home

Tuesday Open Thread

Busy work day.

Hillary widens her lead in Pennsylvania

The Right wing in Colombia refused to approve the peace deal with FARC. The mis-guided public listened to the right wing rhetoric of former President Alvaro Uribe.

Hurricane Matthew slams Haiti, heads to Florida.

Anyone watching the Veep debate tonight? I'll pass.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Kim Kardashian Tied Up, Robbed in Paris Apartment | There Has to Be Another Phone Choice >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    I'm going to watch it (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Oct 04, 2016 at 04:48:45 PM EST
    though Pence is so creepy I'm not sure how long I will last. Looking into his legislation in Indiana should be enough to scare off lots of voters from the GOP ticket and possibly drag down ticket into the dumpster too.

    Yeah, me too. I want to see Tim Kaine's approach. (none / 0) (#3)
    by ruffian on Tue Oct 04, 2016 at 04:57:47 PM EST
    Watching Biden talk about Trump's statements on veterans and PTSD last night, I was beginning to think Clinton should have taken BTD's advice and nominated Biden again. I hope Kaine can bring the fire at least on that topic.

    Parent
    I want to see how Kaine responds (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Peter G on Tue Oct 04, 2016 at 05:15:59 PM EST
    to the absurd but potentially harmful "Willie Horton" attack on him for having taken two pro bono capital cases as a lawyer decades ago. And how Pence justifies the attack. Considering that Kaine's (presumed) opposition to capital punishment undoubtedly stems from his being a religious Catholic, that should be a hard line of attack for Pence - the defender of religious "freedom" in the public sphere - to defend.

    Parent
    I understand (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Oct 04, 2016 at 05:28:47 PM EST
    they used that same line of attack twice on him in Virginia both when he ran for governor and for senate and both times it was a bust. So I'm pretty sure he will easily handle that question.

    Parent
    I saw headlines about that (none / 0) (#5)
    by ruffian on Tue Oct 04, 2016 at 05:21:50 PM EST
    but did not dig into what it was about. Yes, that will be an interesting discussion - I'm sure it will be brought up.

    Who is the moderator, I'm alsmost afraid to look...

    Hmm, a new face, Elaine Quijano. that will be worth watching for its own sake

    But on Tuesday night, Quijano will preside over the vice presidential debate between Tim Kaine and Mike Pence, introducing herself to tens of millions of Americans in the process. A 42-year-old Filipino-American, Quijano will be the first Asian-American journalist ever to moderate a national debate, and the youngest in 28 years.  

    Parent

    What amazed me, Peter, was that ... (none / 0) (#8)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Oct 04, 2016 at 05:51:46 PM EST
    ... Republicans actually bragged about doing so yesterday, and GOP communications director Sean Spicer even called it a "Willie Horton-style attack" in his initial media releases. Honestly, these clowns make me embarrassed to be a white man nowadays.

    Parent
    Kaine did a very fine job (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Peter G on Tue Oct 04, 2016 at 10:21:03 PM EST
    on the death penalty tonight, and gave the best articulation for general consumption that I've ever heard of the proper roles of private belief and public policy in the life of a public servant. He wisely and consistently applied that paradigm both to capital punishment and to abortion policy. Pence responded, as I understood it, that his private beliefs were strong, and that he thought it was proper to impose them on everyone else whenever he can.

    Parent
    IMHO, Gov. Pence showed me last night ... (none / 0) (#36)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 12:29:13 PM EST
    ... why his gubernatorial re-election campaign was becoming increasingly problematic this year for Indiana Republicans. He's straight out of central casting for the stock role of stereotypical conservative politician, as a guy who can score points on style but is woefully lacking in genuine substance.

    Now, that could've worked if Pence's constituents in Hoosierville were merely content to let him rule benignly. But given that they actually expected him to govern effectively, his shtick very quickly wore thin. To paraphrase my late grandmother, he proved himself to be all meringue and no filling.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    I read that the hurricane may have depressed (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by ruffian on Tue Oct 04, 2016 at 04:55:23 PM EST
    the vote in the areas along the coast that were expected to vote heavily in favor of the peace deal the deal with FARC in Colombia. With such a close vote I think that makes a lot of sense. Too bad they did not postpone it.

    The VP debate in one sentece: (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Oct 04, 2016 at 09:00:04 PM EST
    Pence just repeats the same lies that Trump repeated at the first debate.

    Well I guess I watched it so you didn't have to (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by ruffian on Tue Oct 04, 2016 at 10:15:34 PM EST
    Kaine came across a little weird - he was looking away from he camera and did interrupt a lot, but he made good undefended points against Trump, which was the goal.

    Pence was his talk show host rehearsed self, so I'm sure people that already like him think he did great, but he makes me sick. People saying he did best for himself in 2020...for Trump? Maybe not so much.

    More actual talk about policy than I expected, which was interesting...I just couldn't tell what Pence was actually saying about most of it, except abortion = bad.

    Moderator was one of the type that was bound and determined to ask all of her smart questions even if it meant interrupting any real conversation that was breaking out.

    I don't think any minds were changed.

    Andrea Mitchell thinks the burning question is...wait for it...where in the world is Al Gore?

    There, that about sums it up.

    All they had to do (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by FreakyBeaky on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 01:28:37 AM EST
    Was not take a dump on national tv. They both avoided that, so it's a draw regardless of who you'd rather have a beer with or what you think of Pence's droning blizzard of reality-challenged "facts" and things that would be very bad if they were happening, but aren't.

    I think Kaine was not prepated for how annoying Pence's cement-headed untruths are and at first lost his cool and tried to refudiate every one of them, a hopeless task. After that he basically took the number of the bus that hit him and counterattacked with his best weapon: Donald Trump. It mainly worked, but wasn't a knockout. Pence just denied his way through it with strongly-held prior beliefs (i.e., derp).

    Biggest OMFG moment was Pence's irony-free certidude that the "inner city" is such a crime-ridden hellhole of killer illegal aliens that African-Americans would just love them some stop-and-frisk.

    Parent

    Anyway (%%#}}%ing post button) (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by FreakyBeaky on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 01:35:15 AM EST
    Ordinarily I would say they both did what a veep candidate needs to do in a debate: don't embarrass the one that picked you. But things aren't ordinary; Trump is the embarrassment and there's no fix for that (and if there were one it wouldn't be Pence).

    Tonight's winner - Hillary by default.

    Parent

    FreakyBeaky: "Biggest OMFG moment was Pence's irony-free [certitude] that the 'inner city' is such a crime-ridden hellhole of killer illegal aliens that African-Americans would just love them some stop-and-frisk."

    ... that Sen. Kaine was "whipping out that Mexican thing again," which of course is only the latest iteration of a GOP ticket that whips out that stupid white guy thing at every available opportunity.

    :-|

    Parent

    Update: In the immediate wake ... (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 05:22:52 PM EST
    ... of this first round of debates, 83% of Latino voters are supporting Hillary Clinton, according the Florida International University's latest NLV online tracking poll.

    Parent
    Thanks for the spellcheck (none / 0) (#119)
    by FreakyBeaky on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 11:22:05 AM EST
    I am going blind. Or that's what I get for using "refudiate."

    Parent
    I did like the term "certidude." (none / 0) (#147)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 10:52:54 PM EST
    Donald Trump could be defined as a "Certi-Dude."

    Parent
    If any of you (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 12:49:58 PM EST
    want to join in on laughing at Pence or see where we're all laughing at it's here

    Sports as a metaphor: (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 01:26:02 PM EST
    There's a a rather fascinating article in this week's "The Bleacher Report" about how the Trump-Clinton contest has led to some serious collateral racial fallout on NFL teams such as the Buffalo Bills, where Coach Rex Ryan's unabashedly pro-Trump public huckstings is slowly eroding his standing amongst his African-American players:

    "Six months ago, Rex Ryan stood before a roaring crowd in Buffalo and gave a pep talk. This was not an unfamiliar scene for the Bills head coach, except for maybe the suit and tie. Well, that and the subject of his four-minute speech: Donald J. Trump.

    "'There's so many things I admire about Mr. Trump, but one thing I really admire about him is--you know what--he'll say what's on his mind,' Ryan said. 'And so many times, you'll see people--a lot of people--want to say the same thing. But there's a big difference: They don't have the courage to say it. They all think it, but they don't have the courage to say it. And Donald Trump certainly has the courage to say it.'

