Clarence Thomas Failed to Report Wife’s Income

Politics • Views: 39,433

The Los Angeles Times reports that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas failed to disclose his Tea Party activist wife’s six-figure income from the right wing Heritage Foundation for at least five years, a possible violation of the laws governing federal judges.

A Supreme Court spokesperson could not be reached for comment late Friday. But Virginia Thomas’ employment by the Heritage Foundation was well known at the time.

Virginia Thomas also has been active in the group Liberty Central, an organization she founded to restore the “founding principles” of limited government and individual liberty.

In his 2009 disclosure, Justice Thomas also reported spousal income as “none.” Common Cause contends that Liberty Central paid Virginia Thomas an unknown salary that year.

Federal judges are bound by law to disclose the source of spousal income, according to Stephen Gillers, a professor at NYU School of Law. Thomas’ omission — which could be interpreted as a violation of that law — could lead to some form of penalty, Gillers said.

Jump to bottom

822 comments
1 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 7:51:58pm

is this one of those "wait until they catch us then OKAY I GUESS WE'LL PAY OUR TAXES" sorts of deals

2 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 7:53:35pm

5 years of 6 figure income?...has he never heard of Google?
"rather dramatic omission" indeed....maybe he's taking tax advice from Charlie Rangle?

3 freetoken  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 7:53:59pm

This LA Times story is a follow up to the earlier story that broke about both Thomas and Scalia being influenced by the Koch brothers.

The issue being that the Citizen's United decision could have been affected by Thomas's and Scalia's connection to the Kochs and their foundations.

4 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 7:54:13pm

re: #1 WindUpBird

is this one of those "wait until they catch us then OKAY I GUESS WE'LL PAY OUR TAXES" sorts of deals

No, they paid the taxes. They didn't report it on the Supreme Court Financial Disclosure.

The point of that is to make sure your wife isn't working for a company that you will have to rule on.

5 elizajane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 7:54:42pm

Not disclosing his wife's income from Heritage. Makes you wonder what other conflicts of interest this man is "not disclosing."

The right wing blogs are going to come out full blast and say "There was no fraud involved! She filed separately!" Which may be true, but the point here is that a Supreme Court judge is lying to the U.S. government in order to cover up a conflict of interest. Which seems pretty, er, unethical to me.

6 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 7:54:45pm

okay, so is he a republican?....that's the real issue here LOL!

7 Charles Johnson  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 7:57:55pm

This is not a tax issue. It's a possible violation of the laws for federal judges regarding disclosure of spousal income. See the last sentence of the quote above.

8 Killgore Trout  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 7:57:55pm
9 Interesting Times  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 7:58:46pm

“Good morning, Anita Hill Common Cause, it’s Ginny Thomas. I just wanted to reach across the airwaves and the years and ask you to consider something. I would love you to consider an apology sometime and some full explanation of why you did what you did with about my husband's Supreme Court financial disclosure forms. So give it some thought and certainly pray about this and come to understand why you did what you did. Okay, have a good day.”

10 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 7:58:47pm

The important words here would be "Conflict of Interest."

11 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 7:59:10pm

And that's more than our entire income for...more than five years. Just his wife's income.

12 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 7:59:45pm

re: #3 freetoken

This LA Times story is a follow up to the earlier story that broke about both Thomas and Scalia being influenced by the Koch brothers.

The issue being that the Citizen's United decision could have been affected by Thomas's and Scalia's connection to the Kochs and their foundations.

Frankly, I disagree with that earlier story. I also think it irrelevant, since the ruling was consistant with the principles of both justices. The LA Times is just running a smear story.

13 William Barnett-Lewis  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:00:16pm

No surprise. IOKIYAR

I sometimes get a conspiracy theory vibe going and wonder if the whole Hill thing wasn't brought up to get him on the court via victimization. He certainly doesn't belong there on merit. I don't like Scalia or Roberts either but both are appropriate to the bench. I know better in my head, but in my heart?

14 Kronocide  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:00:20pm

re: #3 freetoken

This LA Times story is a follow up to the earlier story that broke about both Thomas and Scalia being influenced by the Koch brothers.

The issue being that the Citizen's United decision could have been affected by Thomas's and Scalia's connection to the Kochs and their foundations.

That's deeply disturbing. The court system is not supposed to be gamed by the same politics that the other branches of government are.

15 latitude51  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:00:41pm

Maybe it was an oversight, distracted by something in his cola.

16 Dancing along the light of day  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:00:54pm

re: #7 Charles

It is a big deal.

17 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:01:08pm

re: #6 albusteve

okay, so is he a republican?...that's the real issue here LOL!

Agreed.

18 Political Atheist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:01:11pm

re: #3 freetoken

And that story is pretty thin. You would think judges must be cloistered monks to avoid these accusations.

19 Dancing along the light of day  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:02:23pm

From the quoted article:

Federal judges are bound by law to disclose the source of spousal income, according to Stephen Gillers, a professor at NYU School of Law. Thomas’ omission — which could be interpreted as a violation of that law — could lead to some form of penalty, Gillers said.

/blockquote>

20 Political Atheist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:02:39pm

re: #17 Dark_Falcon

Sour grapes kinda thing. Losers whine.

21 bratwurst  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:03:39pm

re: #18 Rightwingconspirator

And that story is pretty thin. You would think judges must be cloistered monks to avoid these accusations.

I think there plenty of real estate to inhabit between being a cloistered monk and partying with the Koch brothers!

22 Kronocide  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:03:47pm

My first reaction to the story, after the obvious 'Uh Oh,' is that it will turn into another left vs right scrum and cloud up the real issue, which is very serious. Influence from the Koch brothers is even more serious.

'They couldn't get him with Anita Hill so they're trying to get him with a stupid check box on some mundane form.' I can see it now, the echo chamber will get the stories and the narrative framed.

Right Wing Woo Groundhog's Day.

23 Reginald Perrin  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:04:12pm

re: #2 albusteve

5 years of 6 figure income?...has he never heard of Google?
"rather dramatic omission" indeed...maybe he's taking tax advice from Charlie Rangle?

Lets try something completely different.

You stop using the magic fairy balance

This could potentially become a major issue, considering his vote.

Let the adults have a chance to debate this issue honestly

24 jaunte  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:04:43pm
"It wasn't a miscalculation; he simply omitted his wife's source of income for six years, which is a rather dramatic omission," Gillers said. "It could not have been an oversight."


This isn't a Republican or Democrat thing, it's a failure to follow the rules.

25 Political Atheist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:05:05pm

re: #21 bratwurst

Not enough apparently. I'll pay attention when some evidence of wrongdoing as per the Koch brothers shows up. Until then, meh. Judges have lives too.

26 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:05:46pm

re: #6 albusteve

okay, so is he a republican?...that's the real issue here LOL!

Yes. Because we know that if he was a Democrat it wouldn't be an issue.

27 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:06:22pm

re: #21 bratwurst

I think there plenty of real estate to inhabit between being a cloistered monk and partying with the Koch brothers!

speaking of real estate...if you visit DC you really must go look at the SC building...one hell of a piece of architecture, and the last building of it's type ever constructed...a real work of art

28 Dancing along the light of day  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:06:32pm

re: #23 Reginald Perrin

Rotsa ruck, but worth a try!

29 Decatur Deb  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:06:38pm

re: #14 BigPapa

That's deeply disturbing. The court system is not supposed to be gamed by the same politics that the other branches of government are.

Sit down, Grasshopper. We must talk.

30 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:07:43pm

re: #26 Gus 802

Yes. Because we know that if he was a Democrat it wouldn't be an issue.

It would be an issue, but it would be different people screaming. This is going to turn into a factional fight, and I'm on Team Conservative.

31 bratwurst  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:08:24pm

re: #27 albusteve

speaking of real estate...if you visit DC you really must go look at the SC building...one hell of a piece of architecture, and the last building of it's type ever constructed...a real work of art

I have been inside twice and seen the 9 supremes in action once. Fantastic experience I recommend to any and all.

32 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:08:41pm

re: #23 Reginald Perrin

Lets try something completely different.

You stop using the magic fairy balance

This could potentially become a major issue, considering his vote.

Let the adults have a chance to debate this issue honestly

and why are you not out capturing trolls?....don't be so condescending LOL!

33 Kronocide  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:09:49pm

re: #29 Decatur Deb

Sit down, Grasshopper. We must talk.

don't ask me to pick a pebble from your hand or I'll pull a gun out.

34 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:09:53pm

re: #4 EmmmieG

No, they paid the taxes. They didn't report it on the Supreme Court Financial Disclosure.

The point of that is to make sure your wife isn't working for a company that you will have to rule on.

oh ahah!

More politically insidious, nice

35 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:10:43pm

I look forward to hearing what Justice Thomas has to say.

36 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:11:23pm

re: #31 bratwurst

I have been inside twice and seen the 9 supremes in action once. Fantastic experience I recommend to any and all.

never did that...what a cool thing to see...I did see the House in session when I was a kid...left a lasting impression for sure....how do you get in?...just show up, first come first serve?

37 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:12:40pm

re: #30 Dark_Falcon

It would be an issue, but it would be different people screaming. This is going to turn into a factional fight, and I'm on Team Conservative.

lets hope it's not another partisan gutter brawl...that stuff is getting pretty old, regardless of the jokes

38 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:12:59pm

re: #30 Dark_Falcon

It would be an issue, but it would be different people screaming. This is going to turn into a factional fight, and I'm on Team Conservative.

yeah, but the heritage foundation are all buttholes, and nobody wants to be on team butthole!

39 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:13:44pm

I seriously am in too silly a mood to care about this at the moment, I'm about to see Tron 2.0

40 Jadespring  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:15:25pm

re: #39 WindUpBird

I seriously am in too silly a mood to care about this at the moment, I'm about to see Tron 2.0

Ooo... Make sure you let me know what it's like.

41 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:16:14pm

re: #30 Dark_Falcon

It would be an issue, but it would be different people screaming. This is going to turn into a factional fight, and I'm on Team Conservative.

Well. I was under the impression that principle, and the law, transcends partisanship.

42 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:16:49pm

re: #35 EmmmieG

I look forward to hearing what Justice Thomas has to say.

Me, too. Common Cause was also griping about this:

Justice Scalia set to address Tea Party Caucus on Capitol Hill

Justice Antonin Scalia, a popular and entertaining speaker at various forums around the world, has one of the busiest schedules off the bench. But a closed-door address the conservative justice is scheduled to give Monday afternoon has attracted controversy, partly because of who is sponsoring the event.

The Tea Party Caucus, an informal congressional body, had invited the 74-year-old to talk informally with legislators, the first in what leaders are billing as regular "conservative constitutional seminars."

The event was designed as a "teaching event" only for members of Congress, and no cameras or reporters would be allowed to cover it. Scalia's scheduled one-hour topic will be "separation of powers."

"It is a special privilege to have him address the first of what will be regular seminars featuring constitutional scholars," Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minnesota, chairwoman of the Tea Party Caucus, said in December. "In his 24 years of service on the high court, Justice Scalia has distinguished himself by his 'originalist' approach to constitutional interpretation."

Her office said Friday that about 40 members were expected to attend.

Justice Scalia will, I hope, work get the errant congresswoman from Minnesota some understanding of what the Constitution actually is.

43 Reginald Perrin  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:18:01pm

re: #28 Floral Giraffe

Rotsa ruck, but worth a try!

Not anymore

The times they are a changing

44 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:18:21pm

re: #39 WindUpBird

I seriously am in too silly a mood to care about this at the moment, I'm about to see Tron 2.0

It's enjoyable if you don't take it too seriously. Have fun with it, WUB.

45 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:18:37pm

re: #41 Gus 802

Well. I was under the impression that principle, and the law, transcends partisanship.

they do, until you involve politics...I'm pretty jaded tho

46 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:19:17pm

re: #30 Dark_Falcon

It's nice when you make statements like this. It saves me so much time reading your whiny, worn out talking points. Grow up, you aren't in little league, its not about having your team win at all costs.

47 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:19:33pm

re: #44 Dark_Falcon

It's enjoyable if you don't take it too seriously. Have fun with it, WUB.

No, No, it is a deep and sophisticated look into the heart of mankind in the technological age, much like "Heart of Africa" was for the age of imperialism, with many great things to say about human choice, personal connections, and Olivia Wilde's body parts.

48 APox  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:20:19pm

Sounds like this one might go to the Supreme Court!

... Waiiiiit

/

49 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:22:26pm

re: #43 Reginald Perrin

Not anymore

The times they are a changing

Check downstairs for my reply to your question.

50 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:23:29pm

re: #44 Dark_Falcon

It's enjoyable if you don't take it too seriously. Have fun with it, WUB.

light cycles

51 William Barnett-Lewis  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:24:05pm

Sorta on topic and sorta not, Frank Rich gets back to his Art Critic roots and actually has something interesting to say. He compares and contrasts both versions of "True Grit" with "The Social Network"

[Link: www.nytimes.com...]

I presume he's not highly considered around here, but I'd urge a read of this one anyway. It's much more interesting than his usual partisan schlock.

52 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:24:44pm

A sleazy justice being sleazy? Imagine my surprise. =P

53 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:24:46pm

re: #46 McSpiff

It's nice when you make statements like this. It saves me so much time reading your whiny, worn out talking points. Grow up, you aren't in little league, its not about having your team win at all costs.

I never played Little League. But I don't believe for one second that the LA Times would have pursued this story if it would have impacted a liberal justice.

54 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:24:47pm

re: #40 Jadespring

Ooo... Make sure you let me know what it's like.

I gots people telling me it sucks, that it's great, whatever, I'm going in as a dude who freaking adored the first one, but is not blind to the fact that they need to make a Modern Epic Effects Blockbuster out if it, we'll see :D


Also Daft Punk

55 bratwurst  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:25:15pm

re: #36 albusteve

never did that...what a cool thing to see...I did see the House in session when I was a kid...left a lasting impression for sure...how do you get in?...just show up, first come first serve?

I actually had a family member who was arguing a case! I think we got a block of seats just for that case. Pretty wild to see your flesh and blood going toe to toe with Scalia!

56 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:25:50pm

re: #53 Dark_Falcon

I never played Little League. But I don't believe for one second that the LA Times would have pursued this story if it would have impacted a liberal justice.

That's nice. You're admitting you won't let reality affect your bias. I'm not wasting my time on you.

57 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:26:08pm

You know what would be a great name for a band?

Megabortion

58 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:26:15pm

re: #48 APox

Sounds like this one might go to the Supreme Court!

... Waiiit

/

See, I wonder if the explanation will be cute--something like claiming releasing info that was requested violates his rights somehow, and it was widely held knowledge where his wife worked so he felt no need to disclose her salary details. Something along those lines....

Then, he'll challenge the constitutionality of his disclosure requirement, and of course all the Supremes have to recuse themselves. Ergo, he is above the law. :/)

59 Dancing along the light of day  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:26:19pm

It is a big deal.

Federal judges are bound by law to disclose the source of spousal income, according to Stephen Gillers, a professor at NYU School of Law. Thomas’ omission — which could be interpreted as a violation of that law — could lead to some form of penalty, Gillers said.

The lawmakers need to follow the laws too!

60 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:27:18pm

re: #53 Dark_Falcon

I never played Little League. But I don't believe for one second that the LA Times would have pursued this story if it would have impacted a liberal justice.

maybe, but try to rise above it...they are a friggin newspaper, and if what you say is true, then you are playing right into their hands

61 Kronocide  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:28:28pm

If any SCOTUS Justice has this issue it would be a story. Due to Thomas' history with Hill it's of a little more interest, but the fact is that it would be a story of any justice.

The issue is whether he did not claim his wife's income or not, before partisanship.

62 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:28:54pm

re: #55 bratwurst

I actually had a family member who was arguing a case! I think we got a block of seats just for that case. Pretty wild to see your flesh and blood going toe to toe with Scalia!

oh man, I bet the electricity was flying that day....that's something very few people get to see

63 bratwurst  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:29:39pm

re: #53 Dark_Falcon

I never played Little League. But I don't believe for one second that the LA Times would have pursued this story if it would have impacted a liberal justice.

Right...I mean look at the Tim Geithner's tax troubles. They never made a peep about that!

Oh wait! They did.

64 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:31:23pm

re: #63 bratwurst

Right...I mean look at the Tim Geithner's tax troubles. They never made a peep about that!

Oh wait! They did.

Don't bring your facts into this! If a republican gets caught with his hand in the cookie jar, its clearly the fault of the liberal media for bringing the whole thing up. Its downright unAmerican.

65 Kronocide  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:31:51pm

re: #53 Dark_Falcon

I never played Little League. But I don't believe for one second that the LA Times would have pursued this story if it would have impacted a liberal justice.

We'll never know for sure but I'm more interested in whether Justice Thomas is guilty of this infraction than I am about real or perceived bias at the LA Times.

And with that I BBL. Wifey wants food.

66 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:32:25pm

re: #61 BigPapa

If any SCOTUS Justice has this issue it would be a story. Due to Thomas' history with Hill it's of a little more interest, but the fact is that it would be a story of any justice.

The issue is whether he did not claim his wife's income or not, before partisanship.

I'm honestly not sure how big of a deal it is to not disclose on a form where his wife works when the whole world would seem to know it--certainly anyone appearing before the Supreme Court.

If the disclosure process is meant to ensure conflicts of interests are known, did Thomas's actions impede that? Was there any non-disclosure that wasn't already very publicly known?

67 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:32:32pm

re: #51 wlewisiii

Sorta on topic and sorta not, Frank Rich gets back to his Art Critic roots and actually has something interesting to say. He compares and contrasts both versions of "True Grit" with "The Social Network"

[Link: www.nytimes.com...]

I presume he's not highly considered around here, but I'd urge a read of this one anyway. It's much more interesting than his usual partisan schlock.

You're right. That is a good piece of commentary.

68 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:33:02pm

re: #63 bratwurst

Right...I mean look at the Tim Geithner's tax troubles. They never made a peep about that!

Oh wait! They did.

tail end charlie blurb from the Times...

But Geithner doesn't just have to convince skeptical senators, according to some members
"It is incumbent on him to explain the details in a way that the American public can understand," said Sen. George V. Voinovich (R-Ohio). "He's going to have to have a very good explanation."

seems to take away any wiggle room

69 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:34:01pm

Oh for the love of Mike.

70 Reginald Perrin  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:34:52pm

re: #49 Dark_Falcon

Check downstairs for my reply to your question.

already been there and there is one waiting for you.

71 bratwurst  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:35:00pm

re: #62 albusteve

oh man, I bet the electricity was flying that day...that's something very few people get to see

Absolutely! To make a special occasion even more special, a whole mess of the family came in from all over so there was the whole reunion vibe. For the children and grandchildren of immigrants, that was about as American dream as it gets.

72 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:35:02pm

re: #4 EmmmieG

No, they paid the taxes. They didn't report it on the Supreme Court Financial Disclosure.

The point of that is to make sure your wife isn't working for a company that you will have to rule on.

If you're a Supreme, you need to be Caesar's wife. There's just no way around it.

73 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:35:25pm

re: #66 BryanS

I'm honestly not sure how big of a deal it is to not disclose on a form where his wife works when the whole world would seem to know it--certainly anyone appearing before the Supreme Court.

The point is, he's supposed to disclose where his wife works and all sources for her income. Period. It's the law, and he violated it.

74 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:35:48pm

re: #66 BryanS

I'm honestly not sure how big of a deal it is to not disclose on a form where his wife works when the whole world would seem to know it--certainly anyone appearing before the Supreme Court.

If the disclosure process is meant to ensure conflicts of interests are known, did Thomas's actions impede that? Was there any non-disclosure that wasn't already very publicly known?

I can't speak for the American legal system, or anything at the federal Supreme Court level, but I can say in Canada, having something like this occur at the provincial level would probably result in that Judge not hearing cases until the matter is resolved. Even the appearance of hiding something is enough, even with otherwise well known, public information.

Especially if she had previously reported as required by law and then stopped after taking this employment.

75 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:36:12pm

Jeff Bridges has quietly put together a primo body of work...I have not seen True Grit but I imagine he's excellent...he is peaking right now imo

76 Mr.Boots  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:36:37pm

re: #66 BryanS

I'm honestly not sure how big of a deal it is to not disclose on a form where his wife works when the whole world would seem to know it--certainly anyone appearing before the Supreme Court.

If the disclosure process is meant to ensure conflicts of interests are known, did Thomas's actions impede that? Was there any non-disclosure that wasn't already very publicly known?

It's not a matter of where she works. It is a matter of who pays her and how much. The idea is to prevent money being paid through the wife or to prevent conflict of interest. to the justice. She apparently has "speaking fee " income as well.

77 latitude51  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:37:26pm

re: #57 WindUpBird

You know what would be a great name for a band?

Megabortion

Remember these guys?
[Link: en.m.wikipedia.org...]

78 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:37:41pm

re: #75 albusteve

Jeff Bridges has quietly put together a primo body of work...I have not seen True Grit but I imagine he's excellent...he is peaking right now imo

See it, Steve. It's very good, and much better than Tron: Legacy, IMO.

79 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:37:55pm

re: #9 publicityStunted

“Good morning, Anita Hill Common Cause, it’s Ginny Thomas. I just wanted to reach across the airwaves and the years and ask you to consider something. I would love you to consider an apology sometime and some full explanation of why you did what you did with about my husband's Supreme Court financial disclosure forms. So give it some thought and certainly pray about this and come to understand why you did what you did. Okay, have a good day.”

You know Clarence Thomas has been on the Supreme Court for twenty years, and until last year I wasn't even aware he was married. Now his wife is all over the damn place.

80 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:38:24pm

re: #71 bratwurst

Absolutely! To make a special occasion even more special, a whole mess of the family came in from all over so there was the whole reunion vibe. For the children and grandchildren of immigrants, that was about as American dream as it gets.

holy shit man...what an awesome thing
that deserves an entire chapter in your autobiography

81 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:39:00pm

re: #24 jaunte

This isn't a Republican or Democrat thing, it's a failure to follow the rules.

I assume there's some mechanism in place to reprimand him, and then we move on?

82 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:39:48pm

re: #73 Lidane

The point is, he's supposed to disclose where his wife works and all sources for her income. Period. It's the law, and he violated it.

And Bill Clinton was not supposed to lie under oath about an immaterial line of questioning.

In this case, Thomas is being accuse of hiding something that was conspicuously already known. I think we're in slap on the wrist territory here unless I hear more about the story.

83 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:39:49pm

re: #73 Lidane

The point is, he's supposed to disclose where his wife works and all sources for her income. Period. It's the law, and he violated it.

just slow down...let's let this thing be properly nuanced before making conclusions

84 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:39:51pm

re: #81 SanFranciscoZionist

I assume there's some mechanism in place to reprimand him, and then we move on?

IMPEACH!!

//Just wanted to try it on for size...

85 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:40:03pm

re: #30 Dark_Falcon

It would be an issue, but it would be different people screaming. This is going to turn into a factional fight, and I'm on Team Conservative.

Ya know, Dark, I often disagree with you, but I love that you're willing to admit to being partisan. Probably because I am also, on the other side of the aisle.

86 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:40:11pm

re: #81 SanFranciscoZionist

I assume there's some mechanism in place to reprimand him, and then we move on?

I would think so, since the rules that Thomas violated apply to everyone on the federal bench. I'm sure there's already procedures in place for what to do when this happens.

87 HugoLindquist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:40:29pm

Christ Almighty...and the Bandwidth! Is this a Brainer?

88 Mr.Boots  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:40:48pm

It would be interesting to know what she does for the Heritage Foundation that is worth seven hundred thousand per year and what her qualification are for the job other than being a Supreme Court Justice's wife.

If I recall, don't the Koch bros fund the Foundation?

89 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:40:54pm

Shoot the messenger first! Ask questions later.

Actually, the LA Times is reporting something that was released by Common Cause on Friday.

And here's your Charles Rangel coverage at the LA Times.

90 Decatur Deb  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:41:26pm

re: #84 McSpiff

IMPEACH!!


REPEAL!!1!

91 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:41:48pm

re: #42 Dark_Falcon

Me, too. Common Cause was also griping about this:

Justice Scalia set to address Tea Party Caucus on Capitol Hill

Justice Scalia will, I hope, work get the errant congresswoman from Minnesota some understanding of what the Constitution actually is.

Scalia is a great legal mind, but he's not a miracle worker.

92 Decatur Deb  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:42:14pm

re: #88 Mr.Boots

It would be interesting to know what she does for the Heritage Foundation that is worth seven hundred thousand per year and what her qualification are for the job other than being a Supreme Court Justice's wife.

If I recall, don't the Koch bros fund the Foundation?

They are very generous.

93 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:42:27pm

re: #83 albusteve

Oh, sorry. Let me go off and excuse Clarence Thomas for his idiocy. I mean, after all, he's a Republican and this was published by the LA Times. Clearly, it's all the liberals' fault that he couldn't remember to disclose his wife's income or employers for five years.

Pfft. Give me a fucking break.

94 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:42:40pm

re: #55 bratwurst

I actually had a family member who was arguing a case! I think we got a block of seats just for that case. Pretty wild to see your flesh and blood going toe to toe with Scalia!

I wouldn't be able to look.

My old landlady was Justice Breyer's aunt!

95 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:43:01pm

re: #84 McSpiff

IMPEACH!!

//Just wanted to try it on for size...

heh...Tee's for sale yet?
bumper stickers
bill boards
etc
$$$

96 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:43:01pm

re: #74 McSpiff

I can't speak for the American legal system, or anything at the federal Supreme Court level, but I can say in Canada, having something like this occur at the provincial level would probably result in that Judge not hearing cases until the matter is resolved. Even the appearance of hiding something is enough, even with otherwise well known, public information.

Especially if she had previously reported as required by law and then stopped after taking this employment.

I agree that appearances of impropriety are still an issue. In this case it would seem he is accused of hiding something already widely known. Still improper, but not something that should result in his removal if you ask me.

97 Mr.Boots  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:43:44pm

re: #92 Decatur Deb

They are very generous.

Especially when they need a Citizen's United ruling.

98 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:43:49pm

re: #94 SanFranciscoZionist

I wouldn't be able to look.

My old landlady was Justice Breyer's aunt!

My friend is Judge Judy's 2nd cousin!

...yours is cooler.

99 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:44:15pm

re: #93 Lidane

Oh, sorry. Let me go off and excuse Clarence Thomas for his idiocy. I mean, after all, he's a Republican and this was published by the LA Times. Clearly, it's all the liberals' fault that he couldn't remember to disclose his wife's income or employers for five years.

Pfft. Give me a fucking break.

snark meter out of tune?

100 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:44:19pm

re: #88 Mr.Boots

It would be interesting to know what she does for the Heritage Foundation that is worth seven hundred thousand per year and what her qualification are for the job other than being a Supreme Court Justice's wife.

What she does and her qualifications for the job are the same thing. She's married to a justice on SCOTUS. That's a valuable thing for Heritage.

101 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:44:24pm

re: #84 McSpiff

IMPEACH!!

//Just wanted to try it on for size...

Not going to happen. The current House would never vote for it. Nor would I support anything that would leave Clarence Thomas to be replaced by a nominee of Barack Obama. THat last sentence is open partisanship, I know, but its an honest statement of my thinking.

102 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:44:45pm

re: #90 Decatur Deb

REPEAL!!1!

INVADE!
(my personal fave)

103 Talking Point Detective  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:45:00pm

re: #53 Dark_Falcon

I never played Little League. But I don't believe for one second that the LA Times would have pursued this story if it would have impacted a liberal justice.

Conspiracy theory much?

104 rwmofo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:45:30pm

From this LA Times article:

"But Steven Lubet, an expert on judicial ethics at Northwestern University School of Law, said such an infraction was unlikely to result in a penalty. Although unfamiliar with the complaint about Thomas' forms, Lubet said failure to disclose spousal income "is not a crime of any sort, but there is a potential civil penalty" for failing to follow the rules. He added: "I am not aware of a single case of a judge being penalized simply for this.""

"A spokesman for the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, which oversees the financial disclosures, could not be reached Friday night to comment on what actions could be taken. In most cases, judges simply amend their forms when an error is discovered."

Yawn.

Nontroversy.

105 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:45:31pm

re: #86 Lidane

I would think so, since the rules that Thomas violated apply to everyone on the federal bench. I'm sure there's already procedures in place for what to do when this happens.

Seems likely.

Movin' right along.

106 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:45:44pm

re: #91 SanFranciscoZionist

Scalia is a great legal mind, but he's not a miracle worker.

I know. I wish he could just smack Michelle Bachmann upside the head with a wet mackerel, but he's too much the gentleman to do that.

107 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:45:47pm

re: #96 BryanS

I agree that appearances of impropriety are still an issue. In this case it would seem he is accused of hiding something already widely known. Still improper, but not something that should result in his removal if you ask me.

Oh completely agreed. Impeachment thing was totally a joke on my part. Like you said, resolve the impropriety, level a reasonable punishment, let the court continue its business. Probably don't shouldn't give him years at a time to file this type of information. Every year, on time, without fail from here on out.

108 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:46:00pm

Trying to blame the press is an old Nixonian tactic. Their last gasp was with Woodward and Bernstein and the Washington Post.

And Watergate.

109 Mr.Boots  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:46:16pm

re: #96 BryanS

I agree that appearances of impropriety are still an issue. In this case it would seem he is accused of hiding something already widely known. Still improper, but not something that should result in his removal if you ask me.

It may be widely known that she works for the Foundation, but how much she gets paid isn't. $700,000 could be questionable if it is a token job or a job others are being paid much less for.

110 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:46:56pm

re: #96 BryanS

I agree that appearances of impropriety are still an issue. In this case it would seem he is accused of hiding something already widely known. Still improper, but not something that should result in his removal if you ask me.

If you ask me, if a judge can't realize when he needs to recuse himself from issues that he has a personal/family tie from, then he shouldn't be allowed to wear the robe....

111 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:47:10pm

re: #108 Gus 802

Trying to blame the press is an old Nixonian tactic. Their last gasp was with Woodward and Bernstein and the Washington Post.

And Watergate.

those were fun times...wow

112 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:47:16pm

re: #88 Mr.Boots

It would be interesting to know what she does for the Heritage Foundation that is worth seven hundred thousand per year and what her qualification are for the job other than being a Supreme Court Justice's wife.

I don't know, but I'm sure the people who were all upset about Michelle Obama's cushy job in Chicago will have a COW over Mrs. Thomas' gig.

Or not.

113 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:47:26pm

re: #96 BryanS

What it does is call his decisions into question for any cases he heard that would have impacted her employers in any way. It's also sleazy as hell.

I don't see him being removed for this, but I'd expect fines and some sort of censure or punishment for it.

114 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:47:30pm

re: #107 McSpiff

Oh completely agreed. Impeachment thing was totally a joke on my part. Like you said, resolve the impropriety, level a reasonable punishment, let the court continue its business. Probably don't shouldn't give him years at a time to file this type of information. Every year, on time, without fail from here on out.

That I agree with. If he's done something wrong, disclosure wise, levy a fine and move on.

