Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
ZooeyModeratorLet the offseason begin.
Thought they might try to restructure Chris Long –
They could still do that. Bring him back for less.
That’s what I expected, but that statement sounded pretty final.
“We will always be grateful for James and Chris’ unselfish commitment to the Rams and wish them the best moving forward.”
ZooeyModeratorWell…there WERE communists. I don’t know about ties to the USSR, but many of the people called out as communists were actually communists. Abraham Polonsky is one, for example. He wrote “Guilty by Suspicion,” a film with Robert DeNiro, that I kinda liked though it didn’t get great reviews. I show it to my classes whenever I teach The Crucible which isn’t very often. But, anyway, Polonsky had his name pulled from the credits because Irwin Winkler changed the main character from an actual communist to someone falsely accused, and Polonsky said he thought Hollywood had enough of the “falsely accused” stories, and wanted to tell it like it was. So he pulled his name from the credits.
Point is. Being a communist was not, and is not, against the law, nor is it unpatriotic.
So. The McCarthyite fears were not without foundation.
He had no right to pursue those fears the way he did, and he and his crew undoubtedly ruined a lot of lives of totally innocent people. But. Some of those totally innocent people actually were communists.
ZooeyModeratorThe Rams horns are the only man-made object visible from outer space.
February 18, 2016 at 7:47 pm in reply to: UC Irvine for Rams training camp? or (update) Cal Lutheran? #39240ZooeyModeratorThose two places are about 14 hours apart. They have got to make a decision soon. Man, if I was a Ram, I would be looking for a rental for the first year. Let everything settle down, and get to know the different areas before buying.
February 18, 2016 at 12:56 am in reply to: Scalia's Trip Was Gift from a "Friend" Who Had Business w/ the SC Last Year #39199ZooeyModeratorThey declined to hear the case. It’s in the story, silly…
Oh.
You know, I read the story, then went away for several hours before returning and responding.
You’re thumb is on fire, btw.
February 17, 2016 at 7:51 pm in reply to: Scalia's Trip Was Gift from a "Friend" Who Had Business w/ the SC Last Year #39174ZooeyModeratorMaybe it’s just me.
But I find THIS a lot more disturbing than the lack of autopsy.
The trip, the Washington Post reports, was a gift from the ranch’s owner, who just last year obtained a favorable result from the Supreme Court.
Wonder which way Scalia voted on that decision.
ZooeyModeratorI think Obama is probably plotting to nominate a Muslim judge who wants to rule America with Sharia law.
All that would do is consolidate the already existing conservative bloc on the SC, and give the conservatives a 5-4 majority.
Right?
..
Ironic, isn’t it?
ZooeyModeratorI think Obama is probably plotting to nominate a Muslim judge who wants to rule America with Sharia law. That’s what I think. You know why?
Because nobody has come out and explicitly denied that. Makes you wonder, doesn’t it? Think about it. If he wasn’t going to appoint a Muslin, he would have said so, right?
I have a case, don’t I?
ZooeyModeratorThere isn’t a law requiring autopsies because SC justices’ deaths have never been questioned before. We don’t make laws, typically, in anticipation of something that might happen. We make laws to address issues we already experience.
And Scalia’s death would not be an issue at all if it weren’t for a few circumstances. First, it’s Scalia. Secondly, he didn’t die in the hospital. And, most importantly, the narrative many people in this country are living is one in which democrats – particularly the Clintons and Obama – are basically demons with no scruples. It goes hand-in-hand with the same narrative that has led us to Donald Trump as a serious presidential candidate. The relentless right wing media assaults on these people have created a subculture that EXPECTS democrats to perform illegal and even “evil” deeds. That suspicion has been seeded continuously for the past 30 years.
It’s really no surprise that they would suspect foul play.
ZooeyModeratorThere is reason. Because of the office he held and the 180 degree effect upon likely upcoming 5-4 decisions before the court his Obama nominated replacement will cause. That is called motive.
But it isn’t the sheriff’s job to do all that political calculating, and especially not to worry about the implications to the court decisions.
A guy died. His OWN doctor and the sheriffs on hand said it was natural causes. Totally routine. It’s paperwork from there. Just declare him dead. Ask the family what they want to do. And the family said to take him to a funeral home and get on with it without an autopsy. That’s it.
All this political calculation and second-guessing and invention of assassination is crazy internet political people doing their crazy internet thing.