    "Back in the Bills locker room, however, Ryan's staff was less impressed with the Republican candidate for president -- and that their boss was backing him. A Bills player said when he learned Ryan had spoken at Trump's rally, he simply couldn't believe it. 'Rex is such an open-minded guy, a really good person,' said the player, who asked not to be identified, fearing repercussions from the Bills. 'But the fact he could back someone as closed-minded as Trump genuinely shocked me.'

    "The player, who is black, emphasized that teammates' frustration with their coach's public endorsement was not universal. But in private discussions, he said, 'Some of the African-American players on the team weren't happy about Rex doing that.'

    "Indeed, said another black player on the Bills who requested anonymity to speak freely about tensions swirling with a combination of protests led by Colin Kaepernick and a combustible candidate: 'I see Trump as someone who is hostile to people of color, and the fact that Rex supports him made me look at him completely differently, and not in a positive way.'"

    Worth a read, if you have the time. As the late UCLA coach John Wooden counseled his players, while your skills can carry you to the very pinnacles of your chosen professions, your character will ultimately determine whether or not you remain there.

    Aloha.

    I just saw where dumb as (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 06:36:06 PM EST
    a box of rocks Pence did not even get the name of the university right last night. Sheesh more comedy gold!

    Per Matthew Yglesias in Sept. 2008, ... (none / 0) (#86)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 08:24:28 PM EST
    ... as the U.S. economy was teetering on the verge of freefall:

    "There are very few members of congress with whom I've ever had the opportunity to discuss a substantive matter of public policy. But as it happens, one of them - the one with whom I've had the second-longest exchange - is Mike Pence (R-IN) who I've seen on television today repeatedly discussing the Republican Study Group's 'plan' for the financial crisis. And I can tell you this about Mike Pence: he has no idea what he's talking about. The man is a fool, who deserves to be laughed at. He's almost stupid enough to work in cable television." (Emphasis is mine.)

    Ouch.

    Parent

    Tried posting on your new thread (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by fishcamp on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 12:37:30 AM EST
    with my MBP, but it's acting up and my posts disappeared.  Yes this is a big bad storm.  I've been helping move large charter boats into hurricane holes in little hidden areas, so I'm pooped.  I'll post an update in the morning.  CG are you going to be ok?  It's getting breezy down here now.  Good night.

    Good luck to all TLers in Matthew's (5.00 / 2) (#116)
    by caseyOR on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 11:01:28 AM EST
    path. Ruffian, fishcamp, Jo, KeysDan, vml, coral gables and anyone I missed- sending all good thoughts your way.

    Please, all of you, let us know how you are doing whenever you get the chance. You know how I worry. :-)

    Parent

    OT- Caesy, I sent you an email a few days ago. (none / 0) (#128)
    by vml68 on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 05:07:24 PM EST
    Thanks. i just sent you a reply. (none / 0) (#131)
    by caseyOR on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 07:01:02 PM EST
    The VP debate begins at 3:00 p.m. out here. (none / 0) (#7)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Oct 04, 2016 at 05:47:08 PM EST
    Unfortunately, I'll be onboard a plane to Honolulu with a 3:08 p.m. departure, and since the flight is 50 minutes long, by the time I disembark I will have missed almost the entire thing. I'm not sure whether the network(s) will re-run it later this evening. The upside is that I get to visit with the grandson, who's 10 months old already.

    Tomorrow, I have two meetings in downtown HNL starting at 7:00 a.m., hence the overnight visit. Then I fly back at 1:45 p.m., arriving just in time for a 3:00 p.m. meeting at the Hawaii County Building, which fortunately is only a 10-min. drive from Hilo Airport. (Younger Daughter is picking me up and chauffeuring me there.)

    So, it's a full evening and day for me. Aloha.

    MSNBC has a split screen with the debate (none / 0) (#9)
    by ruffian on Tue Oct 04, 2016 at 06:31:40 PM EST
    stage even during commercials, like a debate could break out at any moment.

    Maybe they are going to catch microphone saboteurs (5.00 / 3) (#10)
    by ruffian on Tue Oct 04, 2016 at 06:32:36 PM EST
    It was the colombian governments fault (none / 0) (#11)
    by pitachips on Tue Oct 04, 2016 at 07:27:51 PM EST
    stupid to celebrate a victory before the vote. I'm willing to bet that they pushed people who would've otherwise voted for the peace deal to stay home by prematurely celebrating.

    God Pence is so rehearsed on this tax answer (none / 0) (#12)
    by ruffian on Tue Oct 04, 2016 at 08:24:23 PM EST


    Sadly yes (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 08:04:46 AM EST
    I wanted Kaine to squash him like a bug, but he ended up having to chase lie after lie after lie with a swatter. I'm pissed this morning. Outrageous freaking lying and lack of basic ethics.

    Parent
    Pence did (none / 0) (#18)
    by TrevorBolder on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 05:18:59 AM EST
    Channel Big Dog Clinton on Obamacare

    Are they going to let The Big Dog out again?

    He still has resentment towards Obama from 2008, and Madame Sec needs Obama to carry her across the finish line

    Mike Pence used Bill Clinton's recent ObamaCare criticism to rap Democratic rival Tim Kaine at Tuesday's vice presidential debate.

    Saying Kaine and Hillary Clinton want "more of the same," Pence tried to draw a contrast between former President Clinton's striking comments about the health care overhaul and his wife's platform.

    "Even President Bill Clinton calls ObamaCare a crazy plan. But Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine want to build on ObamaCare," Pence said, at the first and only VP debate, held at Longwood University in Virginia.
    ...... her husband raised eyebrows when he told voters in Michigan on Monday that the legislation has created a "crazy system" - one in which millions more people have health care but those unable to qualify for subsidies are getting "killed."

    "The people ... out there busting it, sometimes 60 hours a week, wind up with their premiums doubled and their coverage cut in half," Clinton said. "It's the craziest thing in the world.



    I guess you forgot (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 07:04:35 AM EST
    that Bill did the nominating speech for Obama in 2012. Whatever. Your desperation is showing. We're all laughing at Pence because the same guy you are lauding is the same guy who didn't know anything of what Donald Trump has been saying for over a year now. So either he's mentally handicapped or a liar. Take your pick.

    Parent
    W.J. Clinton did not say that "Obamacare' (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Peter G on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 09:08:31 AM EST
    was a "crazy plan." He said -- very poorly phrased and hard to follow, however, which is not like him -- that the current situation with the ACA is a crazy situation: tens of millions newly insured, yet rates for plans rising again.

    Parent
    The rates are sky rocketing in TN (none / 0) (#25)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 10:00:24 AM EST
    and BCBS and UHC are dropping out. Cigna is shaky. That's the big three. I may have missed others.

    The supposed reason is that not enough young healthy have signed up to off set the old and sick as well as the pre conditions.

    So the tens of millions are like a company selling below cost. Volume will bankrupt you.

    The "public option" is being touted as a solution. That's really just a way of saying the feds will step in. Details at 11.

    Obamacare was sold based on lies. Anyone could see that it couldn't work and that it was designed to take care of the base. It hasn't even done that.

    At some point we will have to come to grips that the only system that will even be close to working for everyone is a single payer plan. And that we must pay for it through a federal sales tax.

    Parent

    Either single payer (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Peter G on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 11:38:37 AM EST
    or expanded public option a/k/a "Medicare for all."

    Parent
    "Medicare" (none / 0) (#34)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 12:04:33 PM EST
    would be a great name for single payer.

    Parent
    Be careful (none / 0) (#43)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 01:19:50 PM EST
    Medicare covers only 80% of the doctors, plus a big payment for the hospital...and meds are a mess... then there is dental and vision...

    Parent
    Why don't you check (none / 0) (#55)
    by jondee on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 02:50:34 PM EST
    in the thesaurus again and look up the definition of the word "expanded."

    Parent
    The Big Dog (none / 0) (#67)
    by TrevorBolder on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 05:26:47 PM EST
    did not endorse ObamaCare, he just re-stated one of the many complaints

    "You've got this crazy system where all of a sudden 25 million more people have health care, and then the people that are out there busting it -- sometimes 60 hours a week -- wind up with their premiums doubled and their coverage cut in half," Clinton said at a rally Tuesday morning in Flint, Michigan. "It's the craziest thing in the world."