115 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:47:52pm

re: #101 Dark_Falcon

Not going to happen. The current House would never vote for it. Nor would I support anything that would leave Clarence Thomas to be replaced by a nominee of Barack Obama. THat last sentence is open partisanship, I know, but its an honest statement of my thinking.

I wouldn't actually support impeachment because that would be ridiculous. And after Citizens United, I'm not worried about SC decisions getting much worse...

116 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:48:35pm

re: #104 rwmofo

Of course it's a nontroversy. He's a Republican, and they can never, ever do anything wrong. Everything's okay when you're a Republican. =P

117 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:48:41pm

re: #112 SanFranciscoZionist

I don't know, but I'm sure the people who were all upset about Michelle Obama's cushy job in Chicago will have a COW over Mrs. Thomas' gig.

Or not.

thanks for bringing that up....talk about fat cats, so we'll see

118 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:49:08pm

re: #104 rwmofo

From this LA Times article:

"But Steven Lubet, an expert on judicial ethics at Northwestern University School of Law, said such an infraction was unlikely to result in a penalty. Although unfamiliar with the complaint about Thomas' forms, Lubet said failure to disclose spousal income "is not a crime of any sort, but there is a potential civil penalty" for failing to follow the rules. He added: "I am not aware of a single case of a judge being penalized simply for this.""

"A spokesman for the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, which oversees the financial disclosures, could not be reached Friday night to comment on what actions could be taken. In most cases, judges simply amend their forms when an error is discovered."

Yawn.

Nontroversy.

Not a nontroversy, but not a major scandal, either.

I'm sure you'd feel the same way, of course, if it were Breyer or Ginsburg who'd done it.

119 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:49:14pm

re: #110 jamesfirecat

If you ask me, if a judge can't realize when he needs to recuse himself from issues that he has a personal/family tie from, then he shouldn't be allowed to wear the robe...

He didn't need to recuse himself from any cases, that's just what Common Cause said he maybe should have done.

120 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:49:38pm

re: #112 SanFranciscoZionist

I don't know, but I'm sure the people who were all upset about Michelle Obama's cushy job in Chicago will have a COW over Mrs. Thomas' gig.

Or not.

Somehow I think this will seem very different to those people. Just going on on a limb there by guessing.//

121 Talking Point Detective  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:49:40pm

re: #64 McSpiff

Don't bring your facts into this! If a republican gets caught with his hand in the cookie jar, its clearly the fault of the liberal media for bringing the whole thing up. Its downright unAmerican.

It's like clockwork.

It does get tiresome, doesn't it?

Like a reporter for the LATimes or any other major newspaper would look the other way on a story of a liberal justice breaking the law. Or an editor would squash such a story. The conspiratorial and persecution mindset of our rightwing brothers covers all contingencies.

122 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:49:40pm

re: #106 Dark_Falcon

I know. I wish he could just smack Michelle Bachmann upside the head with a wet mackerel, but he's too much the gentleman to do that.

I would pay good money to watch that, but it doesn't seem like his style. On the other hand, I imagine he can turn her to dust with a look...

123 bratwurst  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:49:58pm

re: #94 SanFranciscoZionist

I wouldn't be able to look.

My old landlady was Justice Breyer's aunt!

Funny how it works there...it is not like other courts where you get to make a dramatic opening statement. I don't think this family member was up for more than 3 minutes before getting peppered with questions, mostly from the late Justice Rehnquist who could barely stay seated for more than a few minutes at a time due to his bad back.

124 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:50:10pm

re: #115 McSpiff

I wouldn't actually support impeachment because that would be ridiculous. And after Citizens United, I'm not worried about SC decisions getting much worse...

What was wrong with Citizens United? I thought it was correct.

125 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:50:21pm

re: #118 SanFranciscoZionist

NI'm sure you'd feel the same way, of course, if it were Breyer or Ginsburg who'd done it.

If Breyer and Ginsburg were Republicans, sure. He'd totally feel the same way.

126 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:50:23pm

re: #91 SanFranciscoZionist

Scalia is a great legal mind, but he's not a miracle worker.

Isn't he the one who claimed that the cross is not a Christian symbol?

127 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:51:37pm

re: #113 Lidane

What it does is call his decisions into question for any cases he heard that would have impacted her employers in any way. It's also sleazy as hell.

I don't see him being removed for this, but I'd expect fines and some sort of censure or punishment for it.

Has that ever happened where this info not being known by plaintiffs resulted in hearing cases that Thomas should have reasonably recused himself? If not, then there is nothing to question.

128 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:51:40pm

re: #123 bratwurst

Funny how it works there...it is not like other courts where you get to make a dramatic opening statement. I don't think this family member was up for more than 3 minutes before getting peppered with questions, mostly from the late Justice Rehnquist who could barely stay seated for more than a few minutes at a time due to his bad back.

I suppose that presiding over a Supreme Court case while lying down doesn't look right.

129 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:51:44pm

re: #124 Dark_Falcon

What was wrong with Citizens United? I thought it was correct.

Dark... some of us already think that there is enough money going into our elections... letting companies spend however much they want to me seems like a surefire way for them to try and just buy the legislation they want regardless of what it costs the nation....

130 rwmofo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:51:58pm

re: #118 SanFranciscoZionist

Not a nontroversy, but not a major scandal, either.

I'm sure you'd feel the same way, of course, if it were Breyer or Ginsburg who'd done it.

Yes, I would. Notice that I quoted a Northwestern University Law Professor and legal precedent.

131 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:52:27pm

re: #128 SanFranciscoZionist

I suppose that presiding over a Supreme Court case while lying down doesn't look right.

///Specially because I hear you're not allowed to wear anything under the robe....

132 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:52:35pm

if this situation should not be a partisan issue, then why is it?....how does that work?....ahha!....I think I have the answer

133 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:53:03pm

re: #127 BryanS

It's a fair question, I think. Someone should look into it.

I don't see Thomas being removed or anything major coming from this other than potential fines or some other slap on the wrist, but it's still sleazy as hell, and it's still wrong.

134 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:53:16pm

re: #130 rwmofo

Yes, I would. Notice that I quoted a Northwestern University Law Professor and legal precedent.

That's nice.

135 Shiplord Kirel  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:53:48pm

OT
I've tuned up my psychic powers and looked ahead to Tuesday night. I hereby offer a preview of Rep. Michelle Bachmann's (R-Bull Run) expected Tea Party response to President Obama's State of the Union address:

My fellow Americans and Sovereign Citizens, tonight we have heard the so-called President Barack Hussein Obama deliver his constitutionally mandated State of the Union address. This, unfortunately, is virtually the only time we can expect B. Hussein, or any other demon-possessed Democrat Socialist, to obey the Constitution.

Even as they plot with the media and SEIU to destroy the Constitution, make homosexual filth mandatory in the public schools, and otherwise pollute our bodily essences, they forge ahead with their plan to steal the 2012 election through Black Panther intimidation, the confiscation of firearms, and the targeted assassination of patriot leaders by drones and black helicopters. At that point, with the Kenyan as permanent president, they will be poised to achieve their cherished goals of destroying Christianity and enslaving white America.

Our country has never faced a more severe threat, at least not since that dark day at Appomattox. Even in this darkness, though, my message is one of hope. Patriotic Americans in all their might stand ready to block these totalitarian communist and big business measures. Even in the unlikely event that second amendment remedies fail, rest assured that Jesus will return before Hussein can carry through his depraved plans.
Government of the right people, by the white people, and--- uh, what's the other one? Oh, for the people if they own property, shall not perish from the Earth.

Thank you, may the right God bless America and while you're here on the website, please check out my exciting new line of videos and nutritional supplements.

136 Talking Point Detective  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:53:59pm

The real story here is just how lost is the notion of a non-partisan Supreme Court. I won't pretend that political ideology shapes the decisions of the liberals on the court, but I find it absolutely comical when conservatives claim that it is strict interpretation of the Constitution, and not political ideology, that shapes the decisions of the conservatives on the court.

Gore vs. Bush - with the way that both sides abandoned their long-standing patterns of rulings - blew up any notion of a non-partisan SCOTUS for anyone what was paying attention.

137 Dancing along the light of day  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:54:13pm

Good Night, all.
Sleep well.

138 Decatur Deb  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:54:32pm

re: #131 jamesfirecat

///Specially because I hear you're not allowed to wear anything under the robe...

Being True.

139 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:55:14pm

re: #131 jamesfirecat

///Specially because I hear you're not allowed to wear anything under the robe...

and NO propeller beenies or spit wads, damnit!

140 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:55:18pm

re: #104 rwmofo

From this LA Times article:

"But Steven Lubet, an expert on judicial ethics at Northwestern University School of Law, said such an infraction was unlikely to result in a penalty. Although unfamiliar with the complaint about Thomas' forms, Lubet said failure to disclose spousal income "is not a crime of any sort, but there is a potential civil penalty" for failing to follow the rules. He added: "I am not aware of a single case of a judge being penalized simply for this.""

"A spokesman for the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, which oversees the financial disclosures, could not be reached Friday night to comment on what actions could be taken. In most cases, judges simply amend their forms when an error is discovered."

Yawn.

Nontroversy.

And the rest?

"Without disclosure, the public and litigants appearing before the court do not have adequate information to assess potential conflicts of interest, and disclosure is needed to promote the public's interest in open, honest and accountable government," Common Cause President Bob Edgar wrote in a letter to the Judicial Conference of the United States.

The allegation comes days after Common Cause filed a letter requesting that the Justice Department investigate whether Justices Thomas and Antonin Scalia should have disqualified themselves from hearing a campaign finance case after they reportedly attended a private meeting sponsored by Charles and David Koch, billionaire philanthropists who fund conservative causes.

In the case, Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission, the court ruled that corporate and union funds could be spent directly on election advertising.

The Koch brothers have been key supporters of the group Americans for Prosperity, which spent heavily in the 2010 midterm election and claims a nonprofit tax status that allows it to avoid disclosing its donors.

Clarence Thomas has been the lone justice to argue that laws requiring public disclosure of large political contributions are unconstitutional.

Hooray for "woops I made a mistake" on my disclosure listing. I'm sure that Citizens United and the Koch brothers are looking out for yours and my interest.

141 William Barnett-Lewis  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:55:57pm

re: #101 Dark_Falcon

THat last sentence is open partisanship, I know, but its an honest statement of my thinking.

I'll always grant you that, DF. That said, I deleted the snark I first typed.

He's not a good justice and I just wish we could have a decent conservative instead. That is as honest & nice as I can be on the subject. Sorry.

142 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:56:44pm

re: #129 jamesfirecat

Dark... some of us already think that there is enough money going into our elections... letting companies spend however much they want to me seems like a surefire way for them to try and just buy the legislation they want regardless of what it costs the nation...

However, James, the question before the Supreme Court was whether the law set before them accomplished the task you speak of in a manner consistent with the 1st Amendment. And the court found that it did not.

143 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:56:48pm

But don't worry. Once the labor unions start applying the Citizens United ruling then you're going to hear a lot of bellyaching coming from the right.

144 Talking Point Detective  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:57:11pm

re: #127 BryanS

Has that ever happened where this info not being known by plaintiffs resulted in hearing cases that Thomas should have reasonably recused himself? If not, then there is nothing to question.

It has been said that the nature of her work was well known - so it would seem not. If they can go hunting with Cheney and not recuse themselves in a case a few week later that involves Cheney, it seems that they would have ways around this conflict of interest also.

145 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:57:14pm

re: #143 Gus 802

But don't worry. Once the labor unions start applying the Citizens United ruling then you're going to hear a lot of bellyaching coming from the right.

ACTIVIST JUDGES OMG!

146 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:58:07pm

re: #145 Lidane

ACTIVIST JUDGES OMG!

Promoting the Upper West Side gay agenda!!11ty

//

147 Reginald Perrin  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:58:19pm

My bet is that they are going into full spin that this is more evidence that the evil progressives are subverting democracy by seizing the Supreme Court.
And they will play up the race card, as well playing victim .

148 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:58:53pm

re: #142 Dark_Falcon

However, James, the question before the Supreme Court was whether the law set before them accomplished the task you speak of in a manner consistent with the 1st Amendment. And the court found that it did not.

Fair enough but do you like the end result that we've reached Dark, regardless of how constitutional or not it is?

If there was an amendment being voted on in the Senate to make limit the amount of funds that corporations could spend, would you support it?

149 rwmofo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:59:06pm

re: #140 Gus 802

And the rest?

Hooray for "woops I made a mistake" on my disclosure listing. I'm sure that Citizens United and the Koch brothers are looking out for yours and my interest.

You're quoting Common Cause, which is clearly a left-wing special interest organization. Just follow the link. What are the odds they have an axe to grind?

150 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:59:28pm

re: #136 Talking Point Detective

Please tell me how the Gore V. Bush was legal or not in Florida.

151 Reginald Perrin  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:59:35pm

re: #137 Floral Giraffe

Good Night, all.
Sleep well.


U2
*smack*

152 Killgore Trout  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 8:59:51pm

re: #136 Talking Point Detective

Gore vs. Bush - with the way that both sides abandoned their long-standing patterns of rulings - blew up any notion of a non-partisan SCOTUS for anyone what was paying attention.


Uh, no. Let;s not revert back into Mikey Moore's easily debunked talking points about stolen elections. C'mon, it's stupid shit worthy of Glenn Beck's chalkboard.

153 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:00:07pm

re: #135 Shiplord Kirel

Bachmann is from Minnesota. She's a loon, it true, but she's not any type of Neo-Confederate.

154 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:00:13pm

re: #136 Talking Point Detective

The real story here is just how lost is the notion of a non-partisan Supreme Court. I won't pretend that political ideology shapes the decisions of the liberals on the court, but I find it absolutely comical when conservatives claim that it is strict interpretation of the Constitution, and not political ideology, that shapes the decisions of the conservatives on the court.

Gore vs. Bush - with the way that both sides abandoned their long-standing patterns of rulings - blew up any notion of a non-partisan SCOTUS for anyone what was paying attention.

Supremes don't even need to be judges to be appointed, and they are essentially political appointments.

155 William Barnett-Lewis  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:00:34pm

re: #124 Dark_Falcon

What was wrong with Citizens United? I thought it was correct.

Only people have constitutional rights. Corporations are not people (despite bad interpretations of previous decisions) Therefore...

No non-human (corporation, union, government) should be allowed 1st Amendment privilages as far as I am concerned.

156 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:00:47pm

re: #149 rwmofo

Because left-wing special interest organizations are always suspect and right-wing special interest organizations (i.e., the Heritage Foundation) are always virtuous and never, ever do anything wrong.

Right?

157 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:01:18pm

re: #152 Killgore Trout

Uh, no. Let;s not revert back into Mikey Moore's easily debunked talking points about stolen elections. C'mon, it's stupid shit worthy of Glenn Beck's chalkboard.

Not to start this fight all over again, but all I have to say on the issue is that if any point the supreme court makes a ruling that they aren't comfortable being taken as precedent, then they shouldn't make that ruling in the first place....

158 rwmofo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:01:37pm

re: #156 Lidane

Because left-wing special interest organizations are always suspect and right-wing special interest organizations (i.e., the Heritage Foundation) are always virtuous and never, ever do anything wrong.

Right?

Close enough.

159 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:01:46pm

re: #149 rwmofo

You're quoting Common Cause, which is clearly a left-wing special interest organization. Just follow the link. What are the odds they have an axe to grind?

And who the heck do you think Citizen's United is? They're a right wing special interest group. And they got their way in the SCOTUS ruling.

160 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:01:50pm

re: #148 jamesfirecat

Fair enough but do you like the end result that we've reached Dark, regardless of how constitutional or not it is?

If there was an amendment being voted on in the Senate to make limit the amount of funds that corporations could spend, would you support it?

Doubtful, firstly because I don't think the situation requires amending the Constitution.

161 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:02:23pm

re: #159 Gus 802

And who the heck do you think Citizen's United is? They're a right wing special interest group. And they got their way in the SCOTUS ruling.

Pfft. They're Republicans. Everything's okay when you're a Republican, remember?

162 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:02:23pm

re: #157 jamesfirecat

Not to start this fight all over again, but all I have to say on the issue is that if any point the supreme court makes a ruling that they aren't comfortable being taken as precedent, then they shouldn't make that ruling in the first place...

They shouldn't have. gore pushed it because he lost.

163 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:02:33pm

re: #160 Dark_Falcon

Doubtful, firstly because I don't think the situation requires amending the Constitution.

So you don't have a problem with corporations being able to spend as much as they want on elections?

164 rwmofo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:02:39pm

re: #159 Gus 802

And who the heck do you think Citizen's United is? They're a right wing special interest group. And they got their way in the SCOTUS ruling.

I didn't reference or defend them.

165 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:02:46pm

re: #142 Dark_Falcon

It sets a very strong precedent that citizens, through their representatives in the legislative branch do not have the power to regulate corporations, if a constitutional argument can be found that applies to their legal fiction. I do not think its reasonable to assume that the legal fiction of corporate person hood should have the same fundamental rights as citizens. The legislature creates the corporate person, thus in my opinion it can define its right. We are all created by The Creator, thus we have those inalienable rights as outlined in the constitution imparted to us.

166 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:03:48pm

re: #164 rwmofo

I didn't reference or defend them.

My alleged quote was taken from the same LA Time article you quoted from. Only the rest of the story didn't fit into your narrative.

167 Reginald Perrin  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:03:53pm

re: #139 albusteve

Please explain to me exactly whose poodle am I.
You made the accusation, now defend that assertion like an adult.

And one more question, please tell me why you have an issue with me mentioning the individuals stalking Charles Johnson?

In case he haven't noticed, CJ owns this blog and you a merely a guest.

168 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:04:29pm

re: #148 jamesfirecat

Fair enough but do you like the end result that we've reached Dark, regardless of how constitutional or not it is?

If there was an amendment being voted on in the Senate to make limit the amount of funds that corporations could spend, would you support it?

Regardless? To be fair, maybe you were not intending to say that the ruling coming out the way you wished supersedes any constitutional requirements of the law.

I would not support an amendment to restrict speech.

169 Killgore Trout  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:04:31pm

re: #157 jamesfirecat

Not to start this fight all over again, but all I have to say on the issue is that if any point the supreme court makes a ruling that they aren't comfortable being taken as precedent, then they shouldn't make that ruling in the first place...

The core issue is that a state can't continue to recount votes until they arrive at the desired scenario. Florida was in violation of its own election law ad the Supremes had to step in and stop them. No conspiracy, not unconstitutional. This crap is a reminder of when the lefties were almost as stupid as today's wingnuts.

170 Interesting Times  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:04:41pm

re: #124 Dark_Falcon

What was wrong with Citizens United? I thought it was correct.

Since I don't have time to write up everything that's wrong with it, here it is in picture form.

171 Decatur Deb  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:05:11pm

re: #163 jamesfirecat

So you don't have a problem with corporations being able to spend as much as they want on elections?

Does Citizen's United open the door for undisclosed donations from incorporated churches?

172 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:05:28pm

re: #168 BryanS

Regardless? To be fair, maybe you were not intending to say that the ruling coming out the way you wished supersedes any constitutional requirements of the law.

I would not support an amendment to restrict speech.

Speech != Spending money on political elections.

173 Talking Point Detective  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:05:43pm

re: #152 Killgore Trout

Uh, no. Let;s not revert back into Mikey Moore's easily debunked talking points about stolen elections. C'mon, it's stupid shit worthy of Glenn Beck's chalkboard.

I'm not talking about "stolen elections." Please stick to what I say or don't say, rather than lumping me in with a group when you really don't know shit about what I do or don't believe.

The left and the right on the court switched long-standing positions on states' rights. They both did it. It was a political ruling - on both sides.

Again, what I find ridiculous is the notion on the right that the conservative judges somehow rise above partisan ideology when interpreting the Constition. If you wan't to discuss wether that's true or not, I'm game.

174 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:05:44pm

re: #169 Killgore Trout

AlGore tried to change our State's Constitution. Period.

175 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:05:58pm

re: #155 wlewisiii

Only people have constitutional rights. Corporations are not people (despite bad interpretations of previous decisions) Therefore...

No non-human (corporation, union, government) should be allowed 1st Amendment privileges as far as I am concerned.

I disagree. Corporations represent the accumulated financial interests of their shareholders. Free Speech is an essential tool for their promotion and defense of those monies.

176 rwmofo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:06:42pm

re: #166 Gus 802

My alleged quote was taken from the same LA Time article you quoted from. Only the rest of the story didn't fit into your narrative.

So you're alleging quotes and claim to understand my "narrative." Back away from the bong, dude.

177 Killgore Trout  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:07:04pm

re: #174 Cannadian Club Akbar

AlGore tried to change our State's Constitution. Period.


Saskatchewan has a constitution?

178 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:07:05pm

re: #175 Dark_Falcon

I disagree. Corporations represent the accumulated financial interests of their shareholders. Free Speech is an essential tool for their promotion and defense of those monies.

Not when money buys influence and elections. There is no right to privacy when it comes to political campaigning.

179 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:07:42pm

re: #176 rwmofo

So you're alleging quotes and claim to understand my "narrative." Back away from the bong, dude.

Oh, I see. I'm arguing with a dumb redneck.

180 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:08:31pm

re: #175 Dark_Falcon

I disagree. Corporations represent the accumulated financial interests of their shareholders. Free Speech is an essential tool for their promotion and defense of those monies.

Then the share holders can f***ing spend the corporations money when its dolled out to them as profits, let the corporation either hand the money out to those people or pump it back into capital or employee hiring.

181 APox  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:08:38pm

re: #175 Dark_Falcon

I disagree. Corporations represent the accumulated financial interests of their shareholders. Free Speech is an essential tool for their promotion and defense of those monies.

Heh, neat concept. It's unfortunate that they are granted these rights under the concept of "accumulated interests" but when dire things happen; such as the BP oil spill, suddenly there is no "accumulated interest" to be found, and suddenly shareholders are immune to any type of personal accountability.

182 bratwurst  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:08:55pm

re: #179 Gus 802

Oh, I see. I'm arguing with a dumb redneck.

The whole "anyone who doesn't see the world the same way I do must be on drugs" thing NEVER gets old!

183 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:09:14pm

re: #153 Dark_Falcon

Bachmann is from Minnesota. She's a loon, it true, but she's not any type of Neo-Confederate.

I'm not totally sure that you're going to need to be a southerner to be a neo-Confederate soon.

184 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:09:19pm

re: #163 jamesfirecat

So you don't have a problem with corporations being able to spend as much as they want on elections?

I did not say that. What I said is that I would not support a constitutional amendment to restrict corporate donations, as I think such an amendment unneeded and unwise.

185 rwmofo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:09:21pm

re: #155 wlewisiii

Only people have constitutional rights. Corporations are not people (despite bad interpretations of previous decisions) Therefore...

No non-human (corporation, union, government) should be allowed 1st Amendment privilages as far as I am concerned.

Imagine if a conservative wanted to restrict free speech in any form.

186 Shiplord Kirel  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:09:29pm

re: #153 Dark_Falcon

Bachmann is from Minnesota. She's a loon, it true, but she's not any type of Neo-Confederate.

I know that. She is really a kind of neo-Copperhead, since her views (creationism, theocracy, etc.) are much more consistent with the modern neo-confederates than with those of her Republican predecessors.

187 Talking Point Detective  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:09:49pm

re: #169 Killgore Trout

The core issue is that a state can't continue to recount votes until they arrive at the desired scenario. Florida was in violation of its own election law ad the Supremes had to step in and stop them. No conspiracy, not unconstitutional. This crap is a reminder of when the lefties were almost as stupid as today's wingnuts.

There are many respected legal scholars who disagree, completely, with your simplistic explanation. The issue was not clear cut in anything like the way you're portraying it to be.

I haven't said that the election was "stolen." It was partisanship-based SCOTUS ruling, but it was a legal process. I'd say that anyone who believes that the SOTUS is above partisanship is the one who's approaching Glenn Beck-like naivete.

188 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:10:02pm

re: #177 Killgore Trout

Saskatchewan has a constitution?

my new AG. HAR!!!
[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

189 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:10:18pm

re: #184 Dark_Falcon

I did not say that. What I said is that I would not support a constitutional amendment to restrict corporate donations, as I think such an amendment unneeded and unwise.

So you have a problem with it, but you don't think anything should be done to stop it.

Well thanks for your moral support....

(And sorry if I'm misreading your Dark it's late)

190 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:10:22pm

re: #178 Gus 802

Not when money buys influence and elections. There is no right to privacy when it comes to political campaigning.

I never said there was.

191 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:10:55pm

re: #185 rwmofo

Imagine if a conservative wanted to restrict free speech in any form.

Yeah! I can't imagine conservatives ever wanting to restrict free speech. I mean, they're all about unrestricted free speech in all its forms for everybody. We all know that.

///

192 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:10:58pm

re: #182 bratwurst

The whole "anyone who doesn't see the world the same way I do must be on drugs" thing NEVER gets old!

What do you expect though. The last four letters of his nickname/acronym stands for "mother fucker".

193 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:11:10pm

re: #155 wlewisiii

Only people have constitutional rights. Corporations are not people (despite bad interpretations of previous decisions) Therefore...

No non-human (corporation, union, government) should be allowed 1st Amendment privilages as far as I am concerned.

Yeah. The ACLU should just STFU. The Democratic or Republican political party is not a person, so let's muzzle them too. ///

I don't think we need to consider corporations as human equivalents to think that any group or association of individuals need free speech. The first amendment also includes freedom of assembly. I think freedom of assembly requires associations of individuals the same rights of free speech.

194 freetoken  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:11:13pm

A bit of a testy crowd tonight... was there something in the water?

195 rwmofo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:11:50pm

re: #179 Gus 802

Oh, I see. I'm arguing with a dumb redneck.

A lot of you lefties are definitely consistent. When short on substance, commence with the insults.

196 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:11:56pm

re: #186 Shiplord Kirel

I know that. She is really a kind of neo-Copperhead, since her views (creationism, theocracy, etc.) are much more consistent with the modern neo-confederates than with those of her Republican predecessors.

OK, that's a good neologism. I shall use it, with your kind permission, in the future.

197 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:12:00pm

re: #194 freetoken

A bit of a testy crowd tonight... was there something in the water?

Not in the water. Maybe there was something on the "Coke can".

//

198 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:12:06pm

re: #191 Lidane

Yeah! I can't imagine conservatives ever wanting to restrict free speech. I mean, they're all about unrestricted free speech in all its forms for everybody. We all know that.

///

We need a doctrine of some kind. Fairness?

199 jaunte  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:12:22pm

re: #194 freetoken

Why do you HATE WATER!1!

200 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:12:27pm

re: #193 BryanS

Yeah. The ACLU should just STFU. The Democratic or Republican political party is not a person, so let's muzzle them too. ///

I don't think we need to consider corporations as human equivalents to think that any group or association of individuals need free speech. The first amendment also includes freedom of assembly. I think freedom of assembly requires associations of individuals the same rights of free speech.

Aren't their limits on how much a person can donate to a political campaign though?

And if so... why are we giving corporations rights that people don't have?

201 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:12:35pm

re: #195 rwmofo

A lot of you lefties are definitely consistent. When short on substance, commence with the insults.

You say that after accusing me of smoking pot? Whatever.

202 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:12:40pm

re: #195 rwmofo

A lot of you lefties are definitely consistent. When short on substance, commence with the insults.

Hmmm...who brought up bongs?

203 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:12:45pm

re: #163 jamesfirecat

So you don't have a problem with corporations being able to spend as much as they want on elections?

Don't see any problem whatsoever.

204 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:13:03pm

re: #184 Dark_Falcon

I did not say that. What I said is that I would not support a constitutional amendment to restrict corporate donations, as I think such an amendment unneeded and unwise.

The fact that a legal fiction created by the legislature could need a constitutional amendment to change the restrictions on that legal form simply does not make logical sense to me. The legislature created the corporation but the Supreme Court has elevated it to the level of something much more. That to me is an overstep of the Supreme Courts boundaries. Unfortunately I appear to very much be in the minority.

205 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:13:24pm

re: #203 BryanS

Don't see any problem whatsoever.

Do you see a reason for individual campaign contributions to have caps?

206 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:13:28pm

re: #189 jamesfirecat

So you have a problem with it, but you don't think anything should be done to stop it.

Well thanks for your moral support...

(And sorry if I'm misreading your Dark it's late)

You are misreading me, James. You proposed a Constitutional Amendment. Look instead at a law that would require the level of disclosure you think appropriate but would pass constitutional muster.

207 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:14:04pm

re: #172 jamesfirecat

Speech != Spending money on political elections.

When you have to spend money so people can hear you, it most definitely is true that free speech requires allowing spending money on forms of communication.

208 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:14:27pm

re: #206 Dark_Falcon

You are misreading me, James. You proposed a Constitutional Amendment. Look instead at a law that would require the level of disclosure you think appropriate but would pass constitutional muster.

66 States and 3/4 vote?

209 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:14:40pm

re: #203 BryanS

Don't see any problem whatsoever.

If you can't see why this is problematic then clearly us arguing is just going waste both of our times.

210 APox  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:15:09pm

re: #195 rwmofo

A lot of you lefties are definitely consistent. When short on substance, commence with the insults.

I completely agree. The right always is the side to go to when you are looking for substantive evidence in an argument. They never resort to baseless accusations or name-calling, they never resort to fictitious talking points, ever.

211 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:15:13pm

re: #208 Cannadian Club Akbar

66 States and 3/4 vote?

Canada gets to vote now?!

212 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:15:50pm

re: #211 McSpiff

Canada gets to vote now?!

Shhh!! There are 57 States now!!!!
//

213 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:16:15pm

re: #206 Dark_Falcon

You are misreading me, James. You proposed a Constitutional Amendment. Look instead at a law that would require the level of disclosure you think appropriate but would pass constitutional muster.

But you just said in your previous post that the court came to the right decision when they said that corporations should be able to donate as much as they want and do it without saying who they are....

If they came to the right decision based on Constitution, then how could any law which changes the status quo in this area be Constitutional?

214 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:16:22pm

re: #180 jamesfirecat

Then the share holders can f***ing spend the corporations money when its dolled out to them as profits, let the corporation either hand the money out to those people or pump it back into capital or employee hiring.

Replace the word shareholders with the words union member. In both cases I come down on the side of free speech. Do you agree with restricting both groups from participating in politics?

215 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:16:45pm

Remember folks, rwmofo has admitted he now just comes here to piss people off. Think of that before you let your blood pressure rise.

216 Kronocide  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:16:45pm

re: #202 SanFranciscoZionist

Hmmm...who brought up bongs?

Maybe he's on that bong with summa dat Phat Chronic.

217 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:17:10pm

re: #213 jamesfirecat

But you just said in your previous post that the court came to the right decision when they said that corporations should be able to donate as much as they want and do it without saying who they are...

If they came to the right decision based on Constitution, then how could any law which changes the status quo in this area be Constitutional?

Can Unions donate as much asd they want?

218 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:17:12pm

re: #198 Cannadian Club Akbar

We need a doctrine of some kind. Fairness?

Nah. Any "Fairness Doctrine" introduced these days would be written in such a way that it would be next to useless.

