Tuco

Oh. Maybe that explains why you are a bit high strung.

I assume they could only grant immunity for criminal repercussions. His license would be out flapping in the wind.

He means “white people,” right?

Fair nuf.

So, here in Seattle we have a vote coming up. It’s a ballot initiative on whether the city should set up a board to manage nonprofit social housing coops basically. King County has a great website that summarizes the initiative, provides details, and has a pro and con position. The pro position is penned by some liberal Democrats. No surprise there. The con position is penned by some liberal, grassroots, activists, who believe it’s an unnecessary distraction that diverts resources from current efforts. Hard for me to distinguish who is right. They both seem like good people who disagree on how to achieve a noble goal. Meanwhile, my friends back in Nebraska are fighting efforts to make drag shows illegal. Abortion, voting rights, and gun control are also on the docket. I almost feel guilty.

What request?

Yeah, Dems have been addressing the material needs of rural Americans and old people for decades, and they continue to lose those groups, and by increasing margins. Most people are too ignorant or lazy to understand how they are affected by financial policies.

I think he would be more conservative than Warren or Sanders, but there is nothing I have read that would imply he is more conservative than Biden. During the campaign, in response to Warren’s antitrust statements, Pete said the FTC needs to be given additional tools to fight big Tech monopolies. It isn’t terribly controversial, but it’s more than Biden said. My guess is you’d prefer Buttigieg because he’s on the bench. 2nd string quarterbacks are frequently popular. I would also prefer Buttigieg. But I don’t believe his familiarity with the military or corporate America would translate to a more generous deference for either. Like a good butcher, his familiarity with the pig means he knows where to apply the knife.

Based on policy? I would say Biden is more conservative. Is there a policy position where Joe is left of Pete? Or it more of a personality thing?

The spy ballon thing reminded me of the time Japan bombed Omaha in WW2. Relatively late in the war, the Japanese desperately wanted to disrupt the American war effort. The loaded up a bunch of balloons with incendiary ordinance and launched the them into the air stream, with a leakage rates that they believed would cause them to land in the US. They were mainly trying to cause forest fires in the western US. The effort wasn't terribly successful, although I think it did cause some fatalities as a few people who found unexploded bombs didn't stay clear. And, one of these bombs did come down in Omaha, near an area of town called Dundee. The US Military didn't want the Japanese to have any notion of whether it was successful, so they completely covered it up.

Let's unwind the stupid in this statement: 1. That China doesn't have the technology to sufficiently guide a balloon remotely. 2. That he thinks the ballon could hold the cargo of 3 buses (rather than having the size of 3 buses.) 3. "manned spacecraft", in quotes. 4. That we didn't "call China." 5. That the US would publicly leverage the pilot's life for negotiations. 6. That China would give a shit about a pilot.

Money. That’s the only real power the dem party has, either at the state or national level. And call lists to get money. They alienate half their donors when they put their thumb on the scale. Schiff and Porter are nationally recognized names, so they probably raise more for the party than they get from it. One of the interesting dynamics is the candidate to candidate donations. Someone like AOC fundraises like a mofo, doesn’t need much in her district, and donates to other progressive candidates, earning loyalty in the process. It’s almost like a party within a party. The party leadership isn’t nearly as powerful as most people assume. It’s not like a company. They are more like a well funded PAC.

Yep. It’s my favorite example of how people completely twist the Bible to mean whatever they want it to mean. Full story reads like a bizarre sex romp. At one point, the widow ends up disguising herself as a prostitute to trick her father-in-law in to fucking her. She gets prego. Idiot townsfolk prepare to stone her. She proves it was the father-in-law and everyone has a good chuckle. Moral of the story: don’t beat off. Totally logical interpretation.

They're still wankers; they just lie about it. Regarding the one yard rule, I picture this scene with a rather cruel wife walking around the house while her idiot husband is stumbling around, boxers around his ankles just trying to keep up. "Please touch it, Buela,...it's been three weeks for gods sake....at least slow down." I wonder how many wives have woken up in the middle of the night to a breathless husband and a lingering smell.