    So they spent all day cleaning up after the Big Dog

    Pence did a good job overall, and acknowledged by all, well, except maybe a couple of blog posters.

    Parent

    That would be false - again (5.00 / 2) (#92)
    by Yman on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 09:45:48 PM EST
    The Big Dog did not endorse ObamaCare, he just re-stated one of the many complaints

    The "Big Dog" was talking about the need to improve Obamacare to fix this issue.  He DID, in fact, "endorse Obamacare" and has supported it from the day it was passed.


    "Look, the Affordable Health Care Act did a world of good, and the 50-something efforts to repeal it that the Republicans have staged were a terrible mistake," Clinton said at a rally in Athens, Ohio. "We, for the first time in our history, at least are providing insurance to more than 90% of our people."
    "But there is a group of people -- mostly small business owners and employees -- who make just a little too much money to qualify for Medicaid expansion or for the tax incentives who can't get affordable health insurance premiums in a lot of places. And the reason is they're not in big pools," Clinton said. "So they have no bargaining power."


    Parent
    Yup (none / 0) (#105)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 05:49:01 AM EST
    Clean up in aisle 9

    Big Dog will be back on the leash

    Those 2008 memories are coming to the surface

    Parent

    Silly, specious conspiracy theories (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by Yman on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 01:06:11 PM EST
    ... are not "memories", and the only Robb that needs to be "cleaned up" are your piles of tired, baseless, wingnut claims.

    Parent
    For purposes of this discussion, I've highlighted your truncated quote in bold:

    "Now the next thing is, we got to figure out what to do now on health care. Her opponent said, 'Oh, just repeal it all. The market will take care of it.' That didn't work out very well for us, did it? We wound up with the most expensive system in the world and we insured the smallest percentage of people. On the other hand, the current system works fine if you're eligible for Medicaid, if you're a lower income working person, if you're already on Medicare, or if you get enough subsidies on a modest income that you can afford your health care.

    "But the people that are getting killed in this deal are small businesspeople and individuals who make just a little too much to get any of these subsidies. Why? Because they're not organized, they don't have any bargaining power with insurance companies, and they're getting whacked. So you've got this crazy system where all of a sudden, 25 million more people have health care and then the people that are out there busting it, sometimes 60 hours a week, wind up with their premiums doubled and their coverage cut in half.

    "It's the craziest thing in the world. So here's the simplest thing - you raise your hands and you think about it - here's the simplest thing: Figure out an affordable rate and let people use that - something that won't undermine your quality of life, won't interfere with your ability to make expenses, won't interfere with your ability to save money for your kid's college education. And let people buy in to Medicare or Medicaid.

    "Here's why. You can let people buy in for just a little bit because unlike where you are now, if you were on the other side of this, if you were an insurer, you'd say, 'Gosh, I only got 2,000 people in this little pool. Eighty percent of the insurance costs every year come from 20 percent of the people. If I get unlucky in the pool, I'll lose money.' So they overcharge you just to make sure, and on good years, they just make a whopping profit from the people who are least able to pay it.

    "It doesn't make any sense. The insurance model doesn't work here. It's not like life insurance, it's not like casualties, it's not like predicting flooding. It doesn't work. So Hillary believes we should simply let people who are above the line for getting these subsidies have access to affordable entry into the Medicare and Medicaid programs. They'll all be covered. It will not hurt the program. We will not lose a lot of money. And we ought to do it. That's what's in this for you."

    Makes a big difference when you see Mr. Clinton's remarks in proper context, doesn't it? He never mentioned the Affordable Care Act or Obamacare. In fact, he's addressing issues that actually pre-dated the 2010 ACA law, including our concerns about high costs and the lack of guaranteed coverage.

    Not that you're ever interested in primary-sourced material, Trevor, but those persons who are can watch the entire speech here. The remarks that I quoted above begin at the 25:40 mark.

    Ciao.

    Parent

    So you speak to him regularly? (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Yman on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 05:52:07 PM EST
    He still has resentment towards Obama from 2008, and Madame Sec needs Obama to carry her across the finish line.

    Gotta love these silly attempts to psycoanalyze/mindread.

    Too funny.

    BTW - She doesn't need anyone to "carry her across the finish line", but that's pretty funny coming from someone who's candidate can't even get out of the starting block.

    Parent

    Don't have to (none / 0) (#76)
    by TrevorBolder on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 05:59:35 PM EST
    Only a sycophant wouldn't realize it

    The Big Dog went from the 1st Black President,

    To this..

    The first is Bill Clinton, sometimes referred to as "the first black president," who now finds himself on the same uncertain ground as any other white politician speaking dismissively of an African-American rival.

    to Bill Clinton dismissing Sen. Barack Obama's image in the media as a "fairy tale" -- generated outrage on black radio, black blogs and cable television. And now they've drawn the attention of prominent African-American politicians.

    "A cross-section of voters are alarmed at the tenor of some of these statements," said Obama spokeswoman Candice Tolliver, who said that Clinton would have to decide whether she owed anyone an apology.



    Parent
    "Only a sycophant" ... (5.00 / 2) (#82)
    by Yman on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 06:34:38 PM EST
    ... or someone with a impaired logic/reasoning would expect their silly, baseless claims and amateur mindreading to be taken seriously.

    BTW - The quote from Obama's 2008 campaign, while completely irrelevant to your silly tinfoil theory about BC, was pretty amusing.  Wonder how "Madame Secretary" is doing with AA voters?

    Winning 91 to 1!!!

    Oops!

    Maybe you should show them that 2008 article.!

    Heh, heh, heh ...

    Parent

    Once again (none / 0) (#84)
    by TrevorBolder on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 07:57:53 PM EST
    That was always to be expected.

    But will the numbers turn out as they did in 2008 and 2012?

    No!

    And the Big Dog still is smarting from his 2008 fall from grace.

    Parent

    "Always to be exected"? - heh (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by Yman on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 08:21:41 PM EST
    Of course it was.  Because AAs are too smart to buy  the silly, fact-free, evidence-free garbage you're trying to sell.

    BTW - Love how you repeatedly pretend to speak for the "Big Dog", with absolutely nothing to back it up ...

    ... as always.

    You realize repeating bu/$hit doesn't change the fact that it's still bu/$hit ...

    ... right?

    Parent

    Feh (none / 0) (#87)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 09:07:28 PM EST
    why bother with Trevor. Mike Pence last night exposed the entire GOP who isn't with Donald Trump for what they are: Devoid of ideas, trucking in the past and hatred for anyone who isn't like them. Just laugh at them. They're actually pretty good comedy.

    Parent
    If turnout (none / 0) (#89)
    by TrevorBolder on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 09:16:29 PM EST
    For AA is down 10, 15 %,

    Madame Sec may be in trouble, even while she receives 90% of all AA votes.

    It's called enthusiasm , and even you know, Madame Sec has just not enthused the Dem base.

    Parent

    "If" - "may be" - heh (5.00 / 2) (#90)
    by Yman on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 09:36:16 PM EST
    The signs someone has no evidence to back up their silly, baseless claims.

    But I love your silly metric.  Anything less than the historic AA support for Obama is considered

    Before you try telling others what they "know", you should probably get your own thoughts straight, first.  Maybe even some facts to back them up for a change.

    Clinton Erases Voter Enthusiasm Gap And Storms Out To 7 Point Lead On Trump

    BTW - How's the enthusiasm for your candidate?  Has he even made it to 1% yet?  :)

    Parent

    My candidate (none / 0) (#104)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 05:47:53 AM EST
    Will most likely be returning to the Senate as a representative from the state of Florida

    Parent
    Hopefully (none / 0) (#106)
    by jondee on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 06:13:37 AM EST
    he knows the names of the major cities in Florida.

    Parent
    I wouldn't bet the farm on that. (none / 0) (#121)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 01:04:30 PM EST
    Recent polls show a significant tightening in that race.

    Parent
    So you're no longer ... (none / 0) (#124)
    by Yman on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 01:40:13 PM EST
    ... supporting McMullin?