The point is, the idea that conservatives don't want to limit speech is hilarious, given all the restrictions they place on speech about things like birth control and sex ed.

219 William Barnett-Lewis  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:17:24pm

re: #175 Dark_Falcon

I disagree. Corporations represent the accumulated financial interests of their shareholders. Free Speech is an essential tool for their promotion and defense of those monies.

Back in the days of the revolution, one person could buy a printing press and a rack of type and have at it the way we do here on Charles' blog. A Corporation can metaphorically buy a thousand presses for every one I can buy because of their economy of scale. But thanks to Citizens United thier 1000 presses are "equal" to my single press. Somehow I have a hard time imagining that this was the proverbial original intent... :eek:

220 Shiplord Kirel  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:17:33pm

re: #196 SanFranciscoZionist

OK, that's a good neologism. I shall use it, with your kind permission, in the future.

Many thanks, and feel free. Compare Bachmann to actual Copperhead Congressman Daniel W. Voorhees of Indiana:

On the stump his hot temper, passionate partisanship, and stirring eloquence made an irresistible appeal to the western Democracy ( Democratic Party). His bitter cries against protective tariffs and national banks, his intense race prejudice, his suspicion of the eastern Yankee, his devotion to personal liberty, his defense of the Constitution and state rights faithfully reflected the views of his constituents. Like other Jacksonian agrarians he resented the political and economic revolution then in progress. Voorhees idealized a way of life which he thought was being destroyed by the current rulers of his country. His bold protests against these dangerous trends made him the idol of the Democracy of the Wabash Valley.
221 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:17:53pm

re: #210 APox

I completely agree. The right always is the side to go to when you are looking for substantive evidence in an argument. They never resort to baseless accusations or name-calling, they never resort to fictitious talking points, ever.

Why do you hate America?

///

222 rwmofo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:18:13pm

re: #202 SanFranciscoZionist

Hmmm...who brought up bongs?

We right-wingers have a sense of humor. He was really stretching to try to make his point, so I interjected a witty retort. Note that I didn't--and don't--insult lizards. ...and if you can't figure out when I'm joking around, well I'll get over it.

223 Talking Point Detective  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:18:20pm

Speaking of Glenn Beck - I think Cass Sunstein says it nicely:

In the remarkable struggle for the presidency in late 2000, Republicans generally believed that the Florida Supreme Court had not interpreted but instead changed Florida law, and that the U.S. Supreme Court had to do something about the situation. At the same time, Democrats generally believed that the Florida Supreme Court had merely interpreted Florida law, and that intervention by the U.S. Supreme Court was the height of partisanship. The issues involved in the legal controversy were largely technical ones on which few people were well informed. Why were so many people so confident of their position, indeed so dogmatic about it—and so suspicious of the motivations of their adversaries?

224 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:18:29pm

re: #198 Cannadian Club Akbar

We need a doctrine of some kind. Fairness?

boooo. last thing we need to protect speech is a law mandating the content of that speech.

225 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:18:40pm

re: #217 Cannadian Club Akbar

Can Unions donate as much asd they want?

No. But they can buy whatever political airtime they want, so the effect is the same. Same as any other incorporated group. Citizens doesn't just apply to businesses.

226 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:18:43pm

re: #218 Lidane

Nah. Any "Fairness Doctrine" introduced these days would be written in such a way that it would be next to useless.

The point is, the idea that conservatives don't want to limit speech is hilarious, given all the restrictions they place on speech about things like birth control and sex ed.

Ah, things that should be taught within the family?

227 rwmofo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:19:11pm

re: #210 APox

I completely agree. The right always is the side to go to when you are looking for substantive evidence in an argument. They never resort to baseless accusations or name-calling, they never resort to fictitious talking points, ever.

I can't speak for "them," but I don't.

228 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:19:11pm

re: #214 BryanS

Replace the word shareholders with the words union member. In both cases I come down on the side of free speech. Do you agree with restricting both groups from participating in politics?

Yes.

I believe that there is a difference between free speech and spending money.

By their very nature political donations are not "free speech" because it costs someone money to do it!

HA!

Seriously, unless we like having our elected representatives beholden to special interests, why should we make it easier for them to drown out the voices of the little man with mass political donations?

229 Talking Point Detective  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:19:22pm

re: #195 rwmofo

A lot of you lefties are definitely consistent. When short on substance, commence with the insults.

What's hilarious is that rwmofo doesn't even see the blindingly bright irony in that comment.

230 Kronocide  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:19:37pm

re: #215 McSpiff

Remember folks, rwmofo has admitted he now just comes here to piss people off. Think of that before you let your blood pressure rise.

I think it's a faux posture: when irritated say 'LOL I just come here to piss you guys off and I see it worked! LOL LOL'

Like it's thrilling to come into a group of people and piss them off for some kind of satisfaction or noble cause. Gimme a break.

231 rwmofo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:20:13pm

re: #215 McSpiff

Remember folks, rwmofo has admitted he now just comes here to piss people off. Think of that before you let your blood pressure rise.

Not always.

232 APox  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:20:35pm

re: #227 rwmofo

I can't speak for "them," but I don't.

Great! A beaming example of right-wing purity stands among the vile leftists.

233 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:20:38pm

re: #222 rwmofo

and if you can't figure out when I'm joking around, well I'll get over it.


Limbaugh has taught you well young one, but you are not a Jedi yet....

234 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:21:09pm

re: #226 Cannadian Club Akbar

That would be nice, except that sex ed and birth control are rarely, if ever taught in the family, given our horrific teen pregnancy rate over other parts of the world that have more comprehensive programs.

235 Reginald Perrin  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:21:32pm

re: #195 rwmofo

A lot of you lefties are definitely consistent. When short on substance, commence with the insults.

What is it that you think you and your kind are achieving?

Or is this all about butt hurt over your kind losing the blog.

If it is so awful here, what makes you stay?

236 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:21:38pm

re: #200 jamesfirecat

Aren't their limits on how much a person can donate to a political campaign though?

And if so... why are we giving corporations rights that people don't have?

Donate to a campaign? Yes. Spend on their own or buy adds themselves? Sky's the limit. That's one of the reasons the campaign finance reforms made it even more difficult to run a campaign unless you were independently wealthy.

237 APox  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:21:41pm

re: #229 Talking Point Detective

What's hilarious is that rwmofo doesn't even see the blindingly bright irony in that comment.

My #210 highlights no irony, but pure unadulterated fact.

238 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:21:42pm

re: #233 jamesfirecat

Limbaugh has taught you well young one, but you are not a Jedi yet...

I am still learning from Olberman.....wait....
///

239 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:22:25pm

re: #228 jamesfirecat

Yes.

I believe that there is a difference between free speech and spending money.

By their very nature political donations are not "free speech" because it costs someone money to do it!

HA!

Seriously, unless we like having our elected representatives beholden to special interests, why should we make it easier for them to drown out the voices of the little man with mass political donations?

Corporations are still restricted on donations James. I agree with you, but your terminology is getting a little lose.

240 jaunte  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:22:30pm
Thomas failed to note the income in his Supreme Court financial disclosure forms for those years, instead checking a box labeled "none" where "spousal noninvestment income" would be disclosed.


$686,589 is not 'none', so that was a lie. It's not a partisan issue, it's just a lie.

241 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:22:48pm

re: #234 Lidane

That would be nice, except that sex ed and birth control are rarely, if ever taught in the family, given our horrific teen pregnancy rate over other parts of the world that have more comprehensive programs.

Like Africa, who Bush 43 gave 15 billion to to help?

242 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:22:48pm

Oh brother.

243 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:22:51pm

I'm fading fast, so I'm going to sign off for the night. Sleep well, all.

244 Kronocide  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:22:59pm

re: #175 Dark_Falcon

I used to think that but my opinion has changed. A corp may reflect the summary values of it's members, or not. But that would make it a lobby.

I just can't practically consider a corporation a citizen, though the members of the corporation are citizens.

245 Eclectic Infidel  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:23:19pm

re: #6 albusteve

okay, so is he a republican?...that's the real issue here LOL!

I think you're the only one laughing like a freak in front of your monitor.

246 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:23:45pm

re: #239 McSpiff

Corporations are still restricted on donations James. I agree with you, but your terminology is getting a little lose.

Okay then, thanks for keeping me on the rails, and sorry for getting a little loose with my terms.

Either way... yeah we're getting a little off topic here, but yeah, I really don't like the Citizen United ruling, can you tell?

247 rwmofo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:24:13pm

re: #235 Reginald Perrin

What is it that you think you and your kind are achieving?

Or is this all about butt hurt over your kind losing the blog.

If it is so awful here, what makes you stay?

Not sure what you mean by "my kind."

I didn't lose anything.

I don't think it's so bad here. I typically have fun. That's why I drop by every now and then.

248 Talking Point Detective  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:24:16pm

re: #237 APox

My #210 highlights no irony, but pure unadulterated fact.

Indeed. rwmofo's insulting 1/2 of the American public proves that only libz insult people.

249 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:24:21pm

re: #205 SanFranciscoZionist

Do you see a reason for individual campaign contributions to have caps?

Not really. I have no problems with requiring full disclosure of campaign contributions, however. If there is a problematic contribution or appearance of undue influence, let everyone know where the money came from.

The reform laws we had made the system much less transparent, with shell non-profits set up to funnel political spending simply to avoid those caps.

250 palomino  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:24:29pm

re: #6 albusteve

okay, so is he a republican?...that's the real issue here LOL!

So start your own website about all the dastardly Dems. Everyone's doing it.

251 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:25:09pm

re: #244 BigPapa

I used to think that but my opinion has changed. A corp may reflect the summary values of it's members, or not. But that would make it a lobby.

I just can't practically consider a corporation a citizen, though the members of the corporation are citizens.

A bus can be full of people. They can even decide what direction the bus should go, how fast it should go, where to stop for food. But that does not make a bus a person, and no one would claim the bus has rights. Yet if we sign a piece of paper chartering a bus company, somehow that bus deserves the same rights as a flesh and blood.

252 Reginald Perrin  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:25:21pm

re: #229 Talking Point Detective

What's hilarious is that rwmofo doesn't even see the blindingly bright irony in that comment.

He is suffering from an irony deficient diet

253 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:25:35pm

re: #209 jamesfirecat

If you can't see why this is problematic then clearly us arguing is just going waste both of our times.

If you are unwilling to listen to my arguments, fine. It's your loss. I'm reading your comments.

254 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:25:45pm

re: #241 Cannadian Club Akbar

Like Africa, who Bush 43 gave 15 billion to to help?

What the hell does Africa have to do with the US teen pregnancy rate relative to other countries with more comprehensive sex ed classes and birth control information available than the ones here in the States?

255 palomino  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:25:55pm

re: #17 Dark_Falcon

Agreed.

Because no media source ever focuses on Dem corruption? Please. No need to be so defensive whenever your fellow party members get caught.

256 William Barnett-Lewis  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:27:14pm

re: #243 Dark_Falcon

I'm fading fast, so I'm going to sign off for the night. Sleep well, all.

Good night DF. May you enjoy tomorrow's game even if it ends as I expect it to.

257 rwmofo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:27:22pm

Well, it was a treat as always. So you again soon!

258 palomino  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:27:27pm

re: #53 Dark_Falcon

I never played Little League. But I don't believe for one second that the LA Times would have pursued this story if it would have impacted a liberal justice.

Then you don't know jack about the LA Times.

259 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:27:33pm

re: #254 Lidane

You said over parts of the world.

260 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:27:45pm

re: #253 BryanS

If you are unwilling to listen to my arguments, fine. It's your loss. I'm reading your comments.

Do you have any arguments that don't conflate campaign contributions with free speech?

261 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:27:51pm

re: #245 eclectic infidel

I think you're the only one laughing like a freak in front of your monitor.

partisanship is the new pink...when in doubt hide behind your political party,and when you are right, use the party as a shield when you attack...it's the most important aspect of politics these days

262 BongCrodny  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:27:52pm

re: #39 WindUpBird

I seriously am in too silly a mood to care about this at the moment, I'm about to see Tron 2.0

re: #195 rwmofo

A lot of you lefties are definitely consistent. When short on substance, commence with the insults.


And you don't call "Back away from the bong, dude" an insult?

263 Killgore Trout  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:28:15pm

re: #187 Talking Point Detective

There are many respected legal scholars who disagree, completely, with your simplistic explanation.


There are also many "respected" legal scholars who think paper money is unconstitutional. Don't be stupid.

264 BongCrodny  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:28:36pm

re: #202 SanFranciscoZionist

Hmmm...who brought up bongs?


Ha! Beat me to the punch, I see.

265 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:29:21pm

re: #262 BongCrodny

No, in his simple mind he's simply citing a fact, totally objective. Liberals are evil isn't a political insult, its a matter of fact. Arguing with that is what makes us dirty libs...dirty libs.

266 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:29:22pm

re: #259 Cannadian Club Akbar

I was also talking about sex ed and birth control, and specifically mentioned teen pregnancy. The money Bush gave to Africa was for AIDS prevention and largely focused on preventing the spread of HIV.

Again-- what the hell does that have to do with what I was talking about?

267 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:29:33pm

Tonight's Lesson Plan:

• Blame the liberal media first
• Right wingers have a sense of humor
• Left wingers don't have a sense of humor
• Left wingers are the only people that fling insults
• Citizens United is teh good thing

For more information on this lesson plan please navigate to butthurt dot com.

268 Kronocide  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:29:40pm

re: #247 rwmofo

I don't think it's so bad here. I typically have fun.

My interpretation: 'I love to come and piss of liberals.'

269 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:30:06pm

re: #250 palomino

So start your own website about all the dastardly Dems. Everyone's doing it.

no, the parties are interchangable obviously...but republicans are in the forefront these days...that's the point

270 Lidane  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:30:08pm

re: #267 Gus 802

Tonight's Lesson Plan:

• Blame the liberal media first
• Right wingers have a sense of humor
• Left wingers don't have a sense of humor
• Left wingers are the only people that fling insults
• Citizens United is teh good thing

For more information on this lesson plan please navigate to butthurt dot com.

[APPLAUSE]

271 palomino  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:30:59pm

re: #176 rwmofo

So you're alleging quotes and claim to understand my "narrative." Back away from the bong, dude.

You must be 150 years old if you're making bong jokes. "Back in my day, people knew that marijuana was devil's weed. We just drank whiskey all nite like God intended."

272 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:31:24pm

re: #267 Gus 802

Tonight's Lesson Plan:

• Blame the liberal media first
• Right wingers have a sense of humor
• Left wingers don't have a sense of humor
• Left wingers are the only people that fling insults
• Citizens United is teh good thing

For more information on this lesson plan please navigate to butthurt dot com.

*Blame the right and broad brush all on the right, right?

273 tnguitarist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:31:45pm

If corporations are citizens, then they all go to prison when a crime is committed, right?

274 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:31:54pm

re: #267 Gus 802

Tonight's Lesson Plan:

• Blame the liberal media first
• Right wingers have a sense of humor
• Left wingers don't have a sense of humor
• Left wingers are the only people that fling insults
• Citizens United is teh good thing

For more information on this lesson plan please navigate to butthurt dot com.

Remember, you should feel guilty if you vote for your own self-interest over that of corporations.

I'll be nice. D_F actually said almost exactly that once. I felt bad for the guy.

275 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:32:07pm

re: #228 jamesfirecat

Yes.

I believe that there is a difference between free speech and spending money.

By their very nature political donations are not "free speech" because it costs someone money to do it!

HA!

Seriously, unless we like having our elected representatives beholden to special interests, why should we make it easier for them to drown out the voices of the little man with mass political donations?

The solution to the "special interest" concern is not to prevent spending money, but mandate disclosure and transparency. If some Evil Corporation donates too much money to a campaign, there will be hell to pay when the other side makes that a campaign issue.

And sorry, but money is speech, and very much an integral part of enabling assembly as the rights are laid out in the first amendment. The Internet may very well be the closest thing we ever had to leveling the playing field, but even there, money helps get your message heard.

Free speech is meaningless unless you have the right to affect how well it is heard. The right of assembly inherently recognizes this.

276 Talking Point Detective  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:32:09pm

re: #263 Killgore Trout

There are also many "respected" legal scholars who think paper money is unconstitutional. Don't be stupid.

Your partisanship is showing.

So you think that any legal scholar who argues against the ruling of Bush V. Gore is "stupid?"

Really?

And I love the quotation marks around respected. Because you think that there aren't widely respected legal scholars who disagreed with the court's decision in Bush V. Gore?

Tell me, why are you so convinced about the Michael Moore-like quality of people who interpret a techincal legal ruling in a particular way? None of them have integrity in their beliefs? They can't make a logical argument?

277 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:32:24pm

re: #272 Cannadian Club Akbar

*Blame the right and broad brush all on the right, right?

Context is everything. I was essentially referring to rwmofo (aka Right Wing Mother Fucker).

278 palomino  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:32:46pm

re: #195 rwmofo

A lot of you lefties are definitely consistent. When short on substance, commence with the insults.

When you start your post with "a lot of you lefties," do you really expect anyone left of center to take you seriously?

279 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:33:27pm

re: #276 Talking Point Detective

Bush V. Gore was a State Ruling. Wanna tell me about what you know?

280 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:34:15pm

re: #278 palomino

When you start your post with "a lot of you lefties," do you really expect anyone left of center to take you seriously?

he should have said, "all you lefties"
jus kidding

281 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:34:52pm

re: #260 jamesfirecat

Do you have any arguments that don't conflate campaign contributions with free speech?

No. It's not a conflation

282 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:35:01pm

re: #241 Cannadian Club Akbar

Like Africa, who Bush 43 gave 15 billion to to help?

That's a bit of a non-sequitur.

283 Killgore Trout  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:35:02pm

re: #276 Talking Point Detective

Your partisanship is showing.

So you think that any legal scholar who argues against the ruling of Bush V. Gore is "stupid?"

Really?

And I love the quotation marks around respected. Because you think that there aren't widely respected legal scholars who disagreed with the court's decision in Bush V. Gore?

Tell me, why are you so convinced about the Michael Moore-like quality of people who interpret a techincal legal ruling in a particular way? None of them have integrity in their beliefs? They can't make a logical argument?

Sorry but I'm not interested in debating Michael Moore conspiracies about stolen elections if Florida any more than debating if 9-11 was an inside job. It's nonsense and those who still believe it are idiots. This debate was settled long ago.

284 Reginald Perrin  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:35:05pm

re: #261 albusteve

Steve, I left a question upthread at 167

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

Please show the courtesy of making a reply

You made an allegation, finish it!

285 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:35:06pm

re: #275 BryanS

The solution to the "special interest" concern is not to prevent spending money, but mandate disclosure and transparency. If some Evil Corporation donates too much money to a campaign, there will be hell to pay when the other side makes that a campaign issue.

And sorry, but money is speech, and very much an integral part of enabling assembly as the rights are laid out in the first amendment. The Internet may very well be the closest thing we ever had to leveling the playing field, but even there, money helps get your message heard.

Free speech is meaningless unless you have the right to affect how well it is heard. The right of assembly inherently recognizes this.

Which is exactly what Citizens does...the total opposite of. There are plenty of legal tricks used to hide the ownership of a corporation. Shares held in trust, etc. Those will ALL be used next election. There is no way to stay within the Supreme Court ruling and at the same time mandate disclosure and transparency. It would require a complete rewrite of US corporate law.

286 palomino  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:35:21pm

re: #215 McSpiff

Remember folks, rwmofo has admitted he now just comes here to piss people off. Think of that before you let your blood pressure rise.

Was there ever any doubt? Most of his posts are polemics that look like they were cut and pasted directly from redstate/foxnews/freerepublic/whatever.

287 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:35:27pm

Clarence Thomas as sacred cow. Who'd a thunk it.

//

288 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:35:49pm

re: #275 BryanS

The solution to the "special interest" concern is not to prevent spending money, but mandate disclosure and transparency. If some Evil Corporation donates too much money to a campaign, there will be hell to pay when the other side makes that a campaign issue.

And sorry, but money is speech, and very much an integral part of enabling assembly as the rights are laid out in the first amendment. The Internet may very well be the closest thing we ever had to leveling the playing field, but even there, money helps get your message heard.

Free speech is meaningless unless you have the right to affect how well it is heard. The right of assembly inherently recognizes this.

What if then the special interest just spends more money to run adds calling the other guy a liar for claiming that the guy they support is beholden to special interests?

It makes more sense to just make it so that they can't donate that much money in the first place than to hope that our political establishment can self regulate.


So yeah, you're right we're done here.

Nothing you say is ever going to convince me that money equals speech.

Sucks for both of us but there it is.

289 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:36:04pm

re: #287 Gus 802

Clarence Thomas as sacred cow. Who'd a thunk it.

//

The chick with the Coke can?
//

290 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:36:29pm

re: #262 BongCrodny

re: #195 rwmofo


And you don't call "Back away from the bong, dude" an insult?

He was being funny. When a 'lefty' does it, it's just an attack. Get with the program, dude.

291 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:37:15pm

re: #273 tnguitarist

If corporations are citizens, then they all go to prison when a crime is committed, right?

Who was arguing corporations are citizens?

Free speech includes the right of assembly. Why cannot an association of individuals be involved in politics just because it is an association that happens to be a business?

292 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:37:24pm

Bush v. Gore
United States Supreme Court 531 U.S. 98 (2000)

That was a Supreme Court ruling. Other than that I have nothing to add.

293 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:38:12pm

re: #287 Gus 802

Clarence Thomas as sacred cow. Who'd a thunk it.

//

He's always been that.

294 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:38:20pm

re: #291 BryanS

Who was arguing corporations are citizens?

Free speech includes the right of assembly. Why cannot an association of individuals be involved in politics just because it is an association that happens to be a business?

The supreme court?

295 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:38:41pm

re: #292 Gus 802

Bush v. Gore
United States Supreme Court 531 U.S. 98 (2000)

That was a Supreme Court ruling. Other than that I have nothing to add.

So, Gore still lost?

296 palomino  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:38:43pm

re: #269 albusteve

no, the parties are interchangable obviously...but republicans are in the forefront these days...that's the point

That just depends on your viewpoint. My conservative friends in TX see things in starkly opposite terms. This country's now too big, diverse and fractured for any consensus.

297 Interesting Times  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:38:50pm

re: #286 palomino

Was there ever any doubt? Most of his posts are polemics that look like they were cut and pasted directly from redstate/foxnews/freerepublic/whatever.

Making the Bottom Comments gives him a thrill in his naughty place :P

298 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:39:00pm

re: #291 BryanS

Who was arguing corporations are citizens?

Free speech includes the right of assembly. Why cannot an association of individuals be involved in politics just because it is an association that happens to be a business?

Clearly we need to make a direct law that businesses need to stay the F*** out of politics.

We want a democracy and a meritocracy not a corporate "'oligarhy"

299 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:39:48pm

re: #290 SanFranciscoZionist

He was being funny. When a 'lefty' does it, it's just an attack. Get with the program, dude.

Hey. I was channeling Jeff Foxworthy. It was either that or I was about to go psycho Scooby Doo!

300 Amory Blaine  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:40:03pm

re: #298 jamesfirecat

Clearly we need to make a direct law that businesses need to stay the F*** out of politics.

We want a democracy and a meritocracy not a corporate "'oligarhy"

We do? Could fool the fuck out of me/

301 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:40:12pm

re: #295 Cannadian Club Akbar

So, Gore still lost?

Yep.

302 Interesting Times  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:40:27pm

re: #288 jamesfirecat

Nothing you say is ever going to convince me that money equals speech.

"If money equals speech, try paying your VISA bill with an essay"

303 laZardo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:40:32pm

re: #298 jamesfirecat

Clearly we need to make a direct law that businesses need to stay the F*** out of politics.

We want a democracy and a meritocracy not a corporate "'oligarhy"

There was a constitutional amendment being suggested in the House of Representatives now that it's pretty much legal for business to go whole hog into politics.

304 Talking Point Detective  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:41:03pm

re: #283 Killgore Trout

Sorry but I'm not interested in debating Michael Moore conspiracies about stolen elections if Florida any more than debating if 9-11 was an inside job. It's nonsense and those who still believe it are idiots. This debate was settled long ago.

What is even more telling is your adherence to the accusation that I said the election was "stolen" or that I'm promoting some kind of conspiracy theory.

If you want to discuss the case on it's merits, I'm happy to do that, but in fact you have no idea whether I agreed with the ruling or not.

You're arguing against some fantasized version of a "lefty" the exists in the blogosphere, but in this case, in the discussion between you and me, it exists only in your mind.

I haven't said anything about the election being stolen. I haven't said anything about a conspiracy.

I said that both sides on the court reversed their long-standing positions on states' rights issues - which exposed the partisan underbelly of the SCOTUS system on both sides of the aisle.

I can only assume that your need to keep building straw men indicates that you have nothing of value to say on the issue I'm actually discussing?

305 Kronocide  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:41:34pm

re: #290 SanFranciscoZionist

He was being funny. When a 'lefty' does it, it's just an attack. Get with the program, dude.

Clarifications are attacks too. They're all attacks! But I'm having fun, it's always a blast.

306 tnguitarist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:41:34pm

re: #291 BryanS

Who was arguing corporations are citizens?

Free speech includes the right of assembly. Why cannot an association of individuals be involved in politics just because it is an association that happens to be a business?

In my opinion, this opens the doors for unlimited foreign cash to pour into our elections.

307 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:41:55pm

re: #303 laZardo

There was a constitutional amendment being suggested in the House of Representatives now that it's pretty much legal for business to go whole hog into politics.

Maybe we can elect Mr. Goodwrench mayor of the town to deal with our traffic issues, I hear he knows a thing or two about resolving all automotive difficulties!

308 palomino  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:42:21pm

re: #291 BryanS

Who was arguing corporations are citizens?

Free speech includes the right of assembly. Why cannot an association of individuals be involved in politics just because it is an association that happens to be a business?


You're seriously suggesting that corporations aren't already heavily involved in politics? Then what do those 40 million lobbyists in DC do besides cheat on their spouses?

309 William Barnett-Lewis  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:42:57pm

re: #293 SanFranciscoZionist

He's always been that.

Only thing he's ever been good at... ///

310 BongCrodny  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:43:05pm

re: #290 SanFranciscoZionist

He was being funny. When a 'lefty' does it, it's just an attack. Get with the program, dude.


I generally don't call people trolls, but I gotta confess, with mofo it's awful hard sometimes.

311 TedStriker  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:43:22pm

re: #6 albusteve

okay, so is he a republican?...that's the real issue here LOL!

re: #17 Dark_Falcon

Agreed.

I disagree...Thomas may be a Republican, but all judges, whether it's SCOTUS, other federal judges, or state and local judges, should be absolutely aboveboard on anything that could call into question their integrity and honesty.

This doesn't look like and accidental oversight, this looks like a pattern of evasion and concealment...and it shouldn't be happening.

312 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:43:39pm

re: #291 BryanS

Who was arguing corporations are citizens?

Free speech includes the right of assembly. Why cannot an association of individuals be involved in politics just because it is an association that happens to be a business?

Freedom of association does not trump the other rights however. Including other citizens. A restriction on an association is not inherently a restriction on its individual members. The two (the association and its members) are not interchangeable. A corporation forms a firewall between itself and its members, that must work in both directions

313 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:43:41pm

re: #285 McSpiff

Which is exactly what Citizens does...the total opposite of. There are plenty of legal tricks used to hide the ownership of a corporation. Shares held in trust, etc. Those will ALL be used next election. There is no way to stay within the Supreme Court ruling and at the same time mandate disclosure and transparency. It would require a complete rewrite of US corporate law.

That's fairly simple to address. When a corporation donates political money, just make them file disclosure of any partyb(any individual or other corporation) controlling more than say 25% of the company and any and all members of the board. This type of information is already known for any publicly traded company.

314 laZardo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:43:42pm

re: #307 jamesfirecat

Maybe we can elect Mr. Goodwrench mayor of the town to deal with our traffic issues, I hear he knows a thing or two about resolving all automotive difficulties!

First, we have to find him.

315 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:44:22pm

re: #301 Gus 802

Yep.

However, electoral votes were due to be cast in six days. (State Law)
Here in Florida, we have States rights. And with that I am going to bed. So long, suckers, stuck in 2000!!! (not to you and I know who you are)

316 tnguitarist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:44:22pm

re: #308 palomino

You're seriously suggesting that corporations aren't already heavily involved in politics? Then what do those 40 million lobbyists in DC do besides cheat on their spouses?

Now they don't have to dance around with "junkets" or "retreats". They can just stick the money straight in their damn pockets.

317 laZardo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:44:57pm

re: #311 talon_262

It's conservative hypocrisy in action, that's what it is.

318 Amory Blaine  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:45:29pm

re: #312 McSpiff

Freedom of association does not trump the other rights however. Including other citizens. A restriction on an association is not inherently a restriction on its individual members. The two (the association and its members) are not interchangeable. A corporation forms a firewall between itself and its members, that must work in both directions

Personal responsibility? Why accept that when there's a nebulous corporation to blame?

319 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:45:35pm

re: #314 laZardo

First, we have to find him.


[Video]

Maybe he's Hiking the Appalachian Trail...

320 tnguitarist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:46:34pm

re: #318 Amory Blaine

Personal responsibility? Why accept that when there's a nebulous corporation to blame?

For thee, not for me.....

321 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:46:49pm

re: #296 palomino

That just depends on your viewpoint. My conservative friends in TX see things in starkly opposite terms. This country's now too big, diverse and fractured for any consensus.

the parties are interchangable with regard to the original post....my point all along is that regardless of right or wrong, or principle, or conceding for the common good, the first order of business these days is to draw up lines and begin with the typical accusations...it's both left and right, as if parties are some sort of divine club....the line must be towed, the members protected at all cost....it's no way to govern, and not only is govt guilty but so is the electorate....it doesn't matter to me where Thomas is ideologically to me, the question is did he break the law?...why should politics matter?

322 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:48:04pm

re: #308 palomino

You're seriously suggesting that corporations aren't already heavily involved in politics? Then what do those 40 million lobbyists in DC do besides cheat on their spouses?

good one

323 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:48:13pm

re: #315 Cannadian Club Akbar

However, electoral votes were due to be cast in six days. (State Law)
Here in Florida, we have States rights. And with that I am going to bed. So long, suckers, stuck in 2000!!! (not to you and I know who you are)

Yeah. I've always accepted Bush vs. Gore.

324 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:48:23pm

re: #321 albusteve

the parties are interchangable with regard to the original post...my point all along is that regardless of right or wrong, or principle, or conceding for the common good, the first order of business these days is to draw up lines and begin with the typical accusations...it's both left and right, as if parties are some sort of divine club...the line must be towed, the members protected at all cost...it's no way to govern, and not only is govt guilty but so is the electorate...it doesn't matter to me where Thomas is ideologically to me, the question is did he break the law?...why should politics matter?

Politics doesn't matter in this case, not unless it is made to. He screwed up. There will be some consequence. The rest is just silly.

325 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:49:20pm

re: #298 jamesfirecat

Clearly we need to make a direct law that businesses need to stay the F*** out of politics.

