    Parent

    Half an hour ago (none / 0) (#85)
    by ZtoA on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 09:04:32 PM EST
    NPR said it was a dead heat. Can NBC really be calling it already? I know Walker was up in the polls, and his fundraising was 'out' - outrageous and out of state. I am a little leery of recalls but because of his out spending I hope he does not get a victory.

    Parent
    $47.8 million vs. $4 million (5.00 / 4) (#127)
    by Towanda on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 07:25:03 AM EST
    wins every time in the Citizens United States of America, as you will see, wherever you are. . . .

    But we were very, very encouraged by the long-awaited support from Obama -- the night before the election, in a tweet.  What a wordsmith he is, not even using up all 140 characters!

    In gratitude, we are chipping in for a fund for closet organizers for the White House, so that next time, he can find those famous comfy shoes.  Any remaining funds will be used to buy him a calendar and an alarm clock, because he better fricking wake up before the eleventh hour this fall.

    We are sorry that will take us a while, but we do not have a lot left over after that heartwarming driveby visit of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, in response to weeks of begging by thousands of us on petitions for support from the DNC . . . for which we got not funds but her fundraising for more money not to Wisconsin but from Wisconsin.

    In all, we are most appreciative of the glimpses that we gained into the future for Obama and the DNC, and thus for the rest of us.  We, the canaries in the coal mine, now have full warning to fly the heck outahere, if we can, because what is coming this fall ain't pretty, folks.  You will see.

    Parent

    I'm not (5.00 / 2) (#132)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 07:34:50 AM EST
    sure how much fault DWS has in this. I seem to remember OFA gaining or trying to gain control of the money of most of these organizations. That being said it still doesnt excuse the lack of funds that were thrown into WI but you bet your bottom dollar when it's Obama's a** on the line, WI will get a TON of money.

    Parent
    Yes, to be fair, we here also are not sure (none / 0) (#173)
    by Towanda on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 02:51:56 PM EST
    whether Wasserman-Schultz is a decider or just does what she is told.

    Parent
    If anything showed how disconnected (4.50 / 4) (#136)
    by Anne on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 08:07:47 AM EST
    Obama is from the people, and how that disconnect is being reinforced by the party poo-bahs, it has to be the events in Wisconsin that culminated in this recall election.

    "They" - the people running the campaign and the DNC - can keep saying that a state election doesn't matter to the November elections, but I don't think these people realize just how demoralizing it has been for Democrats, especially those who worked so hard in Wisconsin - to see how little the national Democratic organization and the Obama campaign cared about this fight.

    The rhetorical stick with which Obama hopes to beat Romney has been swapped out for a wet noodle: how does he go after Romney as a candidate who doesn't care about the little guy when he's demonstrated quite starkly that he doesn't either?  I guess I'll be treated to more instances of listening to Obama's words and wondering if anyone notices that his actions don't line up with them.

    Argh.  

    Parent

    Hey, Farmboy...feel free to disagree (none / 0) (#149)
    by Anne on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 10:38:37 AM EST
    with me, but troll rating everything I post is not the way to do it; if you don't believe me - ask Jeralyn.

    Parent
    Hey Anne, disagreeing with you on two (none / 0) (#153)
    by Farmboy on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 12:39:22 PM EST
    posts isn't "troll rating everything" you post. I chose those two posts to rate down specifically for their content.

    Please, though, follow through with your threat. If Jeralyn decides I'm a troll because I disagreed with two of your comments about Obama's character, well, it's her site and those are the terms I agreed to.

    Parent

    It wasn't a threat, Farmboy. (5.00 / 2) (#156)
    by Anne on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 12:53:38 PM EST
    I'm not going to Jeralyn over it, but was merely telling you not to take my word for what 1 ratings are for.

    I just know that on multiple occasions, Jeralyn has stated that 1's are not for disagreeing with someone's point of view, which is my understanding of the meaning of "content."

    Seems like it would be much more meaningful to refute or rebut or offer some response than to just whack someone with a "1."

    Parent

    Anne, I've changed the ratings I made on your two (5.00 / 3) (#189)
    by Farmboy on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 05:50:21 PM EST
    posts to show that while I disagree with the opinions you express in them, I don't want to violate any site rules about using a 1 rating to indicate disagreement. Neither do I want to give your posts a 5 to show any support for them. So I chose 3, a nice middle number on the Likert rating scale that hopefully you won't find offensive.

