Open Mic June 29
An enormous week! The Supreme Court declared that it cannot be a crime in any state to look Hispanic and not carry papers to show that you were born in the United States. Nor is it a crime to falsely claim that you received a valor medal. The Court also ruled the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate to be constitutional, thanks to an unexpected vote by Chief Justice John Roberts (and a correspondingly unexpected dissent by Justice Anthony Kennedy). The House of Representatives, for the first time in American history, voted to hold a sitting Cabinet member in contempt of Congress. Much of Colorado is ablaze, in some of the worst wildfires in many years. Debby did Tampa. Ann Curry left the Today show. Spider-Man got a reboot. And Spain will meet Italy in the Euro Cup final on Sunday, after Italy thanked Germany yesterday for its financial bailout by defeating the two-ton Teutons two-one.
What would you like to talk about? Any of these things catch your fancy? Anything else? Grab a keyboard, and let’s talk.
Don’t see an article on a particular topic, but want to talk about it somewhere? This is Open Mic. Talk about whatever you want, but stay respectful.
We create a new Open Mic every week to give a clean slate, but feel free to add to this topic at any time.

This entry was posted by Logarchism.com on June 29, 2012 at 12:01 am, and is filed under Open Mic. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0.You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.
-
#2 written by rgbact 10 months ago
Nor is it a crime to falsely claim that you received a valor medal.
Also looks like courts don’t really mind FL purging voter rolls.
Approved by a Clinton judge. Even Chris Mathews seems to agree, voter ID fraud exists.
MATTHEWS: Because they — and I know this goes on. It has gone
on in old-time politics. It has gone on since the ‘50s that I know
about. People call up, see if you voted or you’re not going to
vote. The, all of a sudden, somebody does come and vote for you.
This is an old strategy in big city politic -
#3 written by Max 10 months ago
Hinkle is the same judge who threw out Scott’s voter registration drive laws late last month.
No one, that I know of, has ever said that voter fraud is non-existent. In stating that it DOES, it is noted that MOST fraud occurs at the voting official level, not at the individual voter level. THAT level of fraud is so minute, that the fact is that the number of ELIGIBLE voters that are FALSELY swept into the dustbin FAR EXCEEDS the number of ineligible ones. Just look at the number of false positives seen in the initial FL list!
And THAT is the objection. -
#4 written by Max 10 months ago
We KNOW that 20%, or MORE of the drivers in states do NOT carry the liability insurance required by all states.
We know that those drivers who do meet the legal requirement often pay ADDITIONAL “uninsured motorists” premium to protect themselves against those who fail to meet the law.
We know that hundreds of millions of dollars in damage is done by uninsured drivers.
Perhaps the states should require, in the next 30 days, that ALL drivers MUST report to the DMV, bringing CERTIFIED proof from an approved insurance provider, that they are properly insured. Further, if they do NOT then, on the 31st day, their driver’s license is REVOKED!
After all, driving is a privilege, not a right.
If such a procedure is fine for protecting against voter fraud, it is just as fine for ridding the roads of uninsured scofflaws. A much bigger and costly problem.
-
Need to remind people that Romney’s form of being a “businessman” was less like running a corner grocery store, and more like being an investment banker.
-
Breaking news from The Daily Edge;
BREAKING: Supreme Court says it’s OK for a President elected by a majority of 10M votes to pass reforms he said he would
and
Romney declaring war on Obamacare is like Bill Gates declaring war on Windows
-
#8 written by mclever 10 months ago
Surely, the most important news this week is that 65% of Americans think Obama would handle an alien invasion better than Romney. Of course, 21% of them would also call on the Hulk to deal with it, and only 8% would call on Spiderman.
-
A tweet from Michael Moore @MMFlint:
Sicko exposed the death panel set up @ Humana where it paid doctors 2 decide who would live & who would die. Obama has now made that illegal
There actually are death panels. They used to exist in health insurance companies. President Obama’s Affordable Care Act put an end to them. Romney wants them back.
-
#10 written by mclever 10 months ago
Of course, most of us are still stunned by yesterday’s shocking result.