We want a democracy and a meritocracy not a corporate "'oligarhy"

Thankfully that won't ever happen. You're basically saying that a group of people, because they are a corporation, is no longer allowed the rights of speech or freedom of assembly. If their property is at risk due to government action, they should not allowed to be able to say anything publicly to protect their interests nomatter the providence of their argument? That is a serious threat to property rights.

326 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:51:01pm

re: #325 BryanS

Thankfully that won't ever happen. You're basically saying that a group of people, because they are a corporation, is no longer allowed the rights of speech or freedom of assembly. If their property is at risk due to government action, they should not allowed to be able to say anything publicly to protect their interests nomatter the providence of their argument? That is a serious threat to property rights.

The people themselves can spend what is there's but not the corporation's money... because the corporation should stick to making money by spending its profits on capital and hiring people... corporations spending money on the political process doesn't help the economy...

327 TedStriker  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:51:36pm

re: #321 albusteve

the parties are interchangable with regard to the original post...my point all along is that regardless of right or wrong, or principle, or conceding for the common good, the first order of business these days is to draw up lines and begin with the typical accusations...it's both left and right, as if parties are some sort of divine club...the line must be towed, the members protected at all cost...it's no way to govern, and not only is govt guilty but so is the electorate...it doesn't matter to me where Thomas is ideologically to me, the question is did he break the law?...why should politics matter?

Which is what I was saying....I don't care whether Thomas has a R or a D after his name, but I want my judges to be honest and forthright. This does not sound honest or forthright and it bothers me.

328 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:52:18pm

re: #306 tnguitarist

In my opinion, this opens the doors for unlimited foreign cash to pour into our elections.

That's a legitimate concern, and I think an area that legislation can rightly target to protect the integrity of our elections. I think the goal should be transparency and disclosure tot he fullest extent--and those goals would be consistent with a goal of preventing foreign money in elections.

329 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:52:43pm

re: #313 BryanS

That's fairly simple to address. When a corporation donates political money, just make them file disclosure of any partyb(any individual or other corporation) controlling more than say 25% of the company and any and all members of the board. This type of information is already known for any publicly traded company.

No offense, but I don't think you understand the type of law you're attempting to form an opinion on. This has nothing to do with publicly traded companies, other than the fact they make up one of many different types of incorporated bodies. There are many different legal structures that do not require declaring 'true ownership', that is who has actual control over a company to the general public. I'd suggest reading up on some of the issues with trusts to begin with. Your simple solution would not work at all in the real world.

330 Reginald Perrin  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:52:50pm

re: #322 albusteve

Why can't you answer the question Steve, you called me a poodle, whose poodle do you allege me to be?

Walter ain't here to help you, is that why you're stuck for an answer?

Maybe the better question is whose poodle are you?

331 tnguitarist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:52:53pm

re: #325 BryanS

Thankfully that won't ever happen. You're basically saying that a group of people, because they are a corporation, is no longer allowed the rights of speech or freedom of assembly. If their property is at risk due to government action, they should not allowed to be able to say anything publicly to protect their interests nomatter the providence of their argument? That is a serious threat to property rights.

That group of people, as individuals, have rights. If their property is at risk, that company is still protected by laws. Just because they can't pump unlimited cash in elections doesn't mean that they aren't protected by the laws of this country. They can even appeal to the court system to address any grievances.

332 laZardo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:54:24pm

re: #325 BryanS

Thankfully that won't ever happen. You're basically saying that a group of people, because they are a corporation, is no longer allowed the rights of speech or freedom of assembly. If their property is at risk due to government action, they should not allowed to be able to say anything publicly to protect their interests nomatter the providence of their argument? That is a serious threat to property rights.

That's implying that everyone in the corporation shares the same group of ideals as the executive board.

333 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:54:53pm

re: #325 BryanS

Thankfully that won't ever happen. You're basically saying that a group of people, because they are a corporation, is no longer allowed the rights of speech or freedom of assembly. If their property is at risk due to government action, they should not allowed to be able to say anything publicly to protect their interests nomatter the providence of their argument? That is a serious threat to property rights.

The people have the exact same rights as they did before the corporation was formed. The entire point of a corporation is that it is legally distinct from the shareholders. You do not seem to grasp this concept in the slightest. It really is central to this issue. F

334 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:55:03pm

re: #327 talon_262

Which is what I was saying...I don't care whether Thomas has a R or a D after his name, but I want my judges to be honest and forthright. This does not sound honest or forthright and it bothers me.

I know what you meant...and it should bother everyone...the question is, does it?....Thomas has already found political allies here before the thing has even been hashed out....it's disturbing

335 palomino  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:55:49pm

re: #321 albusteve

the parties are interchangable with regard to the original post...my point all along is that regardless of right or wrong, or principle, or conceding for the common good, the first order of business these days is to draw up lines and begin with the typical accusations...it's both left and right, as if parties are some sort of divine club...the line must be towed, the members protected at all cost...it's no way to govern, and not only is govt guilty but so is the electorate...it doesn't matter to me where Thomas is ideologically to me, the question is did he break the law?...why should politics matter?

Politics shouldn't matter, and the LA Times, while leaning left, has done plenty to expose liberals too.

You're right about the partisan line drawing. But maybe it shouldn't be surprising. We'll never have the level of unity we had 70-80 years ago. The country's population has tripled and become FAR more ethnically diverse. Also women, gays and minorities have a voice in our public discourse that didn't exist before. And there really was no equivalent to the religiously influenced culture war back in those days. Socio-religious strife, yes. But not as a structuring element in every political issue. Sucks, we're tribal, just with really BIG tribes.

336 tnguitarist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:56:28pm

What about my rights as an individual in that company? What if their political spending is not in line with my beliefs? Do I have rights?

337 Kronocide  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:57:23pm

re: #335 palomino

Or: This is what's its like to be in a Big Tent.

338 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:58:23pm

re: #335 palomino

Politics shouldn't matter, and the LA Times, while leaning left, has done plenty to expose liberals too.

You're right about the partisan line drawing. But maybe it shouldn't be surprising. We'll never have the level of unity we had 70-80 years ago. The country's population has tripled and become FAR more ethnically diverse. Also women, gays and minorities have a voice in our public discourse that didn't exist before. And there really was no equivalent to the religiously influenced culture war back in those days. Socio-religious strife, yes. But not as a structuring element in every political issue. Sucks, we're tribal, just with really BIG tribes.

And if you go to their front page you'll notice that this piece of news is a little tiny entry in text form only.

Just like Drudge Report.

/

339 palomino  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:58:47pm

re: #336 tnguitarist

What about my rights as an individual in that company? What if their political spending is not in line with my beliefs? Do I have rights?

Yes, rights to sell your stock and quit your job. You want more? Sorry, but all socialisms were refudiated back on Nov. 2.

340 Killgore Trout  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:58:48pm

re: #304 Talking Point Detective


*ring ring*
2004 is calling and they want their conspiracy theory back
/Leave a message at the sound of the tone

341 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:59:09pm

re: #333 McSpiff

The people have the exact same rights as they did before the corporation was formed. The entire point of a corporation is that it is legally distinct from the shareholders. You do not seem to grasp this concept in the slightest. It really is central to this issue. F

Let's watch Jon Stewart explain it all....

[Link: www.huffingtonpost.com...]

342 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:59:38pm

From:

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

Piercing the corporate veil describes a legal decision to treat the rights or duties of a corporation as the rights or liabilities of its shareholders or directors. Usually a corporation is treated as a separate legal person, which is solely responsible for the debts it incurs and the sole beneficiary of the credit it is owed.

In light of citizens united, it would be reasonable to include the concept of rights in with debts and credits. Therefore your rights are totally separate from the rights of the corporation, because that's the entire point of incorporating in the first place.

343 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 9:59:43pm

re: #329 McSpiff

No offense, but I don't think you understand the type of law you're attempting to form an opinion on. This has nothing to do with publicly traded companies, other than the fact they make up one of many different types of incorporated bodies. There are many different legal structures that do not require declaring 'true ownership', that is who has actual control over a company to the general public. I'd suggest reading up on some of the issues with trusts to begin with. Your simple solution would not work at all in the real world.

I am suggesting that such disclosure would be required for a corporation to donate to political campaigns. I understand that there are ways to hide true ownership, but if that is the case, then until it is clear who owns the corporation or has a significant stake, they could not comply with the requirements I suggest. Until they can, I would say they could not spend on political campaigns. I don't think it is unreasonable to require that political spending be tied to real people.

344 palomino  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:00:18pm

goodnite everybody. enjoy championship sunday tomorrow, but enjoy responsibly.

345 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:02:06pm

re: #331 tnguitarist

That group of people, as individuals, have rights. If their property is at risk, that company is still protected by laws. Just because they can't pump unlimited cash in elections doesn't mean that they aren't protected by the laws of this country. They can even appeal to the court system to address any grievances.

The purpose of the corporation is to act on behalf of the owners of the property. Why can't it act if the action requires a political outcome?

346 freetoken  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:03:19pm

re: #344 palomino

enjoy championship sunday tomorrow, but enjoy responsibly.

We're having some sort of competition?

347 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:03:19pm

re: #343 BryanS

I am suggesting that such disclosure would be required for a corporation to donate to political campaigns. I understand that there are ways to hide true ownership, but if that is the case, then until it is clear who owns the corporation or has a significant stake, they could not comply with the requirements I suggest. Until they can, I would say they could not spend on political campaigns. I don't think it is unreasonable to require that political spending be tied to real people.

Then you need to read up on citizens united. Because it is completely opposed to what you just said. It does not base the ruling upon the rights of the share holder. It bases its ruling on the inherent right of the corporation by the mere fact that it exists on paper.

348 Reginald Perrin  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:03:50pm

Since Steve won't answer the question , the answer is obvious.

Steve was trolling for Walter, which is just dripping in irony.

Do you deny my allegation?

Or are you going to do the usual odomitr thing and ignore an sincerly asked question.

I ask politely the first two times and it fell on deaf ears. why are you the one who can make an accusation and never ever back it up.

Why did you call me a poodle?

Why did you complain that I mentioned the fact that Charles was being stalked by Eric Odoms old trolls?

You have got a lot of explaining to do.

349 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:04:22pm

re: #345 BryanS

The purpose of the corporation is to act on behalf of the owners of the property. Why can't it act if the action requires a political outcome?

If a corporation has a political problem it can start dishing out dividends so that the people who work for it have more money to spend to support the corporation they work for if they feel the situation calls for it.

350 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:04:44pm

re: #335 palomino

Politics shouldn't matter, and the LA Times, while leaning left, has done plenty to expose liberals too.

You're right about the partisan line drawing. But maybe it shouldn't be surprising. We'll never have the level of unity we had 70-80 years ago. The country's population has tripled and become FAR more ethnically diverse. Also women, gays and minorities have a voice in our public discourse that didn't exist before. And there really was no equivalent to the religiously influenced culture war back in those days. Socio-religious strife, yes. But not as a structuring element in every political issue. Sucks, we're tribal, just with really BIG tribes.

yeah, and I've slowly withdrawn from the process because I don't want to have to vote against candidates because the alternative is worse...and with the shape of the GOP these days, they absolutely do not speak for traditional conservatism...as robust as their message may be, it's still wrong and I refuse to play AmIdol politics...I am not a republican and never have been...I'm an anti authoritarian that wants govt out of my face...I suppose I'm as awkwardly idealistic as the people I criticize for their idealism...my bad....I don't join clubs/churches/parties/or collective groups if I can at all help it....identify?, yes...but nobody owns me

351 tnguitarist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:06:52pm

Maybe we should just shine a little more sunlight on corporate contributions. I'm sure that not all shareholders agree with a company's political contributions. Couldn't that money be put back into their company? A bill should be passed.......REVERSE THE JOB-KILLING CITIZENS UNITED RULING!!

352 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:07:14pm

Good Evening/Morning all!

It's still very cold in the Very Far Western Parts of Chicagoland.

How is everyone?

353 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:09:25pm

re: #347 McSpiff

Then you need to read up on citizens united. Because it is completely opposed to what you just said. It does not base the ruling upon the rights of the share holder. It bases its ruling on the inherent right of the corporation by the mere fact that it exists on paper.

For instances... if a Chinese company, through its legal council in New York forms a corporation in trust, assuming it was probably registered as a foreign agent and otherwise complies with American law will be able to run political ads in America. There is no obvious way to legally restrict this. That corporation has all the same rights as any other legal person.

354 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:11:38pm

re: #342 McSpiff

From:

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

In light of citizens united, it would be reasonable to include the concept of rights in with debts and credits. Therefore your rights are totally separate from the rights of the corporation, because that's the entire point of incorporating in the first place.

re: #347 McSpiff

Then you need to read up on citizens united. Because it is completely opposed to what you just said. It does not base the ruling upon the rights of the share holder. It bases its ruling on the inherent right of the corporation by the mere fact that it exists on paper.

That corporate entity certainly needs to be treated as its own legal entity. On that part, I would agree with Citizens United rulings. But I also think it is consistent with the constitution to know whether it is a foreign interest who is speaking through a corporation. There are all kinds of public disclosure requirements for publicly traded companies--all I am saying is similar requirements can and should exist for any corporate entity participating in the political process.

355 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:13:52pm

re: #354 BryanS

re: #347 McSpiff

That corporate entity certainly needs to be treated as its own legal entity. On that part, I would agree with Citizens United rulings. But I also think it is consistent with the constitution to know whether it is a foreign interest who is speaking through a corporation. There are all kinds of public disclosure requirements for publicly traded companies--all I am saying is similar requirements can and should exist for any corporate entity participating in the political process.

Sure, and as I said that corporation will need to register as a foreign agent. But they still have the right to run ads.

356 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:13:53pm

re: #351 tnguitarist

Maybe we should just shine a little more sunlight on corporate contributions. I'm sure that not all shareholders agree with a company's political contributions. Couldn't that money be put back into their company? A bill should be passed...REVERSE THE JOB-KILLING CITIZENS UNITED RULING!!

heh :) I do have to give you props for the cute rhetoric. As should be clear from what positions I have been describing tonight, I'm all in favor of disclosure.

357 austin_blue  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:14:07pm

Is rwmofo the new Nodrog?

Discuss.

358 tnguitarist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:14:17pm

re: #354 BryanS

re: #347 McSpiff

That corporate entity certainly needs to be treated as its own legal entity. On that part, I would agree with Citizens United rulings. But I also think it is consistent with the constitution to know whether it is a foreign interest who is speaking through a corporation. There are all kinds of public disclosure requirements for publicly traded companies--all I am saying is similar requirements can and should exist for any corporate entity participating in the political process.

The fact that we need to pass laws to cover the holes created by the CU ruling, tells me all I need to know.

359 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:14:28pm

My, it seems there some seriousness being discussed this evening.

High-level seriousness.

The concept of the corporation is fascinating. Corporations as political factions are mind-boggling.

360 jamesfirecat  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:15:22pm

re: #359 ggt

My, it seems there some seriousness being discussed this evening.

High-level seriousness.

The concept of the corporation is fascinating. Corporations as political factions are mind-boggling.

Welcome to Liberterian United Inc!

361 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:15:38pm

re: #357 austin_blue

Is rwmofo the new Nodrog?

Discuss.

How many people here remember Nrodrog?

362 albusteve  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:16:18pm

re: #357 austin_blue

Is rwmofo the new Nodrog?

Discuss.

nah, not even close...same sort of style tho, but lacking the zest

363 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:17:20pm

re: #355 McSpiff

Sure, and as I said that corporation will need to register as a foreign agent. But they still have the right to run ads.

I think we agree that this should not be the case. Funny how we both independently came up with the Chinese as our examples--I was typing mine before reading your example. I think there are enough on the left and right who can agree to pick on China :)

364 Eclectic Infidel  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:18:26pm

re: #361 ggt

How many people here remember Nrodrog?

Before my time I think.

365 William Barnett-Lewis  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:18:45pm

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

I am going to go to bed!

Good Night!

366 tnguitarist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:21:29pm

I must say, it's good to be back on here more often again. Life happened....

367 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:21:45pm

re: #358 tnguitarist

The fact that we need to pass laws to cover the holes created by the CU ruling, tells me all I need to know.

What is that? That passing unconstitutional legislation leaves the risk that gaps in the law are left when it is struck down? Possibly more thought should go into that on the front end during legislation.

That the current laws are inadequate after campaign laws being struck should bot be surprising. Imagine the fallout of there is a 5-4 ruling overturning the health care legislation. In either case, laws were originally passed because of a perceived need--that need will still be there when the laws get struck.

In my view, campaign finance reform should rely heavily on disclosure rather than limits (other then restricting foreign involvement) on spending.

368 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:22:48pm

re: #360 jamesfirecat

Welcome to Liberterian United Inc!

Now, as I understand it. LUI (above mentioned Corp) was started in the US. They have since expanded world-wide and have a 2nd Corp headquarters in China.

US employess were displaced by the Corporations investments in China and are pissed. The Corporation's China interests are very interested in furthering their goals to increase exports to the US and have been lobbying to that effect. They have also been contributing substantially to politicians who (of course, own no stock or mutual funds in the Corporation) see the value of their goals. Stockholders all over the world want this to succeed as it will increase their share value.

Displaced US employees, whose retirement funds are partially tied to the stock value are lobbying and making political contributions against the Corporations China interests because they see it as "outsourcing" American jobs. Other entities, such as municipalities who have lost a tax base when the LUI moved some of it's operations to China, are following suit.

Life is fun isn't it.

369 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:22:54pm

re: #361 ggt

How many people here remember Nrodrog?

Don't recall him. Though I've been here and gone in spurts since registering.

370 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:23:19pm

re: #363 BryanS

I think we agree that this should not be the case. Funny how we both independently came up with the Chinese as our examples--I was typing mine before reading your example. I think there are enough on the left and right who can agree to pick on China :)

I think we agree with a lot of this to be honest. CU opened a whole can of worms that I'm not entirely sure how to deal with. Maybe that doesn't make it wrong, but I truly feel its created some legal questions that will need subsequent legal rulings for. Can the officers of a corporation invoke the 5th amendment if they're called to testify in their capacity as an officer? Can they invoke the 5th in our case of a hypothetical Chinese company violating a disclosure law?

371 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:24:47pm

re: #366 tnguitarist

I must say, it's good to be back on here more often again. Life happened...

Me too, but I'm having a hard time adjusting to this Brave New World of the young--I may have go go back into hiberation as see what it is like when I wake-up.

Science Fiction is my chosen escape.

372 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:24:50pm
373 prairiefire  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:26:07pm

re: #371 ggt

Me too, but I'm having a hard time adjusting to this Brave New World of the young--I may have go go back into hiberation as see what it is like when I wake-up.

Science Fiction is my chosen escape.

Hang in there, ggt. All perspectives are needed.

374 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:26:32pm

re: #367 BryanS

What is that? That passing unconstitutional legislation leaves the risk that gaps in the law are left when it is struck down? Possibly more thought should go into that on the front end during legislation.

That the current laws are inadequate after campaign laws being struck should bot be surprising. Imagine the fallout of there is a 5-4 ruling overturning the health care legislation. In either case, laws were originally passed because of a perceived need--that need will still be there when the laws get struck.

In my view, campaign finance reform should rely heavily on disclosure rather than limits (other then restricting foreign involvement) on spending.

IN a sense, disclosure itself could be a form of limitation if the thinking is that certain entites would not look good on a politicians campain contribution list. But they ways lawyers can come up with to shelter such knowledge is staggering. . . .

375 Reginald Perrin  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:26:36pm

Steve:

You can't make this go away, these are serious allegations I am making.

It isn't stalking if you refuse to answer a question that was asked civilly, and I refuse to drop the issue.

In the reality based universe, things do not go away just because you survived the thread.

376 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:26:53pm

re: #373 prairiefire

Hang in there, ggt. All perspectives are needed.

Thanks!

377 tnguitarist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:29:00pm

re: #371 ggt

Me too, but I'm having a hard time adjusting to this Brave New World of the young--I may have go go back into hiberation as see what it is like when I wake-up.

Science Fiction is my chosen escape.

Guitar is mine. There's a new little man around the house that has been occupying my time.

378 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:30:02pm

re: #377 tnguitarist

Guitar is mine. There's a new little man around the house that has been occupying my time.

ooooooooh! :)

379 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:31:00pm

re: #370 McSpiff

I think we agree with a lot of this to be honest. CU opened a whole can of worms that I'm not entirely sure how to deal with. Maybe that doesn't make it wrong, but I truly feel its created some legal questions that will need subsequent legal rulings for. Can the officers of a corporation invoke the 5th amendment if they're called to testify in their capacity as an officer? Can they invoke the 5th in our case of a hypothetical Chinese company violating a disclosure law?

The government should always have to prove their case without forcing those being charged with testifying. It would be a question I guess on whether the officer represents the company or himself. And just thinking about that briefly now, it seems like a tangled mess. Officers represent the will of the corporation, but sometimes an individual acts outside the corporate will and is individually responsible for wrong doing. Seems to make very complicated scenarios.

380 prairiefire  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:31:04pm

re: #377 tnguitarist

Guitar is mine. There's a new little man around the house that has been occupying my time.

Congratulations! Sing and strum softly.

381 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:31:46pm

re: #368 ggt

Now, as I understand it. LUI (above mentioned Corp) was started in the US. They have since expanded world-wide and have a 2nd Corp headquarters in China.

US employess were displaced by the Corporations investments in China and are pissed. The Corporation's China interests are very interested in furthering their goals to increase exports to the US and have been lobbying to that effect. They have also been contributing substantially to politicians who (of course, own no stock or mutual funds in the Corporation) see the value of their goals. Stockholders all over the world want this to succeed as it will increase their share value.

Displaced US employees, whose retirement funds are partially tied to the stock value are lobbying and making political contributions against the Corporations China interests because they see it as "outsourcing" American jobs. Other entities, such as municipalities who have lost a tax base when the LUI moved some of it's operations to China, are following suit.

Life is fun isn't it.

I forgot to mention LIU's Oil interests . . . .

382 tnguitarist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:32:23pm

re: #378 ggt

oooh! :)

Seven weeks old. I'm tired.......re: #380 prairiefire

Congratulations! Sing and strum softly.

He will actually stop crying when I play for him. He seems partial to T-Bone Walker tunes.

383 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:33:33pm

re: #382 tnguitarist

Seven weeks old. I'm tired...re: #380 prairiefire

He will actually stop crying when I play for him. He seems partial to T-Bone Walker tunes.

ooooooooooooooooh and double ooooooooooooooooh! :) :)

What are you doing on-line? You should be gazing and cooing. It doesn't last long . . . .

384 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:34:12pm

re: #374 ggt

IN a sense, disclosure itself could be a form of limitation if the thinking is that certain entites would not look good on a politicians campain contribution list. But they ways lawyers can come up with to shelter such knowledge is staggering. . . .

Since foreigners do not have rights to influence our election, I'd say it is reasonable to require proof that that is not going on. The right is to free speech, not a right to anonymous free speech.

385 tnguitarist  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:35:30pm

re: #383 ggt

oooh and double oooh! :) :)

What are you doing on-line? You should be gazing and cooing. It doesn't last long . . .

He's snoozing. He's my first boy after 2 girls, so I really can't get enough of him.

386 McSpiff  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:37:19pm

re: #379 BryanS

The government should always have to prove their case without forcing those being charged with testifying. It would be a question I guess on whether the officer represents the company or himself. And just thinking about that briefly now, it seems like a tangled mess. Officers represent the will of the corporation, but sometimes an individual acts outside the corporate will and is individually responsible for wrong doing. Seems to make very complicated scenarios.

Now assume all those officers are attorneys, who are acting for their client... a 2nd corporation! Who also has constitutional rights! Its turtles all the way down.

387 prairiefire  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:38:07pm

re: #382 tnguitarist

Aww.
Audra McDonald said that she made her baby cry when she sang. I think it is because her voice is so strong:

388 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:38:55pm

I get lot's of mail--snail and otherwise. Today I received the CATO regular request for money in the guise of a newsletter.

The entire thing was John McWhorter's arguments to end the War on Drugs because it is destroying Black America.

I kept an open mind until I read that he thinks heroin should be available at the local drug store--OTC and even for free.

I can agree that the War on Drugs as become a major-cluster f&**, but I can't go that extreme.

I could only find the podcast on google, it is linked at the end of the Wiki link above.

389 prairiefire  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:40:32pm

re: #388 ggt

I agree. No heroin, not no way, not no how.

390 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:40:36pm

re: #386 McSpiff

Now assume all those officers are attorneys, who are acting for their client... a 2nd corporation! Who also has constitutional rights! Its turtles all the way down.

Also a favorite saying I like to use when debating a religious person who insists I explain the meaning or purpose of life...

But yeah, lawyers make it even more screwed up.

391 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:41:32pm

re: #384 BryanS

Since foreigners do not have rights to influence our election, I'd say it is reasonable to require proof that that is not going on. The right is to free speech, not a right to anonymous free speech.

Well in the scenerio I listed above (LIU Corp), the US part of the Corp is making contributions (I probably didn't make that clear). They have a right to do so because they think it will increase US share price & pension fund profits for US workers and retirees, while hurting workers (in the form of lost jobs) here and benefiting workers in a foreign country.

392 lostlakehiker  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:44:10pm

re: #1 WindUpBird

is this one of those "wait until they catch us then OKAY I GUESS WE'LL PAY OUR TAXES" sorts of deals

A la Timmy Tax Cheat Geithner? We'll see. I'm doubtful that the LA Times has the story straight. If it does, technically, then I'm betting that the sum in question is derisory.

If it's real money, I'll be very disappointed in Thomas.

393 BryanS  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:44:45pm

re: #388 ggt

I get lot's of mail--snail and otherwise. Today I received the CATO regular request for money in the guise of a newsletter.

The entire thing was John McWhorter's arguments to end the War on Drugs because it is destroying Black America.

I kept an open mind until I read that he thinks heroin should be available at the local drug store--OTC and even for free.

I can agree that the War on Drugs as become a major-cluster f&**, but I can't go that extreme.

I could only find the podcast on google, it is linked at the end of the Wiki link above.

I'd say just make companies who sell the crap liable for the safety of their product. The war on drugs is pretty stupid, but making hard drugs available OTC would be pretty dumb.

394 freetoken  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:46:27pm

re: #388 ggt


I kept an open mind until I read that he thinks heroin should be available at the local drug store--OTC and even for free.

Used to be one could buy many things at the corner drug store...

The problem with McWhorter is that he doesn't know enough about too many of the topics in which he engages. He's skilled at elocution and reasonable adroit at writing, but he gets in over his head wrt technical subjects. It was his unlearned shilling for Intelligent Design on Bloggingheads that led to Carl Zimmer and Sean Carroll flouncing off that site.

395 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:47:10pm

Douche bag Glenn Reynolds links to newly hatched stalker's "Patterico" CJ derangement post.

Film @ 11.

396 Irenicum  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:49:30pm

re: #385 tnguitarist

OK, that comment of yours just made me smile from ear to ear.

397 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 10:59:21pm

Time for something absolutely beautiful!

398 ClaudeMonet  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:02:25pm

re: #106 Dark_Falcon

I know. I wish he could just smack Michelle Bachmann upside the head with a wet mackerel, but he's too much the gentleman to do that.

That would be unfair to the mackerel. Use a sledgehammer.

re: #135 Shiplord Kirel

OT
I've tuned up my psychic powers and looked ahead to Tuesday night. I hereby offer a preview of Rep. Michelle Bachmann's (R-Bull Run) expected Tea Party response to President Obama's State of the Union address:

Actually, it's (R-Bull Shite). And she'll say "precious bodily fluids", not "bodily essences".

399 Irenicum  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:03:21pm

re: #397 ggt

Exquisite.

400 ClaudeMonet  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:07:11pm

re: #136 Talking Point Detective

The real story here is just how lost is the notion of a non-partisan Supreme Court. I won't pretend that political ideology shapes the decisions of the liberals on the court, but I find it absolutely comical when conservatives claim that it is strict interpretation of the Constitution, and not political ideology, that shapes the decisions of the conservatives on the court.

Gore vs. Bush - with the way that both sides abandoned their long-standing patterns of rulings - blew up any notion of a non-partisan SCOTUS for anyone what was paying attention.

Let's see. The Florida Supreme Court, all Democratic appointees, rule for Gore, but it's "non-partisan". The SCOTUS, appointed by various Presidents, rules for Bush, so it's "partisan"?

I'll try to make that the last thing I post about something that happened over 10 years ago. As I tell Republicans about 2008, "It's done. You lost. Stop fighting lost wars."

401 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:12:23pm

Good Night all.

Have a evening/morning!

402 Reginald Perrin  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:14:59pm

Charles I need a small favour, could you go on the record that we have not conversed offline in more than a year? And that includes messages sent through third parties. It might piss off our little stalker to learn that you had nothing to do with his dilemma.

Btw, I rigged the election for Space Jesus and did it the old fashioned American way, I bought votes. I believe he won by 750 votes with somewhere around 80 %of the vote. Low tech, four clicks to a vote and ten cents a vote.
A neighbour is in need of little extra income after being laid off, so I gave her a way to make some needed money at her leisure. The votes would appear at the rate of six a minute and continue steadily until she got bored.
It took about two minutes to find a way around the one vote per day rule. I am no computer genius, the was wide open, I just walked through.
The morons forgot to lock the door.
I used their favorite toy, a proxy. They allowed vistors using a proxy server to vote, real dumb move.
You're going to love the irony, Martinez claims to be in charge of IT at a Tampa Bank

Rick Martinez never ever doesn't fail.

403 ClaudeMonet  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:20:13pm

re: #250 palomino

So start your own website about all the dastardly Dems. Everyone's doing it.

His would be much more literate than most of the existing ones, but the bad ones (which means almost all of them) wouldn't go away, sad to say.

404 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:25:09pm

re: #402 Reginald Perrin

405 freetoken  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:26:03pm

re: #400 ClaudeMonet

The SCOTUS, appointed by various Presidents, rules for Bush, so it's "partisan"?

Just to be technical, in the actual court case:
[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]
the justices had a variety of thoughts/opinions.

In the bigger picture, I thought TPD's comment was geared towards the idea that the SCOTUS is indeed influenced, not as impartial as we would like. And thus, the issue with Thomas and Scalia possibly being overly influenced (by the Koch brothers and their institutions) is not outside the scope of concern many have had about the SCOTUS on several occasions.

406 freetoken  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:29:54pm

re: #395 Gus 802

Douche bag Glenn Reynolds links to newly hatched stalker's "Patterico" CJ derangement post.

Given that Instaputz links to 'Dim' for the satire called "FOX News Hires Olbermann" just a few minutes later shows from where Instaputz now looks to for inspiration.

407 ClaudeMonet  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:30:39pm

I would be more suspicious of the motives of the LA Times (which IMO are generally dubious) IF this "scoop" had come out close to an election or a critical ruling by SCOTUS. That not being the case, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. They got some information that reads like more of an issue than it really is, and they would have published it regardless of party affiliation. The fact that the accused is a Republican is just a bonus.

