by liberal japonicus
Regular commenter hairshirthedonist asks:
Also, too, isn’t it kind of weird that Chuck Berry and Chuck Barris would die within such a short time of each other?
Why yes, yes it is. I may watch Confessions of a Dangerous Mind tonite and 2016 was a banner year for famous people going off to the great beyond. Is 2017 going to match it? Or was Trump getting elected enough pain?
Some interesting perspective regarding Russia:
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russian-federation/2017-03-10/russia-trump-and-new-d-tente
We had a perverse case recently in RI of 97 year old twins perishing within minutes of each other after apparent falling accidents and exposure.
Some interesting perspective regarding Russia:
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russian-federation/2017-03-10/russia-trump-and-new-d-tente
We had a perverse case recently in RI of 97 year old twins perishing within minutes of each other after apparent falling accidents and exposure.
Some interesting perspective regarding
Russia
I find it a bit ironic that after hundreds of years of Russian autocracy/totalitarianism, the United States is blamed for the failure of Democracy after the fall of the Soviet Union.
Some interesting perspective regarding
Russia
I find it a bit ironic that after hundreds of years of Russian autocracy/totalitarianism, the United States is blamed for the failure of Democracy after the fall of the Soviet Union.
Chuck Lorre and Chuck Norris are nervous today.
Chuck Lorre and Chuck Norris are nervous today.
We don’t want to lose Chuck Schumer anytime soon, though.
Chuckle Brother Martin McGuinness also gone this week, lamented by some, not at all by others:
http://www.itv.com/news/2017-03-21/how-bitter-foes-paisley-and-mcguinness-became-peace-process-chuckle-brothers/
I fear for Chuck E. Cheese…
We don’t want to lose Chuck Schumer anytime soon, though.
Chuckle Brother Martin McGuinness also gone this week, lamented by some, not at all by others:
http://www.itv.com/news/2017-03-21/how-bitter-foes-paisley-and-mcguinness-became-peace-process-chuckle-brothers/
I fear for Chuck E. Cheese…
I generally avoid stuff from IBT, but this was too much to resist. Could things be any weirder, you know, presidentially speaking?
I generally avoid stuff from IBT, but this was too much to resist. Could things be any weirder, you know, presidentially speaking?
With any luck, Trump will soon be learning about Rule 34.
With any luck, Trump will soon be learning about Rule 34.
Is 2017 going to match it? Or was Trump getting elected enough pain?
It really just comes down to this: all us Baby Boomers are getting to the age where we start dropping. And the folks, like Chuck Berry, who we watched growing up are even further down that path. So yeah, probably 2017 will at least match last year. And 2018 will likely be even higher.
Is 2017 going to match it? Or was Trump getting elected enough pain?
It really just comes down to this: all us Baby Boomers are getting to the age where we start dropping. And the folks, like Chuck Berry, who we watched growing up are even further down that path. So yeah, probably 2017 will at least match last year. And 2018 will likely be even higher.
hsh, you really should have included the quote from the young lady:
Seems like a girl with her head on straight. Certainly she raises a question which has occurred to a lot of others.
hsh, you really should have included the quote from the young lady:
Seems like a girl with her head on straight. Certainly she raises a question which has occurred to a lot of others.
Snarki, what Trump needs is Gibbs’ Rule 13.
Snarki, what Trump needs is Gibbs’ Rule 13.
What was striking about 2016 was how many famous artists died relatively young, and in several cases while still active. Dying at 90 is not a tragedy like dying before 60 can be.
What was striking about 2016 was how many famous artists died relatively young, and in several cases while still active. Dying at 90 is not a tragedy like dying before 60 can be.
Does anyone else find this to be an amusing headline?
“Payless Is Said to Be Filing for Bankruptcy as Soon as Next Week”
What will their creditors get?
Does anyone else find this to be an amusing headline?
“Payless Is Said to Be Filing for Bankruptcy as Soon as Next Week”
What will their creditors get?
What will their creditors get?
wisdom
What will their creditors get?
wisdom
“Dying at 90 is not a tragedy like dying before 60 can be.”
Only under the absurd rules of the human condition. Ninety is 25 years away for me, which given the accelerating rate of passing time, is beginning to look bloody tragic enough.
Perhaps less surprising than croaking next week, but still bad news.
I expect to die unexpectedly no matter what age.
“Dying at 90 is not a tragedy like dying before 60 can be.”
Only under the absurd rules of the human condition. Ninety is 25 years away for me, which given the accelerating rate of passing time, is beginning to look bloody tragic enough.
Perhaps less surprising than croaking next week, but still bad news.
I expect to die unexpectedly no matter what age.
Hard to know where to post this, but since it’s an open thread:
The attack on Westminster today was carried out using a car as a weapon, then a knife. The death count so far (while still too many) is 4. This is why nobody in the UK can believe their eyes and ears when we see what kind of arms any Tom, Dick or Harry, teenaged or mentally ill, can get their hands on in the States. A semi-automatic operated at one of London’s prime tourist attractions, just outside the legislature, would have produced a total massacre.
Hard to know where to post this, but since it’s an open thread:
The attack on Westminster today was carried out using a car as a weapon, then a knife. The death count so far (while still too many) is 4. This is why nobody in the UK can believe their eyes and ears when we see what kind of arms any Tom, Dick or Harry, teenaged or mentally ill, can get their hands on in the States. A semi-automatic operated at one of London’s prime tourist attractions, just outside the legislature, would have produced a total massacre.
having the freedom to be murdered by someone exercising their freedom to own and operate the tools that make murder easy is something you Brits just don’t appreciate.
having the freedom to be murdered by someone exercising their freedom to own and operate the tools that make murder easy is something you Brits just don’t appreciate.
Even considering things that aren’t made for killing, but that can be used for it in a pinch, I think our American baseball bats make for much better weapons than whatever you call those cricket thingies.
Even considering things that aren’t made for killing, but that can be used for it in a pinch, I think our American baseball bats make for much better weapons than whatever you call those cricket thingies.
So true, cleek. Our concept of freedom is sadly limited.
So true, cleek. Our concept of freedom is sadly limited.
Yes, but right up until Dylan Roof gunned down those innocent Christians in South Carolina, he was protecting them by carrying his weapons.
Right up until the Denver movie theater shooter mowed down his fellow movie lovers, he was protecting those audience members from a terrorist attack.
Right up until the moment the Columbine High School (mile and a half from my house at the time) shooters butchered their classmates and a teacher those school kids were protected from liberal influences by the presence of the shooters’ weapons in that school.
I notice one of the threads here mentioned the other day the relative usefulness of referring to right wingers as Hitler and fascists. I don’t know, maybe America has merely bred a particularly toxic mix of assholes and jagoffs is all, and their increasing and looming presence, now at the highest levels of government and business, will be just as damaging to civilization as murderers with exotic sounding names like Hitler, Stalin, and Mao.
Same necessary solution to stop them …… savage violence ….. but “assholes” and “jagoffs” won’t have the same world historical ring as Nazis and Communists when historians years from record what happened to them.
You don’t need a Timothy Snyder to tell which way the wind blows.
Yes, but right up until Dylan Roof gunned down those innocent Christians in South Carolina, he was protecting them by carrying his weapons.
Right up until the Denver movie theater shooter mowed down his fellow movie lovers, he was protecting those audience members from a terrorist attack.
Right up until the moment the Columbine High School (mile and a half from my house at the time) shooters butchered their classmates and a teacher those school kids were protected from liberal influences by the presence of the shooters’ weapons in that school.
I notice one of the threads here mentioned the other day the relative usefulness of referring to right wingers as Hitler and fascists. I don’t know, maybe America has merely bred a particularly toxic mix of assholes and jagoffs is all, and their increasing and looming presence, now at the highest levels of government and business, will be just as damaging to civilization as murderers with exotic sounding names like Hitler, Stalin, and Mao.
Same necessary solution to stop them …… savage violence ….. but “assholes” and “jagoffs” won’t have the same world historical ring as Nazis and Communists when historians years from record what happened to them.
You don’t need a Timothy Snyder to tell which way the wind blows.
I think our American baseball bats make for much better weapons than whatever you call those cricket thingies.
However, if you want to kill at a distance…
Kurt Eichenwald Case: Texas Grand Jury Says a GIF Is a ‘Deadly Weapon’
I think our American baseball bats make for much better weapons than whatever you call those cricket thingies.
However, if you want to kill at a distance…
Kurt Eichenwald Case: Texas Grand Jury Says a GIF Is a ‘Deadly Weapon’
sounds like intent to me.
sounds like intent to me.
From Trump’s cease and desist letter to kitten girl:
I’m at a loss. It sounds like something drunken Englebert Humperdinck would say if he was trying to pick up somebody’s mom at an oldies gig.
Maybe the whole ‘President Trump’ thing is a prank.
What will their creditors get?
wisdom
Always the optimist.
From Trump’s cease and desist letter to kitten girl:
I’m at a loss. It sounds like something drunken Englebert Humperdinck would say if he was trying to pick up somebody’s mom at an oldies gig.
Maybe the whole ‘President Trump’ thing is a prank.
What will their creditors get?
wisdom
Always the optimist.
What will their creditors get?
wisdom
Shy. As in once bitten….
What will their creditors get?
wisdom
Shy. As in once bitten….
” those cricket thingies.”
Uh, bats.
” those cricket thingies.”
Uh, bats.
russell, that Humperdinck has (by court order) to use a different artist name in Germany in order not to be confused with the Hänsel&Gretel composer (I can’t remember who successfully went to court over this, I guess the heirs of the opera composer). Iirc he has to go by ‘Engelbert’ around here.
russell, that Humperdinck has (by court order) to use a different artist name in Germany in order not to be confused with the Hänsel&Gretel composer (I can’t remember who successfully went to court over this, I guess the heirs of the opera composer). Iirc he has to go by ‘Engelbert’ around here.
…and don’t get Hartmut started on “Budweiser”, also, too.
…and don’t get Hartmut started on “Budweiser”, also, too.
Uh, bats.
Yeah, well, that would be like calling soccer “football,” as if anyone would do that.
I’m sure they have a colorful, quintessentially British-sounding name, like squinkies or choffles or duck-slumbers. Just think of something Dick Van Dyke would say in Mary Poppins in that perfect English accent of his.
Uh, bats.
Yeah, well, that would be like calling soccer “football,” as if anyone would do that.
I’m sure they have a colorful, quintessentially British-sounding name, like squinkies or choffles or duck-slumbers. Just think of something Dick Van Dyke would say in Mary Poppins in that perfect English accent of his.
Yes, but “sticky wicket” sounds like it’s a bit kinky, innit?
Yes, but “sticky wicket” sounds like it’s a bit kinky, innit?
What will their creditors get?
wisdom
Always the optimist.
not always
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2010/07/running_introductions.html?cid=6a00d834515c2369e20133f2ccc79f970b#comment-6a00d834515c2369e20133f2ccc79f970b
What will their creditors get?
wisdom
Always the optimist.
not always
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2010/07/running_introductions.html?cid=6a00d834515c2369e20133f2ccc79f970b#comment-6a00d834515c2369e20133f2ccc79f970b
Charming upbringing.