Sorry.
But the legal authorities don’t make their decisions based on what fringe political citizens in some other state are going to dream up.
And as a fringe political citizen in another state myself, I’ve already told you I would think an autopsy would have been appropriate.
But the absence of that move does not concern me for all the reasons that have already been stated.
His doctor. The local sheriffs. His family. Really. All with 10,000 times more first hand knowledge than you or me. Eye witnesses. They all say the guy died in his sleep. A man of deteriorating health who was nearly 80.
I mean…that’s it.
ZooeyModeratorWell, I’m surprised an autopsy wasn’t performed.
I woulda thot there was some sorta law about that
to be honest.w
vWell, there is no law, I would guess, because the assassination of justices doesn’t have a rich tradition in this country.
Why mandate an autopsy when there is no reason to suspect foul play?
ZooeyModeratorDonnie Avery
ZooeyModeratorToby Wright?
ZooeyModeratorTheres a lot more than 10 but that will do for a start. Background in article.
Gulf of Tonkin Incident
Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment
Project MKUltra
Operation Northwoods
CIA Drug Trafficking
Operation Mockingbird
COINTELPRO
Operation Snow White
Secret Global Economic Policies
The US Government Illegally Spies on its own citizenshttp://theantimedia.org/10-conspiracy-theories-that-turned-out-to-be-true/
I don’t recognize all of those, but what the ones that I do recognize have in common is actual evidence.
As opposed to the Absence of Evidence (negative evidence) being used as evidence.
So the Scalia conspiracy used the absence of an autopsy as evidence of foul play whereas what would really be impressive would be actual evidence such as signs of struggle or injury. And the suffocation by pillow allegation is truly silly. It takes an estimated 5 minutes to suffocate someone with a pillow, and there would certainly have been a struggle. It works on infants and people who are completely infirm, and nobody else.
And while the death decree was made remotely, it was after talking to the sheriffs and Scalia’s doctor who said there was no evidence of foul play.
Just in terms of the credibility of evidence, there is evidence stacked on the side of natural causes, and nothing – except the absence of an autopsy – to suggest otherwise. But the absence of evidence is not evidence.
And none of the conspiracies above were proven to be true by using negative evidence.
ZooeyModeratorThat is exactly what Vince Foster said about Benghazi right before his emails turned up in Whitewater.
So, those are the guys who killed Scalia?
On email?
In Bengazzara?
Yeah.
I got this feeling that an autopsy woulda been rigged somehow. By a coroner who got his job because of a jobs program financed by an Obama sympathizer.
And get this…
he was transferred to that county just a week ago.
ZooeyModeratorIn fact it fans the flames.
There will be very few flames.
That’s my bet.
That is exactly what Vince Foster said about Benghazi right before his emails turned up in Whitewater.
ZooeyModeratorO’Rourke has always struck me as a raging alcoholic. Also, a “glass half full” type to be sure; a little prick who is never happy with anyone or anything. I just thought it interesting that he does Op Ed’s on BBC. I think it is important at times to get an outside view of what goes on here, not that he is an outsider, but he didn’t write this for us, he wrote it for the rest of the world.
I used to read “The Economist” whenever I could, and bought an issue before my trip to CA a few weeks ago.
If you think most Americans think the current race is loopy, you can only imagine what the Europeans think…
Zooey is right, this is a train wreck in slow motion…
Yeah, I think O’Rourke has always fancied himself to be the guy at the Exclusive Gentleman’s Club who is seen as the offbeat iconoclast with the witty bon mot. An Insider positioning himself as a Freethinking Outsider.
ZooeyModeratorOver the years the president’s nominee has normally focused on finding someone that both parties can accept. One strategy now would be for Obama to nominate a very liberal judge which then forces the Republicans to reconsider their stalemate on the chance that Clinton-or Sanders win and their stuck with the worst case scenario.
Hey, I have a question for you. And maybe my premise is wrong, but I’d like your opinion.
Seems to me that there are a number of examples over the years of judges who got appointed to the SC and then drifted to the left. Have you noticed that? And if so, do you have an explanation?
I don’t know. Maybe I’m imagining it. But Blackmun, Kennedy, Souter?
