Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Everyone wants a President who is a savior and anything less than perfect sucks.

The test ought to be: name a better President. Name someone less disappointing. If you can only name one or two in the last century, stop the whining.

Bite me. Whining is one of the few pleasures I have left.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

How about this?

Somebody's looking for cover.

This is why they need to put Yoo in one room, Cheney in another, some of the CIA interrogators in another, and start telling them only one of them will get "the deal" and see who starts squealing. Talk about a great reality TV show!

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Adder

I mean, we kind of knew that he tanked the case from the lack of indictment and his own description of the decidedly abnormal approach he took.

But this takes that cake. This woman sure looks like she was lying, and like the prosecutor knew or should have known that.

You are right, we kind of knew. This removes the "kind of". (And also changes "knew" to present tense, but that doesn't matter as much.)

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

Looks like I got here at exactly the right time. Hi! I've never ever visited this board, ever, but some of you may know me from the fashionable lawyers chatting board forum next door. Well, I quit that board for reasons I don't even want to get into. Also, I understand that you fucking vigilante bastards ran Hank out of this town on a rail. So, to keep equilibrium, I'm here now, and this is where I'll stay. Think of me as the new Hank, but less Hank-like than Hank. Anyhoo, what are we talking about, besides bowls of creamy dicks? Mmmm! I mean, yuck, totally gross, who would want that.

Whiff.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documen...ness-40-496236

The all-important witness 40.

TM

Like I said this prosecutor should be waterboarded then executed for treason.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

Whiff.

Canonical?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

Canonical?

What was to be Gustave Flaubert's masterwork, but not for his untimely death, Bouvard et Pecuchet (1881), essentially is about two clerks who come into an inheritance and devote themselves to developing a taxonomy of whiffs. Ultimately they decide to return to copier comme autrefois.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

What was to be Gustave Flaubert's masterwork, but not for his untimely death, Bouvard et Pecuchet (1881), essentially is about two clerks who come into an inheritance and devote themselves to developing a taxonomy of whiffs. Ultimately they decide to return to copier comme autrefois.

Always pointing out the silver lining to these deaths, aren't you?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

So, I understand every major league baseball scout in America is on-line right now trying to purchase a ticket to Havana.

Epic troll of Cruz and Rubio or acknowledgement that the embargo failed 40 years ago?

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Epic troll of Cruz and Rubio or acknowledgement that the embargo failed 40 years ago?

The two are not mutually exclusive.

And possibly an epic troll of the entire GOP -- they are going to be tripping over each other to accuse Obama of being a Commie.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

The two are not mutually exclusive.

And possibly an epic troll of the entire GOP -- they are going to be tripping over each other to accuse Obama of being a Commie.

According to TPM, the Pope is in on the troll.

Hilary suggested this direction several month ago. Is this really the first major foreign policy achievement of the Hilary Presidency?

And, just as importantly, what team is going to move to Havana now? Maybe the As?

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

According to TPM, the Pope is in on the troll.

Hilary suggested this direction several month ago. Is this really the first major foreign policy achievement of the Hilary Presidency?

And, just as importantly, what team is going to move to Havana now? Maybe the As?

Havana was mostly Meyer Lansky's territory. Whoever inherits from him is gonna tell you who's moving to Havana. That's who's going to Havana, smart guy.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Hilary suggested this direction several month ago. Is this really the first major foreign policy achievement of the Hilary Presidency?

Better question: Did Obama vet this with Hillary? This will be in an issue in Florida during the elections -- but I don't know which side will benefit from it.

[Not Bob]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

Better question: Did Obama vet this with Hillary? This will be in an issue in Florida during the elections -- but I don't know which side will benefit from it.

The NYT seems to suggest it won't be as big a problem as it would have been a few years ago. And, based purely on anecdotal evidence from a client whose family escaped to Miami from Cuba in 1961, the people who really care weren't going to vote for her, anyway.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/12/18...-politics.html

[ThurgreedMarshall]

So I recently sent a friend of mine this email after he asked me what I thought about this article: http://jezebel.com/i-dont-know-what-...ium=socialflow

As I tend to do, I wrote more than what he thought I would, I'm sure. I figured since I took so much damn time to write it out, I might as well post it here for reactions as well.

Seems to me like the author had two goals. The first being that she wanted white people to read this and she knew how to title it to achieve that goal. The second is to get white people thinking about what it actually means to volunteer anger or sadness in support of others. Are they doing it for a pat on the back? Should there be more behind any such expression than just what is on the surface of that emotion?

My wife and I were talking about this today while we were watching the 30 for 30 on the U (the first one). They described the backdrop of the story—Miami in the 70s and 80s which suffered from racial riots sparked over the beatings and killings of black people by police who were either not indicted or acquitted. Watching the clips of black people crying over injustice it struck us that they are exactly the same as what we’ve been watching recently. Exactly. The same sadness, the same rage, the same injustice. It just repeats itself. Again and again and again.

I think the Salon piece should be taken for what it actually is—an expression of pain and frustration over the fear of police brutality and the injustice that inevitably follows. The problem with most white people is that they will take the article as some sort of criticism. And they’ll internalize it. “She doesn’t think I do enough by saying it’s an injustice. What else can I do?” But that’s not really the point. The point is to really get white people to think about their position relative to black people in this country. It’s not enough to recognize that you carry privilege based on your skin color. It’s not enough to acknowledge injustice. Is it? People will be angry about it on facebook and move on before the end of the year. “What’s next?” Black people will continue to suffer at the hands of police and police will continue to get away with it.

The problem is, for things to change, white people have to give something up. No one wants to. Everyone recognizes that. I sure as hell understand it. But if you built this country on the backs of slaves, then set them free, then passed some laws for civil rights, then instituted (and subsequently destroyed) remedial programs like affirmative action to repair past injustice while isolating blacks in ghettos so you don’t have to see them, while glorifying gangster stereotypes by having white-controlled record labels push a certain type of rap consumed by whites in the suburbs who can’t get enough, feeding off of that fear in movie depictions and local news bullshit, and exaggerating and flat-out lying about crack (and crack babies), while ignoring the effects meth has had on white communities, and crafting drug laws using that fear you’ve created to win political points with the voters you’ve scared while taking cash for the commoditization of incarceration of black men, you need to understand that the position you enjoy relative to the black people (even though you have had no personal participation in the deprivation of rights and opportunity) cannot be viewed in a vacuum. That’s what white people do (even good ones). White people have to give that view up.

They tend to think that it’s not fair when they get lumped in with bad white people. But here is the legacy of all the shit I just mentioned: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...hip-study.html Fucking 75% of white people in this country don’t even have one fucking black friend. 75%! This country has been systematically set up that way. White people simply do not know who black people are. Their knowledge of black people comes from Law & Order or 50 Cent. Their knowledge of cops comes from cops helping them whenever they need it. Their knowledge of why cops treat black people the way they do is a combination of all of that. Hell, cops treatment of black people comes from the same place.

So, in short, my thoughts on the article are: She seems annoyed by white people who want to be praised for being an outspoken ally without ever having to give anything up and the emotion that generates in the author. No one is going to say speaking out against injustice is bad or that the fact that there have been so many white participants demanding justice for black men killed for no reason isn’t a positive change from where we used to be. But with this article, as with all the others that have come out recently, it’s about more.

TM