No, I don’t mean the Supreme Court decision on healthcare, I mean superstar Rafael Nadal losing in the 2nd round at Wimbledon to some Czech player named Rosol who ranks about 100th. Could this be the year a Brit (Andy Murray) finally wins on his native grass?
-
#11 written by Max 10 months ago
-
#12 written by mclever 10 months ago
A few years ago, issues of gay rights didn’t matter to me much, outside of generally preferring fairness to unfairness. Sure, I mostly supported equal rights, but it just wasn’t that important to me.
Then, several things happened to draw my focus to the very real unfairness that homosexual Americans face. One of my best friends from high school finally got a sex change after years of depression and fear of persecution and humiliation for feeling out of place in a man’s body. She totally turned her life and outlook around by finding acceptance, and I’ve been so happy for her. Then, one of my cousins moved to Iowa so she could marry her long-time partner. I never realized how much such things mattered until I got to talk to the two of them together. And, more recently, one of the guys in my brother’s Army unit (“Mike”) opened up after DADT was repealed. The others all “knew” though no one said anything, but they all partied like frat boys when he finally married his partner this year.
But it’s Mike’s husband that has my attention today. DADT passing was a tremendous boon to those gay men and women who want to serve and defend our nation, to be accepted as honorable soldiers who are willing to give their all for our country. However, my sister-in-law told me that she accompanies Mike’s husband whenever he wants to shop at the base commissary, because he technically can’t go on his own. He also doesn’t get spousal benefits or base housing. See, because DOMA is still in existence, even here in Iowa, Mike’s husband can’t get any of the benefits that military families would normally be entitled to receive. Given the sacrifices that these Americans make, I think this is a horrible way to treat the families of men and women who are serving our country.
Repealing DADT isn’t enough. DOMA needs to go, too. For the sake of Mike’s husband and all of the other families of gay servicemen.
-
#13 written by Max 10 months ago
-
#14 written by mclever 10 months ago
@Max
The odds on that were only +1/2 for Italy against a relatively young German team.
Italia’s win wasn’t quite so shocking, considering they’ve absolutely owned Germany’s ass in big matches on the pitch. From the 1970 World Cup “Game of the Century” where Italy win 4–3 over West Germany, to the 1982 World Cup final, and the 2006 semi-final. Italy have consistently had Germany’s number.
Tennis pundits are referring to Nadal’s loss as the biggest upset in Tennis history, and they aren’t just being hyperbolic. Nadal hasn’t gone out of a Slam this early since Wimbledon in 2005, and never to someone like Rosol, a 26 year old with a losing record on grass who’s never made it this far before.
-
#15 written by mclever 10 months ago
@Max
Regarding Paddy Power’s odds, Nate’s election forecast is showing the same trend. Now at 65.3% for Obama to win in November up from 61% just three days ago. (The “Now Cast” just exaggerates the trend, from 62.7% three days ago to 75% if the election were today.)
-
#16 written by Rose 10 months ago
Max, re auto insurance.
When I was growing up in NY, in order to renew you car’s registration, you had to show proof of insurance. Back then, it had to be done in person which made it easy to monitor this. I’m not sure how our current online registration renewal methods would handle this.
Granted, a driver who didn’t own a car could borrow one and drive around uninsured. -
Republicans today are in a sore-loser tizzy over the Affordable Care Act. They really expected to win in the Court. (What was that about “frivolous lawsuits” that “tort reform” should do away with? What a waste of tax payer dollars!) Now that their last excuse for opposing the ACA is gone, they’re all upset that OhMyGod! there’s a tax penalty! Who knew!?
So, they’re admitting they were stoopid and hadn’t read the law any time in the last two years. (So how do they know they don’t like it?) Hadn’t even paid attention during the debate, when it was revealed that there would be a (wait for it .…) tax penalty if you didn’t buy insurance.
And these bozi, who are now insisting that President Obama made fools of them for the last two years, they think we should elect them in November. Yeah, I want idiots in charge. I can totally trust them to take away my health care.
The funniest part is that the low-information voters who are the targets of these acts of Republican desperation, most of them won’t be affected. They won’t have to buy anything, or pay any tax penalty, because they already get insurance through their employer. More Republican skulduggery, trying to convince people who already have insurance that they will be required to buy insurance. (Wasn’t it rgbact who was okay with preventing stupid people from voting? Here’s your ticket.)