This is different from my local fish-wrap, which automatically spikes any story about local Republicans and downplays anything about national Republicans, and has done so for over a hundred years.

408 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:33:39pm

Yo, CuriousLurker. Yeah, that didn't make any sense. This in answer to your Tweet. They're seriously whacked. They're now monitoring our Tweets. Dude's gone loco.

409 Reginald Perrin  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:34:58pm

re: #404 Gus 802

How are you feeling?

I never thought this little adventure would get this batshit crazy.
Martinez has been reduced to fighting an imaginary blog war over the issues of civility and intellectual honesty. Apparently they have now gone on the record as being against both.

Tell me I am not dreaming

410 ClaudeMonet  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:36:00pm

re: #377 tnguitarist

Guitar is mine. There's a new little man around the house that has been occupying my time.

Congratulations! How soon do his guitar lessons start?

411 Reginald Perrin  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:36:03pm

re: #408 Gus 802

Yo, CuriousLurker. Yeah, that didn't make any sense. This in answer to your Tweet. They're seriously whacked. They're now monitoring our Tweets. Dude's gone loco.

Who has gone loco?

412 laZardo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:37:57pm

re: #402 Reginald Perrin

Reginald Perrin is Anonymous. O_O

413 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:38:13pm

re: #409 Reginald Perrin

How are you feeling?

I never thought this little adventure would get this batshit crazy.
Martinez has been reduced to fighting an imaginary blog war over the issues of civility and intellectual honesty. Apparently they have now gone on the record as being against both.

Tell me I am not dreaming

Feeling much better!

Yeah, never thought it would get this crazy. It all started with my comment about the Chetniks. He had a one-way conversation with me which I picked up on and the rest is history. Or in this case a mystery. These people have been deranged since 911. Didn't know at the time that they were supporters of Serbian war criminals.

They read everything! LOL

414 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:38:35pm

re: #411 Reginald Perrin

Who has gone loco?

Who else. Rodent.

415 Irenicum  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:41:17pm

re: #408 Gus 802

I got hit too. Silly little dweebs. Their world is really quite small. They really need to go outside once in a while.

416 ClaudeMonet  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:42:14pm

re: #408 Gus 802

Yo, CuriousLurker. Yeah, that didn't make any sense. This in answer to your Tweet. They're seriously whacked. They're now monitoring our Tweets. Dude's gone loco.

One more good argument against "tweeting". Not that anyone should monitor anyone else's "tweets", but if you want to keep it confidential, use other means.

As for "gone loco", from what I've read here, he passed loco many moons ago.

417 Reginald Perrin  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:42:29pm

re: #412 laZardo

Reginald Perrin is Anonymous. O_O


Reginald Perrin is a future member of the Whack a Troll Hall of Fame.

418 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:42:41pm

re: #415 Irenicum

I got hit too. Silly little dweebs. Their world is really quite small. They really need to go outside once in a while.

Really? You? I don't think you've ever said a peep about those chimps. But, that's the SOP with those crazies. They'll rag on anyone that's currently associated with this site. Even those that are on the right.

419 Irenicum  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:43:30pm

re: #418 Gus 802

I guess they like to be equal opportunity offenders.

420 ClaudeMonet  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:44:36pm

re: #418 Gus 802

Really? You? I don't think you've ever said a peep about those chimps. But, that's the SOP with those crazies. They'll rag on anyone that's currently associated with this site. Even those that are on the right.

Why do you hate chimps, that you would associate them with such scum?

421 Irenicum  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:45:18pm

re: #420 ClaudeMonet

Haha! I agree.

422 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:46:14pm

re: #416 ClaudeMonet

One more good argument against "tweeting". Not that anyone should monitor anyone else's "tweets", but if you want to keep it confidential, use other means.

As for "gone loco", from what I've read here, he passed loco many moons ago.

Oh you know. Nothing I posted on Twitter is confidential. They'll zone in on anything their little deranged minds see as threatening. But yeah, he's been loco for some time now. He was actually banned 3 years ago. That's pretty crazy shit right there.

423 Irenicum  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:49:51pm

re: #418 Gus 802

I think their issue with me is that I self identify as a Christan. And so they hate that I haven't flounced over teh ghey or over teh evilution or some other nonsense. Silly kids.

424 laZardo  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:53:11pm

re: #423 Irenicum

I think their issue with me is that I self identify as a Christan. And so they hate that I haven't flounced over teh ghey or over teh evilution or some other nonsense. Silly kids.

You know how blunt I can be about religion. But the Christians did get it right with "blaming the belief, not the believer," to paraphrase.

425 ClaudeMonet  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:55:22pm

re: #422 Gus 802

Oh you know. Nothing I posted on Twitter is confidential. They'll zone in on anything their little deranged minds see as threatening. But yeah, he's been loco for some time now. He was actually banned 3 years ago. That's pretty crazy shit right there.

That's around the time I started lurking (I didn't register until last year because registration was closed whenever I thought about it). My view of banning is that you have to work pretty hard to get banned, but if you absolutely insist, Charles will accommodate you.

My question about people who monitor tweets and such is, "Do you have an actual LIFE?" Who the hell has the time to do that?

426 Irenicum  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:58:26pm

re: #425 ClaudeMonet

Exactly. Anyone who has that much time available to obsess over someone has way too much time available.

427 Gus  Sat, Jan 22, 2011 11:58:59pm

re: #423 Irenicum

I think their issue with me is that I self identify as a Christan. And so they hate that I haven't flounced over teh ghey or over teh evilution or some other nonsense. Silly kids.

They live in a fantasy world. They expect the world to fit their expectations. Much like children do only these are adults with children's minds -- although even then that might be an insult to normal children. Underdeveloped and incapable of any growth except downwards. I'd have to be a complete recluse to reject all of Christianity or Christians. Everyone's unique and that includes Christians, atheists, Jews, Muslims, etc.

428 Gus  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:01:04am

re: #425 ClaudeMonet

That's around the time I started lurking (I didn't register until last year because registration was closed whenever I thought about it). My view of banning is that you have to work pretty hard to get banned, but if you absolutely insist, Charles will accommodate you.

My question about people who monitor tweets and such is, "Do you have an actual LIFE?" Who the hell has the time to do that?

As you know, a few of them monitor this site and now Twitter 24/7. I don't even monitor my favorite porn sites as often as they do. ;)

429 Irenicum  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:02:15am

re: #427 Gus 802

I do worry that the anonymity of the internet brings out our worst instincts though. These trolls and stalkers exemplify that impulse all too well.

430 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:09:04am

re: #413 Gus 802

Feeling much better!

Yeah, never thought it would get this crazy. It all started with my comment about the Chetniks. He had a one-way conversation with me which I picked up on and the rest is history. Or in this case a mystery. These people have been deranged since 911. Didn't know at the time that they were supporters of Serbian war criminals.

They read everything! LOL

They are freaks and I got them to take the bait a few years ago and go into rants advocating genocide. A lot is lost since all the Odom stalker blogs, with the exception of Olbermann Watch vanished into the memory hole.
Martinez was easy to lure someplace where the comments wouldn't vanish. He had a bad habit of editing others comments and banning a blogger for no good reason.

I was banned on my very first comment when I pointed ought the fact to the third stooge, Avid Editor, that it wasn't necessary to use most and best together.
It was the Avid Editors thread and I hurt his feelings

Hell, until a few weeks ago they banned the mere mention of my name. Now here is the cool part, I used to ask twajie why he was afraid to ask the name of the one whose name shall not be mentioned.

This was three years ago11!!1

No miracle, I knew which buttons to push to get him to ban even the mere mention of my name. It took a few years to get around to using the old ace in the hole.
I recycled it from when I was setting up my O'Reilly prank and used it to mock twajie because he was afraid to ask the question to who it was that sent me.
Nobody, but he was too scared to ask.

431 laZardo  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:10:09am

re: #429 Irenicum

I do worry that the anonymity of the internet brings out our worst instincts though. These trolls and stalkers exemplify that impulse all too well.

Depends on who they're doing it to. To us, yeah, it's shameful. To webcam drama-whores, well, they're just asking for it.

432 Gus  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:10:22am

re: #429 Irenicum

I do worry that the anonymity of the internet brings out our worst instincts though. These trolls and stalkers exemplify that impulse all too well.

Stalkers for life. The motivation behind this now though is that Rodent thinks he's going to shut down Little Green Footballs. Much like his failed attempt at trying to shut down Think Progress. Here at LGF we still move on from topic to topic and person to person. From Clarence Thomas to Sarah Palin and so on. In Rodent's (and now ChenZhen) mind the topic always remains Charles Johnson every single day of the week.

433 freetoken  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:11:36am

Mother Jones mag has picked up on the story about how the anti-gay agenda is driving the Iowa GOP caucuses, even this early on:

Gay Rights and the GOP in the Iowa Caucuses

[...] Another dark horse, the gay Republican Fred Karger, is being excluded from a presidential debate because an Iowa Christian group said he "is not a legitimate candidate." That cuts against the advice of John McCain’s last presidential campaign manager Steve Schmidt—a social moderate—who in 2009 urged the GOP to distance itself from perceptions that it’s "anti-gay" [...]

Vander Plaats is determined to make the Iowa GOP caucuses about the necessity of being rigorously anti-gay if one wants to be a Republican.

If one is gay one can't be a "legitimate" GOP candidate. Who knew?

434 Irenicum  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:13:20am

re: #430 Reginald Perrin

Wow.

435 ClaudeMonet  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:13:57am

re: #428 Gus 802

As you know, a few of them monitor this site and now Twitter 24/7. I don't even monitor my favorite porn sites as often as they do. ;)

I'm glad to see you're feeling better, and that you came through with your sense of humor intact.

436 Gus  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:14:08am

Here, let me predict. Tomorrow morning Rodan and ChenZhen are going to wake up. Within one-hour after waking up they're going to think about Charles and Little Green Footballs. Nil Stooge will spend another day of compiling data on what's posted here and post it at his Google site.

437 boxhead  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:14:20am

re: #429 Irenicum

I do worry that the anonymity of the internet brings out our worst instincts though. These trolls and stalkers exemplify that impulse all too well.

The worst and also the ability to talk about issues that people would not but for the anonymity. Like victims of crimes that are scared about disclosing the crime to anyone.

438 boxhead  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:15:47am

re: #436 Gus 802

Here, let me predict. Tomorrow morning Rodan and ChenZhen are going to wake up. Within one-hour after waking up they're going to think about Charles and Little Green Footballs. Nil Stooge will spend another day of compiling data on what's posted here and post it at his Google site.

lol.... I think about Charles in the morning too!!

//

439 Irenicum  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:17:15am

re: #431 laZardo

Bad behavior is bad no matter what. Whether we post anonymously or in our real names, what we say reflects who we are. Ultimately our souls are exposed.

440 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:17:59am

...

441 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:22:19am

re: #434 Irenicum

Wow.

You ain't seen nothing yet, the eleventy goes right off the scale.
Martinez has gone on the record as believing he is superior to African Americans.

No trick question, it was a yes or no question.

442 Gus  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:22:42am

re: #437 boxhead

The worst and also the ability to talk about issues that people would not but for the anonymity. Like victims of crimes that are scared about disclosing the crime to anyone.

It's like a disease. I think it's ironic that a Deputy District Attorney would join ranks with these criminal minds. Legally its OK as long as it's not an ethic violation and he's covered by 1st Amendment rights. But that's how easily Patterico succumbed to being another stalker nut. Can you imagine though? Being prosecuted by some asshole Deputy DA that also follows the stalkers? That's pretty fucked up if you ask me.

443 boxhead  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:28:33am

re: #442 Gus 802

It's like a disease. I think it's ironic that a Deputy District Attorney would join ranks with these criminal minds. Legally its OK as long as it's not an ethic violation and he's covered by 1st Amendment rights. But that's how easily Patterico succumbed to being another stalker nut. Can you imagine though? Being prosecuted by some asshole Deputy DA that also follows the stalkers? That's pretty fucked up if you ask me.

yes... it is bad.... I see their actions as being deranged. They look at me the same. I know I am genuine in my opinion. Likewise for many on their side. I am at a loss for words over this complete disconnect.

444 boxhead  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:29:59am

re: #443 boxhead

yes... it is bad... I see their actions as being deranged. They look at me the same. I know I am genuine in my opinion. Likewise for many on their side. I am at a loss for words over this complete disconnect.

ok not so much a loss for words since I can post and talk ears off... :)

445 Gus  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:31:10am

re: #444 boxhead

ok not so much a loss for words since I can post and talk ears off... :)

Yeah. I'm not at a loss for words. Scum is scum and they're scum.

446 boxhead  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:35:30am

re: #445 Gus 802

Yeah. I'm not at a loss for words. Scum is scum and they're scum.

I am just amazed that otherwise normal folks will buy into the madness. I won't say they are scum because of this "disease". I am unable to understand their thought process other than to say they drank the koolaid. Of course they see me afflicted as well.

447 Gus  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:35:45am

Who in the modern Western world sees Milosevic, Karadzic and Mladic other than a bunch of extremist asshole lunatics?

448 Irenicum  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:36:40am

re: #447 Gus 802

Good point. Genocidal impulses are always evil.

449 Gus  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:36:58am

re: #447 Gus 802

Who in the modern Western world sees Milosevic, Karadzic and Mladic as heroes other than a bunch of extremist asshole lunatics?

Oops.

450 Irenicum  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:38:11am

re: #449 Gus 802

Ha. I read it as you intended.

451 boxhead  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:38:17am

re: #449 Gus 802

Oops.

lol... i had trouble parsing your original comment so that it made sense to me. I couldn't so I thought it was due to me lacking in knowledge...

heh

452 laZardo  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:38:59am

re: #447 Gus 802

I see them as a bunch of extremist asshole lunatic meme fodder.

/well, I am in the modern Eastern world. q;

453 boxhead  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:40:56am

re: #451 boxhead

lol... i had trouble parsing your original comment so that it made sense to me. I couldn't so I thought it was due to me lacking in knowledge...

heh

i also have many beers in me so that would have an issue as well.. :)

454 Irenicum  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:41:06am

By the way, in truly important news: It's now 5 degrees. Shit, I can't wait for spring.

455 Gus  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:41:11am

re: #446 boxhead

I am just amazed that otherwise normal folks will buy into the madness. I won't say they are scum because of this "disease". I am unable to understand their thought process other than to say they drank the koolaid. Of course they see me afflicted as well.

OK Then they have a lot of "pre-existing conditions" well prior to 911. That's when they went super psycho. Part of why they got blocked because they couldn't speak out about their genocidal tendencies.

456 boxhead  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:44:09am

re: #455 Gus 802

OK Then they have a lot of "pre-existing conditions" well prior to 911. That's when they went super psycho. Part of why they got blocked because they couldn't speak out about their genocidal tendencies.

yeah, those folks that backed the killing are weak. I was referring to my friends that also believe the Beck and think I am a freak because I don't. I look at Beck like a bad version of WWE acting.

457 Gus  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:46:10am

re: #456 boxhead

yeah, those folks that backed the killing are weak. I was referring to my friends that also believe the Beck and think I am a freak because I don't. I look at Beck like a bad version of WWE acting.

Really? That's like having friends that think you're a freak for not liking Oprah. But I can see it though. What with the Glenn Beck cult and all.

These are strange times indeed.

458 Irenicum  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:46:49am

re: #455 Gus 802

More and more I'm explaining behavior by psychological types. The details of ideology don't matter as much as how they see themselves and the world. Us/them means more than seeing the world as the complicated mess it is.

459 boxhead  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:47:00am

OT: Blake Griffin is just a sick ass player.... wow

460 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:48:22am

re: #446 boxhead

I am just amazed that otherwise normal folks will buy into the madness. I won't say they are scum because of this "disease". I am unable to understand their thought process other than to say they drank the koolaid. Of course they see me afflicted as well.

It is the 21 first version and the koolaid is electric, delivered via the WWW
All this outrageous outrage is astro turf

ask me why I am quite confident in my opinion....please

Rick Martinez was used as bait and once again he proved to be my lucky lure.

461 boxhead  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:49:59am

re: #457 Gus 802

Really? That's like having friends that think you're a freak for not liking Oprah. But I can see it though. What with the Glenn Beck cult and all.

These are strange times indeed.

These folks also help out at the VFW Post near my house so we have that in common. We also drink beers and such so we have that in common. They are genuinely good people that just happen to believe in freaky stuff.....

Strange indeed.

462 Gus  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:51:45am

re: #461 boxhead

These folks also help out at the VFW Post near my house so we have that in common. We also drink beers and such so we have that in common. They are genuinely good people that just happen to believe in freaky stuff...

Strange indeed.

Understood. I guess being a Glenn Beck fan and being a stalker nut can be two very different things. I know a few folks that listen to him and Rush Limbaugh but aren't this obsessed. They actually have lives to live.

463 boxhead  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:52:01am

re: #458 Irenicum

More and more I'm explaining behavior by psychological types. The details of ideology don't matter as much as how they see themselves and the world. Us/them means more than seeing the world as the complicated mess it is.

I am hesitant to use Nazi Germany as an example on how good folks can be lead astray. It gets harder to do so... And I REALLY don't want to have that happen.

464 freetoken  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:53:56am

And here you all probably though Shiplord's comment upstream was satire:


Iowans' support leaves Michele Bachmann impressed

Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann says the reactions she received in her Friday meetings with Iowa Republican leaders and conservative activists in the leadoff presidential caucus state have encouraged her to explore running for president.

"I am very encouraged by what I heard and the level of support that I saw today," Bachmann told The Des Moines Register after a gauntlet of meetings in Des Moines.

Bachmann's visit stirred up the quietly developing race for the 2012 Republican presidential caucuses in Iowa, a little more than a year away.

The third-term congresswoman from the Twin Cities suburb of Stillwater is an outspoken conservative often featured on Fox News Channel and a favorite of tea party activists.

[...]

"It is not too late to change course and save this great nation," Bachmann told her audience at a downtown Des Moines hotel.

In her 40-minute speech to about 250 activists, Bachmann warned that the federal government spent too much and expanded its reach, referring to the bailout of the banking and auto industries, to the point that future generations' prosperity was at risk.

"The iceberg is straight in front of us. We can all see this iceberg," Bachmann said. "And we like fools are pointing the ship directly into it."

[...]

"We've got this tiny window of opportunity," Bachmann told the group, referring to the new U.S. House Republican majority's chance to act on the priorities of tea party supporters. "And the tea party patriots are saying, 'We have to take our country back.' "

[...]

Oh well, I guess none of this surprises us.

Nevertheless what does surprise me is how the new IA Governor, who had taken a 12 year break from being governor before returning successfully in the last election, is so congenial with Mrs. Bachmann. Branstad is now toting the tea partying line, but when he was governor he wasn't that "conservative".

465 Gus  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:54:36am

I better hit the hay. Good night all.

466 boxhead  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:55:06am

re: #462 Gus 802

Understood. I guess being a Glenn Beck fan and being a stalker nut can be two very different things. I know a few folks that listen to him and Rush Limbaugh but aren't this obsessed. They actually have lives to live.

Do they believe what they say? arrr.... i don't understand how it happens...

467 boxhead  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:55:36am

re: #465 Gus 802

I better hit the hay. Good night all.

nite..

468 Irenicum  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:56:01am

re: #465 Gus 802

Ditto. G'nite mate.

469 laZardo  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:57:42am

re: #464 freetoken

When the two most likely female candidates for president are both conservative...

...fuck, I can't think of anything to finish that. "Only in America."

470 freetoken  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 12:59:03am

re: #469 laZardo

They're "conservative" only in the religious sense. Otherwise they are just reactionaries prone to random labial outbursts.

471 freetoken  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 2:01:32am
472 Obdicut  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 3:14:56am

re: #275 BryanS

If some Evil Corporation donates too much money to a campaign, there will be hell to pay when the other side makes that a campaign issue.
.

This is an absolute fiction. Outside groups poured millions of dollars into Proposition 8 in California, and they won. I have no clue why you believe outrage against propaganda somehow outweighs propaganda.

Groups are not individuals. Individuals need protection from groups. That is part of what protection of the minority is about. We are failing to do so by allowing corporations to spend unlimitedly in the political arena. We are failing badly, and the nation is suffering because of it.

473 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 3:16:28am

re: #30 Dark_Falcon

It would be an issue, but it would be different people screaming. This is going to turn into a factional fight, and I'm on Team Conservative.

Even if one looks at it from a partisan PoV, how can one take the side of a hardcore socon creep who is prolly to the right of Scalia?

474 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 3:32:18am

re: #175 Dark_Falcon

I disagree. Corporations represent the accumulated financial interests of their shareholders. Free Speech is an essential tool for their promotion and defense of those monies.

"It's good for the corporations and their owners" does not mean it is or should be constitutional.

475 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 3:37:48am

re: #301 Gus 802

Yep.

In a fully democratic state Gore would have won since he won the popular vote. Electoral college is undemocratic. The only reason it's still here is because debacles like 2000 don't happen too often.

476 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 3:51:24am

re: #447 Gus 802

Who in the modern Western world sees Milosevic, Karadzic and Mladic other than a bunch of extremist asshole lunatics?

BHHRG.

477 freetoken  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 3:56:40am

re: #475 Sergey Romanov

Electoral college is undemocratic.

In a purist sense - yes. Yet the Electoral college addresses a problem which still exists today, and not just in the US. The EU struggles with the problem of making "one from many" in part because of the inherent inequality between nations.

478 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 4:00:40am

re: #477 freetoken

Also yes in a normal sense. Democracy is a majority rule. The majority elected Gore. And what problem? There's simply no good reason for EC.

479 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 4:01:30am

re: #475 Sergey Romanov

FWIW, and I cannot prove any of this, I predicted in 2000 Gore would win the Electoral College and Bush would win the popular vote. I always get thing half right.

480 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 4:12:20am
[Link: mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com...]

Months before Comcast was expected to gain control of NBC Universal, Comcast officials were worried about the perception that they might interfere with MSNBC for political reasons.

One executive, who asked not to be identified because Comcast had instructed employees not to speak about the situation, said the company dreaded the prospect of being blamed if Mr. Olbermann were to quit soon after the takeover.

481 alexknyc  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 4:46:22am

re: #258 palomino

Then you don't know jack about the LA Times.

Meh... I'm not that impressed by them.

Let me know when they release the Khalidi dinner tape.

482 Fart Knocker  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 4:47:49am

re: #478 Sergey Romanov

Also yes in a normal sense. Democracy is a majority rule. The majority elected Gore. And what problem? There's simply no good reason for EC.

Except it is required by the constitution. If only there were some way to change or amend the constitution...//

Good Morning Lizards!

483 researchok  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 4:48:20am

Morning, all.

484 Obdicut  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 4:53:43am

South Korean forces re-take ship captured by pirates, rescue entire crew. The Captain was wounded in the original takeover; other than that, they got everyone out unharmed.

Way to go.

[Link: news.sky.com...]

485 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:00:08am

re: #482 rwdflynavy

Except it is required by the constitution. If only there were some way to change or amend the constitution...//

Good Morning Lizards!

I could add a couple of punchlines here, but I won't. :)

486 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:01:53am

re: #482 rwdflynavy

Except it is required by the constitution. If only there were some way to change or amend the constitution...//

"Required by the constitution" is a reason why it will continue to exist, not a good reason for its existence.

487 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:03:40am

re: #486 Sergey Romanov

"Required by the constitution" is a reason why it will continue to exist, not a good reason for its existence.

which is why he added the point of there being a way to amend it.

488 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:04:07am

re: #481 alexknyc

Meh... I'm not that impressed by them.

Let me know when they release the Khalidi dinner tape.

If they release it they will breach journalistic ethics.

[Link: www.latimes.com...]

489 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:05:52am

re: #488 Sergey Romanov

If they release it they will breach journalistic ethics.

[Link: www.latimes.com...]

Does the NYT know about this?

490 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:06:45am

re: #487 Cannadian Club Akbar

which is why he added the point of there being a way to amend it.

You know well that it's not going away any time soon, and the reason for it has less to do with the defects of EC than with the inertness of the system. Nobody is gonna bother trying to amend unless another debacle happens. Only if in R v Obama race Obama will win like Bush won in 2000, I think there could be a chance of bipartisan consensus to get rid of EC ;-)

491 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:07:05am

re: #489 Cannadian Club Akbar

Does the NYT know about this?

?

492 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:08:03am

re: #491 Sergey Romanov

?

Ethics in journalism? Why start now?

493 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:08:40am

re: #492 Cannadian Club Akbar

Ethics in journalism? Why start now?

Did LAT ever stop?

494 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:09:14am

re: #492 Cannadian Club Akbar

Ethics in journalism? Why start now?

Ethnics? Did someone pass a law or something?

495 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:09:32am

re: #493 Sergey Romanov

Did LAT ever stop?

Dunno. I don't read papers and don't own a bird. No need for them.

496 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:11:02am

re: #495 Cannadian Club Akbar

Dunno. I don't read papers and don't own a bird. No need for them.

If you don't know that LAT stopped being ethical, why do you ask "Why start now?" presuming that they did stop being ethical?

497 researchok  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:11:19am

re: #494 Walter L. Newton

Ethnics? Did someone pass a law or something?

Are you back?!

498 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:13:04am

re: #496 Sergey Romanov

If you don't know that LAT stopped being ethical, why do you ask "Why start now?" presuming that they did stop being ethical?

I was talking about the NYT. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

499 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:14:04am

re: #498 Cannadian Club Akbar

I was talking about the NYT. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

Since LAT is being discussed, bring up NYT?

500 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:15:12am

re: #499 Sergey Romanov

Since LAT is being discussed, why bring up NYT?

501 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:15:35am

re: #499 Sergey Romanov

Since LAT is being discussed, bring up NYT?

No, ethics in journalism was brought up.

502 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:16:02am

re: #497 researchok

Are you back?!

Nope... tomorrow, about 4:00 mountain time... the last two days here has been terribly chilly and wet, I got a really nasty head cold, so I'm spening the day in the hotel, basically sleeping, watching French Sunday political shows and trying to clear this up a bit so I don't have to sit on plnes for 12 hours feeling like my head is going to fall off.

Girlfriend is off on her own for the last day. I gave her a street map and a metro map, she's doing what she wants. She has been up and down about 3/4 of the metro lines here during the last week, more so than most tourists would, so she has a decent idea of how the whole thing works.

I'm in the little bar/cafe downstairs (the wireless connection doesn't reach the second floor here) checking email and making sure all you guys haven't taken over the country yet.

503 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:17:41am

re: #501 Cannadian Club Akbar

No, ethics in journalism was brought up.

Yes, ethics of journalism that would be breached by LAT if they released the tape. NYT is a red herring.

504 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:19:13am

re: #502 Walter L. Newton

Are you in France?

505 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:19:24am

re: #502 Walter L. Newton

So how are the nudes doing? I mean, the ones in Louvre ;)

506 alexknyc  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:20:05am

re: #488 Sergey Romanov

If they release it they will breach journalistic ethics.

[Link: www.latimes.com...]

Would it be a breach of ethics to release a transcript?

507 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:20:20am

re: #505 Sergey Romanov

So how are the nudes doing? I mean, the ones in Louvre ;)

The Lourve has stripper poles?
//

508 researchok  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:21:23am

Domestic use of aerial drones by law enforcement likely to prompt privacy debatere: #502 Walter L. Newton

Nope... tomorrow, about 4:00 mountain time... the last two days here has been terribly chilly and wet, I got a really nasty head cold, so I'm spening the day in the hotel, basically sleeping, watching French Sunday political shows and trying to clear this up a bit so I don't have to sit on plnes for 12 hours feeling like my head is going to fall off.

Girlfriend is off on her own for the last day. I gave her a street map and a metro map, she's doing what she wants. She has been up and down about 3/4 of the metro lines here during the last week, more so than most tourists would, so she has a decent idea of how the whole thing works.

I'm in the little bar/cafe downstairs (the wireless connection doesn't reach the second floor here) checking email and making sure all you guys haven't taken over the country yet.

We are fomenting revolution even as we speak.

Feel free to bring us pastries for sustenance.

If you don't, we may die- but most importantly, do have fun as best you can on this last day. Don't let our collective condition get in your way.

509 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:22:22am

re: #505 Sergey Romanov

So how are the nudes doing? I mean, the ones in Louvre ;)

I've been through a lot of the Louvre in the past... I still walked away with the same question... why so many nude people? And all those metaphorical battle paintings with everyone nude... no wonder the French kept loosing battles and wasrs... a g-string is not going to stop a spear.

510 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:24:00am

re: #504 Cannadian Club Akbar

Are you in France?

Yes... have been here since Sat. morning 14th. Just before my trip, I got a going away present from Kroger... laid off... so, I go back to the US tomorrow jobless... the fun never stops.

511 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:24:26am

re: #506 alexknyc

Would it be a breach of ethics to release a transcript?

What's the difference?

512 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:26:51am

re: #509 Walter L. Newton

Did you see Bosch's Ship of Fools?

513 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:27:14am

re: #510 Walter L. Newton

I remember you getting laid off. You should have a check soon. But then again, you're in France. Piss off!!!:)

514 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:29:52am

re: #508 researchok

Domestic use of aerial drones by law enforcement likely to prompt privacy debate

We are fomenting revolution even as we speak.

Feel free to bring us pastries for sustenance.

If you don't, we may die- but most importantly, do have fun as best you can on this last day. Don't let our collective condition get in your way.

Well, I'm not going to do anything on my last day, but sit here in the hotel and sleep, surf the intertubes a bit and eat something for supper later. This head cold is really nasty.

I went to the pharmachie across the street earlier (I was lucky, the state pharmacies are all closed on Sundays, except ONE in each district of town. They rotate each sunday. Lucky, the one across the strret was due to be open this sunday.

Got some cold medication and a heat wrap to put on my head for the headache. French state pharmacies are required to give you a small lecture on the use of each product you purchase... so, here is the clerk babbling away in Frend and I'm nodding my head... once again proving that the only language skills you need to get by in most countries is about 20-30 words and good body english.

515 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:30:50am

re: #512 Sergey Romanov

Did you see Bosch's Ship of Fools?

You mean the movie? The book? Neither.

516 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:30:58am

Wow, seems "blame it on the lefty" has deep roots.

[Link: sanseverything.wordpress.com...]

1. On September 15, 1963 a bomb went off at the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama, killing 4 black girls and injuring many more children. (Those killed were Cynthia Wesley, Carole Robertson, Addie Mae Collins, Denise McNair; McNair had been a classmate of the young Condoleezza Rice). The bomb was set by members of the Klu Klux Klan, as part of a wave of terror designed to intimidate the civil rights movement. Here is how National Review commented on the bombing in the October 1, 1963 issue of their biweekly Bulletin: “The fiend who set off the bomb does not have the sympathy of the white population in the South; in fact, he set back the cause of the white people there so dramatically as to raise the question whether in fact the explosion was the act of a provocateur – of a Communist, or of a crazed Negro. Some circumstantial evidence lends a hint of plausibility to that notion, especially the ten-minute fuse (surely a white man walking away form the church basement ten minutes earlier would have been noticed?). And let it be said that the convulsions that go on, and are bound to continue, have resulted from revolutionary assaults on the status quo, and a contempt for the law, which are traceable to the Supreme Court’s manifest contempt for the settled traditions of Constitutional practice.”