    As for attempting to refute or rebut your opinions, what would be the point? Years of reading your posts has clearly demonstrated that there is nothing I could say or do that would change to a positive direction your opinion on Obama, his presidency, or his qualifications to continue in that office.

    So, instead of tilting at windmills I chose to use the rating system. Mea culpa.

    Parent

    Farmboy, that's a very fair and (5.00 / 2) (#191)
    by Anne on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 06:02:54 PM EST
    honorable thing to for you to have done, and I respect you for doing it.

    As for what would be the point of expressing your contrary opinion, I think we all have something to offer that bears considering.  I know it doesn't show in my comments, but I really do struggle with wanting Obama to be what I had hoped he would be and that the country so badly needed him to be.  Are my expectations too high?  I don't know - did Obama set the bar too high?  

    I guess I'm too liberal, but that's just who I am, and I don't see that changing anytime soon.  I really think the two-party system isn't serving us well, so blurred have the lines become between them.  

    Oh well, you've heard me sing this song before, so I'll stop now.  Just wanted to acknowledge your graciousness, which is refreshing and appreciated.

    Peace.

    Parent

    An interjection (5.00 / 2) (#201)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 07:36:20 PM EST
    Your comment to Farmboy is gracious as well.  

    What caught my eye is the language wherein you vocalized that you may be too liberal.  From your comments, I would say that you are not too liberal.  Probably because your stated overall aspirations mirror my own. Yet...it may be that the standards to which you hold politicians (which all Presidents certainly are, by definition) are so theoretical, approaching perfectionism.  To me, that is appealing...on so many levels. And, it is also so pollyanna on so many other levels.  A long time ago (and I'm sure, with my blabbering that I've mentioned it earlier, I spoke as a teenager with Saul Alinsky quite by accident. What I learned then in very briefhand: "Go for the whole load...accept the half...or you may end up with nothing." (He was speaking of moving society forward...and the art of compromise.)

    Nonetheless, I appreciate also the conciliatory & open tone here in response to Farmboy.  

    Parent

    What threat? (5.00 / 1) (#159)
    by sj on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 01:24:18 PM EST
    I've reread these two comments a few times and no matter how I read it I can't find a threat.  

    Parent
    Hey - you made history! (none / 0) (#131)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 07:32:31 AM EST
    Walker is the first governor in the country's history to survive a recall election.

    Parent
    Yes, because we now know we WON (5.00 / 4) (#174)
    by Towanda on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 02:57:42 PM EST
    back the state Senate, hahahahahaha Walker.

    So Democrats now can get their hands on some of those records that Republicans have been refusing to request.  The feds want to see the records, too -- because now, as we learned this week, Perp Walker is facing not just the DA's John Doe (new indictees, too, now more than a dozen of his ex-aides) but also the feds' RICO investigation.

    And now, Walker and we will not see today this headline that he had planned:

    Walker Calls Special Session
    to Push Right-to-Work Law
    and Punish Public Employees
    by Privatizing Pension Fund

    Yep, it's the headlines that we don't see that are the news here . . . where Walker, this very day, is holding his reconciliation session with legislators over brewski and bratwursts.

    If they're Johnsonville brats, of course, may the Dems spit the sausage bits back in his dopey face.

    We won, we won, we stopped Walker!  That's what we wanted.  It took stage one last year, and stage two last year, and now -- on to stage three.

    Parent

    You know (none / 0) (#180)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 03:25:57 PM EST
    that the Wisconsin State Senate is in recess until November, right? And 16 of the 33 seats are up for re-election.

    If it holds up, the victory for Democrats could prove fleeting. They will have to defend their apparent control of the Senate in November under a new set of legislative district maps that were written by Republicans to favor their party.

    Republicans have their sights on the seats held by Democratic Sens. Jim Holperin of Conover and Jessica King of Oshkosh. Holperin is retiring and King is new to the Senate, having won a recall race in August against then-Sen. Randy Hopper of Empire.

    Under that new set of maps, Lehman in 2014 would have to face a Republican opponent in a new district that will be almost impossible for any Democrat to hold.