ZooeyModeratorNot to change the subject, or anything, but here’s a petition to nominate Anita Hill (LOL):
https://www.change.org/p/nominate-anita-hill-for-supreme-court-justice?recruiter=40939820&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylinkZooeyModeratorA supreme court justice unexpectedly dies in office. Despite your prejudice such a death deserves an autopsy.
His family doesn’t agree with you.
But then, maybe they are in on it.
ZooeyModeratorWill never know without an autopsy. No autopsy in the unanticipated death of such an important government official. The surprise death of a man comprising one ninth of one of the three branches of the federal government doesn’t warrant an autopsy?
I would think it would, yes. Though I have no knowledge of how those decisions are made. I don’t know who was at the ranch, how many were there, what Scalia’s last day was like, what health issues he had, who found him, how it was handled.
I will say that suffocating somebody with a pillow is not a very professional way to go about killing someone, and carries a significant risk of failure, as well as the likelihood of leaving signs of struggle that would invite an autopsy and an investigation. I would think that – you know – assassins would have a better plan than that, and probably wouldn’t leave a pillow on his head.
ZooeyModeratorI am delighted,
jesus, finally took him
and threw him
in hell.w
vIt does appear he was taken. The deciding vote, the most reliable vote in opposition to the administrations position in cases to be decided by the supreme court, dies with a pillow over his head at a ranch owned by an Obama supporter and without seeing the body the local coroner rules natural death over the phone thus no autopsy. So convenient and transparent.
Are you claiming Scalia was murdered?
ZooeyModeratorI am actually starting to think that this is an opportunity for Obama to nominate – not a moderate – but a liberal to the court. The Republicans are in a bad, bad place right now. First of all, they lost Scalia. He was a lock as a conservative vote. His subtraction just made the court more liberal. I mean…that’s math. In a court where a lot of votes were 5-4, they have now just become 5-3, or 4-4 at worst. And a 4-4 vote means the lower court ruling is upheld, and the lower courts are currently more liberal than conservative. So the stay the SC just put on the environmental initiative would get through with only the 8 justices there now, and in fact, I expect it will be tweaked and sent back up because of that very opening. So they are under pressure to move.
Also, the Republicans have more senate seats up for grabs this year, and several of them come from moderate to slightly liberal states, and none of those guys have come out and said they are playing the roadblock game. It could kill them.
Now, on the positive side of the ledger for Rs, freezing this debate is red meat for the culture war types. But the problem is that Citizens United is unpopular with most Americans, and most Americans don’t want Roe overturned. So if these firebrands are going to lock down this nomination, they are not only going to fire up their base, they are going to fire up some democrats who are usually lazy about voting. There were 3.6 million fewer votes for Obama in 2012 than 2008, but this could bring more people to the polls, and greater voter turnout favors democrats. And if he nominates Eric Holder, it could bring out the black vote.
Meanwhile this game of Russian Roulette doesn’t have any payoff if the next president is a democrat. They could potentially damage their hold in congress by forcing a stalemate over this issue, all gambling that they get to send a Republican to the white house to make a conservative nomination. It’s a gamble they have to take, and it is more likely to bite them in the ass than to come out the way they want.
Additionally, they have already announced that their opposition is purely political obstructionism. No matter who the nominee is, their opposition to him/her has already been defined as politics by their party leadership. So even if they have some “real” reason to oppose Obama’s nomination, they have already ensured that their objections can’t be taken at face value.
The death of Scalia has hurt conservatives pretty badly. They are between a rock and a hard right place.
The election becomes a referendum on the President versus a do-nothing congress, progress versus obstructionism. The Rs cannot win that. And most Americans are going to reject the implied argument that we need a cultural conservative on the court. Americans have moved to more liberal social views, so the Rs are just on a losing track.
I think nominating a liberal justice will absolutely FORCE the Rs to take this stand, including senators up for re-election. There are 5 R senators in toss up races right now in states that Obama carried in 2012. Obama can pressure those seats by making it harder for them to break ranks with the R. They will either have to vote for the nominee, or face a backlash in their state.
I don’t think Obama will do that because he’s mostly tried to play nice with these assholes for the past 7 years, but even if he nominates a moderate, the Rs are in bad shape.
Man, I am getting jacked up about this election cycle, I must say. All the entrails I am casting on the fire are telling me conservatives are going to get their knuckles rapped pretty hard.
ZooeyModeratorWell i think yer thinkin like a Non-Republican.
The Religious Right will see it as a holy-war — abortion.