    They was fast.

    Well - at least we've put your "no enthusiasm!" myth to bed.


    Parent

    Supporting? (none / 0) (#150)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Oct 07, 2016 at 09:11:49 PM EST
    Not exactly.

    But thats who I will vote for.

    I did support the little Cuban fella

    Parent

    A vote is the ultimate support (none / 0) (#153)
    by Yman on Fri Oct 07, 2016 at 09:37:33 PM EST
    But good luck splitting those hairs.

    Parent
    I fully (none / 0) (#155)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Oct 08, 2016 at 06:17:01 AM EST
    Supported the little Cuban fella,

    Felt he had the best chance to forge a coalition and actually govern.

    McMullin will have my vote as he is actually running.
    Tepid support at best

    Parent

    Did you really just choose to not (none / 0) (#158)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Oct 08, 2016 at 09:11:53 AM EST
    Call the candidate of your choice by his name and instead refer to him as "the little Cuban fellow"? .........Sigh

    Parent
    Yep (none / 0) (#160)
    by Yman on Sat Oct 08, 2016 at 11:38:33 AM EST
    As I said,  how's the candidate you support doing?  Is he even registering in the polls?  I think I saw an article about him in July.

    Parent
    The little Cuban (none / 0) (#157)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 08, 2016 at 09:06:58 AM EST
    fellow that Chris Christie took down with a sentence and who now has his head rammed up Trump's behind? I have to tell you Trevor that was a genius pick.

    Parent
    Well (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 09:52:52 PM EST
    Trevor this nonsense is something that has been shopped for quite a while yet never materialized. You were saying Bernie was going to win the primary because people were "excited". Actually Bernie had a big problem with getting his people to show up and vote. All that's water under the bridge at this time but we've heard this excitement nonsense from you for months now. Hillary's voters don't go to rallies and scream therefore they are not "excited" however they are the ones that actually show up to vote. What shows more excitement? Rallies where people come and then don't bother to vote or small venues that get a huge bang for the buck with turning out 16 million voters?

    You and Pence perhaps would be better off spending your time playing with "that Mexican thing" than attempting any kind of political analysis.

    Parent

    Well, The Big Dog (none / 0) (#107)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 06:14:55 AM EST
    Did say this, and this, and this. No, the Big Dog is not fond of Obama.

    "She's always making something good happen," he said of President Barack Obama's former secretary of state, who is running for the Democratic nomination. "A lot of people say you don't understand it's rigged now. Yeah, it's rigged now because you don't have a president that's a change-maker."

    "Why is it such a wacky election? Because millions and millions and millions and millions of people look at that pretty picture of America he painted and they cannot find themselves in it to save their lives," Clinton said while campaigning for his wife on Monday. "That explains everything."

    "People are upset, frankly, they're anxiety-ridden, they're disoriented, because they don't seem themselves in that picture," Clinton added.

    The former president went on to say his wife is running to "put every single American in the picture President Obama painted." The remarks were critical of the 44th president, who Hillary Clinton ran against in 2008 before joining his cabinet as Secretary of State, yet deferential.

    But if you believe we can all rise together, if you believe we've finally come to the point where we can put the awful  legacy of the last eight years behind us and the seven years before that when we were  practicing trickle-down economics and no regulation in Washington, which is what caused the crash, then you should vote for her because she's the only person who basically had good ideas will tell you how she's going to pay for them, can be commander in chief and is a proven change maker with republicans and democrats and independents alike."


    Parent
    "How she's going to pay for them" (none / 0) (#113)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 09:19:52 AM EST
    Lost in Bill's blizzard of b/s is the underlying assumption, almost universal among the class of professionalized parasites we call politicians, that it's "their" money.

    FWIW, Bill's been peddling that "change-maker" branding for years.  I don't buy it.  A vote for Clinton is a vote for more of the same.  Party supporters who count keep the rights to cost-plus government contracts.  Party supporters who don't count keep the right to "terminate" their unborn and to continue being plundered by Banksters and the Health/Insurance Industrial Complex Protection Racket.

    As Vonnegut said, "So it goes."


    Parent

    Thank you (none / 0) (#151)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Oct 07, 2016 at 09:13:05 PM EST
    the class of professionalized parasites we call politicians, that it's "their" money.


    Parent
    Pence channeled big dog...in what universe? (none / 0) (#21)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 08:01:58 AM EST
    Cuz it wasn't this one. Channeling half of big dog is a chihuahua.

    Apologies to chihuahuas, I love almost all of you tons more than I love Pence.

    Parent

    Mike Pence (none / 0) (#20)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 07:17:18 AM EST
    April 14th, 2005: "Hillary Clinton is an enormously appealing individual...this is one of the most admired not only women but public people in America"

    And once again, I'm laughing my head off at that idiot Pence. Not only can he not remember what Trump said he can't even remember what he said himself.

    Governor Pence looked better (none / 0) (#24)
    by KeysDan on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 09:22:55 AM EST
    than Senator Kaine--Pence being a bit more out of central casting and Kaine a bit more middle-aged Dad. The looks department gave an edge to Pence with the Tweety's of the world and presented an uphill climb for Kaine: Kaine was described as being "borderline" rude for his interruptions, while it was clear that Pence also rode that same horse.

    Senator Kaine seemed to think that Pence would be put on the spot by trying to defend Trump's manic behavior, but underestimated Pence's flat out lying. Pence denied saying things both he and Trump have said. Including that "Mexican thing," as Pence so blithely dismissed.  

    The debate show did, almost inadvertently, reveal more about the vice presidential candidates than the presidential candidates for who they argued. Kaine was much more intelligent and thoughtful. As Peter G observed, Kaine presented a nuanced and balanced place for his faith; Pence presented an absolutist and unbalanced role for his faith--what he believes belongs in law.

    Pence also showed that the Trump/Pence ticket is of one in deceptions and lies, a LIAR/liar ticket. But, as Tweety said, content does not matter, Pence was more presidential, he interrupted less and, besides, Kaine started it.

    The Clinton campaign has a new opportunity to show what these Republicans are like, for any who care to know--just do a Jon Stewart: Kaine quoting Trump and Pence, Pence's denial of any such thing happening or being said, and the actual video clips.

    The Clinton campaign (none / 0) (#27)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 10:33:00 AM EST
    Is ridiculing Pence all over the place. Pence is as much a clown as Trump

    Parent
    Not Just the Clinton campaign, (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by KeysDan on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 11:49:01 AM EST
    it seems the Pence style is not wearing well.  Chicago Tribune, Pence fights  and lies to keep the stench off of him.  Politico says.. The Clinton campaign does have a Jon Stewart-type commercial out already.

    Parent
    Kaine looked like the Joker, w/o make up (none / 0) (#40)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 01:02:20 PM EST
    Several times he actually looked about to loose control.

     

    As Peter G observed, Kaine presented a nuanced and balanced place for his faith; Pence presented an absolutist and unbalanced role for his faith--what he believes belongs in law.

    Both stated their belief's. Kaine tied it to politics. Pence stated his as a matter of faith. We may disagree with either.... but why is the act of having a belief "bad?"

    On that note, time and again Kaine said that Putin was a dictator but not a leader.

    That's nonsense and approaches Humpty Dumpty level.

    Putin is a strong leader. No actual observer can deny that. Nor should they. Wars are lost and people killed because someone under estimates the situation.

    OTOH Obama is weak. His "lead from behind" position is weak. It has encouraged all sorts of bad things from the strong but evil leaders of this world.

    And that is why Putin must not be called strong because Trump's point has been that only he can deal with him, pointing out how Hillary's reset has utterly failed,

    Of course if he was the leader of Wikileaks Hillary would want to use a drone on him.

    Parent

    He's a strong leader? (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by vicndabx on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 01:19:41 PM EST
    Really, oppressive, dictatorial style leadership is strong?

    Well then I guess child abusers and wife beaters are "strong" too then.

    Here I thought a measure of a strong leader was his/her ability to improve things for his/her people.

    What's fascinating is that you folks act like strong is anything other than talking tough - which means squat.  Unless, strong to you means what, troops?  War with Russia?