    While Democrats would take the majority if Lehman is certified as the winner later this month, they would be limited in what they could do.

    Sen. Mike Ellis (R-Neenah) will retain his post as Senate president until the entire Senate meets to replace him. But because the Senate is out of session, it can meet only in limited circumstances, such as if Walker calls a special session or if the Republican-controlled Assembly agrees to hold an extraordinary session.

    The Senate president sits on the Senate Committee on Organization, a leadership committee that has the power to set the Senate agenda and take care of administrative matters, from determining the pay of aides to whether to hire legal counsel. With Ellis as president, the Republicans would have a 3-2 majority on the committee, meaning they could block the will of the Democrats if they wanted.

    If Ellis were to resign as president, Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Leibham (R-Sheboygan) would take his place. Ellis said he didn't know what would happen if Leibham were to then resign as president.

    "I'm stuck as president in there," Ellis said. "I don't plan on resigning. If (Democrats) can constitutionally get to the floor, of course I won't stand in the way.

    "There is no history to deal with this situation."



    Parent
    You know what a special session is, right? (5.00 / 2) (#183)
    by Towanda on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 04:06:06 PM EST
    Yes (none / 0) (#184)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 04:20:22 PM EST
    And it only applies IF it is called.  From what I've read, Walker was going to call it regarding a mining bill, but it doesn't appear that he has yet.

    You DO know that until the Senate is in session, as a full body, that the president of the Senate remains a Republican, don't you?

    Parent

    Yes, I certainly do (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by Towanda on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 04:55:33 PM EST
    since I know Mike Ellis.  Nice guy for a Republican.  (But bad toupe.)

    And I also know, as I wrote as the very reason for my post, that Walker was planning to call that special session today, had he still controlled the legislature.

    You apparently did not know that.

    Now that you do, maybe you can understand my post.

    Parent

    Another bad day for labor (none / 0) (#178)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 03:20:41 PM EST
    After the debacle of all the money they put into the Arkansas primary to defeat Blanche Lincoln (and lost), this is yet another huge loss to labor.

    And this seemed to be an interesting side note:

    Exit polls show union voters supported Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett (D) by a 71 to 29 percent margin over Walker. But voters who live with a union member -- but are not themselves card-carrying members -- supported Barrett by a much narrower margin: 51 percent to 48 percent. Walker won voters with no such union ties by about 20 points.

    All told, voters who live in union households made up 33 percent of recall voters -- the most in any presidential or gubernatorial election dating back to 2004. Union members themselves, though, accounted for 17 percent of voters, while those living with a union member made up 15 percent.

    That suggests that Democratic and labor efforts to turn out their supporters (which is labor's calling card) were largely successful. The problem was that too many of those who came out sided with Walker, whose recall was initiated after a controversial gambit to strip public-sector unions of collective bargaining rights.

    The fact that Walker still won nearly half of the vote from those close to union members suggests the backlash against him was limited to the Democratic base and those directly affected by his decision, while Walker was able to garner plenty of support from everybody else -- including family of union members.



    Parent
    Hold all tickets, hold all tickets... (none / 0) (#6)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:14:04 PM EST
    There is more than a mile and a half standing between "I'll Have Another" and history, Belmont Park maintenance workers and starters are threatening to strike effective Friday.

    They've been without a contract for two years, and the stickler in the negotiations is overtime pay.  The workers got paid overtime on Saturdays and Sundays under the expired deal, the NYRA wants standard pay on the weekends in a new deal, which could amount to a 30% paycut for some workers.

    Why don't they just up the hourly pay? (none / 0) (#9)
    by nycstray on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:28:34 PM EST
    and then pay OT on anything that actually is OT?

    Parent
    Me thinks NYRA.... (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:38:06 PM EST
    is looking to take the workers to the woodshed.  As long as the net pay ain't down 30%, I'm sure the workers would be fine with that type of deal.

    I can't blame the workers for the timing, the Stakes is the only leverage they have in negotiations.  Lets hope they work it out.

    Parent

    Agreed. (none / 0) (#19)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:39:49 PM EST
    I grew up in the land of Santa Anita, Hollywood Park, Los Alamitos and Del Mar. I've never heard of a race track that was closed on weekends and holidays (save for Thanksgiving and Christmas) during racing season.