Charming upbringing.
What are the chances of Trump getting impeached and his staff and friends jailed? I gues I donlt have much faith in the FBI and no faith whatso ever in Congressional Repubicans. But perhaps I am too cynical. But I think tha the investigation will end in a coverup and Trump will skeate the same way Reagan did over Iran contra. Please tell me I;m wrong.
What are the chances of Trump getting impeached and his staff and friends jailed? I gues I donlt have much faith in the FBI and no faith whatso ever in Congressional Repubicans. But perhaps I am too cynical. But I think tha the investigation will end in a coverup and Trump will skeate the same way Reagan did over Iran contra. Please tell me I;m wrong.
wonkie, it’s a matter of time. If you’re thinking “in the next year or two” then yeah you’re probably not wrong.
But consider. The time from the Watergate break in until Nixon was gone was two years. Suppose it takes two years for the investigation to fight thru to a conclusion. Say summer of 2018.
By that point, we’re on the brink of an election. Either
a) the Republicans vote impeachment in the hopes of electoral survival, or
b) the Democrats win big and do the removal.
Either way, once Trump is gone, anybody else involved is probably toast.
Nothing like a certainty, of course. But not at all beyond the bounds of possibility.
wonkie, it’s a matter of time. If you’re thinking “in the next year or two” then yeah you’re probably not wrong.
But consider. The time from the Watergate break in until Nixon was gone was two years. Suppose it takes two years for the investigation to fight thru to a conclusion. Say summer of 2018.
By that point, we’re on the brink of an election. Either
a) the Republicans vote impeachment in the hopes of electoral survival, or
b) the Democrats win big and do the removal.
Either way, once Trump is gone, anybody else involved is probably toast.
Nothing like a certainty, of course. But not at all beyond the bounds of possibility.
Thanks for the link, Yama.
Thanks for the link, Yama.
Snarki, I do not care for beer so don’t expect any sexual-intercourse-in-a-canoe rants from me on that. At best I will joke about mainland Scandinavians calling their beer oil (beginners notoriously confuse øl [beer] with olje [oil]). Icelanders kept ‘bjor’. I guess only the Brits still make a difference between ale and beer because hop was introduced so late into Britain.
What makes Germans rotfl is the Norwegian term for light beer: fad-øl because ‘fad(e)’ in German means ‘lacking taste/aroma’ or simply ‘boring’ (light beer would be ‘Dünnbier’ (thin beer)).
As said above, I do not care about the stuff, so this is about language (tongue) not taste (perception by tongue).
Snarki, I do not care for beer so don’t expect any sexual-intercourse-in-a-canoe rants from me on that. At best I will joke about mainland Scandinavians calling their beer oil (beginners notoriously confuse øl [beer] with olje [oil]). Icelanders kept ‘bjor’. I guess only the Brits still make a difference between ale and beer because hop was introduced so late into Britain.
What makes Germans rotfl is the Norwegian term for light beer: fad-øl because ‘fad(e)’ in German means ‘lacking taste/aroma’ or simply ‘boring’ (light beer would be ‘Dünnbier’ (thin beer)).
As said above, I do not care about the stuff, so this is about language (tongue) not taste (perception by tongue).
Please tell me I;m wrong.
People who care about it need to keep complaining, loudly, to their Congresspeople. I’m going to wait until the healthcare vote is done, then Trump’s impeachment is going to be my main rant.
It would help if people on the “left” would quit saying “Nothing to see here!”
Please tell me I;m wrong.
People who care about it need to keep complaining, loudly, to their Congresspeople. I’m going to wait until the healthcare vote is done, then Trump’s impeachment is going to be my main rant.
It would help if people on the “left” would quit saying “Nothing to see here!”
What are the chances of Trump getting impeached and his staff and friends jailed?
my prediction: if things get too hot they’ll find somebody to throw under the bus and move on. so far that looks like mike flynn, but it’s early days.
to the degree that any of this depends on the (R) congress, nothing will happen at all.
as far as trump himself goes, the challenge will be distinguishing between garden variety mobbed-up shady business deals and plain old law-skirting venality, as compared to actual crimes against the nation.
in other words, trump will personally always have access to the “that was just business” dodge, and it may be impossible to prove otherwise.
What are the chances of Trump getting impeached and his staff and friends jailed?
my prediction: if things get too hot they’ll find somebody to throw under the bus and move on. so far that looks like mike flynn, but it’s early days.
to the degree that any of this depends on the (R) congress, nothing will happen at all.
as far as trump himself goes, the challenge will be distinguishing between garden variety mobbed-up shady business deals and plain old law-skirting venality, as compared to actual crimes against the nation.
in other words, trump will personally always have access to the “that was just business” dodge, and it may be impossible to prove otherwise.
Is anyoe on the left saying ther eis nothign to see? That’s crazy. theres lots and lots to see. I think the problem is that the scandal is too big to register–the idea of a Manchurian candidate who is a puppet of the Russians is just too much. It was easy to get outraged over Monica or over Watergate, but this…
Kind of like how American seems to have amnesia about the war in Iraq. The invasion was such a horribly immoral act with such devastating consequences, so shameful that it defies description–so there is an unspoken agreement to just not talk about it.
Russians influencing our election? Evidence now of Russians feeding fake news to Breitbart and Infowars, which means rightwingers who have a tradition of claiming to be more patriotic than thou got played by an enemy nation. Multiple connections between Trump and his former staffers with Russians. Russians busily killing off witnesses. Its all too much. Its the plot for a thriller, the kind of book some people read on airplanes or at the beach but no one takes seriously.
I just hope the CIA and the FBI are taking it seriously.
Is anyoe on the left saying ther eis nothign to see? That’s crazy. theres lots and lots to see. I think the problem is that the scandal is too big to register–the idea of a Manchurian candidate who is a puppet of the Russians is just too much. It was easy to get outraged over Monica or over Watergate, but this…
Kind of like how American seems to have amnesia about the war in Iraq. The invasion was such a horribly immoral act with such devastating consequences, so shameful that it defies description–so there is an unspoken agreement to just not talk about it.
Russians influencing our election? Evidence now of Russians feeding fake news to Breitbart and Infowars, which means rightwingers who have a tradition of claiming to be more patriotic than thou got played by an enemy nation. Multiple connections between Trump and his former staffers with Russians. Russians busily killing off witnesses. Its all too much. Its the plot for a thriller, the kind of book some people read on airplanes or at the beach but no one takes seriously.
I just hope the CIA and the FBI are taking it seriously.
Outrage fatigue. You’re soaking in it.
“I just hope the CIA and the FBI are taking it seriously.”
Cranking up the impeachment proceedings, or even the 25th Amendment, is very very likely to provoke Trump into a destructive reaction.
If the reason Trump has to be removed is something that the IC has a stake in (like Russian influence), they might be tempted to used “kinetic methods”.
Outrage fatigue. You’re soaking in it.
“I just hope the CIA and the FBI are taking it seriously.”
Cranking up the impeachment proceedings, or even the 25th Amendment, is very very likely to provoke Trump into a destructive reaction.
If the reason Trump has to be removed is something that the IC has a stake in (like Russian influence), they might be tempted to used “kinetic methods”.
we’ll see what happens.
money is speech and corps are people now over here in the usa. for-profit corps can even love jesus in their mercenary little hearts, so says the scotus.
and the POTUS can’t have a conflict of interest.
we’re through the looking glass. who knows where any of this is going.
we’ll see what happens.
money is speech and corps are people now over here in the usa. for-profit corps can even love jesus in their mercenary little hearts, so says the scotus.
and the POTUS can’t have a conflict of interest.
we’re through the looking glass. who knows where any of this is going.
Evidence now of Russians feeding fake news to Breitbart and Infowars
Trump’s base won’t care. they’ve already adopted the position that all other news sources are corrupt, so they’ll just claim that this is the establishment trying to smear the right for being honest.
and Trump will never be impeached. the GOP likes him. the GOP base likes him. the Dems have no power.
Evidence now of Russians feeding fake news to Breitbart and Infowars
Trump’s base won’t care. they’ve already adopted the position that all other news sources are corrupt, so they’ll just claim that this is the establishment trying to smear the right for being honest.
and Trump will never be impeached. the GOP likes him. the GOP base likes him. the Dems have no power.
There’s our optimist!
There’s our optimist!
An analysis of subreddit The Donald by FiveThirtyEight. The results aren’t terribly surprising (by which I mean they aren’t at all surprising). But the analysis is interesting.
An analysis of subreddit The Donald by FiveThirtyEight. The results aren’t terribly surprising (by which I mean they aren’t at all surprising). But the analysis is interesting.
I think the only problem with impeachment is in the vein of what Russell said, showing an actual crime at the Trump level. I am a little confused about the Manafort discussion because I thought he resigned because of his Ukraine/Russia dealings. I’m trying to understand what’s new.
Now if in the investigation that is being relooked at for criminality it certainly provides the administration with a clear fall guy to go with Flynn.
Collusion is hard to prove in the world where .any of these people shave global connections. Wilkerson, Sessions, etc.have perfectly valid reasons to be talking to lots of Russians, as did Hillary’s people.
It’s not clear to me yet that a broad set of charges is likely based on the language, “indications” etc.
I think the only problem with impeachment is in the vein of what Russell said, showing an actual crime at the Trump level. I am a little confused about the Manafort discussion because I thought he resigned because of his Ukraine/Russia dealings. I’m trying to understand what’s new.
Now if in the investigation that is being relooked at for criminality it certainly provides the administration with a clear fall guy to go with Flynn.
Collusion is hard to prove in the world where .any of these people shave global connections. Wilkerson, Sessions, etc.have perfectly valid reasons to be talking to lots of Russians, as did Hillary’s people.
It’s not clear to me yet that a broad set of charges is likely based on the language, “indications” etc.
An analysis of subreddit The Donald by FiveThirtyEight.
that’s some clever stuff.
and, hey look, actual data to support “deplorable”. though we mustn’t say it.
An analysis of subreddit The Donald by FiveThirtyEight.
that’s some clever stuff.
and, hey look, actual data to support “deplorable”. though we mustn’t say it.
From subReddit link “What can we say about the animating force behind r/The_Donald? For one, it’s probably not universal among Trump supporters; nearly 63 million Americans voted for Trump, and the 382,000 members of r/The_Donald represent less than 1 percent of that.”
From subReddit link “What can we say about the animating force behind r/The_Donald? For one, it’s probably not universal among Trump supporters; nearly 63 million Americans voted for Trump, and the 382,000 members of r/The_Donald represent less than 1 percent of that.”