I liked the gas mask mention. OMG, protesters were actually taking measures to avoid being hurt when the cops use tear gas and fire pepper balls. That's terrorism.

There is so much weirdness in that description. "In [his] possession"... "A handgun and shell casings were located at the scene." That is not terribly specific. Was it in his hand? Was it in his tent? Was it within five feet of where he was shot? I see a picture of a dirty handgun laying on the ground with a few cigarettes and ashes. Obviously it's not in a tent. Did the cops move it to take a picture? Casings would imply multiple shots from this gun. How many shots are they claiming Teran fired? And the chain of events is pretty murky. Cop calls out to Teran who was in his tent. Teran doesn't comply and then shoots the cop. The would imply the cop was in the tent, or at least at the entrance. Then several more cops shoot Teran. Were they just shooting blindly into a tent? Are they saying Teran came out blasting, making some bizarre you'll-never-take-me-alive coppers moment? "Additionally, mortar style fireworks, multiple edged weapons, pellet rifles, gas masks, and a blow torch were recovered." So this was the only firearm that was found? Teran, who had been quoted days earlier about avoiding violence, was actually an outlier for being armed? Everyone else avoided having a firearm. "Other preliminary information released in this case is consistent with the investigation so far." What about the unreleased information?

I would also say that the just-need-better-training crowd is usually the moderate dems and the few moderate republicans who will acknowledge there is a problem but will stop short of any measure that would seem hostile to police. Cops don't want to be held accountable. Their unions fight hard for them not to be accountable. But this shit will never diminish until they are. Any real solution will be hostile to cops. Training is an easy out for moderates to pretend they are doing something without actually standing up to cops. But, yeah, you are absolutely right they don't need to knock down 90 acres of forest in the city for deescalation and anti-racism training. You can do that shit at a conference room in the Holiday Inn. The city is clear that this is about recruiting. They need to build a paramilitary amusement park to recruit and you can only guess what type of recruit that attracts.

Apparently the Georgia State Patrol makes a point of not having body cameras. Not because of the cost for the cameras, but because it can be difficult to know what to do with the data. In other words, they have a standing policy to avoid documentation of how their police interact with the public for whatever bullshit excuse that seems plausible. This was from an interview Teran gave, shortly before the GSP says he decided to start shooting at cops: Originally from the AJC

I don’t know the facts of the case other than he’s rich and the case is up to interpretation. Unless he texted someone beforehand saying “watch me scare this bitch,” he ain’t getting convicted.

In a surprise to no one, Pete Ricketts closed on his purchase of Ben Sasse’s vacated seat. Not up for election until 2026.

Did you shoot one in her face? I believe that’s traditional.

It would be amazing to watch the first 5 Dems get up there and vote for some random Republican Congressman. I would donate to each of their campaigns just to watch the expression on McCarthy's face. I don't know if CSPAN has enough cameras to capture the panic.

There are plenty of people in the 30s, 40s, 50s, working in campaigns who don't get paid shit. It's not a standard career path.

I think the Democrats are probably doing the right thing here by just holding their ground and just letting this story be just about the Republicans. But, just to be an armchair qb for a moment, I would like to see them publicly state the following: "We will not support anyone for Speaker who has claimed the 2020 election was stolen. That is not a policy difference. That is an attack on our country. We would consider supporting a Republican for Speaker if we can get an agreement that no election-deniers are appointed to chair committees." That would do a few things: 1) Change the conversation from a vague "far right" issue to one that is centered on election denial. 2) Give an incentive to any non-denier Republican to play ball as they would suddenly get a much better chance of better positions. You would only need six of them. 3) If successful, it would shove McCarthy and the MAGA nutballs completely out of the game. The reason why this is a bad idea is that it would give McCarthy and the MAGA nutballs a reason to unify.

McCarthy has offered to place his hand in Gaetz's mouth as a guarantee.