    If the place is open for business as a matter of course on weekends and holidays, then one should not expect to receive overtime simply because it's not Monday through Friday.

    Overtime should apply to all hours accrued above the 8 hour day or 40 hour work week for full-time employees, or the hours above and beyond one's regularly scheduled shift if one is a part-time employee.

    Parent

    But ya can't go back now... (none / 0) (#26)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:54:06 PM EST
    when all the workers have come to count on that overtime.  Not without raising the base wage considerably to even it out.

    Parent
    You do have a point, especially ... (none / 0) (#36)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:14:04 PM EST
    ... since that was in the prior contract.

    But workers also have to consider that horse tracks across the country are really struggling right now, due to declining attendance. Most of these places were built back when the sport was in its heyday and there was no television or other distractions, and you'd draw 40,000 fans or more even on a weekday. That's simply not the case anymore.

    I went to Santa Anita with my aunt (who loves the sport) the last time I was in Pasadena, and on a Friday afternoon in a rathwer cavernous place that holds over 100,000 people, I'd say that there were no more than 6,000 people there.

    And were it not for off-track book and the popular casino that are located on its premises, Hollywood Park would have fallen to the wrecking ball a long time ago.

    Belmont is one of the largest racetracks in the country, and it's been hurting, big-time. Saturday will be the only time all year that it's full. Its workers can't expect a track that's otherwise in the red and losing money to be able to stay open indefinitely. If they want to continue working there, there has to be some give and take.

    Parent

    I'm not sold they're losing money.... (none / 0) (#139)
    by kdog on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 08:38:27 AM EST
    attendance is way down, true, but the wagering isn't down so much....and that's the cash cow.    

    If the NYRA is losing money I think it is because pols have stashed too many cronies in high paid positions doing d*ck, not because the workers who make the races go are overpaid.  

    Parent

    Can't wait for Saturday (none / 0) (#22)
    by lilburro on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:46:51 PM EST
    should be a great race.  Bodemeister won't be running, but Union Rags is back in the mix.  I hope he can pull it out even though I'm not so sanguine about the trainer.

    Parent
    He's got a real shot I think... (none / 0) (#27)
    by kdog on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:55:33 PM EST
    I'm not worried about Union Rags, I think Dullahan is the main obstacle in the way of a triple crown.

    Parent
    After watching Big Brown at the Belmont (none / 0) (#37)
    by lilburro on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:14:23 PM EST
    I worry about injury more than anything else :/

    Parent
    Shamelessly, (none / 0) (#12)
    by lentinel on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:32:49 PM EST
    I went to see "Prometheus" - a 3D sci-fi movie. I am interested in 3D, and also good sci-fi so I decided to give it a whirl.

    It was so cliché ridden that I could hardly bear it. I could anticipate just about every scene. With no effort. And I didn't want to.
    Many of the clichés were lifted from "Alien", also a Ridley Scott
    film, so I guess he's entitled. But why? For the money?

    But it astonishes me that the only thing that sci-fi people seem to be able to think of in terms of the future - in this case 2092 - is some of the gadgets and machinery. The clothing is the same. Sweatshirts and jeans. Except for a skin-tight spandex outfit for Charlize Theron. Also - the vocabulary and slang is exactly that which is current today. They can't imagine anything hipper it seems. No evolution of language for us. We don't say, "twenty-three skidoo" anymore, but saying, "I ain't taking that sh*t" will apparently be current eighty years from now.

    And speaking of slang and jargon: They have one black character, played by Idris Elba. He is the "commander" of the spaceship. And guess what? In response to a communication from some of the crew, he is made to say, "Copy dat". Seriously. He speaks in what ol' Harry Reid calls a "black accent". (The line I quoted above was also given to him to say.) It seems so racist to me - but I shouldn't be surprised I suppose. But can't these writers and producers imagine anything else?  Will only machinery evolve?

    I love Ridley Scott as a director. (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:47:40 PM EST
    One of my all-time favorite science fiction films is Blade Runner (although the 1991 director's cut is much better than the original 1982 theatrical release).