Buckley. Sane conservative.

517 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:31:33am

re: #515 Walter L. Newton

This:

[Link: www.louvre.fr...]

518 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:32:51am

re: #516 Sergey Romanov

Wow, seems "blame it on the lefty" has deep roots.

[Link: sanseverything.wordpress.com...]

Buckley. Sane conservative.

Yes. But now all things are blamed on the right.
See: Kook shooter in Arizona.

519 alexknyc  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:33:45am

re: #511 Sergey Romanov

What's the difference?

So is that a yes or a no?

520 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:37:30am

re: #517 Sergey Romanov

This:

[Link: www.louvre.fr...]

Ok... now I know who you are talking about... no, I've seen pictures of it before... but I didn't see it at the Louvre. I spent a lot of time sitting down and letting my girlfriend wander around. I've been there twice before, did a very intensive tour the last time, after a while, for me, it becomes like seeing pictures of mountains, they all start to look the same and become a blur.

I enjoy the artifacts much more.

There was an interesting new exhibit at Versailles... bases around the scientific studies going on there and commissioned by the variuios kings, 400 year old sceintific devices, astrolabs, automatrons, static generators, clocks and other very interesting original scientific equipment.

Well worth the look on that one (thank goodness, becuase I've been to Versailles before, and that place becomes a blur after a while).

521 researchok  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:38:00am

re: #514 Walter L. Newton

Well, I'm not going to do anything on my last day, but sit here in the hotel and sleep, surf the intertubes a bit and eat something for supper later. This head cold is really nasty.

I went to the pharmachie across the street earlier (I was lucky, the state pharmacies are all closed on Sundays, except ONE in each district of town. They rotate each sunday. Lucky, the one across the strret was due to be open this sunday.

Got some cold medication and a heat wrap to put on my head for the headache. French state pharmacies are required to give you a small lecture on the use of each product you purchase... so, here is the clerk babbling away in Frend and I'm nodding my head... once again proving that the only language skills you need to get by in most countries is about 20-30 words and good body english.

Glad to hear you're taking it easy toady. Paris can be damp, dark and dispiriting in the winter- and doubly so if you're under the weather.

Which arrondisement are you in? Did you make it to Notre Dame?

522 Decatur Deb  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:38:02am

re: #514 Walter L. Newton

Morning, Walter. Remember as you get on the plane to shout; "Lafayette, we are gone!!". It helps the transition if you make your last o'seas meal at McDonalds.

523 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:39:59am

re: #522 Decatur Deb

Morning, Walter. Remember as you get on the plane to shout; "Lafayette, we are gone!!". It helps the transition if you make your last o'seas meal at McDonalds.

There is a Micky D's wirght down the street at the corner.

524 Decatur Deb  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:40:38am

re: #523 Walter L. Newton

There is a Micky D's wirght down the street at the corner.

I know. We've been watching you.

525 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:40:51am

re: #522 Decatur Deb

Morning, Walter. Remember as you get on the plane to shout; "Lafayette, we are gone!!". It helps the transition if you make your last o'seas meal at McDonalds.

526 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:42:51am

re: #518 Cannadian Club Akbar

Yes. But now all things are blamed on the right.
See: Kook shooter in Arizona.

Um, no. It is the root of the modern conservative tradition to blame crimes by right-wingers on the left. Loughner was also a right-winger, though it can be argued that it was not the direct cause of the massacre, but he was not a left-winger by any measure, yet he is being called just that. Before him there were von Brunn, who was called a leftist because he accepted evolution, the guy who stabbed that Muslim cabbie in NYC, who was called a leftist because allegedly he had some connection to a firm that had Park51 as a client, Adkisson, who couldn't have been more explicit that he was attacking liberals for being liberals was a called a leftist for being an atheist... And so it goes.

527 Decatur Deb  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:44:03am

re: #525 Cannadian Club Akbar

Great dialogue.

528 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:45:10am

re: #494 Walter L. Newton

You little poodle peed on the carpet
That was silly move, Wally
You two bozos are pwned

I am going to enjoy seeing you try to talk your way out of this sticky wicket.

529 Obdicut  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:45:13am

Sad and relevant story:

The Shawna Forde trial: Anti-immigrant extremists murder nine-year-old girl

The little girl's name was Brisenia Flores. She lived near the border with her parents and sister outside the town of Arivaca, Arizona. On May 30 of 2009, a woman named Shawna Forde, who led an offshoot unit of Minutemen who ran armed border patrols for patriotic "fun". Forde's gang had decided to go "operational," which meant they concocted a scheme to raid drug smugglers and take their money and drugs and use it to finance a border race war and "start a revolution against the government". They targeted the Flores home, which had neither money nor drugs, based on dubious information. They convinced Flores to let them in by claiming to be law-enforcement officers seeking fugitives, then shot him point-blank in the head when he questioned them and wounded his wife, Gina Gonzalez. And then, while she pleaded for her life, they shot Brisenia in cold blood in the head. (Her sister, fortunately, was sleeping over at a friend's.)

530 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:46:12am

re: #521 researchok

Glad to hear you're taking it easy toady. Paris can be damp, dark and dispiriting in the winter- and doubly so if you're under the weather.

Which arrondisement are you in? Did you make it to Notre Dame?

The 11th. We are in Menilmontant (put that first "n" into the back of your throat/nose and swallow it when you say it)

It is a very mixed neighborhood. There are arabic and turkish fast food joints, a Mcdonalds and a Kentucky Fried across from each other on the corner, a lot of orientals, blacks, north africans, whites, arabs... very diverse. A lot of bars/cafes, small grocery stores and a market that is set up twice a week down the middle of Rue De Menilmontant.

I don't like to stay in tourist places. The hotel is comfortable, room the size of the bed, which helps, we have a bath (only two of the 20 rooms have a bath), it's a no star hotel, cheap and warm.

531 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:46:46am

re: #519 alexknyc

So is that a yes or a no?

Releasing transcript is almost the same as releasing the video (although the video, of course, is always more powerful). Maybe they also promised not to release the transcript. They did release a detailed report though.

Given that it were they who brought this up in the first place the accusation of bias is idiotic. If they were biased they wouldn't have published anything.

532 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:47:25am

re: #526 Sergey Romanov

I haven't heard Loughner being called left wing. And he certainly wasn't from the right. The guy was a nutball.

533 Talking Point Detective  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:48:19am

re: #340 Killgore Trout

*ring ring*
2004 is calling and they want their conspiracy theory back
/Leave a message at the sound of the tone

*ring ring*
2003 is calling and it wants their lame "ring, ring, someone is on their phone and they want something back" joke back.
/Leave a message at the sound of the tone

How weak is it that you need to keep building that strawman?

534 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:48:42am

re: #530 Walter L. Newton

Walter Newton

Bringing darkness to the City Of Lights!

((sounds like you're having a great time,, did they kick you out of the Louvre for fondling the nude statues??)

535 albusteve  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:48:44am

bonjour Walter...
highs above freezing in Conifer, lows in single digits for a few days....
it's 10 at present

536 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:50:14am

re: #530 Walter L. Newton

The 11th. We are in Menilmontant (put that first "n" into the back of your throat/nose and swallow it when you say it)

It is a very mixed neighborhood. There are arabic and turkish fast food joints, a Mcdonalds and a Kentucky Fried across from each other on the corner, a lot of orientals, blacks, north africans, whites, arabs... very diverse. A lot of bars/cafes, small grocery stores and a market that is set up twice a week down the middle of Rue De Menilmontant.

I don't like to stay in tourist places. The hotel is comfortable, room the size of the bed, which helps, we have a bath (only two of the 20 rooms have a bath), it's a no star hotel, cheap and warm.

How much does it cost per night? Breakfast included?

537 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:50:28am

re: #535 albusteve

bonjour Walter...
highs above freezing in Conifer, lows in single digits for a few days...
it's 10 at present

It was really nasty here for the last few days. I got a bad head cold yesterday. Spending my last day hanging around the hotel. Girlfriend is seeing a few more sights on her own.

538 Renaissance_Man  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:51:14am

re: #532 Cannadian Club Akbar

I haven't heard Loughner being called left wing. And he certainly wasn't from the right. The guy was a nutball.

That seems odd, since every single public statement, blog, news story, and article put out by the Conservative cult media has been calling him a leftist since about four hours after the event.

539 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:51:58am

re: #535 albusteve

bonjour Walter...
highs above freezing in Conifer, lows in single digits for a few days...
it's 10 at present

Just looked at the temperature on my deck. -18 F here right now.

540 Decatur Deb  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:52:01am

re: #532 Cannadian Club Akbar

I haven't heard Loughner being called left wing. And he certainly wasn't from the right. The guy was a nutball.


This is a cache of Gateway pundit--stuff's easy to find.

[Link: www.google.com...]

541 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:52:24am

re: #536 Sergey Romanov

How much does it cost per night? Breakfast included?

It's 69e a night here. Breakfast is not included. But there is a bakery right outside the door. That is for a bigger than normal room with a full bath in the room. There is only one other room with a full bath, the rest have access to a WC.

542 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:53:00am

re: #532 Cannadian Club Akbar

I haven't heard Loughner being called left wing.


LOL


And he certainly wasn't from the right. The guy was a nutball.


One can be both at the same time, you know.

543 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:53:03am

re: #538 Renaissance_Man

That seems odd, since every single public statement, blog, news story, and article put out by the Conservative cult media has been calling him a leftist since about four hours after the event.

The conservatives call him a lefty and the liberals call him a righty. Oh, Noes!! How can I filter this all out?

544 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:53:47am

re: #539 Jadespring

Just looked at the temperature on my deck. -18 F here right now.

Not that cold here, but about 10 degree colder than normal. Friday and Sat. was right at or below freezing, a north wind and wet and rainy.

545 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:53:55am

re: #542 Sergey Romanov

LOL


One can be both at the same time, you know.

Bingo. They meet in the middle of Kookland.

546 alexknyc  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:54:10am

re: #531 Sergey Romanov

Releasing transcript is almost the same as releasing the video (although the video, of course, is always more powerful). Maybe they also promised not to release the transcript. They did release a detailed report though.

Given that it were they who brought this up in the first place the accusation of bias is idiotic. If they were biased they wouldn't have published anything.

Still not seeing a yes or no.

I'm seeing "almost the same" and "maybe."

My question was about journalistic ethics. Your response was about bias.

I should add that most of the people I know in journalism have what can euphemistically be described as flexible ethics, especially when it comes to what they consider the "other side."

547 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:54:25am

re: #543 Cannadian Club Akbar

The conservatives call him a lefty and the liberals call him a righty. Oh, Noes!! How can I filter this all out?

Just call him an insy or and outy.

548 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:55:59am

re: #546 alexknyc

Still not seeing a yes or no.

I'm seeing "almost the same" and "maybe."

My question was about journalistic ethics. Your response was about bias.

I should add that most of the people I know in journalism have what can euphemistically be described as flexible ethics, especially when it comes to what they consider the "other side."

The answer is probably yes. You obviously implied that LAT is biased for Obama by not releasing the tape. I fully debunked your insinuation.

549 albusteve  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:56:20am

re: #539 Jadespring

Just looked at the temperature on my deck. -18 F here right now.

daytime temps in ABQ are upper 50s....sunny and very pleasant

550 Decatur Deb  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:56:39am

re: #547 Jadespring

Just call him an insy or and outy.

They've got him, and we're going to have a couple years to delve into his philosophy. All is good.

551 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:56:42am

re: #543 Cannadian Club Akbar

The conservatives call him a lefty and the liberals call him a righty. Oh, Noes!! How can I filter this all out?

By looking at the data?

552 alexknyc  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:56:49am

re: #543 Cannadian Club Akbar

The conservatives call him a lefty and the liberals call him a righty. Oh, Noes!! How can I filter this all out?

What's to filter? He's a nutjob. What do his politics (or, as I've been reading, lack thereof) have to do with anything other than trying to score political points?

553 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:58:02am

re: #544 Walter L. Newton

Not that cold here, but about 10 degree colder than normal. Friday and Sat. was right at or below freezing, a north wind and wet and rainy.

This is bit colder then normal but not completely out of the ordinary. Usually there's some sort of cold snap at the end of January. It's going to be warming up to 28 (-2C) in a couple of days. It will feel positively balmy.

554 Renaissance_Man  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:58:22am

re: #543 Cannadian Club Akbar

The conservatives call him a lefty and the liberals call him a righty. Oh, Noes!! How can I filter this all out?

This site is good for that. It doesn't see things in the false terms of 'left' or 'right', nor does it assume that because 'the left' say one thing and 'the right' say another, the truth must therefore be somewhere in between. Nor does it assume that 'both sides are just as bad as each other'.

The truth of a matter is rarely directly between two imaginary lying sides.

555 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:58:42am

re: #551 Sergey Romanov

By looking at the data?

re: #552 alexknyc

What's to filter? He's a nutjob. What do his politics (or, as I've been reading, lack thereof) have to do with anything other than trying to score political points?

I was thinking by having a brain. If someone is influenced by the media, I stay away, until I need to make an Army of stoopid people.

556 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:59:58am

re: #554 Renaissance_Man

I may join there.

557 Obdicut  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:00:28am

re: #555 Cannadian Club Akbar

re: #552 alexknyc

I was thinking by having a brain. If someone is influenced by the media, I stay away, until I need to make an Army of stoopid people.


Everyone is influenced by the media, by propaganda, by our culture. We're humans. It's how we work. People may be influenced to a different degree, and they may be able to resist it or filter it out due to rigorous thinking, but everyone is influenced by it.

558 alexknyc  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:00:35am

re: #548 Sergey Romanov

The answer is probably yes. You obviously implied that LAT is biased for Obama by not releasing the tape. I fully debunked your insinuation.

You may have inferred but I didn't imply.

But since you brought it up, I'm not convinced the LA Times would have been as concerned about journalistic ethics had it been Sarah Palin at that dinner.

559 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:00:56am

Anyways.. I've put it off long enough. Time to get buddled up like the pilsbury dough boy and venture out for chores. I'll try not the freeze my thumb to anything this time....

560 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:02:02am

re: #551 Sergey Romanov

By looking at the data?

The "data" showed he was after this one particular congresswoman for years before Palins "target" map yet that didn't stop pundits and bloggers and politicians from attributing the map to the attack

561 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:04:14am

re: #537 Walter L. Newton

Are still in denial about being called out as a troll, despite the fact Charles was the one making the accusation?

Wally, you don't want to go down like Rick Martinez, why do you want to humiliate yourself like this?

I am no poodle, that was your fatal mistake, it got you old stale act bounced out of the room.
It's all about civility and intellectual honesty, why is that so hard for you wingnut trolls understand.

Don't waste your time, Wally, you are between a rock and a hard place.

Slither out of this mess. I want to sit back and watch your lame performance.

You may have missed something, the imaginary blog war is over, and your side lost. We have eric the onion nailed.

562 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:04:19am

re: #560 sattv4u2

The "data" showed he was after this one particular congresswoman for years before Palins "target" map yet that didn't stop pundits and bloggers and politicians from attributing the map to the attack

That reminds me. Where can I get a "CNN John King" Tampon? That guy is a douche.

563 Decatur Deb  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:06:00am

re: #558 alexknyc

You may have inferred but I didn't imply.

But since you brought it up, I'm not convinced the LA Times would have been as concerned about journalistic ethics had it been Sarah Palin at that dinner.

Note that the LA Times is not the NY Times--over the years it seems to land several degrees to the right.

564 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:07:10am

re: #561 Reginald Perrin

Did I miss something while I've been in France. First off, who is Rick, second, who is Eric?

565 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:07:14am

re: #555 Cannadian Club Akbar

If the brain has no input data it will either make no conclusion or fantasize. Anyway, you've already indicated that you didn't even see L. being called a leftist, and that was all over the net, as well as here. So I'm not gonna discuss this further.

566 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:08:30am

Reginald why are you down dinging comments about temperature? #544 549

??? Did you actually mean to that? And if so why? Color me confuse..

567 Talking Point Detective  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:08:56am

re: #400 ClaudeMonet

Let's see. The Florida Supreme Court, all Democratic appointees, rule for Gore, but it's "non-partisan". The SCOTUS, appointed by various Presidents, rules for Bush, so it's "partisan"?

I'll try to make that the last thing I post about something that happened over 10 years ago. As I tell Republicans about 2008, "It's done. You lost. Stop fighting lost wars."

There was a typo on what I wrote originally. I meant to say "I won't pretend that political ideology doesn't shape the decisions of the liberals on the court,"

There were two decsions in Bush V. Gore, and in one of them, 4 judges dissented with the decision about stopping the recount - along partisan lines. If you'll read many other comments I made in the thread, I made it clear that I was refering to both sides when I was pointing ot the partisanship.

The Bush v. Gore reference wasn't a "post about something that happened 10 years ago." The post was about partisan influence on the Supreme Court, which predated Bush v. Gore and has continued since. The Bush v. Gore was a particularly notable example, particularly because the right both went against their typical pattern of rulings on issues that involved states' rights. There are plenty of other examples if you'd prefer.

I completely agree with the gist of your post - it is absurd to argue that partisanship influences the court only either on the left or the right. That's why the notion that only the conservatives are true to the intent of the framers, as if they can make an objective "interpretation" of what they meant, is ridiculous.

568 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:09:08am

re: #565 Sergey Romanov

If the brain has no input data it will either make no conclusion or fantasize. Anyway, you've already indicated that you didn't even see L. being called a leftist, and that was all over the net, as well as here. So I'm not gonna discuss this further.

Sorry, I am limited on internet time and don't watch TV. I called him a kok the first day. You can look that up.

569 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:09:16am

re: #564 Walter L. Newton

Did I miss something while I've been in France. First off, who is Rick, second, who is Eric?


I was wondering who "Wally" is !?!?

570 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:09:40am

re: #566 Jadespring

Reginald why are you down dinging comments about temperature? #544 549

??? Did you actually mean to that? And if so why? Color me confuse..

He HATES being cold!
/

571 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:09:55am

re: #566 Jadespring

Reginald why are you down dinging comments about temperature? #544 549

??? Did you actually mean to that? And if so why? Color me confuse..

Check out his little screeds to me this morning... strange... I don't even know what he is talking about.

572 [deleted]  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:10:57am
573 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:11:25am

re: #566 Jadespring

Reginald why are you down dinging comments about temperature? #544 549

??? Did you actually mean to that? And if so why? Color me confuse..

I better not mention it is 50 right now!!!

574 Obdicut  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:12:02am

re: #572 Reginald Perrin

Reggie, this is getting kind of creepy. You might want to think about what the hell you're doing, and what you think you're going to achieve.

575 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:12:10am

re: #572 Reginald Perrin

Grow up wally, you are nothing more that a freeloader with three failed marriages, and no job. You're leaching off a woman you met on this blog.

Hasn't Charles given you enough?

Four... stupid... you can't even get that right.

576 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:12:18am

re: #560 sattv4u2

The "data" showed he was after this one particular congresswoman for years before Palins "target" map yet that didn't stop pundits and bloggers and politicians from attributing the map to the attack

1. Uh, you're not discussing his political orientation. You're discussing his possible motives. I'm discussing his political orientation.

2. As I said, it is possible to argue that his political orientation didn't have much to do with the killing. It is still clear that he was in the right-libertarian part of the political compass.

3. As for "years before" - it's neither here nor there. Not that I tie Palin's map directly here, but it could just as easily been argued that he only shot her after the maps appeared. I'm not arguing this, but your argument doesn't hold water either.

577 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:12:20am

Oh I see now. It's some sort of high school cock/penis fight.

Nice.

578 morrisab  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:12:26am

re: #565 Sergey Romanov

If the brain has no input data it will either make no conclusion or fantasize. Anyway, you've already indicated that you didn't even see L. being called a leftist, and that was all over the net, as well as here. So I'm not gonna discuss this further.

Truly. I usually skip over several talking points, er, names, here, but that was short and the temerity took my breath away. Just a few days ago the Palindrome-Hannity lovefest featured the very same accusation from the lip licking Caribou Barbie.

579 alexknyc  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:12:50am

re: #563 Decatur Deb

Note that the LA Times is not the NY Times--over the years it seems to land several degrees to the right.

Editorial policy isn't always the same as the unconscious bias that can go into deciding what is (or isn't) news and where stories get placed (Front page or p. 28? Above or below the fold? ).

Besides, anything to the left of the NY Times would have to be Mother Jones or Pravda.
/

580 Obdicut  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:13:16am

re: #577 Jadespring

Hey, reminder that were going to send me an email in re political stuff.

No rush.

581 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:14:30am

re: #580 Obdicut

Hey, reminder that were going to send me an email in re political stuff.

No rush.

Oh yes. Thanks for reminding me. I'd forgotten. I have it half done in my drafts. I'll finish it and send it off in the next couple of days.

582 Decatur Deb  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:14:41am

re: #572 Reginald Perrin

WTF?

583 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:14:46am

re: #572 Reginald Perrin

Grow up wally, you are nothing more that a freeloader with three failed marriages, and no job. You're leaching off a woman you met on this blog.

Hasn't Charles given you enough?

Thats the second time you've invoked Charles

Man up, "Reggie". If you're going to go after "Wally" do it one on one. And preferably without the personal name calling school yard bs

584 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:14:52am

re: #577 Jadespring

Oh I see now. It's some sort of high school cock/penis fight.

Nice.

The guy with the smaller one always starts it.

585 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:14:53am

re: #566 Jadespring

I am down dinging all the trolls until Walter admits he has a problem and Steve answers the two questions he ran away from yesterday.

The silly game is over and Walter has chosen to ignore reality.

586 Obdicut  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:15:49am

re: #579 alexknyc

The Pravda you're likely to see these days is the online version, which is nationalistic and pretty right-wing.

The print newspaper of the same name these days is pretty much on the left.

587 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:16:09am

re: #585 Reginald Perrin

I am down dinging all the trolls until Walter admits he has a problem and Steve answers the two questions he ran away from yesterday.

The silly game is over and Walter has chosen to ignore reality.

This is getting sad... or funny... depending on how you view mental illness.

588 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:16:56am

re: #585 Reginald Perrin

I am down dinging all the trolls until

So in other words,, you're "STALKING" them ,, but just "until"!!

589 albusteve  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:17:32am

re: #583 sattv4u2

Thats the second time you've invoked Charles

Man up, "Reggie". If you're going to go after "Wally" do it one on one. And preferably without the personal name calling school yard bs

it's every few posts....very bizarre

590 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:17:51am

And on that note,,, jumping in the shower to get ready for work

HEY ,, "REGGIE",, need to know the temp of the shower water so you can decide to downding it or not!?!??!

591 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:17:51am

re: #585 Reginald Perrin

I am down dinging all the trolls until Walter admits he has a problem and Steve answers the two questions he ran away from yesterday.

The silly game is over and Walter has chosen to ignore reality.

Yes I get that. As I said, highschool penis fight...

Sorry but you'll get no sympathy from me. I don't agree all the time with Walter or Steve and yeah like lots of people they annoy me at times but I don't see them as "Trolls".

I think you're being bitchy here and taking it over the line. Might what to step back and breathe or something.

592 Obdicut  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:18:53am

re: #585 Reginald Perrin

In other words, you're giving a troll attention and thinking that will somehow dissuade him from doing something?

That's rather silly.

593 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:19:29am

re: #586 Obdicut

The Pravda you're likely to see these days is the online version, which is nationalistic and pretty right-wing.

The print newspaper of the same name these days is pretty much on the left.

pravda.ru has nothing whatsoever to do with the Communist newspaper. This is not to you, Obdi; I just always point that out. ;)

594 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:20:00am

re: #574 Obdicut

It's not about Walter, it never was.

This is being written for those who obsess over Charles

I promise, it will become clear before Monday night.

Trust me, I have a very good track record.

595 Obdicut  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:22:23am

re: #594 Reginald Perrin

At the moment, it just seems like crazypants. But whatevs.

596 RogueOne  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:23:13am

Morning All!

Mitch Daniels: Heartthrob of the elites
[Link: www.politico.com...]

I like Mitch just about as much as I can like any politico but I'm afraid he's way too dry to win the nomination. Watching his State of the State address recently I kept thinking how much it reminded me of a boring 101 level poli-sci class. He's too smart to be president.

597 alexknyc  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:23:20am

re: #567 Talking Point Detective

The Bush v. Gore was a particularly notable example, particularly because the right both went against their typical pattern of rulings on issues that involved states' rights. There are plenty of other examples if you'd prefer.

It's my understanding that the Court said the FL Supremes change of the legislature's deadline had violated Article II, Section i which says, in part, "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct..."

I'm not sure how States Rights arguments enter against the ruling as I understand it.

598 Obdicut  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:23:21am

re: #593 Sergey Romanov

Does the printed newspaper have anything to do with the old Pravda?

599 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:23:44am

re: #588 sattv4u2

No, it is not stalking someone when they go days without explaining why he called me a poodle. I know the answer, it's likely CJ knows the answer too.
Why couldn't Steve answer that question?

600 RogueOne  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:24:36am

re: #575 Walter L. Newton

Four... stupid... you can't even get that right.

Walters problem is he just loves too much!

601 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:25:33am

re: #597 alexknyc

It's my understanding that the Court said the FL Supremes change of the legislature's deadline had violated Article II, Section i which says, in part, "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct..."

I'm not sure how States Rights arguments enter against the ruling as I understand it.

Florida has 7 days to certify an election. Gore tried to change that. Argument over.

602 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:25:48am

re: #595 Obdicut
Please explain to me why this seems crazy, especially when you are not really privy to all the known facts.

603 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:26:00am

re: #600 RogueOne

Walters problem is he just loves too much!

Well... I can't stand it when someone can't even get an insult correct. What the fuck, I have to write Reggie his material too?

604 alexknyc  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:26:41am

re: #586 Obdicut

The Pravda you're likely to see these days is the online version, which is nationalistic and pretty right-wing.

The print newspaper of the same name these days is pretty much on the left.

I know. I'm dating myself.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to chase those kids off my lawn.

605 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:27:30am

re: #598 Obdicut

Does the printed newspaper have anything to do with the old Pravda?

Yes, in that it's still the organ of the Communist party, now CPRF. I'm pretty sure it's also nationalistic, since CPRF is.

606 RogueOne  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:27:48am

re: #603 Walter L. Newton

You back home walter?

607 Obdicut  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:28:39am

re: #596 RogueOne

Right, Mitch Daniels, the genius who said that we should raise the retirement age because younger people today are going to live to be 100 because they'll be replacing body parts like we replace tires.

That guy is too smart to be president.

608 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:29:45am

re: #606 RogueOne

You back home walter?

No... flying home tomorrow... check up thread for details. Basically, I came down with a bad head cold yesterday, so spending my last day at the hotel, in the bar right now, staying warm. Girlfriend is doing some site seeing on her own.

609 alexknyc  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:29:45am

re: #607 Obdicut

Right, Mitch Daniels, the genius who said that we should raise the retirement age because younger people today are going to live to be 100 because they'll be replacing body parts like we replace tires.

That guy is too smart to be president.

He's right about needing to raise the retirement age.

But the rest of it sounds like he needs to replace his brain. The treads seem worn.

610 Obdicut  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:30:00am

re: #602 Reginald Perrin

Please explain to me why this seems crazy, especially when you are not really privy to all the known facts.

That would be why, Reggie. You're alluding to hidden facts that would make everything clear. Without those, everything is as clear as a catfish.

611 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:33:06am

re: #598 Obdicut

Does the printed newspaper have anything to do with the old Pravda?

Here's the real Pravda:

[Link: www.gazeta-pravda.ru...]

612 RogueOne  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:34:07am

re: #607 Obdicut

Don't be a hater. Which part of that did you disagree with, the raising the retirement age or the incredible advancements in the medical field? Lets face it, you aren't going to like anyone with an (R) after their name.

613 RogueOne  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:34:39am

re: #608 Walter L. Newton

No... flying home tomorrow... check up thread for details. Basically, I came down with a bad head cold yesterday, so spending my last day at the hotel, in the bar right now, staying warm. Girlfriend is doing some site seeing on her own.

I was afraid to read to far upthread....

614 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:35:42am

re: #612 RogueOne

Don't be a hater. Which part of that did you disagree with, the raising the retirement age or the incredible advancements in the medical field? Lets face it, you aren't going to like anyone with an (R) after their name.

I'll be dead before I reach retirement. Can I have my money now?

615 RogueOne  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:35:53am

One last read:

Work Out So Hard You Vomit
The rise of P90X, CrossFit, and the "extreme" exercise routine.
[Link: www.slate.com...]

616 alexknyc  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:35:54am

re: #613 RogueOne

I was afraid to read to far upthread...

It's not that far. Walter showed up around #500.

617 Obdicut  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:36:05am

re: #612 RogueOne

he raising the retirement age or the incredible advancements in the medical field?

That part.

Lets face it, you aren't going to like anyone with an (R) after their name.

I thin you're mixing up causation there. It's not that I don't like anyone with an R after their name, it's that I don't like what they actually do and stand for.

Mitch Daniels is also the genius who estimated the Iraq war would cost between 50 and 60 billion dollars, and said an estimate of 200 billion was the far end of a hypothetical.

Clearly far too smart for the White House.

618 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:36:28am

re: #613 RogueOne

I was afraid to read to far upthread...

Don't be...

619 RogueOne  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:36:50am

re: #614 Cannadian Club Akbar

That was my retirement plan, die by 40. I screwed it all up by somehow staying alive.

620 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:37:16am

re: #600 RogueOne

I am not a stalker, I am a writer. It's not as if I somehow counted wives.
He mentioned a few times and I knew it was a big number, so I went with three to ere on the side of caution.

Do you realize that half the blogosphere is obsessed with a deleted eight year old commitment.

Don't you find it a wee tad odd that the people being accused are obsessing about a single comment would chose to completely ignore "reggies' allegation against Eric Odom.

If I was making unsubstituted claims against one of the Tea Party, with their track record, they would have attacked the messenger and not a peep.

I am not reggie, I am the one that does his writing. There is no difficulty separating the two.

621 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:37:51am

re: #599 Reginald Perrin

No, it is not stalking someone when they go days without explaining why he called me a poodle. I know the answer, it's likely CJ knows the answer too.
Why couldn't Steve answer that question?

Well , add this to you collection

You're a poodle!

((don't hold your breath for an "explanation" because since you started all this , as Obdi put it, "crazypants" today I have NO FRAKKIN CLUE WTF is going on! But you seem obsessed because someone HORROR OF HORROR called you a name))(((I do however know you're posts here today are bizarre)))

622 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:38:24am

re: #610 Obdicut

Do you understand my allegations against Mr Odom?

623 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:38:38am

And on that note, the long quiet ride into work beckons!

624 alexknyc  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:38:38am

re: #619 RogueOne

That was my retirement plan, die by 40. I screwed it all up by somehow staying alive.

My plan is cheeseburgers, women, gambling and an excess of whiskey.