    Parent

    We have made enormous strides in NATO (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 02:25:22 PM EST
    Alliances since Obama took office. It shocks me to my core when Republicans speak of disbanding it having not one clue what that means or where that would go, and not caring. It reminds me of the Brexit vote and how after it was done the nihilists for a day wanted a do over.

    Parent
    I am very sorry you cannot understand (5.00 / 3) (#62)
    by Peter G on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 04:36:27 PM EST
    the very important point I was trying to make (and continue to think I made clearly), Jim.
    Both stated their belief's. Kaine tied it to politics. Pence stated his as a matter of faith. We may disagree with either.... but why is the act of having a belief "bad?"

    No one, certainly not myself, has suggested that having a belief is bad. Both articulated what they believe as a matter of faith. The difference is in what they believe is the proper role of a public official's personal faith, when that official carries out the duties of office. What I compared was Kaine's clear explication of -- and professed adherence to -- the American constitutional system, and Pence's disregard for it. Our leaders may be very religious people (and sometimes have been), but if they believe in our democracy, they don't seek to exploit their political or legal power to impose their own beliefs on others in matters of personal moral choice.

    Parent
    Peter, I understood (none / 0) (#71)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 05:39:35 PM EST
    My point was that both expressed their belief but Pence's is supposedly bad because of his position.

    And I see nothing in Trump's or Pence's position that would indicate that they would not follow the law.

    That they might appoint judges that would change the law, just as the Left would/has do/done, is a given.

    Parent

    Pence's is bad (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by vicndabx on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 05:52:57 PM EST
    because he want to impose his beliefs vis a vis circumvention of current law as interpreted by the Supremes years ago.

    Earlier this year, Pence signed a controversial anti-abortion law that would have banned abortions of fetuses sought over gender, race, ancestry, or diagnosis of a genetic disorder. The law also criminalized fetal tissue collection or transferring, a practice that is vital to life-saving fetal tissue donation and research (including for understanding the Zika virus), and required women to view the fetal ultrasound hours before receiving an abortion. The law was so far-reaching that women in Indiana began calling Pence's office to tell him about their periods -- you know, since he seems to care about women's reproductive health so much. A federal judge blocked the law in June.

    Cosmopolitan Link

    Parent

    Sigh (none / 0) (#88)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 09:12:11 PM EST
    I'll try one last time.

    Pence is supposedly bad because he stated his position based on his faith rather than

    Kaine's wanderings and ditherings while trying to square the circle makes Kaine good...

    Kaine also tried to justify the executions on his watch by saying he was just following the law.

    Again, Pence and Trump may want to change the law.

    That's what elections are about and surely you aren't claiming that Trump would just issue an Executive Order..I mean, what President would use a a pen and a telephone to circumvent the law?

    And please tell me  this doesn't mean what it says.

    that would have banned abortions of fetuses sought over gender, race, ancestry, or diagnosis of a genetic disorder

    So a boy is wanted and a girl is what's there...and you think an abortion is okay????

    Parent

    What I think, fwiw, is that it's "okay" (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by Peter G on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 09:48:00 PM EST
    for a woman to make her own choice about whether to carry a pregnancy to term. I also believe that a law that makes her justify that choice and prove that she has a "good" reason and not a "bad" reason is (a) wrong as a matter of policy; and (b) unconstitutional. And no, for that matter, I don't think the state should try to tell a woman (or a couple for that matter) what genetic defects in a fetus -- some of which will result in an inevitable stillbirth and some others in the birth of a baby that will only suffer and soon die -- they are required to disregard in deciding whether to continue with a pregnancy. Also unconstitutional. Sorry, Mike (and Jim). In America, you don't get to legislate your religious beliefs, even if you can muster a majority of the Indiana legislature behind it.

    Parent
    As you can see (none / 0) (#95)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 10:08:05 PM EST
    I underlined gender, race, ancestry so the genetic thing was not in my play book.

    And a baby of the wrong sex, the wrong race or wrong father, to me, is not an automatic candidate to be aborted at the mother's discretion.

    It is a matter of time to me.

    After that, it starts to look like murder to me.

    Parent

    Not ever "bad" or immoral choice (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by Peter G on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 09:31:35 AM EST
    should be against the law. Sometimes getting the government involved makes things worse, for a host of reasons. I guess I'm more conservative than you, as far as the proper role of government power in people's lives is concerned. That thing about "liberty."

    Parent
    Hence, your support for Trump (none / 0) (#96)
    by Yman on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 10:16:17 PM EST
    Who also said women who have illegal abortions (under the law that he wants) should be punished.

    Good luck with that.

    Parent

    The problem with you (none / 0) (#110)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 08:11:50 AM EST
    is that you don't understand that it is possible to oppose one issue and support another issue.

    As to Trump's supposed position we both know he isn't a politician and is likely to say things he doesn't mean.

    You know, like Bill saying Obamacare is a disaster and Hillary saying Americans are deplorable if they don't vote for her.

    lol

    Parent

    false, false, false (5.00 / 4) (#114)
    by Peter G on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 09:28:47 AM EST
      WJC did not say ObamaCare was a disaster, he said that there were serious problems with how it was going right now, vis a vis premium prices rising due to shortfalls in the pool.
      HRC did not say that Americans are deplorable if they don't vote for her. She said that a large percentage of Tr*mp's supporters adhere to deplorable attitudes, including racism and sexism. Polls bear that out.
      And Tr*mp's problem with his statements is not that he isn't a politician, and therefore is more likely to say things he doesn't mean. Exactly the opposite. Because he doesn't have political skills, he is more likely to say what is really on his mind.

    Parent
    Aw shucks (none / 0) (#133)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 07:10:11 PM EST
    So serous problems are not a disaster?

    And Trump supporters aren't deplorable but they adhere to deplorable attitudes.

    Okie dokie.

    Parent

    Read what he wrote (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by Yman on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 09:03:23 PM EST
    Peter did not say what you are saying.  

    So serous problems are not a disaster?

    Actually, they're not - and Clinton's statements were about the state of the healthcare systems as a whole.  More specifically, he was talking about a situation that long predates Obamacare.

    And Trump supporters aren't deplorable but they adhere to deplorable attitudes.

    Is that what he actually said?

    She said that a large percentage of Tr*mp's supporters adhere to deplorable attitudes, including racism and sexism. Polls bear that out
    .

    Let me know if you need links to some of those polls illustrating the deplorable attitudes of many of Trump's supporters.  Or links to their blogs.

    Parent

    The "problem with you" (none / 0) (#123)
    by Yman on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 01:36:47 PM EST
    ... is that you constantly push false claims,  like your candidate.

    BTW - Trump's problem isn't that he "says things he doesn't mean".  His problem is he says things he DOES mean,  because he's winging it.  He, like many of his supporters,  is clueless.

    Parent

    "no one?????" (none / 0) (#108)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 07:45:35 AM EST
    I defer to Jean Meslier.  Theology is nothing but ignorance of natural causes reduced to a system.

    Parent
    I am reminded of (none / 0) (#117)
    by BackFromOhio on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 11:13:26 AM EST
    former Governor Mario Cuomo Sr. who was known to be a devout Catholic, but repeatedly acknowledged the difference between how his faith would govern decisions he made for his personal life, while the Constitutional separation of church and state would determine how he would conduct himself as a public official.

    It is scary to me how, over the years, the separation of church and state, a crucial founding policy of this nation, has been eroded. Too bad our children rarely seem to learn the history of this country and the role that desire for freedom from religious oppression played.

    It is unfortunate, as well, because when we oppose  terrorism conducted in the name of religion, we would be on much firmer ground if we adhered to our own tradition of church-state separation and promotion of religious freedom.

    Parent

    Maybe you could enumerate (none / 0) (#54)
    by jondee on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 02:45:28 PM EST
    some actual concrete instances that sharply contrast Putin's actions with those of a dictator.

    Since you're so sure Putin isn't one.

    Don't be shy, Jim.

    Parent

    Your opinion of Obama's leadership ... (none / 0) (#75)
    by Yman on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 05:57:33 PM EST
    ... compared to Putin's is duly noted and will be given all the consideration it deserves.

    Parent
    Do not make this thread about Jim (none / 0) (#125)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 02:15:23 PM EST
    four comments have been deleted. If you want to address the substance of his comment, do  so. Lay off the insults, and Jim, move on to your next topic.