I am a little confused about the Manafort discussion because I thought he resigned because of his Ukraine/Russia dealings. I’m trying to understand what’s new.
we knew he was involved in Ukrainian elections. we knew he was receiving secret payments from the “Party of Regions”.
the guy was literally in the business of manufacturing US news for the benefit of Russia.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/03/22/timeline-paul-manaforts-long-murky-history-of-political-interventions/
I am a little confused about the Manafort discussion because I thought he resigned because of his Ukraine/Russia dealings. I’m trying to understand what’s new.
we knew he was involved in Ukrainian elections. we knew he was receiving secret payments from the “Party of Regions”.
the guy was literally in the business of manufacturing US news for the benefit of Russia.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/03/22/timeline-paul-manaforts-long-murky-history-of-political-interventions/
Is anyone on the left saying there is nothing to see?
Glenn Greenwald and the Intercept, folks at the Nation, etc., call it new McCarthyism, and say that both sides do it so why complain that a fascist dictator in Russia helped get a fascist regime elected, and policies implemented, in the U.S. I’m not going to link to them, but if you’re interested, I’m sure you can find plenty. Glenn Greenwald has been a frequent guest of Fox News saying all of this. Of course, how else would a patriot act?
Is anyone on the left saying there is nothing to see?
Glenn Greenwald and the Intercept, folks at the Nation, etc., call it new McCarthyism, and say that both sides do it so why complain that a fascist dictator in Russia helped get a fascist regime elected, and policies implemented, in the U.S. I’m not going to link to them, but if you’re interested, I’m sure you can find plenty. Glenn Greenwald has been a frequent guest of Fox News saying all of this. Of course, how else would a patriot act?
In reading about the Gorsuch hearings it occurs to me that the role of the Office of Legal Counsel at the DOJ and really anyone advising the President in his official capacity as POTUS (as opposed to advising the President on his personal legal matters) needs to be substantially revised if not completely re-thought.
From reading, Gorsuch seemed to rely a lot for explanation of his views while working at DOJ and being involved in the legal issues surrounding torture and prisoners of the war on terror that he was just providing legal advice to his “client” (which is basically John Yoo’s view/excuse). This frame, ISTM, too easily lends itself to the kind of “my side vs. your side” POV that many lawyers adopt – quite rightly in most cases – when representing an individual client: any non-frivolous argument about the law is just fine (i.e., it would not be subject to Rule 11 sanctions).
But this is not the typical lawyer-client situation. Indeed, I would take the position that POTUS should not be viewed as a “client” of DOJ and the OLC at all. Instead, if anyone should be viewed as the client it should be the American People writ-large and/or the Constitution. In such a case I would say the role of OLC/DOJ should be to determine what the “most correct” answer is when it comes to Constitutional and other legal questions.
But instead, we have a situation where, ISTM, OLC is writing opinions that are designed to provide a “plausible” argument for question X – e.g., does POTUS have the power to do this thing? – rather than what the most likely answer is. That is, instead of adopting the position that would likely carry the day in front of a judge, they feel comfortable blessing actions by POTUS even if they are not the supported by the balance of the evidence/precedent as long as some non-frivolous argument can be mustered in support of the actions.
Maybe I’m misunderstanding how OLC operates, but that’s how it looks like to me from the outside – they are on the President’s “team” and thus any legal justification for opining that what he wants to do is legal – no matter how thin – will be used to bless the action in question. That should not be the role of the DOJ/OLC in our Constitutional structure. That is, in their they are not lawyers, but policy makers, or at a minimum policy enablers, and should be viewed/treated as such.
In reading about the Gorsuch hearings it occurs to me that the role of the Office of Legal Counsel at the DOJ and really anyone advising the President in his official capacity as POTUS (as opposed to advising the President on his personal legal matters) needs to be substantially revised if not completely re-thought.
From reading, Gorsuch seemed to rely a lot for explanation of his views while working at DOJ and being involved in the legal issues surrounding torture and prisoners of the war on terror that he was just providing legal advice to his “client” (which is basically John Yoo’s view/excuse). This frame, ISTM, too easily lends itself to the kind of “my side vs. your side” POV that many lawyers adopt – quite rightly in most cases – when representing an individual client: any non-frivolous argument about the law is just fine (i.e., it would not be subject to Rule 11 sanctions).
But this is not the typical lawyer-client situation. Indeed, I would take the position that POTUS should not be viewed as a “client” of DOJ and the OLC at all. Instead, if anyone should be viewed as the client it should be the American People writ-large and/or the Constitution. In such a case I would say the role of OLC/DOJ should be to determine what the “most correct” answer is when it comes to Constitutional and other legal questions.
But instead, we have a situation where, ISTM, OLC is writing opinions that are designed to provide a “plausible” argument for question X – e.g., does POTUS have the power to do this thing? – rather than what the most likely answer is. That is, instead of adopting the position that would likely carry the day in front of a judge, they feel comfortable blessing actions by POTUS even if they are not the supported by the balance of the evidence/precedent as long as some non-frivolous argument can be mustered in support of the actions.
Maybe I’m misunderstanding how OLC operates, but that’s how it looks like to me from the outside – they are on the President’s “team” and thus any legal justification for opining that what he wants to do is legal – no matter how thin – will be used to bless the action in question. That should not be the role of the DOJ/OLC in our Constitutional structure. That is, in their they are not lawyers, but policy makers, or at a minimum policy enablers, and should be viewed/treated as such.
“That is, in their they are not lawyers, but policy makers, or at a minimum policy enablers, and should be viewed/treated as such.”
Including prosecution for aiding and abetting war crimes, and crimes against humanity.
If only.
“That is, in their they are not lawyers, but policy makers, or at a minimum policy enablers, and should be viewed/treated as such.”
Including prosecution for aiding and abetting war crimes, and crimes against humanity.
If only.
Yes cleek, but most of that outline was known when he resigned. And not one of those payments was recorded after 2012. So here is a guy who has been in US politics as an advisor, manager for decades who got paid to run campaigns and marketing for Ukrainian and Russian officials as part of a firm that did that for a living.
I am really trying to see what is new, or criminal. That’s all.
Yes cleek, but most of that outline was known when he resigned. And not one of those payments was recorded after 2012. So here is a guy who has been in US politics as an advisor, manager for decades who got paid to run campaigns and marketing for Ukrainian and Russian officials as part of a firm that did that for a living.
I am really trying to see what is new, or criminal. That’s all.
Gorsuch is a weasel.
Gorsuch is a weasel.
russell: my prediction: if things get too hot they’ll find somebody to throw under the bus and move on. so far that looks like mike flynn, but it’s early days.
No doubt they will try tossing people under the bus. That’s Trump at his most Trumpian.
But at some point, you run out of even vaguely plausible candidates to toss. At that point (or maybe even before it’s reached), we are probably looking at a drummed up foreign crisis, probably with military action.
How that plays out depends on whether they can come up with something relatively plausible. North Korea could do it. A spat with India or Japan wouldn’t — but does Trump even have a clue on that?
And, once he tries to start something, how does the rest of the government, from the Congress to the military high command, respond? And yes, I can envision a circumstance where the military would say “Illegal order!” and refuse to act. Not easy to get to that, but Trump has impressed with his ability to decide to try the wildly improbable.
russell: my prediction: if things get too hot they’ll find somebody to throw under the bus and move on. so far that looks like mike flynn, but it’s early days.
No doubt they will try tossing people under the bus. That’s Trump at his most Trumpian.
But at some point, you run out of even vaguely plausible candidates to toss. At that point (or maybe even before it’s reached), we are probably looking at a drummed up foreign crisis, probably with military action.
How that plays out depends on whether they can come up with something relatively plausible. North Korea could do it. A spat with India or Japan wouldn’t — but does Trump even have a clue on that?
And, once he tries to start something, how does the rest of the government, from the Congress to the military high command, respond? And yes, I can envision a circumstance where the military would say “Illegal order!” and refuse to act. Not easy to get to that, but Trump has impressed with his ability to decide to try the wildly improbable.
I think the business deals – Manafort, Page, Flynn with the Turks, the various entangled Trump et al real estate deals involving Russian principals – are not likely to yield anything that will lead to impeachment.
Grifters gotta grift. Opportunity attracts opportunists. Everybody wants to be a billionaire.
In the case of Russia in particular, it can be very hard to draw a line between business interests and the interest of the state. It may be very hard to demonstrate collusion for political ends. There may in fact not actually be very much collusion for political ends.
Maybe Putin hacked everybody, and just dumped stuff about Clinton because he really dislikes Clinton. Payback for her interference in stuff in Russia’s preferred zone of control.
The fact that people in Trump’s circle were also knee-deep in oligarch wheeling and dealing could very easily just be coincidental.
The big smell, to my eye, is the change of the GOP platform on the Ukraine. It could be that Trump sincerely thought the GOP policy up to then was wrong-headed, and wanted the platform changed purely due to his analysis of the geopolitical situation, uninfluenced by any connection he or his circle may have had with either Putin or the pro-Russia factions in the Ukraine.
That could be possible.
But it’s pretty freaking smelly.
My guess is that Trump et al will be forgiven anything that was simply a desire to get their hands on big buckets of oligarch money.
Business is business. The real American motto.
Doing favors at a policy level is (maybe) a different story.
I think the business deals – Manafort, Page, Flynn with the Turks, the various entangled Trump et al real estate deals involving Russian principals – are not likely to yield anything that will lead to impeachment.
Grifters gotta grift. Opportunity attracts opportunists. Everybody wants to be a billionaire.
In the case of Russia in particular, it can be very hard to draw a line between business interests and the interest of the state. It may be very hard to demonstrate collusion for political ends. There may in fact not actually be very much collusion for political ends.
Maybe Putin hacked everybody, and just dumped stuff about Clinton because he really dislikes Clinton. Payback for her interference in stuff in Russia’s preferred zone of control.
The fact that people in Trump’s circle were also knee-deep in oligarch wheeling and dealing could very easily just be coincidental.
The big smell, to my eye, is the change of the GOP platform on the Ukraine. It could be that Trump sincerely thought the GOP policy up to then was wrong-headed, and wanted the platform changed purely due to his analysis of the geopolitical situation, uninfluenced by any connection he or his circle may have had with either Putin or the pro-Russia factions in the Ukraine.
That could be possible.
But it’s pretty freaking smelly.
My guess is that Trump et al will be forgiven anything that was simply a desire to get their hands on big buckets of oligarch money.
Business is business. The real American motto.
Doing favors at a policy level is (maybe) a different story.
The thirty perecenters will always support authoritariansim.
Isn;t lying an impeachable ofense? And hasn;t Trump already lied about the Russian connections?
The thirty perecenters will always support authoritariansim.
Isn;t lying an impeachable ofense? And hasn;t Trump already lied about the Russian connections?
“…it’s probably not universal among Trump supporters; nearly 63 million Americans voted for Trump, and the 382,000 members of r/The_Donald represent less than 1 percent of that.”
True, and while I have stated on many occasions here that I don’t think the now-familiar list of -isms was the primary force behind Trump’s election, there is a lot of space between the maximum of “(probably) not universal” and the minimum of what could be called considerable or significant.
That 1% is likely representative of some larger percentage of Trump voters, though almost certainly not all of them.
“…it’s probably not universal among Trump supporters; nearly 63 million Americans voted for Trump, and the 382,000 members of r/The_Donald represent less than 1 percent of that.”