Even if I screw it up, I'll still be having a great time.

625 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:39:59am

re: #617 Obdicut

That part.

I thin you're mixing up causation there. It's not that I don't like anyone with an R after their name, it's that I don't like what they actually do and stand for.

Mitch Daniels is also the genius who estimated the Iraq war would cost between 50 and 60 billion dollars, and said an estimate of 200 billion was the far end of a hypothetical.

Clearly far too smart for the White House.

Jeanine Garaffalo said we ordered 10,000 body bags for the war. Another Brainiac.

626 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:40:08am

re: #620 Reginald Perrin

I am not a stalker, I am a writer. It's not as if I somehow counted wives.
He mentioned a few times and I knew it was a big number, so I went with three to ere on the side of caution.

Do you realize that half the blogosphere is obsessed with a deleted eight year old commitment.

Don't you find it a wee tad odd that the people being accused are obsessing about a single comment would chose to completely ignore "reggies' allegation against Eric Odom.

If I was making unsubstituted claims against one of the Tea Party, with their track record, they would have attacked the messenger and not a peep.

I am not reggie, I am the one that does his writing. There is no difficulty separating the two.

Well... please Reggie... don't make your writing look ragged and full of holes... in the least get your facts straight. It will help with establishing your credibility in the future.

627 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:41:05am

re: #624 alexknyc

My plan is cheeseburgers, women, gambling and an excess of whiskey.

Even if I screw it up, I'll still be having a great time.

I'm moving in. Make space on the couch.:)

628 Obdicut  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:42:07am

re: #622 Reginald Perrin

Do you understand my allegations against Mr Odom?

Not really, no. If you have something to straightforwardly put out there, you should do it. Hinting at it isn't going to get you anywhere, and, as you can see, it's not very well-received.

629 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:42:33am

re: #622 Reginald Perrin

Do you understand my allegations against Mr Odom?

How did your conversation go from me to Steve to Mr. Odom to Rick Martinez? Two of those people I don't even know, personally or by emails or even responding to on a blog. Steve I know, even though we have never met, we have talked, both my email and phone.

So, what does this all have to do with LGF and certain people here?

630 RogueOne  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:42:59am

re: #620 Reginald Perrin

Don't know why you addressed that to me. I stayed out of the fray other than the one down-ding, a rare occurrence for me, for going way over the top in a personal attack. If you can't make a point without dragging someones marital history into it my guess is you don't have much of a point.

631 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:43:27am

re: #624 alexknyc

My plan is cheeseburgers, women, gambling and an excess of whiskey.

Even if I screw it up, I'll still be having a great time.

Mine is to sell everything off and move to somewhere like Costa Rica.

632 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:44:48am

re: #631 Jadespring

Mine is to sell everything off and move to somewhere like Costa Rica.

re: #627 Cannadian Club Akbar

I'm moving in. Make space on the couch.:)

My response works on so many levels.:)

633 albusteve  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:45:10am

re: #629 Walter L. Newton

How did your conversation go from me to Steve to Mr. Odom to Rick Martinez? Two of those people I don't even know, personally or by emails or even responding to on a blog. Steve I know, even though we have never met, we have talked, both my email and phone.

So, what does this all have to do with LGF and certain people here?

check out #369 in the Onion thread right behind us...

634 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:45:23am

re: #626 Walter L. Newton

What facts straight, the fact that I underestimated your number of failed marriages?

Or my facts about Eric the onion's trolling operation?

Or all of Eric's vanished stalker blogs

Rick Martinez got drunk a few years back and spilled the beans

What are you confused about?

635 Decatur Deb  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:45:34am

re: #622 Reginald Perrin

Do you understand my allegations against Mr Odom?

As a relative newbie, I'm vaguely aware of them and even predisposed to believe them. The passion in your insult harms your case.

636 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:48:25am

re: #633 albusteve

check out #369 in the Onion thread right behind us...

Ok... read it... still don't know what that has to do with me? But this is getting really humorous... if you get a kick out of watching a mental breakdown.

637 albusteve  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:49:13am

re: #625 Cannadian Club Akbar

Jeanine Garaffalo said we ordered 10,000 body bags for the war. Another Brainiac.

nothing ever goes according to plan in war....people making these assumptions just look bad in the end...whatever possesses them to predict these outcomes is beyond me...some sense of inflated pretense of knowledge maybe....it's bad for the public as well as whatever admin is trying to prosecute a war....bad leadership

638 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:50:46am

re: #632 Cannadian Club Akbar

re: #627 Cannadian Club Akbar

My response works on so many levels.:)

I was thinking about it a lot as my nostril hairs were freezing this morning.

Bummer thing is I'm going to have to venture out a lot today as the bucket warmer doesn't to be working for some reason. So I'll have to take water out every couple of hours at least.

At least the suns out so it's all shiny and sparkly.

639 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:50:46am

re: #630 RogueOne

I thought to ask a right winger their opinion.

Would you like to take a pass instead?

Your choice

640 RogueOne  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:50:56am

Regarding the Bob Barr holding hands with a Haitian dictator:

I Walked With a Tyrant: Bob Barr in Haiti
[Link: reason.com...]

My favorite comment from a reader I've gone around and around with:
[Link: reason.com...]


F****! How enBARRessing.

Just nominate me in 2012. I promise to do poorly in the election, garnishing the traditional Libertarian Party zero electoral votes and I won't embarrass the libertarian philosophy (I'll pay for my hookers and blow with my own money).

641 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:50:59am

re: #634 Reginald Perrin

WTF does Walter being married have to do with anything?

642 albusteve  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:51:21am

re: #636 Walter L. Newton

Ok... read it... still don't know what that has to do with me? But this is getting really humorous... if you get a kick out of watching a mental breakdown.

or me....just an example of some cryptic conspiracy we are involved in....I have no clue

643 Fart Knocker  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:52:09am

re: #599 Reginald Perrin

No, it is not stalking someone when they go days without explaining why he called me a poodle. I know the answer, it's likely CJ knows the answer too.
Why couldn't Steve answer that question?

You know your avatar is a dog right?

644 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:52:24am

re: #634 Reginald Perrin

What facts straight, the fact that I underestimated your number of failed marriages?

Or my facts about Eric the onion's trolling operation?

Or all of Eric's vanished stalker blogs

Rick Martinez got drunk a few years back and spilled the beans

What are you confused about?

What the fuck do I care... I don't even know who Eric Odom is, any more than some of the crazy shit you have posted here... I don't hang around stalker blogs... I don't know Rick Martinez... and all of your exposition is starting to sound like someone who is really having a psychotic break... and I just broke one of my rules about internet diagnoses... but you are sailing much higher than the rest of the human race right now... so, get your shit together... post whatever it is you have to post... stop mumbling about all this mysterious shit and cut the crap.

645 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:53:01am

re: #638 Jadespring

I was thinking about it a lot as my nostril hairs were freezing this morning.

Bummer thing is I'm going to have to venture out a lot today as the bucket warmer doesn't to be working for some reason. So I'll have to take water out every couple of hours at least.

At least the suns out so it's all shiny and sparkly.

[Link: www.1costaricalink.com...]

646 Varek Raith  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:53:54am

Morning.
What are we warring about today?

647 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:54:40am

re: #646 Varek Raith

Morning.
What are we warring about today?

Whatever it is, Walter started it. Or not.
//

648 Fart Knocker  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:55:14am

re: #620 Reginald Perrin

I am not a stalker, I am a writer. It's not as if I somehow counted wives.
He mentioned a few times and I knew it was a big number, so I went with three to ere on the side of caution.

Do you realize that half the blogosphere is obsessed with a deleted eight year old commitment.

Don't you find it a wee tad odd that the people being accused are obsessing about a single comment would chose to completely ignore "reggies' allegation against Eric Odom.

If I was making unsubstituted claims against one of the Tea Party, with their track record, they would have attacked the messenger and not a peep.

I am not reggie, I am the one that does his writing. There is no difficulty separating the two.

Are you familiar with the uni-bomber's work?
//

649 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:55:21am

re: #641 Cannadian Club Akbar

nothing whatsoever.

He is being silly and mocking "reggie" because he failed to guess the correct number of his wallys failed marriages, like it was some question in a game of trivial pursuit.

It is all he has got left to hang on to, he forgot to bring a life-preserver.

650 albusteve  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:56:58am

re: #641 Cannadian Club Akbar

WTF does Walter being married have to do with anything?

it's supposed to be an insult....nice huh?

651 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:57:20am

re: #644 Walter L. Newton

So says a man that was called out for trolling by this blogs owners.

652 RogueOne  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:58:16am

re: #639 Reginald Perrin

I thought to ask a right winger their opinion.

Would you like to take a pass instead?

Your choice

I didn't notice you asked me a question. I stopped reading after the first sentence.

A) I'm not a "right-winger"
B) The only fight I know anything about is with Patterico, whom I don't like and don't read.
C) I thought the fight was over the Beck video that Charles posted yesterday.
D) I doubt anyone is holding their breath waiting for me to chime in on how I feel about people I don't know, read, or watch.

653 Sionainn  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:58:28am

re: #596 RogueOne

Morning All!

Mitch Daniels: Heartthrob of the elites
[Link: www.politico.com...]

I like Mitch just about as much as I can like any politico but I'm afraid he's way too dry to win the nomination. Watching his State of the State address recently I kept thinking how much it reminded me of a boring 101 level poli-sci class. He's too smart to be president.

He's not got a chance of getting the nomination from the current base who sneer at education, wrap themselves in social issues and at the same time scream about their own rights. Nope. It'll never happen. That's what the GOP "elite" get for pandering to the not too bright.

654 Varek Raith  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:58:33am

Yikes...
*Dons flame suit*
Don't mind me, I'll be at the bar.
;)

655 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:58:49am

re: #357 austin_blue

Is rwmofo the new Nodrog?

Discuss.

re: #572 Reginald Perrin

Grow up wally, you are nothing more that a freeloader with three failed marriages, and no job. You're leaching off a woman you met on this blog.

Hasn't Charles given you enough?

Sorry, Reggie but that one was over the line.

656 RogueOne  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:59:50am

re: #646 Varek Raith

Morning.
What are we warring about today?

whether Mitch Daniels is smarter than Obama. I say it's a slam dunk but Obdi seems to disagree.

657 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 6:59:58am

re: #654 Varek Raith

Yikes...
*Dons flame suit*
Don't mind me, I'll be at the bar.
;)

That's where I'm at right now... not drinking... listening to this crazy... I may start.

658 Sionainn  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:00:22am

re: #607 Obdicut

Right, Mitch Daniels, the genius who said that we should raise the retirement age because younger people today are going to live to be 100 because they'll be replacing body parts like we replace tires.

That guy is too smart to be president.

LOL. I missed that one.

659 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:01:19am

re: #634 Reginald Perrin

Reggie, lay off with the personal attacks. They make you look like a jerk.

660 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:01:54am

re: #655 Dark_Falcon

re: #572 Reginald Perrin

Sorry, Reggie but that one was over the line.

Perfect timing, I need you to illustrate a point.

Have I ever bailed you out with the stalkers?

661 albusteve  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:01:57am

re: #658 Sionainn

LOL. I missed that one.

we're all gonna look like this guy in twenty years...
[Link: delbeneinteriors.blogspot.com...]

662 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:02:32am

You know... one of the things I was most concerned about was being tempted to smoke here in Paris... a lot of good memories based around cigarettes and French coffee.

I didn't have to. Since the French has really cracked down on smoking rules and regulations, EVERYONE is smoking on the street. All I have to do is stand still for a few minutes, or sit outside at a cafe' and I can smoke two or three cigarettes without lighting up a single one of them.

663 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:03:21am

re: #648 rwdflynavy

Are you familiar with the uni-bomber's work?
//

Have some negative karma for the ugly insult.

664 RogueOne  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:03:40am

Exercise time! I'll BBL, probably. If not, Go Bears!

665 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:04:29am

re: #660 Reginald Perrin

Perfect timing, I need you to illustrate a point.

Have I ever bailed you out with the stalkers?

Yes, you have been a great help to me where they are concerned.

666 albusteve  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:05:27am

re: #662 Walter L. Newton

You know... one of the things I was most concerned about was being tempted to smoke here in Paris... a lot of good memories based around cigarettes and French coffee.

I didn't have to. Since the French has really cracked down on smoking rules and regulations, EVERYONE is smoking on the street. All I have to do is stand still for a few minutes, or sit outside at a cafe' and I can smoke two or three cigarettes without lighting up a single one of them.

I can just see you with your little beret and cig holder

667 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:06:13am

re: #666 albusteve

I can just see you with your little beret and cig holder

No you can't...

668 Varek Raith  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:09:34am

re: #666 albusteve

I can just see you with your little beret and cig holder

That would look so cute!
/

669 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:09:39am

My dogs are really being annoying. They come in and then five minutes later they want out again. Then five minutes after that they remember why they wanted to come in the last time.

Yes my doggie dears the sun may be out but it's COLD.

670 albusteve  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:10:10am

re: #667 Walter L. Newton

No you can't...

wearing a striped skin tight shirt...
and ballet slippers

671 Reginald Perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:12:16am

re: #665 Dark_Falcon

This is still about them

Don't you find it strange that all of twitter is abuzz over a missing eight year old comment. If what I allege isn't true, why not a peep about this. They are trying to nail CJ, why not humiliate him by exposing me as a fraud.

They did the same thing the trolls do, ignore it and obsess of something trivial.

Do you feel what Steve did was right?
Is that the way the right wing is going to continue to operate. Running away from any question they chose to ignore?

672 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:12:26am

re: #668 Varek Raith

That would look so cute!
/

Ok... I'm going to head back to my room, head cold medication is getting the best of me... I'll see you all on the other side of the globe tomorrow evening or soon... after I get home... gee... I hope the three kids are still alive and the house hasn't burned down.

Catch you later too 'Reggie."

673 albusteve  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:13:25am

the end of an era...

Tour de France icon Lance Armstrong brought an end to his international cycling career when he completed the final stage of the Tour Down Under in South Australia Sunday.

[Link: msn.foxsports.com...]

674 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:19:56am

re: #671 Reginald Perrin

This is still about them

Don't you find it strange that all of twitter is abuzz over a missing eight year old comment. If what I allege isn't true, why not a peep about this. They are trying to nail CJ, why not humiliate him by exposing me as a fraud.

They did the same thing the trolls do, ignore it and obsess of something trivial.

Do you feel what Steve did was right?
Is that the way the right wing is going to continue to operate. Running away from any question they chose to ignore?

Which 'Steve', Reggie? And what exactly did he do? I'm not sure I entirely understand. Please, for clarity's sake, lay out your entire case for us in one place. Use a Page if you need to. That way we'll all understand what the situation is.

675 reine.de.tout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:21:31am

re: #674 Dark_Falcon

Which 'Steve', Reggie? And what exactly did he do? I'm not sure I entirely understand. Please, for clarity's sake, lay out your entire case for us in one place. Use a Page if you need to. That way we'll all understand what the situation is.

I'm not understanding what's going on, either.

676 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:23:50am

re: #674 Dark_Falcon

Which 'Steve', Reggie? And what exactly did he do? I'm not sure I entirely understand. Please, for clarity's sake, lay out your entire case for us in one place. Use a Page if you need to. That way we'll all understand what the situation is.

IIUC, albusteve called Reginald a poodle yesterday (by my time at least). And so it goes. I don't know how Walter got mixed here.

677 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:25:34am

re: #675 reine.de.tout

I'm not understanding what's going on, either.

You should know, Reine, that Rodan (AKA Trajan AKA Twajie AKA Daedalus AKA Dorkus) fixated on you yesterday. He called you "The Queen of Ignorance" and "a self-hating Catholic). The man went stark raving mad and took the rest on his stalkers along for a hate-spew.

678 Sionainn  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:25:51am

re: #656 RogueOne

whether Mitch Daniels is smarter than Obama. I say it's a slam dunk but Obdi seems to disagree.

Hey, I didn't get that from your article.

679 albusteve  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:26:11am

re: #676 Sergey Romanov

IIUC, albusteve called Reginald a poodle yesterday (by my time at least). And so it goes. I don't know how Walter got mixed here.

I don't think so...one could simply post the comment...somehow Walter and I are being sucked into the stalker situation, how or why, I have no clue

680 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:27:26am

re: #677 Dark_Falcon

You should know, Reine, that Rodan (AKA Trajan AKA Twajie AKA Daedalus AKA Dorkus) fixated on you yesterday. He called you "The Queen of Ignorance" and "a self-hating Catholic). The man went stark raving mad and took the rest on his stalkers along for a hate-spew.

I hereby declare them Douchebags.

681 reginald perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:28:01am

He called me a poodle and I asked him politely to clarify that remark'
The second question was why did he object to my mentioning Odom's stalking of CJ.
It wasn't thought out very well.
Never is

682 harlequinade  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:28:25am

re: #676 Sergey Romanov

I saw that...kinda. I saw Reggie ask Steve who's poodle Steve thought Reggie was (if that's not too ugly a sentence...) which Steve industriously ignored despite being asked repeatedly.

I took the line Reggie took to suggest that Steve's answer would have pointed to something larger and that was the reason Steve was dodging.

And now we're at today.

683 reine.de.tout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:30:11am

re: #677 Dark_Falcon

You should know, Reine, that Rodan (AKA Trajan AKA Twajie AKA Daedalus AKA Dorkus) fixated on you yesterday. He called you "The Queen of Ignorance" and "a self-hating Catholic). The man went stark raving mad and took the rest on his stalkers along for a hate-spew.

Thanks DF none of that is new.

I know who and what I am and don't need their approval.

If they are OK with the Church covering up for pedophilia and moving priests around so they can continue that behavior- well, I wonder who is the "self-hating" in that scenario.

I will admit the lunacy of the man and his minions is putting me off; and the idea of genuine threats being made or attempted is not far from my mind.

684 reginald perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:31:27am

re: #677 Dark_Falcon

You are neglecting to mention the crude comments that used the T word to describe Reine. They were on a sexist rampage.

685 lawhawk  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:35:20am

re: #677 Dark_Falcon

For a supposedly irrelevant blog (as the haters keep claiming without any actual evidence), they sure do fixate and spend an inordinate amount of time not only combing through Charles' posts, but individual posters.

It aint right - and it can't be healthy.

686 reine.de.tout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:36:28am

re: #684 reginald perrin

You are neglecting to mention the crude comments that used the T word to describe Reine. They were on a sexist rampage.

The "T" word?
Somebody e-mail me and tell me what it is - can't bring anything to mind right now. And I'm NOT gonna go look.

687 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:38:09am

re: #686 reine.de.tout

The "T" word?
Somebody e-mail me and tell me what it is - can't bring anything to mind right now. And I'm NOT gonna go look.

It's a four-letter word and it's not 'twit'. Yep, they're sexist assholes.

688 reginald perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:39:23am

re: #686 reine.de.tout

I havn't seen them beyond a third parties description.
Te word starts and ends with T an has a wa in the middle.

689 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:39:36am

re: #683 reine.de.tout

Reine, I see you as someone who has integrity towards to you are. You have your beliefs and sometimes get flack for them but you handle it with grace. You also are open to others thinking differently and think that's okay. You aren't an ideologue or a partisan in the sense that you will 'defend' no matter what. You think rather then just react from some unspoken sense of groupthink rules as to what a true "Conservative" or a true "Catholic" or true whatever should be or do.

Those people just don't know how to handle or understand people like you so they do the only thing they know how to do, attack, hate and mock because anything else would use too much brain power.

690 reine.de.tout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:40:03am

re: #688 reginald perrin

I havn't seen them beyond a third parties description.
Te word starts and ends with T an has a wa in the middle.

ah.
*sigh*
They seriously need to expand their vocabulary.

691 reginald perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:40:08am

re: #687 Sergey Romanov

It's a four-letter word and it's not 'twit'. Yep, they're sexist assholes.

I like yours better

692 reine.de.tout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:41:17am

re: #689 Jadespring

Reine, I see you as someone who has integrity towards to you are. You have your beliefs and sometimes get flack for them but you handle it with grace. You also are open to others thinking differently and think that's okay. You aren't an ideologue or a partisan in the sense that you will 'defend' no matter what. You think rather then just react from some unspoken sense of groupthink rules as to what a true "Conservative" or a true "Catholic" or true whatever should be or do.

Those people just don't know how to handle or understand people like you so they do the only thing they know how to do, attack, hate and mock because anything else would use too much brain power.

{Jadespring}
thank you.

693 reine.de.tout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:41:40am

BBL -

694 Political Atheist  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:42:07am

Honest questions from one who largely ignores the blog wars-This is the part of blogging that I understand the least.

At what point does the line between being sensibly informed and giving them too much attention here get crossed?

What if we exchanged emails enough to stay informed and made no mention of them here apart from countering their ugly & disgusting trolling forays onto this blog?

695 reginald perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:44:37am

re: #690 reine.de.tout

They're game is over, hang on the your chair, they are in complete denial.

They are now taking a stand against civility, they even had a post at the main blog that was anticivility.

No joke

Is it crazy enough or do you want more?

696 Obdicut  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:45:41am

re: #694 Rightwingconspirator

I stopped paying any attention to them after they had a post where they talked about how Putin was so much better than Obama, and literally defended genocide against Muslims.

There's no point. They're over the cliff.

697 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:47:39am

re: #684 reginald perrin

You are neglecting to mention the crude comments that used the T word to describe Reine. They were on a sexist rampage.

I consciously didn't put that in there. I don't repeat that sort of vile sexual attack, because just repeating to relay what was said makes me feel filthy. I also don't like saying such things to a lady like REine for any reason.

698 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:49:45am

re: #696 Obdicut

I stopped paying any attention to them after they had a post where they talked about how Putin was so much better than Obama, and literally defended genocide against Muslims.

There's no point. They're over the cliff.

They fell off the cliff, landed on top of the Stupid Tree, fell of that, and are presently engaged in hitting every branch on the way down.

699 Political Atheist  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:52:44am

re: #698 Dark_Falcon

Just got a twitter notice-Diary of D is following me on twitter. I'll not be returning the "favor".

700 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:54:10am

re: #699 Rightwingconspirator

Just got a twitter notice-Diary of D is following me on twitter. I'll not be returning the "favor".

Block those assholes. Twitter is one place you can keep them from Stalking you.

701 reginald perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:57:08am

re: #694 Rightwingconspirator

Seriously, they ran out of moves.
They have been neutered.

There never was a blog war anywhere outside of their heads.

Fortunately the trolls are not even an issue, they are reduced to being good comedy material that is soaked in irony.

It is the other bloggers who are the problem, they are the ones waging this imaginary war.
There are some pretty big names there, why the silence about my unbelievable claims. Why no mockery and denial ?

This isn't the first time around but this time it is going to stick.

702 ClaudeMonet  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:58:23am

re: #607 Obdicut

Right, Mitch Daniels, the genius who said that we should raise the retirement age because younger people today are going to live to be 100 because they'll be replacing body parts like we replace tires.

That guy is too smart to be president.

Compared to Palin, Huckabee, Bachmann, and Pawlenty, yes, he's too smart. Compared to Gingrich, a brilliant but warped individual, no, he's not.

An Indiana resident I know calls him "the Republican Dukakis". I don't know if that's accurate, but it's not a compliment.

703 Political Atheist  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 7:59:05am

re: #700 Dark_Falcon

Oh yes. But how do you block someone from following? I do not see a button for that. Sorry, I never took twitter seriously.

704 darthstar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:00:56am

re: #699 Rightwingconspirator

Just got a twitter notice-Diary of D is following me on twitter. I'll not be returning the "favor".

Just send a daily tweet about how Diary of D is possibly a sexual stalker and add #tcot.

705 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:01:02am

re: #698 Dark_Falcon

They fell off the cliff, landed on top of the Stupid Tree, fell of that, and are presently engaged in hitting every branch on the way down.

It is some what fascinating from a psychological viewpoint. I've taken some peeks to see what's up and all I really see is a bunch of people fixating on something that for whatever reason seems like 'the most important thing in the whole damn world' and supposedly everyone else is supposed to think likewise due to the reams of evidence presented. It difficult to try to understand what drives people like that because for someone looking in it just looks like some sort of overblown junvenile obession like the things that happen in the bubble world of high school where everything seems like THE MOST OUTRAGESES thing evah! So and so said a bad thing to me. I lurvs him so much and I think I'm going to die!!! My life is over. Black pits of utter despair.....
Like the blog version of "Mean Girls" in action.

I dunno most people grow out of that OMG stage, grow up and mature and end up looking back on the OMG stage of their lives with embarassment and quite a bit of humor. I sure do, when I need a laugh I'll just pull out my teen thought journal. I think I actually have a poem in it about a 'black pit of despair'. LOL

706 reine.de.tout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:02:06am

re: #699 Rightwingconspirator

Just got a twitter notice-Diary of D is following me on twitter. I'll not be returning the "favor".

Same thing here.
I actually prefer to know what they're tweeting, so I won't be blocking.

707 reginald perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:02:22am

re: #704 darthstar

It isn't sexual

708 reine.de.tout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:05:03am

re: #703 Rightwingconspirator

Oh yes. But how do you block someone from following? I do not see a button for that. Sorry, I never took twitter seriously.

Click their twitter name - then there will be a line that says "Follow", and on that line there are some other symbols. Click the drop-down arrow on the last one in the line, and there is an option to "block".

709 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:05:55am

re: #708 reine.de.tout

Click their twitter name - then there will be a line that says "Follow", and on that line there are some other symbols. Click the drop-down arrow on the last one in the line, and there is an option to "block".

This expertise from the lady that can't even send me a simple e-mail!!!

///

710 reine.de.tout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:07:13am

re: #709 sattv4u2

This expertise from the lady that can't even send me a simple e-mail!!!

///

hehehe.

Curious Lurker figured out what's happening.

Apparently, in the header of my e-mail, there is an IP address that your email is "reading" as virus-infected or something, and the filter isn't letting my e-mails through.

I need to contact my ISP.

711 Political Atheist  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:07:25am

re: #708 reine.de.tout

Done and thank you very much.

712 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:08:25am

re: #710 reine.de.tout

hehehe.

Curious Lurker figured out what's happening.

Apparently, in the header of my e-mail, there is an IP address that your email is "reading" as virus-infected or something, and the filter isn't letting my e-mails through.

I need to contact my ISP.


So , all this was an elaborate ruse for you to infect my companies e-mail servers!!!
/

713 albusteve  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:10:27am

for the record I have never dismissed the seriousness of the stalker phenomenon with regard to Charles and their selected targets for harassment, and I have the highest regard for Charles and LGF in spite of the timeouts I received....they were warranted and I didn't complain, and yes one timeout was for what Charles considered trolling...so be it

what I have objected to since the infamous Irish Rose Hit List is an overt war with the stalkers here at LGF simply because I believe that it's precisely what the stalkers want and once in, it's impossible to extract out of it...but it's a matter of degrees and that was then, it's gotten worse all the way around from what I gather...I have yet to visit their site and do not know their names, and have no dog in that fight and neither do the vast majority of the readers

I have never advocated that Charles ignore the stalkers, even tho I have for the commenters because there is nothing to be done accept try and bust socks etc...I find the entire thing sordid, voyeuristic and splashing the details of who's attacking who sets a pall, a bad vibe over the threads...then maybe I'm making too much of that part of it...these are just my simple opinions and I don't presume that they carry any weight of value...I'm not part of a larger conspiracy, and I'm trying not to influence anybody else's behavior....it's too bad this is all happening but I fail to see where fighting with them in public has any merit

714 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:10:52am

I thougt someone posted here yesterday that Ron Paul won the NH Straw Poll??

[Link: blogs.abcnews.com...]

ABC has Romney (35%) with Paul a very distand 2nd (11%)

The 24 Hour Rule RULES!!!

715 darthstar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:10:56am

re: #707 reginald perrin

It isn't sexual

You have to wonder if maybe Diary of Daedalus's parents ever let him play outside with other kids when he was growing up. This virtual stalking thing is really kind of creepy. By the way, I found myself highlighted on his blog once - had to laugh. He must have scored in the low 300s on his SATs because his reading comprehension skills are about the shittiest I've seen.

716 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:11:41am

I'm going to have to breakdown and get a twitter account. Need it for business. Though I expect my twitters will be quite dull to any not interested.

"Baby lettuce is ready to harvest! " " At XXX market today with potatoes and arugula". "Rabbits got into the chard last night" "Check out this article about preserving beans..."

717 reine.de.tout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:12:04am

re: #712 sattv4u2

So , all this was an elaborate ruse for you to infect my companies e-mail servers!!!
/

Yes.
I'm just that evil
Just check the other place, they'll tell you.

718 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:12:35am

re: #714 sattv4u2

I think somebody yesterday said just that, that Paul came in second.

719 Political Atheist  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:12:36am

re: #717 reine.de.tout

LOL!

720 darthstar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:13:11am

re: #716 Jadespring

I'm going to have to breakdown and get a twitter account. Need it for business. Though I expect my twitters will be quite dull to any not interested.

"Baby lettuce is ready to harvest! " " At XXX market today with potatoes and arugula". "Rabbits got into the chard last night" "Check out this article about preserving beans..."

Now that's the kind of twitter feed that could make me actually use my twitter account.

721 reine.de.tout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:13:44am

re: #713 albusteve

for the record I have never dismissed the seriousness of the stalker phenomenon with regard to Charles and their selected targets for harassment, and I have the highest regard for Charles and LGF in spite of the timeouts I received...they were warranted and I didn't complain, and yes one timeout was for what Charles considered trolling...so be it

what I have objected to since the infamous Irish Rose Hit List is an overt war with the stalkers here at LGF simply because I believe that it's precisely what the stalkers want and once in, it's impossible to extract out of it...but it's a matter of degrees and that was then, it's gotten worse all the way around from what I gather...I have yet to visit their site and do not know their names, and have no dog in that fight and neither do the vast majority of the readers

I have never advocated that Charles ignore the stalkers, even tho I have for the commenters because there is nothing to be done accept try and bust socks etc...I find the entire thing sordid, voyeuristic and splashing the details of who's attacking who sets a pall, a bad vibe over the threads...then maybe I'm making too much of that part of it...these are just my simple opinions and I don't presume that they carry any weight of value...I'm not part of a larger conspiracy, and I'm trying not to influence anybody else's behavior...it's too bad this is all happening but I fail to see where fighting with them in public has any merit

Upding. I know you pay no attention to them, so I thought I'd let you know.
But really - don't go calling people poodles.

722 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:14:22am

re: #705 Jadespring

It is some what fascinating from a psychological viewpoint. I've taken some peeks to see what's up and all I really see is a bunch of people fixating on something that for whatever reason seems like 'the most important thing in the whole damn world' and supposedly everyone else is supposed to think likewise due to the reams of evidence presented. It difficult to try to understand what drives people like that because for someone looking in it just looks like some sort of overblown junvenile obession like the things that happen in the bubble world of high school where everything seems like THE MOST OUTRAGESES thing evah! So and so said a bad thing to me. I lurvs him so much and I think I'm going to die!!! My life is over. Black pits of utter despair...
Like the blog version of "Mean Girls" in action.