    Parent
    Reagan was called (none / 0) (#26)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 10:02:30 AM EST
    The Great Communicator.

    Senator Kaine is now known as

    The Great Interrupter.

     

    Uh, no, he is not. (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by ruffian on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 11:29:24 AM EST
    The great interrupter (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by Peter G on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 11:47:30 AM EST
    was Tr*mp in the first debate, with his incessant (and clearly against-the-rules) interjections of "not true" (even disregarding that nearly all of what he asserted to be "not true" was in fact patently true).

    Parent
    Kaine (none / 0) (#37)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 12:36:54 PM EST
    interrupted Pence every 1.25 minutes according to posts on the net. I have no idea as to how accurate that is but it can't be far from wrong.

    Perhaps that isn't a record.

    But it sure is a good average. ;-)

    That kinda made the "debate" useless.

    Perhaps that was Kaine's intent.

    And his repeated charges were largely statements taken out of context.

    That was his intent.

    Sad to say the debates are mostly useless unless they use two moderators, one from each campaign.

    Parent

    We sure are (none / 0) (#38)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 12:39:18 PM EST
    having a great time laughing and mocking Pence today despite the fact that he was "interrupted".

    Thanks so much for the laughs, Jim.

    Parent

    The Donald (none / 0) (#68)
    by TrevorBolder on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 05:29:32 PM EST
    Interrupted Madame Sec 51 times,
    PitBull Kaine interrupted Pence 72 times

    The winner, and new champion ,
    The Great Interrupter,

    Pit Bull Kaine

    Parent

    If that's your takeaway, fine. (none / 0) (#74)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 05:57:20 PM EST
    For many others, it's the fact that Gov. Pence repeatedly and falsely claimed over and again that both he and Trump have never said the very things that Sen. Kaine was actually quoting verbatim last night.

    For the folks at Clinton HQ in Brooklyn, who hastily gathered all the video evidence otherwise and then posted this online ad within minutes of the vice presidential debate's conclusion, it was like shooting fish in a barrel.

    Initial public perceptions about political debates can change markedly over time, once people have had time to reflect upon what was actually said. Whatever goodwill Mike Pence may have generated last night is likely to be lost, as evidence of his disingenuousness plays out on the public airwaves over the next couple of days.

    In that regard, Der Trumpenfuhrer & Co. can consider themselves fortunate that Hurricane Matthew is the new shiny object in the media's present view plain, and holds great potential to mitigate and perhaps even eclipse the negative political coverage which has enveloped the Trump/Pence campaign over the last 10 days.

    Ciao 4 now.

    Parent

    We're too (none / 0) (#81)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 06:25:27 PM EST
    busy laughing at Trump and Pence to even care who you and the wingnut welfare brigade said won the debate. Kaine set the trap and dumb as box of rocks Pence walked right in. The only thing missing is Pence being exposed for the extremist radical he is. Think those suburban women would go for Pence mandating them having funerals for miscarriages? He sounds like he'd be right at home with the attitudes the nuts in the middle east.

    Parent
    I like Kaine a lot, much more (none / 0) (#30)
    by Peter G on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 11:44:35 AM EST
    than I had expected to. But I found his interrupting very annoying, if not offensive, and counterproductive. And he did start it. Apparently based on badly explained ground rules; that they were permitted to dialog and not be limited to one-at-a-time answering of the moderator's questions. Nevertheless, I will not defend his behavior in the first half hour of the debate. But after that, he (and Pence) got it under control, thanks to an excellent moderator. So I don't think it was really the main take-away. That's just an excuse for partisans to claim Pence did better.

    Parent
    Agree with (none / 0) (#118)
    by BackFromOhio on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 11:19:03 AM EST
    Peter G's observations. On the other hand, the focus group's reactions I read indicated they thought Pence won on style, but that Kaine way out-performed his opponent on substance.

    I think Kaine was so incensed by the lies, that in the absence of moderator fact-checking, he allowed himself to show his exasperation.

    I've read several commentaries pointing out how important it was for Kaine, as VP, to strongly defend the top of the ticket, citing how much Lieberman hurt Gore in 2000 when he did not defend Gore.

    Parent

    I don't think (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 12:28:51 PM EST
    the goal ever was to win for team Clinton. IMO Kaine's goal was to get Pence on the record. Pence could either choose to expose how radical Republican beliefs are or he could lie. Kaine put him in that corner. Pence chose to lie about almost everything he said. Lying 70% of the time is simply amazing. He's apparently never been held accountable by anyone his entire life. Kaine got what they needed to ridicule Pence. And now we're all laughing at the idiotic Pence who professed not to know anything but was caught being a stupid liar.

    Parent
    Yes, That too (none / 0) (#126)
    by BackFromOhio on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 02:57:19 PM EST
    I wasn't talking about the campaign's goal, but rather commentary on the importance of having the VP support the top of the ticket rather than behave as though they are look warm themselves. Debate caught Pence denying things Trump actually said, disagreeing, lying... a treasure trove.

    Parent
    Interesting that you are comparing (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by CST on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 01:20:42 PM EST
    A president to a vice presidential candidate.

    Although I can certainly see why you'd want to do that.  It doesn't really hold up.

    Parent

    When your P.R. firm writes your legend... (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by Repack Rider on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 05:58:54 PM EST
    Reagan was called The Great Communicator.

    Yeah, what was up with THAT?  Dude didn't know what day it was or which way was west.

    "Rotten Ronnie" as my 96-y.o., Liberty-Ship building mom calls him, was a long way from "great," and was incapable of "communicating" without a script written by someone else.

    Parent

    As opposed to the (none / 0) (#78)
    by Yman on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 06:03:14 PM EST
    ... Interruptor-in-Chief, Donald Trump.

    Heh.

    The hypocrisy is too funny.

    Parent

    Rigged system (none / 0) (#33)
    by ding7777 on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 11:56:46 AM EST
    Trump is projecting Republican values when rants about rigged systems RNC declares Pence winner of VP debate -- hours before start

    An NSA contractor may have been (none / 0) (#35)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 12:07:00 PM EST
    Bad...sad (none / 0) (#41)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 01:11:25 PM EST
    He's going to imprisoned for a very long time.

    Parent
    Odd though (none / 0) (#127)
    by BackFromOhio on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 02:58:36 PM EST
    authorities do not know if guy actually leaked any info.  I.e., don't know his motive.

    Parent
    They aren't fooling around though with this stuff (none / 0) (#141)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 08:52:33 PM EST
    If he had things he wasn't supposed to have, he's cooked. I wonder if the FBI trolls these employees now testing for weakness? The FBI seemed to have a clue while his employer was clueless.

    Parent
    From what I've read (none / 0) (#148)
    by BackFromOhio on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 10:58:03 PM EST
    he certainly had things he was not supposed to. He was described in one article as a hoarder. As for that and the rest, I guess we'll have to wait and see what info comes out

    Parent
    Heh! The guy worked for Booz Allen Hamilton. (none / 0) (#79)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 06:17:54 PM EST
    That was the same contractor which employed Edward Snowden, who was working in Hawaii at the time he purloined the documents which exposed the NSA's PRISM program, among others. Booz Allen's Hawaii HQ was located in the very same Honolulu office complex where I worked until last year, when I moved to Hilo.

    When The Guardian first printed the Snowden exposé in June 2013, the complex's garden courtyard was chock full of national and international media that same day, all seeking public comment from a company whose office doors were very quickly closed and locked for the immediate duration of the scandal. To be honest, I don't know if they've ever reopened that office.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Why can't our government (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by BackFromOhio on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 06:14:40 PM EST
    employee people directly?  It costs a fortune to hire these high-priced consulting firms. Remnant of 'privatizing' that ends up costing the taxpayers a small fortune. The consulting company makes a bundle and its "contract" workers get paid no more than they would on professional level federal government salaries, and probably less.

    Parent
    Contract workers actually make good money. (none / 0) (#134)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 07:12:29 PM EST
    But that minor quibble aside, your point is well taken, in that government can do this cheaper by eliminating the contracted middle man. Further, the biggest opportunities for corruption are available not to the government employee, but to the contractors, particularly in cases where there is little or no contractual oversight provided by the federal agency. That's what happened in Iraq, where costs spiraled out of control and the war became the most expensive per capita in our nation's history.