So, we see the last recourse of scoundrels. When all else fails, when every argument against the President’s policies is shown to be nonsense (yes, Virginia, it really is Constitutional), then scream your favorite four-letter word (they can’t count well, either): “TAXES!!”
-
rgbact,
looks like courts don’t really mind FL purging voter rolls…Even Chris Mathews seems to agree, voter ID fraud exists
First of all, purging the voter rolls has zero to do with voter ID laws. Yes, they are both designed to depress turnout, but the former is much more effective and targeted than the latter.
But, moreover, Chris Matthews refers to the stuff that went on in the 1950s. And, yes, it went on back then. A lot. As that decade wound down, the vote fraud landscape shifted, starting in Texas (where else?). Instead of going to the trouble of changing one vote at a time (which is horribly inefficient and hard to hide), they shifted to fraud where the votes are tallied. LBJ wasn’t the first to do it, but he quickly learned to be the best. By the 1970s, that form of ballot-stuffing had disappeared, because it was impossible to beat the LBJ method with it.
In short, that inefficient method of vote fraud is old technology. And it’s being used as a cover to depress voter turnout in a lopsided fashion.
-
Navratilova winning Wimbledon (6) times in a row and Borg/Federer winning (5) times in a row and even Sampras winning (7) time in eight years, all against top notch competition is kinda impressive when you consider you could easily wake up a day of a match feeling like crap!
Impressive if you care about tennis. ok, ok, back in the day liked Evert and John You can’t be serious! McEnroe. And who doesn’t like Billie Jean King. Heck, even conservative gay bigots like Billie Jean lol.
And Nadal ending Federer’s streak in 2008, 6–4, 6–4, 6–7(5–7), 6–7(8–10), 9–7 after a lengthy rain delay was epic!
ESPN had a 30 for 30 w/Chris and Martina “Unmatched” which was very entertaining …
-
#20 written by fopplssiegeparty 10 months ago
@mc,
We have now seen what it takes to beat Rafa on two occasions, both quite similar. If you want to get the best of him, you had better be really tall and hit the ball flat. Both Rosol and Soderling possess those qualities. Against shorter players (relatively speaking), Rafa’s ridiculous amounts of topspin take the ball right out of their strike zone. The only problem with this strategy is that flat hitters have very little margin for error and no tennis player who has ever lived is “on” all the time. I don’t think that Rosol will go very far in the tournament, but this is not meant to demean his mind boggling match yesterday.
Another thing that the match demonstrated was that even though Men’s tennis is currently dominated by a select few, the actual difference between the play of the #250 player is only marginally different from that of the top 10. I have attended quite a few ATP & WTA tournaments and I also attend local college (both Men & Women) matches. The difference in quality, from my old man 4.5 level of viewing is almost negligible.
Which brings me to my main beef with professional tennis. Unless you are a top player, the compensation totally sucks. Only those who are rich or able to find someone to take a gamble on them can take the constant travel and expense. -
Rose,
I’m not sure how our current online registration renewal methods would handle this.
Most major insurance companies are hooked into a system that allows the state to validate the current state of an owner’s automobile insurance. It’s one reason I think the whole “proof of insurance” card is silly these days.
-
#23 written by DrFunguy 10 months ago
In other good news this week, Fortune published a long piece that blows away the canard of Fast and Furious as a ‘gun-walking’ operation. Actually they were unable to obtain warrants to arrest the straw-buyers of guns, so they tried to track them…
A Fortune investigation reveals that the ATF never intentionally allowed guns to fall into the hands of Mexican drug cartels.
-
#24 written by Max 10 months ago
-
-
#26 written by WA7th 10 months ago
DOJ won’t prosecute Holder for contempt of Congress.
Can the House vote to hire a special prosecutor?
-
-
-
-
#31 written by WA7th 10 months ago
(illegal-≠-criminal thread )
#40 written by shiloh 3 days ago
Neither here nor there, but one of the reasons Scalia was soooo damn upset yesterday, other than the fact he hates/loathes Barack Hussein Obama, may be he knows what’s coming down on Thursday. Or not …
Just a thought.