True, and while I have stated on many occasions here that I don’t think the now-familiar list of -isms was the primary force behind Trump’s election, there is a lot of space between the maximum of “(probably) not universal” and the minimum of what could be called considerable or significant.
That 1% is likely representative of some larger percentage of Trump voters, though almost certainly not all of them.
Isn;t lying an impeachable ofense?
Only if congress thinks it is under the circumstances, including the political circumstances.
Isn;t lying an impeachable ofense?
Only if congress thinks it is under the circumstances, including the political circumstances.
the endless news reports of people harassing minorities in Trump’s name, the multiple polls that tell us Trump supporters are more likely to be racist and sexist, the fact that his sexual assault was passionately defended – if not happily embraced – by his supporters, his enthusiastic support among out-and-proud -ists, and the fact that i’ve seen multiple coal-rollin’ pickup trucks sporting “I’M A DEPLORABLE” stickers have convinced me that Clinton’s estimate was in the ball park.
the endless news reports of people harassing minorities in Trump’s name, the multiple polls that tell us Trump supporters are more likely to be racist and sexist, the fact that his sexual assault was passionately defended – if not happily embraced – by his supporters, his enthusiastic support among out-and-proud -ists, and the fact that i’ve seen multiple coal-rollin’ pickup trucks sporting “I’M A DEPLORABLE” stickers have convinced me that Clinton’s estimate was in the ball park.
Isn;t lying an impeachable ofense?
Lying per se, no.
Clinton was impeached for lying under oath, which is an impeachable offense.
Isn;t lying an impeachable ofense?
Lying per se, no.
Clinton was impeached for lying under oath, which is an impeachable offense.
The big smell, to my eye, is the change of the GOP platform on the Ukraine. It could be that Trump sincerely thought the GOP policy up to then was wrong-headed, and wanted the platform changed purely due to his analysis of the geopolitical situation, uninfluenced by any connection he or his circle may have had with either Putin or the pro-Russia factions in the Ukraine.
That could be possible.
But it’s pretty freaking smelly.
IF Trump and his campaign had said that Yes, they got the change to the platform made. And they did if for that reason. Then it would be no big deal. Policy changes happen all the time.
What moves it from being a difference of opinion on policy to something seriously problematic is that they denied, loudly, repeatedly, and even now, that they had anything to do with the change. Which makes it hard to attribute the change to just a different policy view.
The big smell, to my eye, is the change of the GOP platform on the Ukraine. It could be that Trump sincerely thought the GOP policy up to then was wrong-headed, and wanted the platform changed purely due to his analysis of the geopolitical situation, uninfluenced by any connection he or his circle may have had with either Putin or the pro-Russia factions in the Ukraine.
That could be possible.
But it’s pretty freaking smelly.
IF Trump and his campaign had said that Yes, they got the change to the platform made. And they did if for that reason. Then it would be no big deal. Policy changes happen all the time.
What moves it from being a difference of opinion on policy to something seriously problematic is that they denied, loudly, repeatedly, and even now, that they had anything to do with the change. Which makes it hard to attribute the change to just a different policy view.
Isn;t lying an impeachable ofense? And hasn;t Trump already lied about the Russian connections?
No, lying is definitely NOT an impeachable offense. Lying under oath** (i.e. perjury) is, because it is a crime. But you can stand up and lie yourself blue in the face (Ah! What an image to conjure with!) and that’s not criminal and therefore not an impeachable offense.
So, while it looks more and more like Trump has lied about his Russian connections (among many, many other things), that isn’t grounds for impeachment.
** That’s what got Bill Clinton.
Isn;t lying an impeachable ofense? And hasn;t Trump already lied about the Russian connections?
No, lying is definitely NOT an impeachable offense. Lying under oath** (i.e. perjury) is, because it is a crime. But you can stand up and lie yourself blue in the face (Ah! What an image to conjure with!) and that’s not criminal and therefore not an impeachable offense.
So, while it looks more and more like Trump has lied about his Russian connections (among many, many other things), that isn’t grounds for impeachment.
** That’s what got Bill Clinton.
I am really trying to see what is new, or criminal. That’s all.
If you’re talking about Manafort, there’s the fact that he didn’t register as a foreign lobbyist, which is a felony if he was working as one. And whether his work with the Trump campaign was being done in connection with his secret contract with Putin. And whether there was money laundering involved, etc.
He’s not “guilty” until convicted, of course.
I am really trying to see what is new, or criminal. That’s all.
If you’re talking about Manafort, there’s the fact that he didn’t register as a foreign lobbyist, which is a felony if he was working as one. And whether his work with the Trump campaign was being done in connection with his secret contract with Putin. And whether there was money laundering involved, etc.
He’s not “guilty” until convicted, of course.
So, while it looks more and more like Trump has lied about his Russian connections (among many, many other things), that isn’t grounds for impeachment.
What’s impeachable under the Constitution “high crimes and misdemeanors” clause is pretty much up to Congress to decide. It doesn’t necessarily have to be an actual crime.
So, while it looks more and more like Trump has lied about his Russian connections (among many, many other things), that isn’t grounds for impeachment.
What’s impeachable under the Constitution “high crimes and misdemeanors” clause is pretty much up to Congress to decide. It doesn’t necessarily have to be an actual crime.
‘And whether his work with the Trump campaign was being done in connection with his secret contract with Putin.”
Are you referring to his secret contract with Putin from 2012 and before? And was he a foreign lobbyist to our government at the time, since he essentially ran campaigns in the Ukraine?
And, I am not being difficult. I wouldn’t defend Manafort for a second, or Trump if there were actual evidence of collusion. My challenge is the allegations seem to have barely more substance some of Trumps. The public information seems to be based on timelines and assumptions that bad characters will be bad.
‘And whether his work with the Trump campaign was being done in connection with his secret contract with Putin.”
Are you referring to his secret contract with Putin from 2012 and before? And was he a foreign lobbyist to our government at the time, since he essentially ran campaigns in the Ukraine?
And, I am not being difficult. I wouldn’t defend Manafort for a second, or Trump if there were actual evidence of collusion. My challenge is the allegations seem to have barely more substance some of Trumps. The public information seems to be based on timelines and assumptions that bad characters will be bad.
At this point, they are suspicions, not allegations. We’re not going after Clinton, after all.
At this point, they are suspicions, not allegations. We’re not going after Clinton, after all.
Well, none of them killed Vince Foster either.
Well, none of them killed Vince Foster either.
From the AP Report: “Manafort proposed in a confidential strategy plan as early as June 2005 that he would influence politics, business dealings and news coverage inside the United States, Europe and former Soviet republics to benefit President Vladimir Putin’s government, even as U.S.-Russia relations under Republican President George W. Bush grew worse.”
Italics added for emphasis. Sounds like working in the US to me. Do we know when his strategy plan was supposed to have been implemented?
From the AP Report: “Manafort proposed in a confidential strategy plan as early as June 2005 that he would influence politics, business dealings and news coverage inside the United States, Europe and former Soviet republics to benefit President Vladimir Putin’s government, even as U.S.-Russia relations under Republican President George W. Bush grew worse.”
Italics added for emphasis. Sounds like working in the US to me. Do we know when his strategy plan was supposed to have been implemented?
My comment got eaten, Marty, so hope this doesn’t appear twice, but here’s a link to the AP story.
Manafort proposed in a confidential strategy plan as early as June 2005 that he would influence politics, business dealings and news coverage inside the United States, Europe and former Soviet republics to benefit President Vladimir Putin’s government, even as U.S.-Russia relations under Republican President George W. Bush grew worse.
My comment got eaten, Marty, so hope this doesn’t appear twice, but here’s a link to the AP story.
Manafort proposed in a confidential strategy plan as early as June 2005 that he would influence politics, business dealings and news coverage inside the United States, Europe and former Soviet republics to benefit President Vladimir Putin’s government, even as U.S.-Russia relations under Republican President George W. Bush grew worse.
My comments are disappearing.
wj: The spam filter has been working overtime. I at least got a couple of them published.
My comments are disappearing.
wj: The spam filter has been working overtime. I at least got a couple of them published.
AP Story:
“Manafort proposed in a confidential strategy plan as early as June 2005 that he would influence politics, business dealings and news coverage inside the United States, Europe and former Soviet republics to benefit President Vladimir Putin’s government, even as U.S.-Russia relations under Republican President George W. Bush grew worse.”
AP Story:
“Manafort proposed in a confidential strategy plan as early as June 2005 that he would influence politics, business dealings and news coverage inside the United States, Europe and former Soviet republics to benefit President Vladimir Putin’s government, even as U.S.-Russia relations under Republican President George W. Bush grew worse.”
For some reason, I can’t make the AP story link show up. It specifically says that Manafort would influence politics inside the United States.
For some reason, I can’t make the AP story link show up. It specifically says that Manafort would influence politics inside the United States.
Actually Sapient, I think I did read that it said that also. So that is a good point. So depending on lobbying rules etc. it may very well be that he should have registered. If so he should be held accountable to whatever penalty is associated with that.
But I have seen no indication that he still worked for them past 2012, and none that he was acting on their behalf while working for Trump.
He clearly has been a player in Republican politics for decades so it could be his interest in the Trump campaign, and role, was what he did for Reagan and the first Bush.
Its a bigger stretch to me that he was some dark character undermining the American electoral process for nefarious Soviet purposes, than it is to believe he was an unscrupulous political opportunist that was hired to run another campaign and had to resign when the optics were bad.
But it is certainly not unbelievable that he could have taken a payment to impact the policy stances. So, while I am not convinced, I am not convinced either way.
Actually Sapient, I think I did read that it said that also. So that is a good point. So depending on lobbying rules etc. it may very well be that he should have registered. If so he should be held accountable to whatever penalty is associated with that.
But I have seen no indication that he still worked for them past 2012, and none that he was acting on their behalf while working for Trump.
He clearly has been a player in Republican politics for decades so it could be his interest in the Trump campaign, and role, was what he did for Reagan and the first Bush.
Its a bigger stretch to me that he was some dark character undermining the American electoral process for nefarious Soviet purposes, than it is to believe he was an unscrupulous political opportunist that was hired to run another campaign and had to resign when the optics were bad.
But it is certainly not unbelievable that he could have taken a payment to impact the policy stances. So, while I am not convinced, I am not convinced either way.
Thanks, wj.
Thanks, wj.
Well, now we understand why the State Department budget needed to be
increasedcut. From Reuters:Wonder if they even realize that the folks who do this latest bit of “extreme vetting” are part of the State Department.
I’m also wondering if the steady drumbeat of crazy will eventually wear down my capacity for amazement.
Well, now we understand why the State Department budget needed to be
increasedcut. From Reuters:Wonder if they even realize that the folks who do this latest bit of “extreme vetting” are part of the State Department.
I’m also wondering if the steady drumbeat of crazy will eventually wear down my capacity for amazement.
actually, betting that bad actors will do bad stuff is not unreasonable.
actually, betting that bad actors will do bad stuff is not unreasonable.
Considering how many times Benghazi was investigated, I’d say this deserves some level of scrutiny.