    Parent
    I recall during (none / 0) (#136)
    by BackFromOhio on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 07:30:40 PM EST
    the Iraq War, Blackwater folks making $600k per year; our soldiers, $500(?) per week? Although it may be difficult to enlist volunteers to go to war, professionals will gladly sign on for decent government salaries and benefits. Contract employees may be paid well, but typically do not get benefits and have no job security.

    Parent
    odd, isn't it? (none / 0) (#137)
    by linea on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 07:46:57 PM EST
    i was suprised to learn that mercenaries are not illegal in america. i researched it and discovered that the usa did not sign this particular Protocol Additional (among others) to the Geneva Convention.

    Parent
    Actually, it is illegal for Americans ... (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 08:50:15 PM EST
    ... to serve as mercenaries per Article 47 of the Geneva Convention, which reads as follows:

    Article 47. Mercenaries
    1. A mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war.
    2. A mercenary is any person who:
    (a) Is especially recruited locally or abroad in order to fight in an armed conflict;
    (b) Does, in fact, take a direct part in the hostilities;
    (c) Is motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a Party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party;
    (d) Is neither a national of a Party to the conflict nor a resident of territory controlled by a Party to the conflict;
    (e) Is not a member of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict; and
    (f) Has not been sent by a State which is not a Party to the conflict on official duty as a member of its armed forces.

    Our government gets around Article 47 by hiring "civilian contractors" for what are essentially quasi-military roles, as has been done in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, it is a violation of law for Americans as individuals to hire themselves out to foreign governments or a foreign combatant party to fight in an armed conflict.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    i read that (none / 0) (#144)
    by linea on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 08:57:15 PM EST
    Article 47 was not endorsed by the usa (thus this has nothing to do with being "tricky" by calling a mercenary a contractor).

    Parent
    That said, even though our government has not formally ratified the Protection of Victims of International Conflict (Protocol 1), which was added in April 1977 to the Protocols Additional of the Geneva Conventions of August 1949 (which we HAVE ratified), it is in our nation's best interests to actively discourage Americans from offering their services overseas as soldiers of fortune. That's because other nations which have endorsed Article 47 are free to act accordingly against those American citizens who are caught fighting as mercenaries.

    As such, mercenaries who are captured in battle risk being classified as common criminals, rather than as prisoners of war, and are thus not due the protections for POWs a prescribed by the Geneva Conventions. Mercenaries may be subject to execution by the party that captured them.

    Daniel Gearhart, who had advertised his services as a mercenary in American newspapers (not smart!) and was hired by the rebel FNLA during early days of the Angolan Civil War, was captured by government forces without ever having fired a single shot, a mere three days after his arrival in Angola. Tried and convicted as a mercenary, he was executed by firing squad in the capital of Luanda on July 10, 1976. The U.S. government could do nothing on his behalf.

    As far as U.S. law is concerned, the Foreign Agents Registration Act prohibits U.S. citizens from acting as agents on behalf of a foreign power without first informing the State Department thereof. I would assume that one could make a case that because a U.S. mercenary is effectively acting as such an agent, he or she cold face prosecution by the federal government under that law. It's an interesting topic for discussion, for sure.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Donald beat me to it, but contract tech workers (none / 0) (#138)
    by ruffian on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 08:21:53 PM EST
    make more money working for a company like Booz-Allen than they would direct for the government, with its strict pay grades, etc. That is why the government has to hire those companies - they cannot pay enough to get the best people. They can however let big contacts with a statement of work that the company can then fulfill.

    Parent
    By best I mean best technically, not necessarily (none / 0) (#139)
    by ruffian on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 08:24:09 PM EST
    any more or less likely to steal data.

    Parent
    Why does NSA need a Booz Allen though (none / 0) (#143)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 08:57:00 PM EST
    I mean, I can't tell you why we used to have contract triggers. So they could light up a street with no provocation and there was no governmental authority over them immediately responsible for their actions.

    Parent
    I have worked for the government (none / 0) (#149)
    by BackFromOhio on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 11:02:16 PM EST
    and the pay grades are widely varied and can rival private sector salaries. In addition, many government jobs provide excellent salaries. So why the government be able to pay exorbitant contract rates but not be able to hire? Not economically sensible to me.

    Parent
    That's what I want to know (none / 0) (#142)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 08:54:27 PM EST
    It's for the NSA, why aren't these people under direct NSA authority and the UCMJ? What needle are they threading here?

    Parent
    Benefit expense (none / 0) (#152)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Oct 07, 2016 at 09:19:19 PM EST
    And it is impossible to fire a federal worker

    Go see the VA, no one has been fired after their systemic crippling of health care for veterans, and lying about it.

    Contractors get no benefits, and can be fired.

    Those are driving factors for hiring contractors.

    Parent

    More silly, false claims (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by Yman on Fri Oct 07, 2016 at 09:51:23 PM EST
    And it is impossible to fire a federal worker

    You can't fire a federal employee? Don't tell that to the agency that hears their appeals.

    In answer to the perception that "it's impossible to fire a federal employee," the Merit Systems Protection Board pointed out that over fiscal 2000-2014, more than 77,000 full-time, permanent, federal employees "were discharged as a result of performance and/or conduct issues."

    Go see the VA, no one has been fired after their systemic crippling of health care for veterans, and lying about it.

    Interesting little "fact" - aka made-up BS.

    Three more Phoenix VA officials fired in aftermath of wait-time, retaliation probes.

    Parent

    Someone agrees with me (none / 0) (#156)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Oct 08, 2016 at 06:22:49 AM EST
    Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, D-Ariz., welcomed the firings while noting that "something is very wrong when it takes more than two years to do so

    From your article, btw.

    So after 2 years, 3 people were fired  (2 years, lol)

    And, they will win on appeal, but that won't make the headlines.

    Like I said, you cannot fire a federal worker, that is one of the biggest reasons governments are converting to contractors.
    These 3 would have been released, no explanation necessary 2 years ago.

    Parent

    No, she doesn't (none / 0) (#159)
    by Yman on Sat Oct 08, 2016 at 11:36:20 AM EST
    That's not what you said.   You said it was impossible to fire a federal worker.   You said no one at the VA was fired.  Both are laughably false claims,  which is why you're trying and faltling to backpedal.

    As usual.

    Parent

    Wow (none / 0) (#162)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Oct 08, 2016 at 11:01:38 PM EST
    The fired 3 in June, which I must have missed  Sue me.
    And they will appeal , and win

    Like I said , the Dem representative sees a problem also,

    And I say again,

    That is a big reason why contractors are used.

    It took 2 years to fire (before appeals) 3 of the mangers in the Phoenix VA,
    And you are bragging about it, see see they can fire federal workers.
    They should have been fired after 1 month of research , and many more as well.

    Sad


    Parent

    "Sad", indeed (none / 0) (#164)
    by Yman on Sun Oct 09, 2016 at 10:59:50 AM EST
    The false claim that no one was fired,  followed by the baseless,  fact-free claims that they will win on appeal, and the false claim that it's impossible to fire government workers,  when a cursory search shows tens of thousands have been fired - and that's not even a complete count.

    Funny,  but mostly just sad how consistently you make false claims.

    Parent

    Yes (none / 0) (#165)
    by TrevorBolder on Sun Oct 09, 2016 at 09:15:14 PM EST
    It is sad
    When taxpayer funds are paid out to non deserving employees,

    Because they cannot be fired

    They do not even try

    The federal government's disciplinary personnel process have become so cumbersome that only about 4,000 employees a year -- 0.2 % of the total workforce of 2.1 million -- are fired, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO).

    In 2013, the federal agencies dismissed around 3,500 employees for performance or a combination of performance and conduct.

    In its report to the Senate Homeland Security committee, the GAO stated, "The time and resource commitment needed to remove a poor performing permanent employee can be substantial."

    In fact, found the GAO, firing a federal employee often takes from six months to over a year.

    "According to selected experts and GAO's literature review, concerns over internal support, lack of performance management training, and legal issues can also reduce a supervisor's willingness to address poor performance," wrote the GAO.



    Parent
    Heh - that's funny (none / 0) (#166)
    by Yman on Mon Oct 10, 2016 at 03:27:05 PM EST
    You think that supports your patently false claims that it's impossible to fire a government employee and that no one was fired in the VA case.