    That said, I've really had my doubts about Prometheus, strictly judging by the constant TV trailers that have been fired away at us. Thanks for confirming my darkest suspicions that this was going to be one of Scott's cinematic misfires. I'll save $10 and wait for its release on DVD.

    Parent

    I am going for one reason (none / 0) (#24)
    by Slado on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:50:25 PM EST
    to see Naomi Rapace on the big screen.

    I developed an unhealthy love affair with her after the Swedish GWTDT movies.

    she is awesome.

    Parent

    greaaaat... (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by CST on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:58:18 PM EST
    way to plant an unnecessary seed.

    I do not need to pay $10 just to see Idris Elba on the big screen.
    I do not need to pay $10 just to see Idris Elba on the big screen.
    I do not need to pay $10 just to see Idris Elba on the big screen.

    I've developed an unhealthy love affair with just about every actor from the Wire, but especially Idris Elba and Michael B. Jordan (Wallace!!!!!)

    Parent

    Watch (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:07:49 PM EST
    Luther on Netflix (Elba) and Friday Night Lights (TV) / Parenthood on Hulu (Jordan).

    Parent
    ohhh (none / 0) (#35)
    by CST on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:10:26 PM EST
    I know :)

    Also the movie Chronicle (Jordan).  And those 5-6 episodes of the office (Elba).

    Btw. Friday Night Lights and Parenthood are also on netflix.

    Parent

    Gawk.... Who are those people?? (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:50:50 PM EST
    I feel sooooo old.

    Parent
    They are (none / 0) (#49)
    by CST on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:57:38 PM EST
    actors.

    Idris Elba

    Michael B Jordan

    They were both in the HBO show The Wire, which is critically acclaimed, but my mother hated it.

    Parent

    Thank you (5.00 / 2) (#62)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 06:18:48 PM EST
    Now if you will wheel me back inside......

    Parent
    Get also the bbc series 'the Hour' if it is out (none / 0) (#76)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 08:27:21 PM EST
    on Netflix yet for your Dominic West (McNulty) fix.

    Parent
    Lol. I never had any intention of seeing this (none / 0) (#74)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 08:24:44 PM EST
     movie ....but Idris Elba on the big screen? Hmmmmmm.....

    Parent
    Blade Runner (none / 0) (#104)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 11:18:39 PM EST
    is the all times best true scifi flick ever made.

    "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep," Phillip K Dick.

    Parent

    Especially funny (none / 0) (#13)
    by jbindc on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:34:43 PM EST
    since Idris Elba speaks normally with a British accent.  :)

    Parent
    Unbelievable. (none / 0) (#20)
    by lentinel on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 03:41:13 PM EST
    That confirms what I felt.

    Parent
    I'm sick of the (none / 0) (#45)
    by brodie on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 04:47:41 PM EST
    cinematic cliche of the monster evil alien.

    Plus I have a sense that most of the intelligent highly evolved life forms we're going to encounter in our space travels, much later in the century probably, will predominantly be of human form, perhaps varying mainly in size but not overall anthropomorphic shape.

    Btw, Ridley Scott says this one doesn't even qualify as a prequel to Alien, but instead has only "DNA strains" of that movie series and is different enough to spawn an entirely new line of sequels.  That's the claim anyway.  It appears someone here would disagree.

    Parent

    On the (none / 0) (#57)
    by lentinel on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 05:40:43 PM EST
    one hand, we have the monster alien.

    On the other hand, we have the humanoid alien with no clothes a big head and big eyes.

    You know - there are creatures I have seen that live way under the sea that are way past the imaginings of any of these earthbound screen writers.

    You know, the original "Invaders from Mars" has a quality about it that is scary and otherworldly - even though you can see the "aliens" running around with zippers on the back of their costumes.

    The original "War of the Worlds" is also otherworldly.
    The original "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" is still chilling.

    The technology of those older films has been surpassed - i suppose - but they have an aura that these newer glossy commercial megabuck epics do not. They encourage the "willing suspension of disbelief". These newer ones - well - I can't for even a moment forget that I am sitting in a theatre watching someone out to make a buck.

    Parent

    I thought Prometheus is meant to be an Alien (none / 0) (#51)
    by Farmboy on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 05:14:28 PM EST
    prequel. Without spoilers, does that assumption make sense or have I unwisely trusted something I read on the web?