They will want the Reps to delay no matter what. They’ll applaud it.And the Money-Corporate-RightWingers will also not want
a new justice who might roll back some of the huge
corporate gains in the last few years. So, they wont care about ‘honor’ or ethics or any of that silly liberal bullshit.And the middle-grounders and the ‘undecided’ types who
decide elections ? Well they are off playing
video games or wondering whats on tv this week.w
vSure.
But when the undecideds lift up their eyes in September and October, and see the obstructionism of the Rs and the damaged R presidential nominee, they are going to vote for the Ds. Unfortunately, many of the districts have been gerrymandered so severely that it’s not possible for the Rs to get blown out, but holding up the Supreme Court is not going to play well with the independents and undecideds. They may not have passionate political beliefs, but I’m pretty confident that they don’t want the federal government to be jammed up and gridlocked. Ted Cruz and Grover Norquist want that, but most people don’t.
ZooeyModeratorI’ve never liked O’Rourke. Yeah, he’s a rightie libertarian, a group that as a leftie libertarian myself, I would think I would have more affinity for, but of all possibilities in the political spectrum, I find rightie libertarians to be the most annoying by far. I wonder where they are going this election with Paul long gone. Kasich, I guess.
To the rest of the world Donald Trump seems like a joke. And, please, let’s hope he is. Trump is a prank the American electorate is pulling on the American political establishment.
Like many jokes, Trump is a manifestation of discomfort and anxiety.
This is Karl Rove’s and Roger Ailes’ cynicism having now grown large enough to bite the Republicans in the ass. They have deliberately seeded anger, resentment, and fear through Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, Beck, O’Reilly, and the FOX news network in order to line up this voting bloc, and guess what? They now have a fully grown angry, resentful, and xenophobic group of voters on their hands who are dissatisfied with all the empty promises. The hardline cultural conservatives are feeling the same way. For more than 30 years, the corporate politicians have been giving lip service to abortion and gays and illegal immigration and Big Government et cetera, and then not doing much of anything about it. Those people are pissed now. Trump isn’t a joke. He is the embodiment of the disenfranchisement of the uneducated white males who have been deliberately targeted with this propaganda and USED by the Republican party to support their money grab for the 1%. They seeded this monster, fertilized it, and used it for decades to consolidate their rigging of the economic system, and now that bloc is getting out of control and demanding delivery of these crackpot solutions they’ve been sold as reasonable solutions.
Interestingly, FOX News itself has a fault line trembling through the middle of it right now. Murdoch is trying to line up succession both to himself and to Ailes, and it isn’t going well. Ailes ended up getting a contract extension, but he is reportedly much more scattered these days, and FOX isn’t receiving a clear cut set of marching orders like it used to. That’s part of the reason why FOX hasn’t delivered a clear Trump message. FOX is for Rubio, evidently, but without a Trump plan, it is floundering. There is also a schism between the News side and the Programming/business side with the leaders of those two divisions openly hating each other and rarely speaking, and publicly exemplified by the little cat fight between George Will and Bill O’Reilly. FOX is more likely to repair their rift than the Republican party is, but the conservative branches in this country are starting to turn on each other, and that can only be good for the country.
ZooeyModeratorI try to watch the Republican debates, but with only one TV and limited ability to relieve stress (one can only deep breathe so much before it’s actually hyperventilating), I just can’t do it anymore.
We know too much about how the words translate into action.
Unfortunately, that leaves me with the regurgitated aftermath… and it doesn’t take much imagination to realize that if the original wasn’t very appealing, that the regurgitated mess isn’t any more appealing.
That anyone can do it is fantastic. Thanks for the reportage. I take them like Camp Reports… valuable since I can’t be there…
I totally understand.
No one has to tell me about the ennui of following modern American politics.
But this is a train wreck. We don’t have a bunch of stiffs out-platituding each other.
We have a genuine dust up. A bunch of silver spoons trying to maintain their dignity in the middle of a food fight, and not able to do it.
You guys are missing out.
ZooeyModeratorI am as “into” it as I have been since W finally left office. I have been taking a vacation from politics to a large extent post-Bush since I was worn out, and also because I pretty much expected mainstream Cruise Control under Obama which is what we got. But at least he wasn’t out doing abnormally sociopathic things like W.