Considering how many times Benghazi was investigated, I’d say this deserves some level of scrutiny.
honestly, i think if Trump was personally involved in some kind of under-the-table election influence/rigging he’d be unable to stop from dropping hints about how awesome he was at getting the job done.
honestly, i think if Trump was personally involved in some kind of under-the-table election influence/rigging he’d be unable to stop from dropping hints about how awesome he was at getting the job done.
I assume you’ve all seen this Time interview?
http://time.com/4710456/donald-trump-time-interview-truth-falsehood/
SNL will not require scriptwriters anymore.
I assume you’ve all seen this Time interview?
http://time.com/4710456/donald-trump-time-interview-truth-falsehood/
SNL will not require scriptwriters anymore.
“SNL will not require scriptwriters anymore.”
Good thing that Al Franken found different job, then.
“SNL will not require scriptwriters anymore.”
Good thing that Al Franken found different job, then.
I wouldn’t defend Manafort for a second
But I have seen no indication that he still worked for them past 2012
second’s up…
I wouldn’t defend Manafort for a second
But I have seen no indication that he still worked for them past 2012
second’s up…
The things is, if you break the law through sheer ignorant incompetent hapless chaotic ham-handed stupidity and greed, you still break the law.
Even if you didn’t mean to, and were only trying to get absolutely filthy stinking rich.
So, we’ll see where it all lands. I hope the FBI and whoever else is looking into it is allowed to follow it all where it leads.
I’m not invested in Trump being impeached, neither am I interested in cutting any of those bozos any slack. Every new thing we find out reaffirms my opinion that they are a bunch of greedy freaking lampreys.
It’s true, I would be inclined toward that opinion anyway, and I don’t mind owning up to that. But they’re not doing anything to make me think any different.
The things is, if you break the law through sheer ignorant incompetent hapless chaotic ham-handed stupidity and greed, you still break the law.
Even if you didn’t mean to, and were only trying to get absolutely filthy stinking rich.
So, we’ll see where it all lands. I hope the FBI and whoever else is looking into it is allowed to follow it all where it leads.
I’m not invested in Trump being impeached, neither am I interested in cutting any of those bozos any slack. Every new thing we find out reaffirms my opinion that they are a bunch of greedy freaking lampreys.
It’s true, I would be inclined toward that opinion anyway, and I don’t mind owning up to that. But they’re not doing anything to make me think any different.
I think that it is essential that there be serious consequences os some kind given to people conspired with the Russians to influence the election and to influence policy. I see that kind of behavior as a very serous threat to representative government. Mabye not as seroius as gerrymandering and voter supporesssion laws and packing the judiciary with Ayn rand wackadoodles, but serious.
I think that it is essential that there be serious consequences os some kind given to people conspired with the Russians to influence the election and to influence policy. I see that kind of behavior as a very serous threat to representative government. Mabye not as seroius as gerrymandering and voter supporesssion laws and packing the judiciary with Ayn rand wackadoodles, but serious.
And on the OT, “who’s next” is apparently Sib Hashian, former drummer for the band Boston and a local (to these parts) musical luminary. Apparently he passed while playing on a “Legends of Rock” cruise. 67 years old, which seems younger and younger to me every day.
I once walked into a rehearsal at a space a buddy of mine had, the band was a bunch of local veteran players, Sib was playing drums. He was the loudest freaking drummer I ever heard in my life. It was alarming.
Loud, accurate, good sound, and his time was well-rooted and right down the middle. Everything you want in a big-room rock drummer.
R.I.P Sib.
And on the OT, “who’s next” is apparently Sib Hashian, former drummer for the band Boston and a local (to these parts) musical luminary. Apparently he passed while playing on a “Legends of Rock” cruise. 67 years old, which seems younger and younger to me every day.
I once walked into a rehearsal at a space a buddy of mine had, the band was a bunch of local veteran players, Sib was playing drums. He was the loudest freaking drummer I ever heard in my life. It was alarming.
Loud, accurate, good sound, and his time was well-rooted and right down the middle. Everything you want in a big-room rock drummer.
R.I.P Sib.
wonkie, to this I agree completely:
I think that it is essential that there be serious consequences os some kind given to people conspired with the Russians to influence the election and to influence policy. I see that kind of behavior as a very serous threat to representative government.
I think it’s about as bad as it gets.
wonkie, to this I agree completely:
I think that it is essential that there be serious consequences os some kind given to people conspired with the Russians to influence the election and to influence policy. I see that kind of behavior as a very serous threat to representative government.
I think it’s about as bad as it gets.
Two pieces of British arcana for y’all’s delectation (or is it “all y’all” now as the plural…? I lose track).
First, the “secret” (which is to say “not widely circulated because it’s kinda morbid”) plan for the days after the death of The Queen:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/16/what-happens-when-queen-elizabeth-dies-london-bridge
At 86 she has an average of 4 and a bit years left, so it would be a bit of a surprise if it was this year.
Second is that today the City of London is electing its representative to Parliament, the Remembrancer (for those who read William Gibson’s The Peripheral the job title will be familiar; I didn’t know it was real myself).
What’s special about this election? Corporations literally get a vote (thousands of votes, in some cases!), and you can only stand if you are a freeman of the City of London — a status mostly only granted to members of one of the City’s various medieval-origin “livery companies”.
http://www.unlockdemocracy.org/blog/2017/3/23/britains-most-undemocratic-election-the-city-of-london-corporation?utm_content=bufferbdecd&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Two pieces of British arcana for y’all’s delectation (or is it “all y’all” now as the plural…? I lose track).
First, the “secret” (which is to say “not widely circulated because it’s kinda morbid”) plan for the days after the death of The Queen:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/16/what-happens-when-queen-elizabeth-dies-london-bridge
At 86 she has an average of 4 and a bit years left, so it would be a bit of a surprise if it was this year.
Second is that today the City of London is electing its representative to Parliament, the Remembrancer (for those who read William Gibson’s The Peripheral the job title will be familiar; I didn’t know it was real myself).
What’s special about this election? Corporations literally get a vote (thousands of votes, in some cases!), and you can only stand if you are a freeman of the City of London — a status mostly only granted to members of one of the City’s various medieval-origin “livery companies”.
http://www.unlockdemocracy.org/blog/2017/3/23/britains-most-undemocratic-election-the-city-of-london-corporation?utm_content=bufferbdecd&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
sanbikinoraion, I don’t know if you are British or not, but this may be the place to say that whenever I use y’all I feel a frisson of embarrassment, as if I am not entitled. But it’s a) so useful, and b) so charming, I can’t resist. I realise it may be cultural appropriation, but I’m hoping nobody here minds!
sanbikinoraion, I don’t know if you are British or not, but this may be the place to say that whenever I use y’all I feel a frisson of embarrassment, as if I am not entitled. But it’s a) so useful, and b) so charming, I can’t resist. I realise it may be cultural appropriation, but I’m hoping nobody here minds!
As long as you don’t write ‘you all’, you’ll be fine…
As long as you don’t write ‘you all’, you’ll be fine…
Just keep your mitts off “youse guys” and no one gets hurt.
Just keep your mitts off “youse guys” and no one gets hurt.
If lobbying on behalf of other countries with rotten human rights records is bad, Manafort should have been dog meat decades ago. Better late than never, but promising to lobby for countries with bad human rights records is absolutely bog standard stuff. This is from the early 90’s
https://cloudfront-files-1.publicintegrity.org/legacy_projects/pdf_reports/THETORTURERSLOBBY.pdf
I would be very interested in knowing how many lobbyists for countries with bad human rights records have chummy relationships with politicians in DC. But for people who are really good at it the first rule of lobbying is that nobody respectable talks about your lobbying.
If lobbying on behalf of other countries with rotten human rights records is bad, Manafort should have been dog meat decades ago. Better late than never, but promising to lobby for countries with bad human rights records is absolutely bog standard stuff. This is from the early 90’s
https://cloudfront-files-1.publicintegrity.org/legacy_projects/pdf_reports/THETORTURERSLOBBY.pdf
I would be very interested in knowing how many lobbyists for countries with bad human rights records have chummy relationships with politicians in DC. But for people who are really good at it the first rule of lobbying is that nobody respectable talks about your lobbying.
If lobbying on behalf of other countries with rotten human rights records is bad, Manafort should have been dog meat decades ago
Yes, he should have. But when the torture lobbyists actually become the government, as they just have, we’ve really got problems. You see, some things might be bad, and still others way worse. The Trump administration is cruel just for the hell of it.
If lobbying on behalf of other countries with rotten human rights records is bad, Manafort should have been dog meat decades ago
Yes, he should have. But when the torture lobbyists actually become the government, as they just have, we’ve really got problems. You see, some things might be bad, and still others way worse. The Trump administration is cruel just for the hell of it.
We’ve had this problem forever, in both parties. I think Trump is on track to be one of the worst Presidents ever on virtually all fronts. But I am interested in this Russia thing for the precedents it sets, good and bad. One good one — apparently it is bad for politicians to have sympathetic relations with nasty people overseas and for their underlings to lobby for them. Who knew?
Black Manafort Stone and Kelly–
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Black,_Manafort,_Stone_and_Kelly
We’ve had this problem forever, in both parties. I think Trump is on track to be one of the worst Presidents ever on virtually all fronts. But I am interested in this Russia thing for the precedents it sets, good and bad. One good one — apparently it is bad for politicians to have sympathetic relations with nasty people overseas and for their underlings to lobby for them. Who knew?
Black Manafort Stone and Kelly–
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Black,_Manafort,_Stone_and_Kelly
GftNC — born in Glasgow, raised in Doncaster, currently somewhere between Munich and Reading. I have a friend in North Carolina, though, and over the years I’ve noticed “y’all” moving from definitely plural into a general purpose “you”, thus defeating its minor benefit of allowing you to differentiate between you (singular) and you (plural). In fact it seems that the local residents were sufficiently aware of this that they ginned up “all y’all” as a new plural form. Who knows where this linguistic rollercoaster will go next…?
GftNC — born in Glasgow, raised in Doncaster, currently somewhere between Munich and Reading. I have a friend in North Carolina, though, and over the years I’ve noticed “y’all” moving from definitely plural into a general purpose “you”, thus defeating its minor benefit of allowing you to differentiate between you (singular) and you (plural). In fact it seems that the local residents were sufficiently aware of this that they ginned up “all y’all” as a new plural form. Who knows where this linguistic rollercoaster will go next…?
That reminds me of the monosyllabic “liked” not sounding past-tensey enough (I believe particularly among Puerto Ricans in and around NYC), so it became “likeded.” Now I’ve heard it morph into “likededed” for even greater past-tensity.
That reminds me of the monosyllabic “liked” not sounding past-tensey enough (I believe particularly among Puerto Ricans in and around NYC), so it became “likeded.” Now I’ve heard it morph into “likededed” for even greater past-tensity.
The converse of hairshirt’s “likeded” (which I haven’t run into; maybe it’s regional?) — people saying “text” (or “tex-t”? or whatever they’re thinking, or not-thinking) for “texted.”