    Cause stuff on the web would never be wrong...

    Parent

    It's hard to (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by lentinel on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 05:25:45 PM EST
    think of this film as a prequel.

    I did not read anything about this movie before seeing it.
    I saw it partly because I liked "Alien" and saw that it was directed by Ridley Scott.

    All I saw was material - lots of it - that was taken from "Alien" and used - to no dramatic effect - in this movie. Rather than feeling like a prequel, it felt like a ripoff.


    Parent

    It's not a direct prequel ... (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 08:16:31 AM EST
    but it's set in the same universe prior to "Alien".  According to Scott, it will take two more movies before they get to the events that lead directly into "Alien".

    Parent
    Well, (none / 0) (#140)
    by lentinel on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 08:42:04 AM EST
    they can make as many movies as they want.
    But I have had quite enough.

    Parent
    Wisconsin (none / 0) (#91)
    by DFLer on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 09:24:46 PM EST
    CSPAN just reported that there are still people waiting to vote in Milwaukee. The voter that they interviewed said that yes he had heard that some news orgs had called the race, but still would continue to wait to vote, so the margin would reflect all votes, etc. He said he'd been waiting an hour and half or so. Sheesh

    Milwaukee Channel4 page (none / 0) (#93)
    by BTAL on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 09:30:14 PM EST
    for the 4 Senate races/results.

    Link

    Double digit leads for all 4 incumbents.

    How is it possible (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by NYShooter on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 09:38:49 PM EST
    that the polls were this wrong?

    I know they mostly called it for walker, but close.

    Something is very, very wrong.

    Parent

    Big areas still counting? (none / 0) (#96)
    by EL seattle on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 09:51:21 PM EST
    That would be my guess. When 40% of the votes were in, it was 60-40. Now that ratio has declined somewhat.  But not that much.

    Politically, maybe this was a good thing for Obama to keep out of. Although it has big national implications (esp. for gov. unions), it was still a local/state mudfight, and maybe non-locals weren't be too welcome.  

    Parent

    The explanations that I've read (5.00 / 3) (#97)
    by NYShooter on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 10:23:39 PM EST
    that make the most sense is that people generally don't approve of recalls for reasons other than criminal malfeasance. For better or worse elections are pretty much sacrosanct and the way to get rid of unpopular politicians is through the next election.

    Makes sense to me.


    Parent

    Yes...I also heard that many don't like recalls (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by DFLer on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 08:04:41 AM EST
    and say that(except for criminal mal. as you say) , elections should count and stand. So many democrats may have voted for Walker on those grounds.

    However, unfortunately, Walker will use this as some kind of mandate on his policies. IMO, those who voted for him on the basis on a dislike for recalls screwed up.

    Parent

    Screwed up politaclly speaking that is. (none / 0) (#138)
    by DFLer on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 08:25:49 AM EST
    agree, and (5.00 / 1) (#194)
    by NYShooter on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 06:13:57 PM EST
    agree.

    Walker will distort the meaning of the results, and the well meaning, but woefully confused, "principal" voters screwed up.....royally.

    Parent

    Case in point: The Governator. (none / 0) (#98)
    by oculus on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 10:27:10 PM EST
    I think you're right. (none / 0) (#106)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 11:20:26 PM EST
    The unions and the Demos way over played their hands.

    Parent
    I agree that is the most likely reason (none / 0) (#171)
    by indy in sc on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 02:40:28 PM EST
    for the margin of the win.  He would probably have won anyway given the enormous $$ disparity, but many people, myself included, believe that a recall should be a rare tool used only for official misconduct.  I don't think it needs to rise to the level of criminal malfeasance, but official misconduct should be the reason for a recall and not just bad policies (even terrible ones). Bad policies should be vigorously fought against, but if you lose the fight--that's what the next election is for...

    As many like to say "elections have consequences" and unfortunately, we have to suffer through some bad ones in order to get to where the populace elects someone better.