I dunno most people grow out of that OMG stage, grow up and mature and end up looking back on the OMG stage of their lives with embarassment and quite a bit of humor. I sure do, when I need a laugh I'll just pull out my teen thought journal. I think I actually have a poem in it about a 'black pit of despair'. LOL

The Stalker Blog as "Mean Girls" works well, since most of its admins are Lindsey Lohan-level train wrecks.

723 Killgore Trout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:14:41am

re: #716 Jadespring

I'm going to have to breakdown and get a twitter account. Need it for business. Though I expect my twitters will be quite dull to any not interested.

"Baby lettuce is ready to harvest! " " At XXX market today with potatoes and arugula". "Rabbits got into the chard last night" "Check out this article about preserving beans..."

Sounds interesting to me.

724 harlequinade  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:15:11am

re: #716 Jadespring

You'll be surprised. I never really like it until I started using it. Now it's invaluable - from childish comedy from @drunkhulk or @thebloggess to useful news items. It's brilliant.

I'm @mbhulo when you get it up and running. I talk a lot of arse, but I'll be doing some work related stuff and writing bits soon

725 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:15:48am

re: #718 Sergey Romanov

I think somebody yesterday said just that, that Paul came in second.

Thanks,,, by the time it was posted I was bleary eyed/ exhasted so I may have mis read or mis-remembered

726 albusteve  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:16:20am

re: #721 reine.de.tout

Upding. I know you pay no attention to them, so I thought I'd let you know.
But really - don't go calling people poodles.

for you, I'll consider it

727 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:17:03am

re: #714 sattv4u2

I thougt someone posted here yesterday that Ron Paul won the NH Straw Poll??

[Link: blogs.abcnews.com...]

ABC has Romney (35%) with Paul a very distand 2nd (11%)

The 24 Hour Rule RULES!!!

I posted yesterday with the blue letters RON PAUL!!! but never said he won

728 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:17:24am

re: #720 darthstar

Now that's the kind of twitter feed that could make me actually use my twitter account.

:D I've been looking into and found out that a number of small scale growers use twitter among other things to inform customers when things become available so they can come get them right away or place orders. Plus I guess some their client base just enjoys getting little tidbits of what's going on down on the farm.

729 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:18:28am

re: #727 Cannadian Club Akbar

I posted yesterday with the blue letters RON PAUL!!! but never said he won

Ah ,, then it was your fault !!
//

730 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:21:00am

re: #723 Killgore Trout

re: #724 harlequinade


Well I'll make sure to let everyone know here when I do get going with it. I have to set up a webpage/blog and likely a facebook page (shudder) as well. I don't really want to do the facebook thing but I know a lot of business like mine have them and use them a lot.

731 darthstar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:21:34am

Do the Jets play the Bears next week or the week after? Oh, and the Steelers and Packers can suck it!

732 reginald perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:21:38am

re: #713 albusteve

Answer the questions steve
--
How many days does it take to get a straight answer out of a troll?

My guess is the same amount of time it will take Eric Odom to reply to my allegations regarding Charle's stalking

733 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:23:11am

re: #731 darthstar

Do the Jets play the Bears next week or the week after? Oh, and the Steelers and Packers can suck it!

Jets and Pack on the 6th.

734 reginald perrin  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:24:16am

The trolls are steve's strawman. nobody ever said he was affiliated with the stalkers. That has nothing to do with the two questions I asked

735 darthstar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:24:45am

re: #733 Cannadian Club Akbar

Jets and Pack on the 6th.

Okay, okay...don't really give a crap about Chicago anyway...see, I can compromise!

736 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:25:12am

re: #731 darthstar

Do the Jets play the Bears next week or the week after? Oh, and the Steelers and Packers can suck it!

Feb 6th is Super Sunday

737 Killgore Trout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:26:09am

re: #730 Jadespring

re: #724 harlequinade

Well I'll make sure to let everyone know here when I do get going with it. I have to set up a webpage/blog and likely a facebook page (shudder) as well. I don't really want to do the facebook thing but I know a lot of business like mine have them and use them a lot.

What is your business? growing produce? How much land do you have?

738 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:27:19am

re: #733 Cannadian Club Akbar

Jets and Pack on the 6th.

No, that's Jets vs. Bears. The Packers are being eliminated today.

739 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:28:40am

re: #732 reginald perrin

re: #734 reginald perrin

Why don't you go check E-Bay for a new Dead Horse

The one that you're beating is all used up!!

740 ClaudeMonet  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:29:37am

re: #731 darthstar

Do the Jets play the Bears next week or the week after? Oh, and the Steelers and Packers can suck it!

I'm a Steeler fan, and I make no assumptions. My team has won six Super Bowls--but has also lost a lot of AFC championship games.

Jets-Bears seems to have some traction with the media "experts", probably the same ones who last August were telling us it was a no-doubter that the SB would be New England vs. Dallas.

741 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:30:13am

re: #737 Killgore Trout

What is your business? growing produce? How much land do you have?

Did you have that crab last night?

Kepp the shells and make a stock??

742 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:31:01am

re: #737 Killgore Trout

re: #741 sattv4u2

Did you have that crab last night?

Keepp the shells and make a stock??

damn thumbs

743 Decatur Deb  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:31:35am

re: #714 sattv4u2

I thougt someone posted here yesterday that Ron Paul won the NH Straw Poll??

[Link: blogs.abcnews.com...]

ABC has Romney (35%) with Paul a very distand 2nd (11%)

The 24 Hour Rule RULES!!!

Let me 'splain Libertarian Math to you....

744 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:34:21am

re: #740 ClaudeMonet

I'm a Steeler fan, and I make no assumptions. My team has won six Super Bowls--but has also lost a lot of AFC championship games.

Jets-Bears seems to have some traction with the media "experts", probably the same ones who last August were telling us it was a no-doubter that the SB would be New England vs. Dallas.

WWhhhhaaaa


They (the Patriots) now owe us (their fans) TWO Championships

This years ,, plus losing to the Giants in the last minutes from a couple of years ago

745 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:34:23am

CCA is selling a TV. More beer money for football today. Yippee!!!!

746 Killgore Trout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:35:44am

re: #741 sattv4u2

Did you have that crab last night?

Kepp the shells and make a stock??

Nah, I was too lazy and thought of spending the afternoon picking crab meat made me think twice, I had some leftover crayfish out of the freezer. I'm anxious to try my new jumbo sized steamer. Maybe later this week.

747 albusteve  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:36:04am

re: #736 sattv4u2

Feb 6th is Super Sunday

but today is the biggest day in the NFL...probably the best football as well

748 albusteve  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:36:55am

re: #738 Dark_Falcon

No, that's Jets vs. Bears. The Packers are being eliminated today.

wrong...I'll sent you flowers

749 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:37:31am

re: #747 albusteve

but today is the biggest day in the NFL...probably the best football as well

Agreed. 2 great games in the cold. Sucks to be them. BTW, we'll hit about 68 today. And I know you'll be warm!!

750 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:37:53am

re: #747 albusteve

but today is the biggest day in the NFL...probably the best football as well

Yes ,, "Championship Sunday" is always great viewing

Less than half the pre-game hype shows ,,, Halftime is "normal" length,,, two games with no long break between

751 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:40:31am

All righty, gotta run. Nice seeing ya'll again. See ya in a week or so.:)

752 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:41:11am

re: #737 Killgore Trout

What is your business? growing produce? How much land do you have?

Yep it's growing. I've been testing things out for a couple of years to figure out exactly what I will focus on. Finally got a good plan together. I'm going to be growing some specific things for a couple of restaurants as well as focusing on fresh herbs and greens. No one in my area is doing this in a big way yet. Another thing I'll be doing is working with a few restaurants as well as other growers to develop a distribution business. Again there is no one in the surrounding counties doing this yet with a focus on local fresh food and I've gotten from all the market research that it is something that is really needed. Never done anything like that so I plan to start small while I figure it all out. Luckily I've got support from other growers as well as retailers for the learning period while the kinks get worked out.

I have about 1.3 acres which will be put into production. Small but a good size to start with. If and when it's time to expand I already have other people whose land I can use. Long-term I may end up with a way larger 'farm' but it won't be all in one place.

753 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:41:23am

re: #748 albusteve

wrong...I'll sent you flowers

I don't need flowers. And the Bears are going to win.

754 Political Atheist  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:42:09am

re: #752 Jadespring

That sounds like a nice biz to have.

755 albusteve  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:43:38am

re: #750 sattv4u2

Yes ,, "Championship Sunday" is always great viewing

Less than half the pre-game hype shows ,,, Halftime is "normal" length,,, two games with no long break between

all that stuff...
and on that note, I gotta scoot

756 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:44:58am

re: #754 Rightwingconspirator

That sounds like a nice biz to have.

Well I'm hoping it will be. Still at the ground level though. Lots of work.

The demand for is there though which is what matters. If my stuff is good I won't have a problem selling it around here.

757 BongCrodny  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:46:16am

re: #744 sattv4u2

WWhhhaaa

They (the Patriots) now owe us (their fans) TWO Championships

This years ,, plus losing to the Giants in the last minutes from a couple of years ago


I'm a Pats fan, but there was some karma in their Super Bowl loss to the Giants.

This is an organization that actually tried to trademark the phrase "19-0."

Before the Super Bowl.

The Gods of Football were watching, and they were not pleased.

758 harlequinade  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:47:34am

re: #752 Jadespring

Good luck! That sounds amazing. I can't wait to watch this (socially) grow.

759 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:47:59am

Okay. I did it. I set up a twitter account. Now I just have to figure out how it works.

760 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:48:39am

re: #759 Jadespring

@odonatafen if anyone is interested

761 McSpiff  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:49:51am

re: #713 albusteve

I feel like Steve just broke the fourth wall on us or something. Very well put.

762 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:50:50am

re: #761 McSpiff

I feel like Steve just broke the fourth wall on us or something. Very well put.

Yet ,,,one poster deemed it downdingable!!!!

763 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:50:59am

re: #758 harlequinade

Good luck! That sounds amazing. I can't wait to watch this (socially) grow.

:D I just followed you.

764 McSpiff  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:53:02am

re: #762 sattv4u2

Yet ,,,one poster deemed it downdingable!!!

I noticed that. Very odd.

765 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:54:42am

re: #764 McSpiff

I noticed that. Very odd.

ADS

(abusteve derangement syndrome)

766 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:54:43am

re: #761 McSpiff

I feel like Steve just broke the fourth wall on us or something. Very well put.

That's what happens when they begin to write complete paragraphs instead of curt sentences! ;)

767 harlequinade  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:54:59am

re: #763 Jadespring

And I returned the favour :)

768 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:56:51am

re: #760 Jadespring

@odonatafen if anyone is interested

Not finding you.

769 Killgore Trout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 8:57:08am

re: #752 Jadespring

Yep it's growing. I've been testing things out for a couple of years to figure out exactly what I will focus on. Finally got a good plan together. I'm going to be growing some specific things for a couple of restaurants as well as focusing on fresh herbs and greens. No one in my area is doing this in a big way yet. Another thing I'll be doing is working with a few restaurants as well as other growers to develop a distribution business. Again there is no one in the surrounding counties doing this yet with a focus on local fresh food and I've gotten from all the market research that it is something that is really needed. Never done anything like that so I plan to start small while I figure it all out. Luckily I've got support from other growers as well as retailers for the learning period while the kinks get worked out.

I have about 1.3 acres which will be put into production. Small but a good size to start with. If and when it's time to expand I already have other people whose land I can use. Long-term I may end up with a way larger 'farm' but it won't be all in one place.

That sounds very cool. I'm looking forward to seeing how your project progresses.

770 Killgore Trout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:00:15am

Tree cat

771 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:04:00am

re: #770 Killgore Trout

Tree cat

[Video]

Nice little vid, thanks.

772 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:13:09am

Morning all!

How goes it? --it's still very cold where I am. Wearing 3-layers, more if I go outside.

773 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:15:46am

re: #772 ggt

Morning all!

How goes it? --it's still very cold where I am. Wearing 3-layers, more if I go outside.

Not so bad here, but I'm in a busier area closer to the lake. But it's still very cold. Worse is that I have a scratchy throat and won't be able to go to my friend's apartment (not my best friend, but another friend I've come to know through him) to watch the game.

774 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:15:59am

re: #768 Dark_Falcon

Not finding you.

Maybe because I hadn't confirmed my account until a couple of minutes ago?

Try looking up Odonata Farms. That's the name I'm using.

775 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:19:33am

re: #773 Dark_Falcon

Not so bad here, but I'm in a busier area closer to the lake. But it's still very cold. Worse is that I have a scratchy throat and won't be able to go to my friend's apartment (not my best friend, but another friend I've come to know through him) to watch the game.

Oh, DF! Lots of people with upper respiratory problems right now. I strongly suggest the Neti Pot or at least saline spray.

feel better.

776 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:19:59am

re: #774 Jadespring

Maybe because I hadn't confirmed my account until a couple of minutes ago?

Try looking up Odonata Farms. That's the name I'm using.

Still can't find you. Trying sending a tweet to Dark_Falcon7. That's me.

777 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:20:15am

No twitter for me. One new technology a year is all I can handle.

778 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:21:25am

re: #777 ggt

No twitter for me. One new technology a year is all I can handle.

You getting an 8 Track player next year?

I got a Transistor Radio for Christmas !!!

//

779 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:21:32am

re: #775 ggt

Oh, DF! Lots of people with upper respiratory problems right now. I strongly suggest the Neti Pot or at least saline spray.

feel better.

It's not my lungs or nose, just my throat. The funny part is I got my flu shot yesterday, then got sick from something that flu shots don't protect against. They do nothing to deal with the bacteria that cause sore throats.

780 reine.de.tout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:23:59am

re: #726 albusteve

for you, I'll consider it

{steve}

781 McSpiff  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:24:13am

re: #779 Dark_Falcon

It's not my lungs or nose, just my throat. The funny part is I got my flu shot yesterday, then got sick from something that flu shots don't protect against. They do nothing to deal with the bacteria that cause sore throats.

That is me on twitter D_F.

782 reine.de.tout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:24:34am

re: #779 Dark_Falcon

It's not my lungs or nose, just my throat. The funny part is I got my flu shot yesterday, then got sick from something that flu shots don't protect against. They do nothing to deal with the bacteria that cause sore throats.

Neti Pot, as ggt suggested.
Use daily.
You don't need their "solution". Just 1/2 tsp salt in some warm water.

783 reine.de.tout  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:25:16am

re: #768 Dark_Falcon

Not finding you.

Sometimes it takes awhile, maybe a whole day before new sign-ups show up in search.

784 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:25:22am

re: #776 Dark_Falcon

Still can't find you. Trying sending a tweet to Dark_Falcon7. That's me.

Just followed you.

785 A Man for all Seasons  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:25:54am

re: #779 Dark_Falcon

It's not my lungs or nose, just my throat. The funny part is I got my flu shot yesterday, then got sick from something that flu shots don't protect against. They do nothing to deal with the bacteria that cause sore throats.

Try Whisky..It won't cure anything..but you won't know you are sick!
BTW..Since my Daughter is a huge Bears fan I'm rooting for them today..Good luck

786 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:26:27am

re: #781 McSpiff

That is me on twitter D_F.

re: #784 Jadespring

Just followed you.

Found you both, thanks. Am following you as well.

787 McSpiff  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:27:59am

And if CuriousLurker is around, that was me as well...

788 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:28:05am

re: #785 HoosierHoops

Try Whisky..It won't cure anything..but you won't know you are sick!
BTW..Since my Daughter is a huge Bears fan I'm rooting for them today..Good luck

I don't drink, but thanks Hoops.

789 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:28:11am

You kids with your fancy shmancey tweeters and bloggees and stuff

GET OFF MY LAWN

AND TURN DOWN THAT MUSIC

790 A Man for all Seasons  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:28:57am

re: #788 Dark_Falcon

I don't drink, but thanks Hoops.

I guess my jokes aren't very funny..Get well

791 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:29:47am

re: #478 Sergey Romanov

Also yes in a normal sense. Democracy is a majority rule. The majority elected Gore. And what problem? There's simply no good reason for EC.

We are not a democracy. We are a representative republic.

792 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:30:01am

re: #790 HoosierHoops

I guess my jokes aren't very funny..Get well

It was funny, but LOLing hurts right now.

793 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:30:14am

re: #779 Dark_Falcon

It's not my lungs or nose, just my throat. The funny part is I got my flu shot yesterday, then got sick from something that flu shots don't protect against. They do nothing to deal with the bacteria that cause sore throats.

NETI POT does.

794 McSpiff  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:30:37am

D'oh, thought I already had you Reine! Following now as well. Je m'excuse!

795 ClaudeMonet  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:32:21am

re: #744 sattv4u2

WWhhhaaa

They (the Patriots) now owe us (their fans) TWO Championships

This years ,, plus losing to the Giants in the last minutes from a couple of years ago

Any team that has won even one championship owes its fans nothing more than an honest effort. The problem is that many franchises don't make an honest effort. The Patriots certainly make the effort.

I loathe the Patriots, always have. Ironically, I rooted for them against the Giants, only because if they won, we wouldn't have to listen to the BS from the '72 Dolphins anymore. It would have been welcome relief, similar to the end of "The Curse of the Bambino" crud after the Red Sox won it all in 2004.

If I were a Pats fan and honest about my team, I wouldn't be all upset about the season. While the experts picked the Pats because they're lazy and always pick them, I didn't think they'd be all that great. They proved me wrong and looked unstoppable--then picked the exact wrong time to lay an egg.

But that's OK, the "experts" will pick them to win it all again next year and will continue to cultivate the image of St. Brady The Unbeatable, despite the fact that this will be the sixth year in a row that the Pats haven't won it all.

What I'm looking for this afternoon/tonight--One game will be rock 'em-sock 'em as predicted, the other won't be nearly as close. I have no predictions except that (a) it'll be cold, (b) the announcers will talk too much, (c) their announcements will all sound as canned and pre-packaged as they are, and (d) whoever wins, all the experts will announce that everything turned out as they predicted, whether they predicted it or not.

Then comes almost two weeks of bullshit before they actually play the big game.

796 Jadespring  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:32:56am

re: #794 McSpiff

D'oh, thought I already had you Reine! Following now as well. Je m'excuse!

I think I just followed you.

797 McSpiff  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:34:06am

re: #796 Jadespring

I think I just followed you.

I believe you did. I reciprocated.

798 ClaudeMonet  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:35:14am

re: #779 Dark_Falcon

It's not my lungs or nose, just my throat. The funny part is I got my flu shot yesterday, then got sick from something that flu shots don't protect against. They do nothing to deal with the bacteria that cause sore throats.

Take care of yourself, remember to eat and drink no matter how much it hurts to do it, and enjoy the games on TV.

799 A Man for all Seasons  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:35:29am

re: #796 Jadespring

I think I just followed you.

Good song title

800 sattv4u2  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:37:08am

re: #795 ClaudeMonet

I honestly didn't think they (the Pats) would be that good this year

I figured they could score 30 points a game, but with their questions on defense going into the year I thought they'd give up 35 a game

801 jaunte  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:38:12am

re: #799 HoosierHoops

I Tweet, Ipod, I Hulu,
But I don't know what to do
When technology gets ahead of me,
I think I just followed you...

802 ClaudeMonet  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:39:27am

re: #800 sattv4u2

I honestly didn't think they (the Pats) would be that good this year

I figured they could score 30 points a game, but with their questions on defense going into the year I thought they'd give up 35 a game

Well, even if they had done that, it wouldn't have been boring. Aggravating, but not boring.

803 Holidays are Family Fun Time  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:39:48am

re: #801 jaunte

"I think I just followed you..."

New song title or rotating title. I'm thinking about the Partridge Family for the song . . .

gotta go,

have a great day all!

804 A Man for all Seasons  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:41:19am

re: #801 jaunte

I Tweet, Ipod, I Hulu,
But I don't know what to do
When technology gets ahead of me,
I think I just followed you...

a social network leaves me in the fog
so I thought I'd just blog
It's all I know how to do
I think I just followed you

805 ClaudeMonet  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:41:26am

re: #801 jaunte

I Tweet, Ipod, I Hulu,
But I don't know what to do
When technology gets ahead of me,
I think I just followed you...

I don't tweet, I don't have an iPod, I don't use Facebook.

Hell, I can't even figure out how to get my name to go blue so someone can e-mail me if they'd like. Help! :-)

806 Obdicut  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:44:55am

re: #791 ggt

We are not a democracy. We are a representative republic.

We're both, actually. They're not opposed terms. When we talk about spreading democracy, we mean our form of government.

807 Talking Point Detective  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:50:57am

re: #597 alexknyc

It's my understanding that the Court said the FL Supremes change of the legislature's deadline had violated Article II, Section i which says, in part, "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct..."

I'm not sure how States Rights arguments enter against the ruling as I understand it.

You had a group of conservative judges, who typically advocate for states' rights and for "judicial restraint," who ruled on a states election contest and essentially shut it down.

You also had a group of liberal judges, who typically look more favorably at the federal court ruling on states' rights issues, advocating for states' rights in that case..

Please note that the case has never been cited as precedent, and the conservative judges specifically stated that they didn't want the ruling to serve as precedent on states' rights issues.

Why do you suppose that was? Perhaps, because the ruling was contradictory to how they typically rule, and intend to rule in the future, on states' rights issues?

808 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:51:07am

This came out in the New York Times on Friday. I didn't know that Frances Fox Piven was still alive. She is, though, and some of Glenn Beck's followers are making threats:

Spotlight From Glenn Beck Brings a CUNY Professor Threats

On his daily radio and television shows, Glenn Beck has elevated once-obscure conservative thinkers onto best-seller lists. Recently, he has elevated a 78-year-old liberal academic to celebrity of a different sort, in a way that some say is endangering her life.

Frances Fox Piven, a City University of New York professor, has been a primary character in Mr. Beck’s warnings about a progressive take-down of America. Ms. Piven, Mr. Beck says, is responsible for a plan to “intentionally collapse our economic system.”

Her name has become a kind of shorthand for “enemy” on Mr. Beck’s Fox News Channel program, which is watched by more than 2 million people, and on one of his Web sites, The Blaze. This week, Mr. Beck suggested on television that she was an enemy of the Constitution.

Never mind that Ms. Piven’s radical plan to help poor people was published 45 years ago, when Mr. Beck was a toddler. Anonymous visitors to his Web site have called for her death, and some, she said, have contacted her directly via e-mail.

In response, a liberal nonprofit group, the Center for Constitutional Rights, wrote to the chairman of Fox News, Roger Ailes, on Thursday to ask him to put a stop to Mr. Beck’s “false accusations” about Ms. Piven.

“Mr. Beck is putting Professor Piven in actual physical danger of a violent response,” the group wrote.

Fox News disagrees. Joel Cheatwood, a senior vice president, said Friday that Mr. Beck would not be ordered to stop talking about Ms. Piven on television. He said Mr. Beck had quoted her accurately and had never threatened her.

SNIP

The Nation, which has featured Ms. Piven’s columns for decades, quoted some of the threats against her in an editorial this week that condemned the “concerted campaign” against her.

One such threat, published as an anonymous comment on The Blaze, read, “Somebody tell Frances I have 5000 roundas ready and I’ll give My life to take Our freedom back.” (The spelling and capitalizing have not been changed.)

I despise Piven's politics, but I despise political violence even more. Fox News needs to require Glenn Beck to devote at least 10 minutes of one of his shows to explaining why violence and death threats are wrong and unacceptable. Because otherwise someone's going to get hurt or killed.

809 jaunte  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:59:04am

re: #808 Dark_Falcon

It's just bizarre that Beck has resurrected an unworkable mid-1960's idea from an obscure professor and turned it into enough of a perceived threat that unstable people are beginning to freak out.

810 ClaudeMonet  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 9:59:58am

re: #808 Dark_Falcon

This came out in the New York Times on Friday. I didn't know that Frances Fox Piven was still alive. She is, though, and some of Glenn Beck's followers are making threats:

Spotlight From Glenn Beck Brings a CUNY Professor Threats

SNIP

I despise Piven's politics, but I despise political violence even more. Fox News needs to require Glenn Beck to devote at least 10 minutes of one of his shows to explaining why violence and death threats are wrong and unacceptable. Because otherwise someone's going to get hurt or killed.

Beck's rants are such a snarled bunch of half-truths, untruths, flat-out lies, inversions, distortions, logical fallacies, and just plain idiocy that any attempt at doing what you advocate, even if sincere, will be misinterpreted. Ms. Piven's future would be served best if Beck never mentions her again.

There's some irony here. Had Ms. Piven passed on before Beck started mentioning her, there would have been little attention paid outside of liberal academic circles perhaps. If anything happens to her now, it will be a cause celebre even if it's natural causes (she is 78, after all).

In the meantime, so long as it upsets Glenn Beck so much, I hope that Ms. Piven lives an even longer and happy, healthy life.

811 Obdicut  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 10:01:05am

re: #808 Dark_Falcon

Taking the time to explain why violence is wrong isn't good enough. He needs to stop the demonization and the apocalyptic rhetoric.

812 ClaudeMonet  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 10:01:21am

re: #809 jaunte

It's just bizarre that Beck has resurrected an unworkable mid-1960's idea from an obscure professor and turned it into enough of a perceived threat that unstable people are beginning to freak out.

It's no more bizarre than the rest of his crap.

813 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 10:04:53am

re: #810 ClaudeMonet

Beck's rants are such a snarled bunch of half-truths, untruths, flat-out lies, inversions, distortions, logical fallacies, and just plain idiocy that any attempt at doing what you advocate, even if sincere, will be misinterpreted. Ms. Piven's future would be served best if Beck never mentions her again.

There's some irony here. Had Ms. Piven passed on before Beck started mentioning her, there would have been little attention paid outside of liberal academic circles perhaps. If anything happens to her now, it will be a cause celebre even if it's natural causes (she is 78, after all).

In the meantime, so long as it upsets Glenn Beck so much, I hope that Ms. Piven lives an even longer and happy, healthy life.

I wish her health as well as happiness in things outside politics. She is still political, and her recent column calling for mass protests is fair game. But to attack the way he does, without any counterbalance or any reminder of why political violence is wrong, is grossly irresponsible.

814 Talking Point Detective  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 10:08:15am

re: #807 Talking Point Detective

By the way, the libs and cons on the SCOTUS also reversed positions with respect to their patterns of rulings on Equal Potection rights.

815 TedStriker  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 10:20:19am

re: #528 Reginald Perrin

That was a bit uncalled for...Walter wasn't even talking about the thread, just relaying stuff about his trip and such, and you drag him into your ongoing feud with Steve.

I don't particularly care if you hate Steve and Walter's guts and vice versa, but you are acting low rent and low class.

816 TedStriker  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 10:32:54am

re: #715 darthstar

You have to wonder if maybe Diary of Daedalus's parents ever let him play outside with other kids when he was growing up. This virtual stalking thing is really kind of creepy. By the way, I found myself highlighted on his blog once - had to laugh. He must have scored in the low 300s on his SATs because his reading comprehension skills are about the shittiest I've seen.

I wonder if he (and the other stalkers) ate lead paint chips as children...

/

817 alexknyc  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 10:34:13am

re: #807 Talking Point Detective

You had a group of conservative judges, who typically advocate for states' rights and for "judicial restraint," who ruled on a states election contest and essentially shut it down.

You also had a group of liberal judges, who typically look more favorably at the federal court ruling on states' rights issues, advocating for states' rights in that case..

Please note that the case has never been cited as precedent, and the conservative judges specifically stated that they didn't want the ruling to serve as precedent on states' rights issues.

Why do you suppose that was? Perhaps, because the ruling was contradictory to how they typically rule, and intend to rule in the future, on states' rights issues?

By my reading of Article II, Section I, the 5-4 SCOTUS decision regarding FL Supreme Court overstepping its constitutional authority was correct. I understand SCOTUS is usually loath to rule on state election law but in this case, they were not ruling on legislation but on the changing of legislation by the bench, in violation of Article II, Section I.

I understand only three of the five justices in the majority used Article II as a basis, and two others (plus the four dissenters) ignored it. I think that perfectly illustrates your original point-- that partisanship affects both the right and the left on the court (and elsewhere).

The Equal Protection issue is another kettle of fish but I find both arguments to have merit. SCOTUS apparently disagreed, as that was the 7-2 decision.

818 TedStriker  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 10:34:56am

re: #732 reginald perrin

Lay the fuck off, OK? You've made whatever point you were trying to make, just let it go...

819 Talking Point Detective  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 11:15:37am

re: #817 alexknyc

By my reading of Article II, Section I, the 5-4 SCOTUS decision regarding FL Supreme Court overstepping its constitutional authority was correct. I understand SCOTUS is usually loath to rule on state election law but in this case, they were not ruling on legislation but on the changing of legislation by the bench, in violation of Article II, Section I.

I understand only three of the five justices in the majority used Article II as a basis, and two others (plus the four dissenters) ignored it. I think that perfectly illustrates your original point-- that partisanship affects both the right and the left on the court (and elsewhere).

The Equal Protection issue is another kettle of fish but I find both arguments to have merit. SCOTUS apparently disagreed, as that was the 7-2 decision.

I'm not necessarily questioning the ruling - or your opinion - with respect to states' rights; I respect that there are valid arguments on both sides of the issue (I have to if I'm going to be consistent as I generally fall on the fed side of the fed versus states' rights side of debates).

And I think you get where I'm coming from, but again, the cons quickly and aggressively reexamined state law to reverse a state supreme court decision, and ironically, in the process used as Warren Court era precedent developed in civil rights cases. That is not what they typically do, and I don't think the context was irrelevant to their atypical reasoning (and the same would apply to the libs).

820 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 11:19:22am

re: #791 ggt

We are not a democracy.

LOL, yes you are.

821 ryannon  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 11:44:36am

re: #402 Reginald Perrin

Charles I need a small favour, could you go on the record that we have not conversed offline in more than a year? And that includes messages sent through third parties. It might piss off our little stalker to learn that you had nothing to do with his dilemma.

Btw, I rigged the election for Space Jesus and did it the old fashioned American way, I bought votes. I believe he won by 750 votes with somewhere around 80 %of the vote. Low tech, four clicks to a vote and ten cents a vote.
A neighbour is in need of little extra income after being laid off, so I gave her a way to make some needed money at her leisure. The votes would appear at the rate of six a minute and continue steadily until she got bored.
It took about two minutes to find a way around the one vote per day rule. I am no computer genius, the was wide open, I just walked through.
The morons forgot to lock the door.
I used their favorite toy, a proxy. They allowed vistors using a proxy server to vote, real dumb move.
You're going to love the irony, Martinez claims to be in charge of IT at a Tampa Bank
Rick Martinez never ever doesn't fail.

I thought it was bad form to 'out' people's names and identities on the Net - not to mention LGF?

822 buzzflash  Sun, Jan 23, 2011 5:19:55pm

Are Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas the Bonnie and Clyde of Judicial Ethics? "Citizens Robbed" [Link: blog.buzzflash.com...]


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ...
Cheechako
4 days ago
Views: 130 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 294 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1