Also: the use of “may” for “might” (“If it hadn’t rained yesterday, he may not have had the accident.”) I’ve got a lengthening file of examples for this one.
Also: headlines in the past tense on news websites.
Also, millions of dollars at stake for lack of a comma:
I wouldn’t like to be the person who drafted that drafting manual. But then, I *wouldn’t* be that person, because as far as I’m concerned, the comma always stays in. WTF is the benefit of leaving it out in the first place?
The converse of hairshirt’s “likeded” (which I haven’t run into; maybe it’s regional?) — people saying “text” (or “tex-t”? or whatever they’re thinking, or not-thinking) for “texted.”
Also: the use of “may” for “might” (“If it hadn’t rained yesterday, he may not have had the accident.”) I’ve got a lengthening file of examples for this one.
Also: headlines in the past tense on news websites.
Also, millions of dollars at stake for lack of a comma:
I wouldn’t like to be the person who drafted that drafting manual. But then, I *wouldn’t* be that person, because as far as I’m concerned, the comma always stays in. WTF is the benefit of leaving it out in the first place?
(which I haven’t run into; maybe it’s regional?)
AFAIK, it’s at least mostly a Nuyorican thing.
(which I haven’t run into; maybe it’s regional?)
AFAIK, it’s at least mostly a Nuyorican thing.
What about incidence, instances, and incidents?
I was recently at a work meeting when someone brought up a new “smoking sensation” program. (No, it wasn’t John Smoketoomuch.)
What about incidence, instances, and incidents?
I was recently at a work meeting when someone brought up a new “smoking sensation” program. (No, it wasn’t John Smoketoomuch.)
Eats, shoots and leaves.
Eats, shoots and leaves.
AFAIK, it’s at least mostly a Nuyorican thing.
Yeah, you said that in the first place. I was just racing along too fast. 🙂
****
How about “utilize” where “use” would do just fine? Or “assist” for “help”? But no, “use” and “help” aren’t highfalutin enough.
AFAIK, it’s at least mostly a Nuyorican thing.
Yeah, you said that in the first place. I was just racing along too fast. 🙂
****
How about “utilize” where “use” would do just fine? Or “assist” for “help”? But no, “use” and “help” aren’t highfalutin enough.
Or “impacts” for “affects”?
Or “impacts” for “affects”?
But it’s a) so useful, and b) so charming, I can’t resist. I realise it may be cultural appropriation, but I’m hoping nobody here minds!
Kind of hard to object, when America is all about cultural appropriation. Our culture is a conglomeration of stuff people brought when they came here, all mashed together. (Sssh! Don’t tell the America First!ers — they’d just die . . . except that they’d write it off as “fake news.”)
But it’s a) so useful, and b) so charming, I can’t resist. I realise it may be cultural appropriation, but I’m hoping nobody here minds!
Kind of hard to object, when America is all about cultural appropriation. Our culture is a conglomeration of stuff people brought when they came here, all mashed together. (Sssh! Don’t tell the America First!ers — they’d just die . . . except that they’d write it off as “fake news.”)
And what would you give for the chance to go down in history as a “thought leader”?
And what would you give for the chance to go down in history as a “thought leader”?
sanbikinoraion, I was particularly taken by this line from your link:
[emphasis added]
We think too much today is done because of the media. But here it was in 1936, making a difference in when someone died. Wow. Just wow.
sanbikinoraion, I was particularly taken by this line from your link:
[emphasis added]
We think too much today is done because of the media. But here it was in 1936, making a difference in when someone died. Wow. Just wow.
“Two pieces of British arcana for y’all’s delectation (or is it “all y’all” now as the plural…? I lose track).”
“Y’all” is always plural. People using it as a singular “you” are incorrect and should be shunned until they learn to live in civilized society.
“All y’all” is used for emphasis, much like the phrase “great big”. I used to drive a Scottish woman crazy by saying “wee little” for the same reason, so it’s possible this is just something Americans do.
“Two pieces of British arcana for y’all’s delectation (or is it “all y’all” now as the plural…? I lose track).”
“Y’all” is always plural. People using it as a singular “you” are incorrect and should be shunned until they learn to live in civilized society.
“All y’all” is used for emphasis, much like the phrase “great big”. I used to drive a Scottish woman crazy by saying “wee little” for the same reason, so it’s possible this is just something Americans do.
somewhere, John Boehner is watching Paul Ryan’s thrashing and congratulating himself on making the right decision.
somewhere, John Boehner is watching Paul Ryan’s thrashing and congratulating himself on making the right decision.
Gawd I love England. A historical office handed down from William the Bastard. It should be restricted to descendants of the Inklings, IMO.
Gawd I love England. A historical office handed down from William the Bastard. It should be restricted to descendants of the Inklings, IMO.
“impactful”
also, what the hell are people not “passionate” about nowadays?
for regionalisms, I’m a fan of “wicked pisser”, which is properly pronounced as “wickit pissah”, preferably employing glottal stops for the “ck” and “t” in “wickit”.
things that are “wicked pisser” are good. it’s kind of like “craic” but with a broader application.
“impactful”
also, what the hell are people not “passionate” about nowadays?
for regionalisms, I’m a fan of “wicked pisser”, which is properly pronounced as “wickit pissah”, preferably employing glottal stops for the “ck” and “t” in “wickit”.
things that are “wicked pisser” are good. it’s kind of like “craic” but with a broader application.
The lobsters in Finding Nemo nailed the New England manner of speech. It still cracks me up.
I went to college at CMU in Pittsburgh; I am still fond of Yins, Stillers, and Mullets (and, unrelated, the oxford comma). The locals were mutually amused by my barbaric New England speech.
The lobsters in Finding Nemo nailed the New England manner of speech. It still cracks me up.
I went to college at CMU in Pittsburgh; I am still fond of Yins, Stillers, and Mullets (and, unrelated, the oxford comma). The locals were mutually amused by my barbaric New England speech.
Don’t Pittsburghers and New Englanders both say “pawt” for the thing you might boil pasta or cook soup in?
I didn’t know Stillers was a thing. That’s like Iggles in Philly.
Don’t Pittsburghers and New Englanders both say “pawt” for the thing you might boil pasta or cook soup in?
I didn’t know Stillers was a thing. That’s like Iggles in Philly.
The pawt really confuses us, as we have the Native American names for Pawtucket (city), Pawcatuk (river), and Pawtuxet (village and river).
Tonic verse Pop verse Soda verse Hoagie, I guess.
OTOH, I recall Chuck Berry / Barris, Hedy / Hedley Lamarr, and Chuck / Peter Lorre were all massively confusing.
And what the hell is going on with Main Street, Post Road, and Water Street? Not to mention Watling Street, returning to merry olde Englaland. Alfred, Ælfrēd, Ælfrǣd the Great?
The pawt really confuses us, as we have the Native American names for Pawtucket (city), Pawcatuk (river), and Pawtuxet (village and river).
Tonic verse Pop verse Soda verse Hoagie, I guess.
OTOH, I recall Chuck Berry / Barris, Hedy / Hedley Lamarr, and Chuck / Peter Lorre were all massively confusing.
And what the hell is going on with Main Street, Post Road, and Water Street? Not to mention Watling Street, returning to merry olde Englaland. Alfred, Ælfrēd, Ælfrǣd the Great?
Tonic vs pop vs soda reminds me of my adventures as an eighteen-year-old midwesterner off to college in the Boston area.
I still remember going into the Brigham’s (long gone) in Harvard Square, ordering an ice cream cone, and having this exchange:
Kid behind the counter: “Withuhwuhthout?”
Me: “Sorry, what?”
Kid: “With or without?” (Enunciating patiently.)
Me: “With or without what?”
Kid: “Jimmies.”
Me: “What are jimmies?”
He must have shown me rather than told me at that point.
Me: “With.” (Chocolate sprinkles.)
Tonic vs pop vs soda reminds me of my adventures as an eighteen-year-old midwesterner off to college in the Boston area.
I still remember going into the Brigham’s (long gone) in Harvard Square, ordering an ice cream cone, and having this exchange:
Kid behind the counter: “Withuhwuhthout?”
Me: “Sorry, what?”
Kid: “With or without?” (Enunciating patiently.)
Me: “With or without what?”
Kid: “Jimmies.”
Me: “What are jimmies?”
He must have shown me rather than told me at that point.
Me: “With.” (Chocolate sprinkles.)
I was cured of midwesternly referring to soda as “pop” about a month into college. Been soda ever since (but my siblings and parents still call it pop, the neanderthals).
I was cured of midwesternly referring to soda as “pop” about a month into college. Been soda ever since (but my siblings and parents still call it pop, the neanderthals).
Where I grew up soda was Coke.
Would you like a coke, sure. What kind? Dr Pepper is fone.
Where I grew up soda was Coke.
Would you like a coke, sure. What kind? Dr Pepper is fone.
I think the soda region is nearly conterminous with the sneaker region. Pop and tennis shoes for the rest, I guess.
I think the soda region is nearly conterminous with the sneaker region. Pop and tennis shoes for the rest, I guess.
I hear both sprinkles and jimmies, but usually it’s rainbow sprinkles and chocolate jimmies.
Some people, particularly Italians (or people from South Philly, even if they aren’t Italian), call the red stuff you put on spaghetti “gravy.” But there is sometimes the distinction that it’s only gravy if it involves meat. Marinara is still sauce in that case.
I hear both sprinkles and jimmies, but usually it’s rainbow sprinkles and chocolate jimmies.
Some people, particularly Italians (or people from South Philly, even if they aren’t Italian), call the red stuff you put on spaghetti “gravy.” But there is sometimes the distinction that it’s only gravy if it involves meat. Marinara is still sauce in that case.
The family that Ughs together hugs together.
The family that Ughs together hugs together.
In my growing up world (Ohio “Italian”), “sauce” meant tomato sauce and “cheese” meant Parmesan. Other “sauces” and other cheeses had to be specified. I’ve never heard any of my Italian relatives use the word “marinara.” But then, we came from southern Italian peasant stock, so I’m sure there’s a dialect issue among other things.
Types of pasta were specified. We ate macaroni most often at my house, spaghetti sometimes at Grandma’s, or, for a special treat, hand-made cuhvuhdills (cavatelli). I never heard of gnocchi as a kid, though cavatelli are kind of like smaller gnocchi, without the potatoes.
I don’t think I’ve ever heard tomato sauce called gravy in real life to this day. But then, I’ve never been to Philadelphia. 😉
In my growing up world (Ohio “Italian”), “sauce” meant tomato sauce and “cheese” meant Parmesan. Other “sauces” and other cheeses had to be specified. I’ve never heard any of my Italian relatives use the word “marinara.” But then, we came from southern Italian peasant stock, so I’m sure there’s a dialect issue among other things.
Types of pasta were specified. We ate macaroni most often at my house, spaghetti sometimes at Grandma’s, or, for a special treat, hand-made cuhvuhdills (cavatelli). I never heard of gnocchi as a kid, though cavatelli are kind of like smaller gnocchi, without the potatoes.
