gehringer_2

but the point isn't really which description was more accurate. Cruz is no fool, he said what he said the first time because that is what the he wanted to say to that audience. What's unseemly is Cruz being Tucker's bitch when Carlson didn't approve of Cruz's formulation.

Cunningham and Hayes 7 for 29 and neither got to the line once. Cade's lack of fouls drawn is almost as depressing as his inability to find his shot consistently.

It certainly sounds promising to see them picking up people from orgs like the Dodgers and Driveline.

yeah - the more I think about it the more I believe we need a shift in the way we think about speech. For most of recorded history, the resources to spread information were limited and suppression of ideas was fairly easy. That lead to legal theories biased strongly to speech protection as a fundamental guarantor of liberty. But there really has been a fundamental shift with the IT age. Today virtually nothing can be truly suppressed. Get it on the internet once and it lives forever and can go anywhere. The real problem today is the just like the industrial age polluted the physical environment in ways unthinkable in the pre-industrial era, the internet pollutes is capable of polluting the intellectual environment in ways unimagined a generation ago. And it's even reached the point where media misinformation has become a form of international warfare. It seems to me the eventual result has to be that just as pollution forced a reconsideration of and limitation of the primacy of private property rights (which used to be considered inviolate) to protect the physical earth we must share, we are going to reach a point where we will need a reasonable legal regime that recognizes the media environment we have to share is also reaching a point of pollution that demands some reasonable ways to push back against. It's going to be a hard line to find, but I think we need to stop whistling past the graveyard clinging to 18th century speech theory and start looking to find a different way forward before misinformation destroys the national polity completely.

Texas. Makes it doubly ironic that this kind of wimpy spineless creep must get be getting votes from so many wannabe cowboys. I guess they've never seen a Gary Cooper or John Wayne movie.

Someone sign her up permanently - no-one can be worse to listen to than Paul Woods.

I keep windows open in my lab as much as possible without having the room temp drop too much. Obviously it's going to be a reasonable compromise with whatever the weather is doing but air movement is about the most effective thing you can do to safe a room environment against COVID. Even in January. The U even did flow modeling on their campus buses and figured out how many windows to leave open on them (all year) as well.

FIFY...

yeah - that's an aspect of the way the system has broken down. Much of the rural GOP leadership is racist and facist, much of the urban DEM leadership is corrupt or just nutz, but the system is so broken that 'reform' is not a winning platform for either party to the attack the other's weaknesses. When it's all tribal/cultural, nobody cares about quality of government on either side. That wasn't supposed to be how it worked.

A documentary on Napoleon should have been shorter.

Don't know what Veleno is good at yet. He hasn't established any kind of calling card for his game - like the quickness of Betruzzi's stick for instance. Zadina reminds me of Chris Draper in his inability to put the puck in the net, the difference is that Chris still made an impact when he was out there. Maybe once or twice I've watched a game where Zadina actually made his presence felt as a fore checker, there's some potential there, but most of the time he's a non-presence.

Tigers should have gone independent before they signed the last FSN/Sinclair deal. The current situation is a mess. of course if they go to $20/mo they won't have to worry about who can get the service 'cause they won't have many takers.

If the old South States keep sliding back into Jim Crow, a state like CA might decide to pass a serious secession plan. That would precipitate a crisis that would force the rest of the country's hand. Or the northern states House delegations might someday bring the issues to crises by refusing to approve transfer payments into the 'consumer' states - just stopping the Federal government. But they could at least get back closer to some political balance if they would admit DC and Puerto Rico and then increase the size of the House to 500 to dilute the EC imbalance. None of that would require an amendment but would get us closer to where the idea of amendments would be back on the table.

Except that was put to death in practice pretty firmly in by 1863. The Civil War established once and for all on the ground that the US is a single unitary state and no longer a confederation. We may have a tiered federal government, but we are no longer a confederation. The people in every state need their votes to count equally if we are to continue to call ourselves a democracy.

If you want to watch the Tigers your options seem to be shrinking. We are with DirectTV_Stream/Nee ATT mostly because they will still carry the local sports networks, though there is now a surcharge for them.

As I have watched politics over a few decades, the money in elections bothers me more day by day, but legislative horse trading, which can be labeled 'pork', is actually not so bad a thing to me - it's how get things done - somebody in my district needs this, someone in your district wants that. I think it's something that sounds worse in rhetoric than it really is in operation. I really have no problem with 'earmarking' for example and I think the Congressional leadership made a mistake eliminating the process. The question is not so much whether something got into a bill by individual earmark or for what might be a narrow constituency - as long as it is a public one. It don't mind if an interest is narrow as long as it's public. A post office for Podunk or a road that may be little used but still connects some real people I can live with as the cost of getting enough legislators on board for more important stuff even if some would call that pork. Even a useless weapons system isn't the worst thing since most of that money goes to salaries in the end. It's the tax and regulatory giveaways to the donor class, both private and corporate, that bother me most anymore.

LOL - One of the things Pelosi was trying to do would have been a favor to the remaining sane people in the GOP by removing Trump from future electoral politics, but they weren't having any.

always a good call.

LOL! On seeing this bit of blasphemy, any Christian that has read his NT should think of this: Have a nice day.

We've seen it before in MI. The same kind of 'stick in your eye voting' is probably also what helped keep Coleman Young in office so long. Consequences are just broader when it happens on a national scale.

Just grazing google there have been a couple of Al Qaeda plots caught inside Canada since 9/11, so their screening procedures aren't all that perfect.

not quite true. There was Ahmed Ressam in 1999. Ferried to Washington State from Vancouver with 100lbs of explosives. Planned to set off a bomb at LAX. I thought there was one other group apprehended in BC a number of years ago as well but I can't find anything that matches. Maybe it was this same story and I had it muddled. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/trail/inside/cron.html

I can see there are some interesting aspects. We have been told that more women in power is supposed to create a 'better' environment than the testosterone dominated one, so if women in business are just as bad as men, there's a counter narrative story on that front. But then even more than that, she has turned around and based her defense on blaming everything on the men, trying to play poor abused woman, so there is a story in whether she is believed (aren't we always supposed to believe the woman?) or does she get her comeuppance (yes she did) for trying to have it both ways? So I think the case does reflect a lot of current cultural tensions.

The language Progs apparently don't see that telling Spanish speakers how to speak Spanish is pretty much a form of English language cultural imperialism.

true. English nouns do not have gendered forms, we only have only gendered pronouns. In Latin and languages more closely derived from it, the nouns themselves have gender which makes the fixations of our English language police on pronouns pointless in those languages. You'd have to rewrite the entire dictionary.