___________________________________________________I’m still getting a kick out of that one, so it was worth re-posting. Or not…
Just a thought
-
#32 written by Armchair Warlord 10 months ago
Didn’t Issa just get a big ethics complaint filed against him? Right!
Mike,
In response to an earlier comment you made about Obama’s electoral opposition between 2008 and 2012, I believe that your characterization of John McCain as a weak candidate is incorrect. Among other things, McCain is a war hero and a genuine elder statesman. I am convinced that he would have buried Hillary Clinton had she been the Democratic nominee instead of Obama. Romney has a mountain of poorly-regulated campaign cash and an exceptionally zealous party base going for him, and given how things break between now and November he could easily under-perform McCain 2008. -
Another clue re: ACA was Ruth Bader Ginsburg quipping about the secrecy surrounding the decision …
6⁄15
“With a wry smile, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg laid waste Friday to all those rumors about the fate of the Affordable Care Act in the Supreme Court.
“Those who know don’t talk. And those who talk don’t know,” she quipped Friday night at a conference hosted by the American Constitution Society at the Capital Hilton.
Ginsburg said she was responding to a “steady stream of rumors and fifth-hand accounts” about the court’s deliberations on the law.”
>
As they say in poker … a tell.
>
Again, Hillary vs. McCain hypothetical aside, McCain certainly had no problem wiping the floor w/mittens’ mittens
in 2008. -
#34 written by mclever 10 months ago
Roger Federer almost lost today, too… Down two sets to a Frenchman. But, like the champ he is, he pulled out the five-set win.
Making Brad Gilbert prescient, because yesterday he said that the difference between Nadal and Federer was that Federer never lost these sorts of matches. (Hence his record for the longest streak of consecutive Slam semis reached.)
-
#35 written by Max 10 months ago
Just spent an enjoyable hour with a couple of Jehovah’s Witness’. Don’t think they were quite prepared for a reasoned debate on religion and it’s interference with politics.
We had a good Bible study session over the “one-man, one-woman marriage”, with the two leafing through their’s while I had to quote passages from memory, citing chapter and verse. When we got to their citing the “become one flesh” and I referred them to 1 Corinthians 6, 15–17 (relations with a whore causes two to become “one flesh) they had a “come to Jesus” moment and were a bit stunned. Food for thought.
Parted agreeing to disagree on religious grounds.
-
I have a lot of respect for Jehovah’s Witnesses. They know their stuff and are always polite. They also will respectfully discuss with you if you respectfully discuss with them. And they will go away, even with a smile, if you ask them to.
Plus, and most importantly, most of the legal and judical precident we have for religious freedom in this country came about because of suits brought by the Jehovah’s Witnesses. And from everything I’ve seen, they have not the slightest bit of a second thought or resentment that other religions benefit from the court actions they brought.
-
#37 written by Max 10 months ago
-
Chronology of Roberts:
Who picked/nominated Roberts as SC Chief Justice? Bush43
Who picked/appointed Bush43 president Dec. 2000? The Supreme Court
So who can conservatives now blame for the appointment of Roberts and constitutionality of ACA?
Rehnquist, O’Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas
Oh what a tangled web we weave …
Just a thought.
>
btw, who voted against Roberts’ nomination?
Barack Hussein Obama
>
Where have you gone, Harriet Miers?
-
-
#42 written by WA7th 10 months ago
-
One interesting side corner of the PPACA/Obamacare debate, that isn’t big enough for me to write a full article, has to do with the Intrade betting on the mandate.
Recall that Intrade asked:
The U.S. Supreme Court to rule individual mandate unconstitutional before midnight ET 31 Dec 2012.
This website, and many other news outlets, reported that Intrade was up to an 80% chance (i.e. $8 to win $10) in support of the above contract.
The byzantine logic of the Supreme Court decision, however, defied that sort of easy analysis. I wondered what Intrade would do, and now we know:
http://go.bloomberg.com/political-capital/2012–06-29/intrade-bettors-lost-on-health-care/
In short, they welched on the bet.
-
You must be logged in to post a comment. - Comment Feed for this Post
Didn't find any related posts :(






For Michael: science backs up my tomato-growing theories.