    Parent

    would not dispute (none / 0) (#195)
    by NYShooter on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 06:16:47 PM EST
    your clarification of my remarks.

    thanks

    Parent

    Attitudes toward "Recall" in general (none / 0) (#175)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 03:06:00 PM EST
    Agree that a significant factor here appears to be the polity's attitude toward recalls as a removal option...CBS, among others, reports that a large plurality accepts the recall approach as appropriate in situations of known misdeeds and exceptional circumstances.  My husband (once the American Government etc political-sci professor) reminded me as a muttered around the place last night that voter aversion to recalls are the historical norm...& that the unusual personality & California factors in the Gray Davis recall some years back proved only the exception.

    Also:  Adding other factors such as a bit of fallaway from union households in view of playing off against public employees (the referenced "divide & conquer") together with the earlier absentees (estimated about 15%) would lead to an in-place result that mimicked 2010.  For me, the good news--in addition to the state senate win--is that the fierce, outsize spending by Koch & the RNC resulted only in the in-place apparent result...and not the pulverization that might be expected with an 8 to 1 advantage.  Against a stacked $$$ deck, the teachers, the unions, & their tremendous supporters and foot soldiers did themselves proud by staunching further incursion by awakening the rest of us.

    Parent

    Juan Cole (Informed Comment) includes: (none / 0) (#177)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 03:09:13 PM EST
    8. Barrett had already lost big to Walker in 2010, getting only 36% of the vote. He just isn't that popular on a statewide basis and the Dems were foolish to have him lead the recall effort.



    Parent
    Obama's caution as a politician (none / 0) (#121)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 06:09:02 AM EST
    seems to have been justified in this case. Saw that he probably could not sway things and did not tie himself to it.

     Neither did Romney, for that matter.

    Parent

    He missed an opportunity, though, to (4.67 / 6) (#125)
    by Anne on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 06:52:20 AM EST
    build on the energy of the protests and the issues that brought so many people to the capitol, to talk about workers and workers' rights, and the effort by Republicans to solidify corporate power on the backs of workers - all strong, populist messages that would have spoken to people all over the country, and would have sharpened the divide between Republicans and Democrats.

    Unless that's a message he isn't behind.  

    Wisconsin isn't the only state that's looking to weaken the unions and shift more power to big business, and sort of standing off to the side and being a dispassionate observer of what Walker and the Koch brothers engineered in Wisconsin did a terrible disservice to workers there and in states around the country.  If I'm a union member, do I think Barack Obama has my back?  Is interested in fighting for me?  No, I don't.

    That's the opportunity he didn't show up for - heck, he couldn't even show up in Wisconsin when the protests were happening.  What Walker did in Wisconsin is going to happen again in states that have Republican governors and strong Republican legislatures, and where will Obama be?  

    I think the Obama people are kidding themselves if they think this won't matter in November; sure, maybe the exit polling in Wisconsin has Dems breathing a sigh of relief, but the fallout from the Wisconsin election, the analysis of what went wrong, is going to have a message in there for Obama - and it may not be the one he wants to hear.

    Parent

    Well, that is what caution is (none / 0) (#199)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 07:08:48 PM EST
    The unwillingness to risk a big loss for a big gain.

    Parent
    Recall elections are (none / 0) (#109)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 11:25:52 PM EST
    almost impossible to poll correctly because they're so rare.  Nobody has a proven model for who's actually going to go to the polls.

    Parent
    The polls weren't wrong (none / 0) (#122)
    by jbindc on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 06:11:34 AM EST
    Every poll (except Barrett's quoted "internal polls") said this would be a Walker win - the last poll I saw out of Marquette Law School said 7 points.

    Guess they were right.

    Parent

    One good thing at least (none / 0) (#112)
    by NYShooter on Tue Jun 05, 2012 at 11:42:12 PM EST
    that came out of this was that it was not a referendum on Obama. He polled at least 12 points better than Romney, so it confirms the opinion that this was strictly a local "Wisconsin thing" and had little National implication.


    Losers thank God for exit polls (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by lousy1 on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 12:00:32 AM EST
    winners thank God for votes.


    Parent
    Yep. See (5.00 / 2) (#129)
    by Towanda on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 07:29:55 AM EST
    my comments upthread, and what we're seeing in more analysis of the numbers . . . well, I've put in enough time here and in an incredible grassroots movement to know that millions of boots on the ground cannot beat big money, so it's back to work for me.  And I wouldn't want Nu Dems to have to worry their pretty little heads that are on the chopping block for this fall.