I don’t think I’ve ever heard tomato sauce called gravy in real life to this day. But then, I’ve never been to Philadelphia. 😉
Just keep your mitts off “youse guys” and no one gets hurt
made me laugh out loud.
Annoying misuses:
flaunt v flout
uninterested v disinterested
English people saying “garden-variety” instead of what we used to say up until around five years ago “common or garden” and saying “from the get-go” instead ditto of “from the word go”. I realise this is pretty rich from an English user of y’all, but whoever said I was consistent? Also in this connection, from my youth I heard certain Americans (Texans I think) use y’all for the singular as well as the plural. Any more rebuttals or else confirmations?
In no particular order: everybody being passionate about everything also drives me slightly crazy; I am under the impression that only Americans call Italian tomato sauce Marinara; the only equivalent I think I know to “likeded” is from Israel, a country I had occasion to visit several times a few decades ago. As you know, “im” is the plural ending in Hebrew (a language I do not speak), as in kibbutzim. Someone I knew needed a new seal-beam headlight unit for his car, and he discovered that because of the way “seal-beam” sounded, the Israeli mechanics treated the word as a plural “silbim”, and when they only had to order one called it a “silb”.
Just keep your mitts off “youse guys” and no one gets hurt
made me laugh out loud.
Annoying misuses:
flaunt v flout
uninterested v disinterested
English people saying “garden-variety” instead of what we used to say up until around five years ago “common or garden” and saying “from the get-go” instead ditto of “from the word go”. I realise this is pretty rich from an English user of y’all, but whoever said I was consistent? Also in this connection, from my youth I heard certain Americans (Texans I think) use y’all for the singular as well as the plural. Any more rebuttals or else confirmations?
In no particular order: everybody being passionate about everything also drives me slightly crazy; I am under the impression that only Americans call Italian tomato sauce Marinara; the only equivalent I think I know to “likeded” is from Israel, a country I had occasion to visit several times a few decades ago. As you know, “im” is the plural ending in Hebrew (a language I do not speak), as in kibbutzim. Someone I knew needed a new seal-beam headlight unit for his car, and he discovered that because of the way “seal-beam” sounded, the Israeli mechanics treated the word as a plural “silbim”, and when they only had to order one called it a “silb”.
GftNC — I wasn’t going to start quibbling with other commenters who seemed so passionate (TM) about it, but I often heard “y’all” meaning singular “you” when I was growing up.
However, this edges toward the sociological aspects of language, so I’m going to leave it alone for now and maybe take up the bigger topic later.
Just don’t forget: A language is just a dialect with an army. Or something like that.
GftNC — I wasn’t going to start quibbling with other commenters who seemed so passionate (TM) about it, but I often heard “y’all” meaning singular “you” when I was growing up.
However, this edges toward the sociological aspects of language, so I’m going to leave it alone for now and maybe take up the bigger topic later.
Just don’t forget: A language is just a dialect with an army. Or something like that.
When I had an Irish girlfriend, once or twice we came to minor grief over the American vs British/Irish use of “call.”
“I’ll call tomorrow” implies the telephone in American English (at least in all the versions I know), whereas in Ireland that would be “I’ll ring you.” In Ireland, “I’ll call” means “I’ll stop by your house.”
Fun times.
When I had an Irish girlfriend, once or twice we came to minor grief over the American vs British/Irish use of “call.”
“I’ll call tomorrow” implies the telephone in American English (at least in all the versions I know), whereas in Ireland that would be “I’ll ring you.” In Ireland, “I’ll call” means “I’ll stop by your house.”
Fun times.
JanieM: as if relationships don’t have enough hidden rocks without linguistic differences. MrGftNC is a Yorkshireman born and bred, and if on say Tuesday I say I will do such and such “next Thursday”, he thinks it means in 2 days time, whereas I think it means in 9 days time, and that if I meant in 2 days time I would say “this Thursday”. This may or may not be a regional difference, I’m not sure.
JanieM: as if relationships don’t have enough hidden rocks without linguistic differences. MrGftNC is a Yorkshireman born and bred, and if on say Tuesday I say I will do such and such “next Thursday”, he thinks it means in 2 days time, whereas I think it means in 9 days time, and that if I meant in 2 days time I would say “this Thursday”. This may or may not be a regional difference, I’m not sure.
on the other hand “i’ll call you on the telephone” works fine if you’re Roger Daltrey and your voice is rough with cigarettes. you bet.
on the other hand “i’ll call you on the telephone” works fine if you’re Roger Daltrey and your voice is rough with cigarettes. you bet.
GftNC — “this” vs “next” drives my daughter crazy, and her irritation about it is catchy. If it’s regional, the regional-ness must have gotten well-dispersed in the US, because this ambiguity comes up all the time. I find myself always trying to clarify, as in “this coming Thursday” — or by specifying a date, especially when talking about weekends.
GftNC — “this” vs “next” drives my daughter crazy, and her irritation about it is catchy. If it’s regional, the regional-ness must have gotten well-dispersed in the US, because this ambiguity comes up all the time. I find myself always trying to clarify, as in “this coming Thursday” — or by specifying a date, especially when talking about weekends.
If I recall correctly “this” and “next” is the way Spanish treats time also (este vs. proxima).
If I recall correctly “this” and “next” is the way Spanish treats time also (este vs. proxima).
You level an accusation and you levy a tax, but many people who are allowed to comment on TV don’t seem to know the difference.
You abscond with the petty cash and you abdicate a responsibility. but a member of Congress I heard interviewed last night didn’t seem to know that.
Not content to mangle their own language, many Americans insist on saying things like “coo de grah” and “kewpon”. I had to write a strongly worded letter to Rachel Maddow about that once.
My favorite localism is “that’s mine’s”, a common way to indicate possession of some object around Lowell MA when I was growing up.
English being my second language and all, I approach abuses of it somewhat like a converted Savonarola. But they still grate on me less than the abuses of my first language which my Greek American relatives and friends commit as casually as a butcher cutting pork chops. Think Spanglish but much, much worse.
–TP
You level an accusation and you levy a tax, but many people who are allowed to comment on TV don’t seem to know the difference.
You abscond with the petty cash and you abdicate a responsibility. but a member of Congress I heard interviewed last night didn’t seem to know that.
Not content to mangle their own language, many Americans insist on saying things like “coo de grah” and “kewpon”. I had to write a strongly worded letter to Rachel Maddow about that once.
My favorite localism is “that’s mine’s”, a common way to indicate possession of some object around Lowell MA when I was growing up.
English being my second language and all, I approach abuses of it somewhat like a converted Savonarola. But they still grate on me less than the abuses of my first language which my Greek American relatives and friends commit as casually as a butcher cutting pork chops. Think Spanglish but much, much worse.
–TP
My wife and I argue often over whether a future day is “this” or “next,” sometimes even whether a day in the past is “this” or “last.”
My logic is that “next” always means the soonest to come of whatever day of the week, but that “this” can refer to the very same day if that day hasn’t yet come within the current week. To avoid ambiguity, if I were talking on Tuesday about a Thursday 9 days in the future, I would say “Thursday (of) next week” to avoid confusing it with next/this Thursday. (But that’s me.)
Days in the past are less of a problem, because using the past tense allows you to leave a day that occurred within the same week unmodified, though you might go with “this past.” But on Thursday, “last Tuesday” could mean 2 days ago or 9 days ago. Best to just leave it as “Tuesday” for 2 days ago or call it “Tuesday (of) last week” for 9 days ago.
That is my theory.
My wife and I argue often over whether a future day is “this” or “next,” sometimes even whether a day in the past is “this” or “last.”
My logic is that “next” always means the soonest to come of whatever day of the week, but that “this” can refer to the very same day if that day hasn’t yet come within the current week. To avoid ambiguity, if I were talking on Tuesday about a Thursday 9 days in the future, I would say “Thursday (of) next week” to avoid confusing it with next/this Thursday. (But that’s me.)
Days in the past are less of a problem, because using the past tense allows you to leave a day that occurred within the same week unmodified, though you might go with “this past.” But on Thursday, “last Tuesday” could mean 2 days ago or 9 days ago. Best to just leave it as “Tuesday” for 2 days ago or call it “Tuesday (of) last week” for 9 days ago.
That is my theory.
Now that I’m thinking about it, if it’s Tuesday and I’m talking about the Thursday in 2 days, it shouldn’t need to be modified unless someone asks. Then see above.
Now that I’m thinking about it, if it’s Tuesday and I’m talking about the Thursday in 2 days, it shouldn’t need to be modified unless someone asks. Then see above.
Frances was in the broom closet, singing:
Frances was in the broom closet, singing:
“this” vs “next” I mostly go with “this Wednesday” vs. “a week from Wednesday” — with the latter sometimes contracted to “Wednesday week.”
As a side note, the biggest confusion occurs 1-3 days after the day of the week in question. once the day is less than half a week away, life is clearer.
“this” vs “next” I mostly go with “this Wednesday” vs. “a week from Wednesday” — with the latter sometimes contracted to “Wednesday week.”
As a side note, the biggest confusion occurs 1-3 days after the day of the week in question. once the day is less than half a week away, life is clearer.
‘next’ means it happens after the weekend.
‘next monday’ is in 4 days.
saturday is tomorrow.
sunday is the day after tomorrow.
‘next’ means it happens after the weekend.
‘next monday’ is in 4 days.
saturday is tomorrow.
sunday is the day after tomorrow.
Look, it’s quite simple: “This” Thursday is the Thursday of “this” week. “Next” Thursday is the Thursday of “next” week.
More controversial, surely, is the case when on Thursday you’re talking about Tuesday. But “this” Tuesday is clearly in the past, and “next” Tuesday is the one next week. It would be madness for “next” Tuesday to be the Tuesday after that!
I’m glad I could clear that up for everyone.
Look, it’s quite simple: “This” Thursday is the Thursday of “this” week. “Next” Thursday is the Thursday of “next” week.
More controversial, surely, is the case when on Thursday you’re talking about Tuesday. But “this” Tuesday is clearly in the past, and “next” Tuesday is the one next week. It would be madness for “next” Tuesday to be the Tuesday after that!
I’m glad I could clear that up for everyone.
Tony P, I spent a lot of time in Lowell with my cousins in the 60s to 70s. Scary town. Was it liquor store or package store (or packy)?
Tony P, I spent a lot of time in Lowell with my cousins in the 60s to 70s. Scary town. Was it liquor store or package store (or packy)?
Same problem in German. “nächsten Donnerstag” can mean Thursday this or next week. “diesen Donnerstag” always means the Thursday this week (and thus cannot be used Friday to Sunday*). “kommenden Donnerstag” (coming Thursday) is far more likely this week (if said Monday to Wednesday) but can be used occasionally for next. Unambiguous would be “diese Woche Donnerstag” (Thursday this week) and “nächste Woche Donnerstag” (Thursday next week).
*around here the week begins on Monday, in other parts on Sunday though.