    It doesn't.

    My only question is whether your reading comprehension is actually that poor, or is the obtuseness an intentional effort to try to backpedal on your false claims.

    Either way ... it's seriously funny.

    Parent

    I was aware (none / 0) (#161)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat Oct 08, 2016 at 08:19:03 PM EST
    of several people having been fired and none of the dismissals took more than a few weeks or so.

    Parent
    I haven't seen (none / 0) (#163)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Oct 08, 2016 at 11:02:14 PM EST
    Anything regarding that

    Parent
    I thought Kaine did a fine job (none / 0) (#46)
    by vicndabx on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 01:27:17 PM EST
    defending his presumptive boss, which is what the VP is supposed to do.

    I also thought he was on par w/Pence w/r/t debate tactics and style.  Not understanding all the desire for politeness and no interruptions during a debate.  It's  debate fer crissakes, they're supposed to mix it up, YMMV.

    The same thing (none / 0) (#48)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 02:09:36 PM EST
    was said about Biden in 2012, he was rude, disrespectful etc. Ended up being a legend for Biden after all this time. After Pence gets sliced and diced for lying 70% of the time I wonder if he's going to be considered having a "win".

    Parent
    There's no "win" without someone (none / 0) (#109)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 07:48:26 AM EST
    having changed their mind.

    Do you really believe that any of these debates have changed anyone's mind about anything?

    They've been little more than an excuse for partisan insults.

    Parent

    It seems the first (none / 0) (#112)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 08:25:52 AM EST
    debate between Hillary and Trump changed some minds. VP debates rarely do anything.

    Parent
    He might have prospered in Russia (none / 0) (#52)
    by CST on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 02:26:46 PM EST
    But Russia didn't.

    True (none / 0) (#57)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 03:05:38 PM EST
    Neither did N Korea, Cuba and Venezuela and who lot of other dictators.

    Doesn't make any difference.

    Saying Putin is a strong leader doesn't say he is not a dictator or that that he is not evil.

    OTOH the strongest presidents we have had is FDR and Lincoln.

    Were they evil?

    Parent

    Leave it to the American right wing (none / 0) (#60)
    by jondee on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 03:20:59 PM EST
    to lump FDR and Lincoln in together with Putin.

    Parent
    Gee, I am so lucky (none / 0) (#80)
    by MKS on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 06:19:53 PM EST
    to be able to learn such things.

    Parent
    Interesting that you use FDR and Lincoln (none / 0) (#61)
    by CST on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 03:28:35 PM EST
    Since they both represent this remark:

    "His "lead from behind" position is weak. It has encouraged all sorts of bad things from the strong but evil leaders of this world."

    When I think of all the ways in which Lincoln and FDR tried to avoid war and were ultimately forced into it by the evil leaders of the world - it's almost like your definition of "weak" is meaningless.

    Parent

    The libertarians and neoconfederates (none / 0) (#63)
    by jondee on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 04:39:06 PM EST
    on Jim's side of the aisle are still saying "sic semper tyrannis" about both FDR and Lincoln.

    To this day.

    I don't know what his point is other than to say that if you liberals admire FDR and Lincoln, then you should admire Putin -- the way Trump and Pence do.

    Parent

    Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce once noted ... (none / 0) (#64)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 04:55:22 PM EST
    ... that the most resolute and confounding enemy in battle is often the man who first did his very best to avoid armed confrontation.

    Parent
    The NA's lost. (none / 0) (#69)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 05:33:35 PM EST
    So did the Confederacy. (5.00 / 4) (#77)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 06:01:48 PM EST
    Of course I know what a strong man is (none / 0) (#56)
    by vicndabx on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 02:57:53 PM EST
    just never thought I'd see Americans pining (apparently) for one to be their leader.  Sorry, that's what were supposed to be against here, you know, constitution, bill or rights and all that.

    Strength to the authoritarian mentality (none / 0) (#58)
    by jondee on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 03:12:52 PM EST
    always means the domineering alpha ape who imposes his will on others..

    Don't have nothin' to do with no sustainable democratic institutions or no hifalutin book learnin' or increases in knowledge.

    Parent

    Recommended listening (none / 0) (#59)
    by Nemi on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 03:13:41 PM EST
    re Bill Clinton's remarks about Obamacare: Greg Dworkin's take on Kagro in the Morning. Starting around the 28 min. mark.

    Another endorsement for Hillary Clinton (none / 0) (#70)
    by hilts on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 05:37:49 PM EST
    For only the 3rd time since its founding in 1857, the Atlantic magazine has made an endorsement in a presidential race by endorsing Hillary Clinton.

    Hurricane Matthew (none / 0) (#91)
    by fishcamp on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 09:43:58 PM EST
    Is cruising through the Bahamas at 115 mph destroying most everything in its path.  It will cross over Nassau tonight, and continue over to the Miami, Ft. Lauderdale area with either category 3 or 4 winds.  They just declared mandatory evacuation for the city of Palm Beach.  I'm very concerned about ruffian up near Orlando.  Then to make matters worse, a cold front is coming down and the hurricane is likely to turn and head back down this way.  We are very lucky down here in the keys, since it has missed us.  It will get wet and windy tomorrow, but nothing like 100 miles north of us.  Will update early tomorrow morning.  Hoping the best for Fl. Joe and vml too.  If I missed any Florida TL friends, good luck up there.  Hopefully it won't get up to you Ga6th.

    Looks (none / 0) (#97)
    by FlJoe on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 10:23:08 PM EST
    like it's going to be right on top of me Friday morning, hopefully it will stay far enough offshore to avoid the full force but the latest projection has it passing well within 50 miles, possibly right over us.

    Parent
    Where are you Joe? (none / 0) (#98)
    by ruffian on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 10:45:01 PM EST
    It looks like Orlando is going to get hit worse than I expected earlier in the week. Just got all the prep I can done...food, water, stuff off the patio, etc. will go to work for a few hours in the morning tomorrow then come hunker down. Supposed to start getting exciting sometime late tomorrow, and really bad Friday morning.

    Hoping for the best!

    Parent

    Ruffian, keep us posted (none / 0) (#99)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 10:51:16 PM EST
    on how you are doing. Please stay safe and I'm glad you stocked up.

    Parent
    I (none / 0) (#102)
    by FlJoe on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 04:48:39 AM EST
    am in Melbourne, it's going to get pretty dicey. looks like the eye wall will a least brush us expecting 100+ wind speed.

    Parent
    Best wishes to you. (none / 0) (#103)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 04:54:23 AM EST
    I'll be thinking good thoughts for you and your neighbors tomorrow. Stay safe.

    Parent
    thank you fishcamp (none / 0) (#100)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Oct 05, 2016 at 10:54:32 PM EST
    you are always so knowledgeable on hurricane stuff, it's great to have you commenting. I know the Keys are supposedly safe, but you are right about the potential loop back so let's hope it stays that way. Your local news has an article on how Key West is serving as a "safe harbor" during Matthew for military ships.

    U.S. Coast Guard cutters from up and down Florida's Atlantic seaboard, as well as nine scheduled Royal Bahamian Defense Force ships, are among a slew of military ships expected to arrive at Key West Harbor by today due to Hurricane Matthew, according to Coast Guard Sector Key West and Naval Air Station Key West officials.


    Parent
    Op-eds on the 2nd chair debate (none / 0) (#111)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 08:20:58 AM EST
    ten or twenty are here.

    I didn't watch.  Life's too short.

    two topics for me (none / 0) (#135)
    by linea on Thu Oct 06, 2016 at 07:25:33 PM EST
    the topic of sex selection was brought up earlier in this thread. all the counties i know prohibit prenatal sex selection but i like that it's legal in america - or at least california where PiGD-IVF is available for 18000USD - though i dont expect this is a popular position on this forum. i don't feel randomness is more moral than making your own choice unless one is going to ascribe^ randomness to god choosing (which i do not).

    ^attribute something to (a cause)

    second topic: noam chomsy was on npr the other day and argued against those who would vote third party.  he stated that the consequenses of our choices are a more important consideration than feeling good about a choice and that voting third party is voting your "comfort" not your "conscious."