    Because for Obama to win, what he will have to give up ought to be the worry:  Us.

    Parent

    That (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 07:38:03 AM EST
    is the worst part of all this: money trumps all it seems.

    Parent
    Making the best play (none / 0) (#179)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 03:23:21 PM EST
    Though my emotional side wanted the President to travel to Wisconsin & "do/say something dramatic." I came to realize recently that the better approach was to allow the focus to be fully on the grassroots growth within the state for a very practical read :  The outsider nationalization by White House or DNC entry would not be likely to bring in the additional votes that Recall effort needed (namely--as I understand from a chance chat with a local politician this a.m.--more white male demographic), thereby leading to a perceived double loss in the state & at the national Dem level.  The approach taken seems to have offered the maximum chance to enhance some gain (e.g., state senate ) and minimize loss (e.g., the avoidance of throwing in the WH to fall on the sword.)

    Parent
    He didn't have to go there to (5.00 / 1) (#182)
    by Anne on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 03:49:43 PM EST
    talk about the issues raised, or to use those issues to highlight the reasons why the overall Democratic message was head-and-shoulders above the dreck Republicans like Walker are pushing.

    Parent
    No doubt (5.00 / 1) (#185)
    by sj on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 04:46:38 PM EST
    A tweet was exactly the right tack for Obama to take in support.

    ::takes a pinch of snuff::

    Parent

    ...or a snort of scotch (none / 0) (#190)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 06:02:31 PM EST
    ew (none / 0) (#192)
    by sj on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 06:09:22 PM EST
    I despise scotch (none / 0) (#193)
    by sj on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 06:11:49 PM EST
    And since I didn't have lunch that kind of upset my stomach.  Nevertheless, I'm glad you understand the appropriate response to Obama's exertions on Wisconsin's behalf.

    Parent
    My husband (none / 0) (#197)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 06:47:35 PM EST
    loves, loves loves scotch and I can't stand it. Ugh, that stuff is just simply awful in my book.

    Parent
    To: sj and Ga6th (5.00 / 1) (#200)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 07:20:59 PM EST
    Wouldn't ya know: Other than a good Boodles martini (stirred, one olive), there's little better than a good single malt scotch.  (Clarification: They serve different purposes, IMO.  As I'm older now, scotch is reserved for very special occasions...and usually in colder weather.)

    Oops...didn't mean to opine too much on fluids & palates.

    Parent

    Is the State of Florida guilty of profiling? (none / 0) (#116)
    by Redbrow on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 01:59:32 AM EST
    This is an obscure law but might possibly apply or at least disprove the accusation that Zimmerman was profiling.

    Didn't Dee Dee originally testify that Trayvon put up his hood up in response to Zimmerman watching him, presumably to hide his face?

    876.12 Wearing mask, hood, or other device on public way.--No person or persons over 16 years of age shall, while wearing any mask, hood, or device whereby any portion of the face is so hidden, concealed, or covered as to conceal the identity of the wearer, enter upon, or be or appear upon any lane, walk, alley, street, road, highway, or other public way in this state.


    Good thing it doesn't get (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by nycstray on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 02:25:43 AM EST
    freezing a** cold there ;)

    Perhaps since it's an obscure law, they mean a hood vs a hoodie? You know, those things that look like pillow cases etc used to rob banks and other fun activities . . . . TM could have just as easily been wearing a baseball cap and pulled down the brim . . . . which also wouldn't say if Z was or was not profiling or the state for that matter.

    Parent

    found the audio of Dee Dee (none / 0) (#117)
    by Redbrow on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 02:15:05 AM EST
    At around 0:20 in this clip from the Young Turks.

    "he said this man was watching him so he put his hoodie on.."

    Parent

    Amtrak ticket agent in LA informed (none / 0) (#155)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 12:52:44 PM EST
    us he waited on Gloria Allred.  I asked, did she have a woman with her?  He didn't respond.  

    For kdog: artist arrested in NY, (none / 0) (#188)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 06, 2012 at 05:36:09 PM EST
    jailed at Rikers Island.  Handcuffs.  The whole nine yards.  He's out now.  link