Same problem in German. “nächsten Donnerstag” can mean Thursday this or next week. “diesen Donnerstag” always means the Thursday this week (and thus cannot be used Friday to Sunday*). “kommenden Donnerstag” (coming Thursday) is far more likely this week (if said Monday to Wednesday) but can be used occasionally for next. Unambiguous would be “diese Woche Donnerstag” (Thursday this week) and “nächste Woche Donnerstag” (Thursday next week).
*around here the week begins on Monday, in other parts on Sunday though.
Yama,
“Package store” for sure. I always wondered why.
My family got to Lowell in 67 and my mother still lives there. It will always be my home town because, alluding to a couple of threads back, that’s where my father is buried. I have not actually lived there year-round since I went off to high school in 71, though. You may be pleased to know (and you might know, if you still have relatives there) that Lowell has gone somewhat upscale since our day.
–TP
Yama,
“Package store” for sure. I always wondered why.
My family got to Lowell in 67 and my mother still lives there. It will always be my home town because, alluding to a couple of threads back, that’s where my father is buried. I have not actually lived there year-round since I went off to high school in 71, though. You may be pleased to know (and you might know, if you still have relatives there) that Lowell has gone somewhat upscale since our day.
–TP
Clarification: it does not seem to be regional here after all, or even a class difference (always a possibility in this country). Now I think of it, I have had the same misunderstanding with an impeccably upper-middle class, highly educated southern girlfriend, whereas Mr GftNC is a working class Yorkshireman who left school at 15 (although in all fairness seriously autodidactic and decently read since then).
Clarification: it does not seem to be regional here after all, or even a class difference (always a possibility in this country). Now I think of it, I have had the same misunderstanding with an impeccably upper-middle class, highly educated southern girlfriend, whereas Mr GftNC is a working class Yorkshireman who left school at 15 (although in all fairness seriously autodidactic and decently read since then).
Glad I’m not the only one squabbling over linguistic matters with their partner – our pet peeve:
a couple of x (e.g. days)
My wife insists it means ‘two’ and nothing else, while I’m of the opinion that it’s equivalent to ‘a few’, i.e. a small number of x.
Glad I’m not the only one squabbling over linguistic matters with their partner – our pet peeve:
a couple of x (e.g. days)
My wife insists it means ‘two’ and nothing else, while I’m of the opinion that it’s equivalent to ‘a few’, i.e. a small number of x.
Your wife is obviously right, novakant. In fact, a few is 3 or more (how many more depending on the context), and most definitely not 2 – says me, that is.
Your wife is obviously right, novakant. In fact, a few is 3 or more (how many more depending on the context), and most definitely not 2 – says me, that is.
“A few” is, indeed, 3 to some number less than 10 (and probably less than 8). “A couple” can be 2 or 3 or even (at a stretch) 4 — except when talking about people, in which case “a couple” is exactly 2 and no more.
For numbers from 4 to 6, use “a handful”.
“A few” is, indeed, 3 to some number less than 10 (and probably less than 8). “A couple” can be 2 or 3 or even (at a stretch) 4 — except when talking about people, in which case “a couple” is exactly 2 and no more.
For numbers from 4 to 6, use “a handful”.
Couldn’t “a few” also mean some small percentage of some large number? Less than 10%, 8%?
Couldn’t “a few” also mean some small percentage of some large number? Less than 10%, 8%?
‘few’ can also mean any number that’s grossly insufficient for acute needs.
Clinton received a few votes in Wyoming last fall.
the actual number was nearly 56,000. but 56,000 wasn’t even close to what Trump got.
‘few’ can also mean any number that’s grossly insufficient for acute needs.
Clinton received a few votes in Wyoming last fall.
the actual number was nearly 56,000. but 56,000 wasn’t even close to what Trump got.
There are some exoressions from the British Isles which I encounteredd in books. DOn;t kow how wide spread the usages is but I use these phrases! Because I love them!
Bog standard for ordinary
not so green as cabbage=looking for a fake
good at bottom but its a long ways down
Tere’s a few more but I hae to go to work right htis second so off I go!
There are some exoressions from the British Isles which I encounteredd in books. DOn;t kow how wide spread the usages is but I use these phrases! Because I love them!
Bog standard for ordinary
not so green as cabbage=looking for a fake
good at bottom but its a long ways down
Tere’s a few more but I hae to go to work right htis second so off I go!
I picked up “No worries” from the Australians I know. It frequently seems to fit better than “No problem.”
I picked up “No worries” from the Australians I know. It frequently seems to fit better than “No problem.”
A memorable lede:
From sportswriting treasure Frank Deford in Sports Illustrated, 7/16/84.
A memorable lede:
From sportswriting treasure Frank Deford in Sports Illustrated, 7/16/84.
P.S. It’s a lede to an article about John McEnroe and Martina Navratilova at Wimbledon that year. Click the link for a walk down memory lane.
P.S. It’s a lede to an article about John McEnroe and Martina Navratilova at Wimbledon that year. Click the link for a walk down memory lane.
And as for “no problem” — there’s a context in which it’s appropriate, as, let’s say, when someone is apologizing for some minor thing and you want to say it’s not a problem, don’t worry about it. But it gets used all the time in place of “you’re welcome,” and that’s where tend to want to slap someone. As in:
Me: Can I have a croissant and a medium black tea?
Young (always) person behind counter: No problem.
Me (not out loud): It had better not be a problem, it’s your damned job.
(Person brings tea and treat.)
Me (out loud): Thanks.
Person behind counter: No problem.
Me (not out loud): Grrrrrrrr. ;=)
And as for “no problem” — there’s a context in which it’s appropriate, as, let’s say, when someone is apologizing for some minor thing and you want to say it’s not a problem, don’t worry about it. But it gets used all the time in place of “you’re welcome,” and that’s where tend to want to slap someone. As in:
Me: Can I have a croissant and a medium black tea?
Young (always) person behind counter: No problem.
Me (not out loud): It had better not be a problem, it’s your damned job.
(Person brings tea and treat.)
Me (out loud): Thanks.
Person behind counter: No problem.
Me (not out loud): Grrrrrrrr. ;=)
Wonkie, a tip: never say ‘British Isles’ while in (the Republicans of) Ireland – won’t go down very well….
Wonkie, a tip: never say ‘British Isles’ while in (the Republicans of) Ireland – won’t go down very well….
JanieM, don’t try that in Berlin, Germany. You risk that the waiter will simply answer ‘yes’ and then ask what you want (the latter only if in a good mood). (You did not ask for the stuff but whether you can have it).
It’s tradition, we even made Goethe run back to Weimar that way. Your correct answer to that would be: ‘The croissant only medium black and the tea not too crunchy’. That’s the kind of rude to get respect from the (true*) locals.
*if they have a stereotypical Berlin accent, they are either fake or from the region surrounding the city (Brandenburg).
JanieM, don’t try that in Berlin, Germany. You risk that the waiter will simply answer ‘yes’ and then ask what you want (the latter only if in a good mood). (You did not ask for the stuff but whether you can have it).
It’s tradition, we even made Goethe run back to Weimar that way. Your correct answer to that would be: ‘The croissant only medium black and the tea not too crunchy’. That’s the kind of rude to get respect from the (true*) locals.
*if they have a stereotypical Berlin accent, they are either fake or from the region surrounding the city (Brandenburg).
novakant: while few means “3 or more” it can also equal 2. For small values of “3”.
novakant: while few means “3 or more” it can also equal 2. For small values of “3”.
Who’s next? Martin McGuinness was next. Contrary to what Gerry Adams said, he was neither a terrorist nor a freedom fighter – he was both. A friend told me yesterday to watch the full version of Bill Clinton’s eulogy at Martin McG’s funeral the other day. Here it is in full, for anyone who is interested:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcG6HGoTUic
Who’s next? Martin McGuinness was next. Contrary to what Gerry Adams said, he was neither a terrorist nor a freedom fighter – he was both. A friend told me yesterday to watch the full version of Bill Clinton’s eulogy at Martin McG’s funeral the other day. Here it is in full, for anyone who is interested:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcG6HGoTUic
Hartmut — this sounds like having to dicker with vendors in China: i.e., something I wouldn’t be very good at.
And anyhow, how long would it take me to learn to distinguish a Berlin accent, much less a fake one? If I ever get to Germany, I’ll contact you for lessons. 😉
Hartmut — this sounds like having to dicker with vendors in China: i.e., something I wouldn’t be very good at.
And anyhow, how long would it take me to learn to distinguish a Berlin accent, much less a fake one? If I ever get to Germany, I’ll contact you for lessons. 😉
Novakant–I wasn’t including Ireland in that> I was thinking more of the islands up by Scotland and the cones in teh channel. But I was also concerned about not offending by not using a term that would imply that the whole area was England.
Not wanting to be a wanker, yo see.
Novakant–I wasn’t including Ireland in that> I was thinking more of the islands up by Scotland and the cones in teh channel. But I was also concerned about not offending by not using a term that would imply that the whole area was England.
Not wanting to be a wanker, yo see.
This seems to be the open thread, so some links —
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/03/27/happy-anniversary-to-americas-shameful-travesty-of-a-war-in-yemen/
https://theintercept.com/2017/03/26/trumps-war-on-terror-has-quickly-become-as-barbaric-and-savage-as-he-promised/
And one more in the next post, but I have the impression too many links in one post causes problems.
This seems to be the open thread, so some links —
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/03/27/happy-anniversary-to-americas-shameful-travesty-of-a-war-in-yemen/
https://theintercept.com/2017/03/26/trumps-war-on-terror-has-quickly-become-as-barbaric-and-savage-as-he-promised/
And one more in the next post, but I have the impression too many links in one post causes problems.
An authoritarian regime which corrupts our democracy by spreading money around —
http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2017/03/saudi-money-at-harvard.html
http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2017/03/there-are-people-who-get-10-year-jail.html
An authoritarian regime which corrupts our democracy by spreading money around —
http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2017/03/saudi-money-at-harvard.html
http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2017/03/there-are-people-who-get-10-year-jail.html
wonkie —
“bog standard” is, well, bog standard.
“not so green as cabbage-looking” is rare
“…a long ways…” sounds entirely American to me.
wonkie —
“bog standard” is, well, bog standard.
“not so green as cabbage-looking” is rare
“…a long ways…” sounds entirely American to me.
Last link
https://airwars.org/civilian-casualty-claims/
By Airwars calculations, the Russians have probably killed more civilians in the past few years in Syria than we have in Syria and Iraq, but the numbers are the same order of magnitude. In the past month we might be passing the Russians in killing per month.
So this raises a question. With all the outrage over Russian bombing of civilians ( a vastly more serious crime than email theft) in Syria, what do we say if it turns out we are starting to kill more per month than they do?
Last link
https://airwars.org/civilian-casualty-claims/
By Airwars calculations, the Russians have probably killed more civilians in the past few years in Syria than we have in Syria and Iraq, but the numbers are the same order of magnitude. In the past month we might be passing the Russians in killing per month.
So this raises a question. With all the outrage over Russian bombing of civilians ( a vastly more serious crime than email theft) in Syria, what do we say if it turns out we are starting to kill more per month than they do?