Well, because I’m a generous soul, here’s an open thread with some random assortment of thoughts.

You’ve already heard about this…  but we can still hold off those pesky collection agencies for 11 weeks, isn’t that nice?

Her Majesty the Queen will become the first British Monarch to step foot on independent Irish soil today….  but not everyone is happy she’s coming.

This story just makes me shake my head.  I was absolutely shocked by this, and even more by this.  Ok, I lied, I wasn’t shocked by either one.

So anyway, you people got anything you want to get off your chest, this is the time, this is the place.


19 Responses to Tuesday Morning Open Thread

  1. JMPrince says:

    Please Call Sen. Chambliss & Isakson today & tell them NOT to filibuster judicial appointments and confirm Goodwin Liu!
    Vote is coming soon Thurs. JMP

    • Brian McCann says:

      Hey man…I hit two homeruns today, including an extra-innings walkoff. Trust me when I say: chill bro.

  2. Brian McCann says:

    Hey guys, did you know I am a beast? Well, I am.

  3. JMPrince says:

    Why does Political Knowledge matter? Or how, when and in what amounts might this be communicated in the media? Much.
    Think of the ‘submerged social welfare state’. Then think of all those Medicaid & Medicare recipients who form the bulk of the ‘TeaParty’ and deny vehemently they’re ‘getting anymore than they paid into’ such Big gumminit’ social insurance programs.


    Count as ‘Whoosh 2’, ‘The Political consequences of Public Ignorance’. Take your place at the head of the parade Ed.

  4. JMPrince says:

    OK I lied. I Do care about Ed’s moods. Just to keep him moodier:

    Why does the Media Matter? (For folks who may not have even heard of MediaMatters?) Because it’s the most effective and efficient mass motivator known to mankind. Political implications? Many. Count as ‘Whoosh 1’. JMP

  5. JMPrince says:

    Me? I don’t care much about moods, except for people I live with. And relevance is always pretty subjective. As moods are.

    Wholly unrelated to get Ed out of his ignorance block.

    Media. Then & now. The Press? Knew this. But Arnold slipped them, Totally. Different for the ‘Clinton standards’, but then again most of you were too young to recognize what was going on back then too. Just like deficits only really matter for Dems. Morality is only truly ‘counted’ on them too. Likely related.


    Youthful indiscretions no doubt. CA is a basket case for it too.

  6. innerredneckexposed says:

    I played golf today so I’m n a good mood. Allow me to say: “Don’t feed the troll”.

  7. innerredneckexposed says:

    Uh…don’t break the law you have nothing to be afraid of.

    Pretty simple here, really.

    • EGaluszka says:

      You think the police only arrest people who have committed crimes. How quaint.

      • Jen B. says:


        • JMPrince says:

          Goes way beyond being ‘quaint’. Historically misinformed or plainly ignorant of both the law and experience here. But hey, a clear majority of the USSC wants to believe that as well for whatever reason. Despite the history of well, a few 100 years behind us on this very topic.

          A truly depressing way to start the week. And yes, we might ask the surviving family members of the late Kathryn Johnston if there’s anything that ‘might go wrong here’. The Atl ‘Red Squad’ just knew they were justified in breaking in and gunning her down too. Now? She or her estate might not have a leg to stand on in court trying to get some redress, or make it that much more difficult to do so. So overall, it might easily render moot most of the 4th Amendment. Or just when you ‘need it’ for those ‘special cases’. Sure, that’s the ticket! JMP

          • Steve Golden says:

            One of the few times JMP comes on and makes an astutely relevant point.

            If you think that police harassment only applies to the guilty, then you’re high. And don’t even get me started on racial profiling.

  8. EGaluszka says:

    I’m kind of surprised you guys haven’t posted on The Supreme Court dumping all over the 4th amendment the other day. An 8-1 ruling that police can enter a home without a warrant is kind of a big story, if you ask me.

    • Jen B. says:

      That’s an interesting way to put it (mostly because I guess it will surprise most people that the police have been able to do this for years), but.. a) I blame the trial court for assuming exigent circumstances exist; and, b) this holding is limited to those where exigent circumstances exist (which is always a factual issue).

      In related news, the Indiana Supreme Court dropped a 4th Amendment shitbomb yesterday as well.

      “Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.”

      • Steve Golden says:

        I need to see the actual SCOTUS decision, but I would tend to believe that this was not a blanket statement. I just can’t see the liberals on the court being okay with unlawful searches.

        That being said, yes the Indiana Supreme Court’s ruling is beyond troubling. That’s really the dangerous precedent.

        • Jen B. says:

          I should do a 4th Amendment Round-Up, maybe with a pitchfork as the icon.

          • EGaluszka says:

            I would love to see one. It’s insane how far right the court has gotten, even with Obama’s picks, when it comes to civil rights issues.