But I am intrigued by this election. The establishment people are facing rejection by a large number of voters. This is the storyline. Both Rs and Ds are pissed at the establishment – as they have been for a long time – but this time is different. There are large numbers in each party that are demanding changes to the status quo. The shit-stirrers are the candidates with passionate followings. They may still lose out, but the threat is real, and I think is going to have consequences.
I had hoped with Obama – best case scenario – that he could be transformative in the way that Reagan was. That he could start the pendulum swinging back away from conservative excesses. He wasn’t. But he may have at least put brakes on the rightward swing.
The establishment Rs are getting zero love. One of them may still win, but it will clearly be because he is not Donald Trump more than because he is inspiring.
Hillary has some love, but there’s no passion. The only sign of passion coming out of her campaign is coming from her supporters attacking Sanders’ followers with all the petulance of someone who feels like some kids cut in line in front of her.
The passion squares up behind Sanders and Trump only. They are the ones promising changes in the system, and come across as honest rather than calculated. Hillary just isn’t able to fire anyone up with her rallying cry of “Hey, I can make incremental progress!” and the Rs are all just making each other look completely unfit for the Oval Office.
Something is happening here. And it may get swallowed up under the SuperPACs in the long run, but the establishment needs to take control of this by the first week of March, or there are going to be fireworks this summer and into the Fall.
ZooeyModeratorThis is bad for the Republicans. Boy, oh boy, I hope we get a floor fight at the convention.
Well, are you sure republican voters think that?
They could be fine with it.
I’m not sure I know what ANYBODY thinks. That’s why this election has more drama for me as a spectator compared to most of them, and why I’m on a message board trying to get into conversations about what other people are seeing.
The quote you put up is by a Trump supporter. A diehard supporter who saw Trump clean up in the debate. I have not hit the news yet this morning – coming here first as is my habit – but last night all the TH (Talking Heads) were saying Trump lost and that Bush was the victor. Which I thought was interesting in itself because I saw no difference between Trump last night and the Trump was declared a victor in previous debates. He wasn’t “exposed,” or embarrassed the way Rubio was last time. And the dude plastered Bush with several body blows on Iraq. And he got away with denouncing Cruz as a Fat Liar. Rubio was much better this time, Bush was okay, Carson is dead and basically forgotten, and it looked to me like….
Well, here’s where I speculate. Rob Proud American would be happy to have the convention look like that debate, I suppose. But the “establishment” Republicans certainly don’t. They want to win the White House, and I think the party is going to suffer badly if Trump wins the nomination, or if there is an ugly floor fight that ends with an establishment nominee at Trump’s expense. I think there is a possibility that there will be voter defections: either vote for someone else, or stay home. And so I speculate that the establishment is now starting to impose their establishment views without restraint. They are now starting to say that Trump lost. The establishment can’t let this continue. They can’t have a different candidate every time take first or second place while Trump stays up there in first or second place. They anti-Trump wing of the party has to coalesce quickly around somebody, or else. IMO, Trump doesn’t ever get more popular. Every possible Trump supporter is already on board. Nobody – imo – has Trump as their 2nd choice if their first choice drops out. That’s the thing. He has 1/3 of the Republican party, and that’s it. The people who want a bull in the china shop are already lined up behind him.
And independents…they aren’t going to support a bloody and bruised candidate that emerges from a messy convention.
I think the Republicans are in a very bad position right now, and here they are lining up to filibuster whomever Obama nominates to replace Scalia. They aren’t going to look good doing that if Obama nominates someone without some glaring vulnerability. It’s going to look like partisan politics – which it is – and I don’t think the Republicans have a shot at the White House anyway at this point. Fighting the appointment…I mean, seriously, I think this could have impact going well down the party. I think there is the possibility of wide defections, and significant defeat for the Republicans.
The Republicans are divided right now. You can say that the Democrats are divided, too, and you would be right. But they aren’t headed towards a gang fight like the Republicans are.
ZooeyModeratorAt the risk of ruining a perfectly good reputation for pessimism, I will venture to say that it wouldn’t be asking a lot of Mannion to exceed the performance of many of his recent predecessors.
ZooeyModeratorThat’s the first debate I’ve watched from start to finish. Brilliant theatre. I am surprised nobody threw an octopus onto the stage. I’m hearing that Jerry Springer is going to moderate the next debate.
This is bad for the Republicans. Boy, oh boy, I hope we get a floor fight at the convention.
-
AuthorPosts
