From jazz at qnet.com Mon Feb 2 11:12:51 2009 From: jazz at qnet.com (Bill Taylor) Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 09:12:51 -0800 Subject: [Goglog] On the Auctioning Off of Barack Obama's Senate Seat Message-ID: <200902021713.n12HDnmX001924@mail.zarquon.net> www.thenation.com/doc/20081229/trillin Calvin Trillin was on an interview show this morning, and mentioned this poem. Apparently this is a "mono rhyme". Bill Taylor From bentley at crenelle.com Thu Feb 5 15:40:53 2009 From: bentley at crenelle.com (Michael Brian Bentley) Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 13:40:53 -0800 Subject: [Goglog] are DoD alarm bells accurate? Message-ID: Why does the DoD continue to freely generate unfounded drivel in the Obama era? Unless the DoD has fixed its paperwork problem in just the last two weeks, which I seriously doubt, they can't possibly be an authority on anything gitmo related. I personally assume some of the released prisoners are in fact back in action, but I find it difficult to believe that the DoD would know one way or the other. The DoD and the previous Administration were as inept in handling the paperwork, fact finding, background checks, and so forth as you possibly can get. It is a no-brainer to expect huge mistakes, but a big deal to discover them. I also assume they tend to talk out of their hat a lot, too. How can they be making claims of this order when we already know they just don't know? It would be amusing if this situation weren't so dire! http://www.antiwar.com/ips/fisher.php?articleid=14194 From steveg at swhi.net Thu Feb 5 17:13:51 2009 From: steveg at swhi.net (Steve Gruenwald) Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 17:13:51 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Goglog] are DoD alarm bells accurate? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41916.144.183.224.2.1233875631.squirrel@www.swhi.net> Michael Brian Bentley wrote: > Why does the DoD continue to freely generate unfounded drivel in the > Obama era? I must be missing something. Are you disputing something DoD has actually said, or just saying "look, this writer says this law professor says they're unreliable, and gee, I think so too"? Did you mean to identify what you're arguing with? I don't see anything in the article even specifying what it is that the third-hand source is disputing, except that there was a report containing very vague claims, so vague as to be almost irrelevant, issued by someone not identified, in "mid-January," i.e., before the change in Administration. Everything else seems to have been earlier. I see nothing on which to base any conclusions as to why the report was issued (e.g. as propaganda, answers to questions from Congress, best attempt to respond to a press inquiry, required monthly update statistics, or what), by whom (intel, public affairs, a platoon commander on the ground), asserting what level of confidence (from "we're sure" to "worst-case estimates we have received say"), or anything you can meaningfully either agree or disagree with. - Steve G From SteveG at swhi.net Sat Feb 14 08:10:15 2009 From: SteveG at swhi.net (Steve Gruenwald) Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2009 08:10:15 -0600 Subject: [Goglog] Does God Need Notice of a Lawsuit? Message-ID: May be a silly question, but actually being argued in a case now in appeal in Nebraska. http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_page=2798&u_sid=10560406 Yes, similar issues have come up before. IIRC someone tried to sue Satan many years ago, and the Marshal's office (or whoever was supposed to serve the papers) reported back that he could not be found in the county. My question, especially after reading the article: if God is subject to lawsuit, can he ever have effective assistance of counsel? - Steve G PS - And do you have to provide services pro bono? From jazz at qnet.com Sat Feb 14 10:33:36 2009 From: jazz at qnet.com (Bill Taylor) Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2009 08:33:36 -0800 Subject: [Goglog] Does God Need Notice of a Lawsuit? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200902141636.n1EGaVcU013208@mail.zarquon.net> At 08:10 2/14/2009 -0600, Steve Gruenwald wrote: >Replies are directed to the list. >If you wish to respond only to the sender, please edit the To: line! >____________________________________________________________ > >May be a silly question, but actually being argued in a >case now in appeal in Nebraska. > >http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_page=2798&u_sid=10560406 > >Yes, similar issues have come up before. IIRC someone >tried to sue Satan many years ago, and the Marshal's office >(or whoever was supposed to serve the papers) reported back >that he could not be found in the county. > >My question, especially after reading the article: if God >is subject to lawsuit, can he ever have effective assistance >of counsel? The Vatican had (or maybe still has) a Devil's Advocate. Presumably only acting in the *supposed* intentions and best interests of the Devil. But perhaps there is a somewhat more direct contact in place that we are not generally aware of. After all, not all traditions put the Devil in a fully opposed position with regard to God (cf. conversations documented at Job 1 et seq.). So maybe that channel could be exploited to get word to God that an appearance in person was required. Or probably just requested, since presumably God is a sovereign and cannot be compelled by a common court. Bill Taylor From ben at bl.com Sun Feb 15 03:21:51 2009 From: ben at bl.com (Ben Liberman) Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2009 03:21:51 -0600 Subject: [Goglog] The real difference between liberals and conservatives Message-ID: TED 2008 talk -- Jonathan Haidt: The real difference between liberals and conservatives http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jonathan_haidt_on_the_moral_mind.html It's 19 minutes. -- ------------------------------ ben at BL.COM Ben Liberman ------------------------------ From jazz at qnet.com Mon Feb 16 08:22:36 2009 From: jazz at qnet.com (Bill Taylor) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 06:22:36 -0800 Subject: [Goglog] Roland Burris Message-ID: <200902161436.n1GEaegR015692@mail.zarquon.net> "You got me in the mood to use this thing, and by God, if you don't think of something, I'll use it on you! I mean it." www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS//02/15/burris.blagojevich/index.html You guys were all telling me how clean and honest he was. Now he's talking about some fundraising he may have been involved with. Bill Taylor From par at richinn.com Mon Feb 16 10:46:21 2009 From: par at richinn.com (par at richinn.com) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 09:46:21 -0700 Subject: [Goglog] Roland Burris In-Reply-To: <200902161436.n1GEaegR015692@mail.zarquon.net> References: <200902161436.n1GEaegR015692@mail.zarquon.net> Message-ID: <20090216094621.pib3ykyyskskksk8@richinn.com> Quoting Bill Taylor : > "You got me in the mood to use this thing, and by God, if you don't > think of something, I'll use it on you! I mean it." > > www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS//02/15/burris.blagojevich/index.html > > You guys were all telling me how clean and honest he was. Now he's > talking about some fundraising he may have been involved with. > He was asked for money and said it would be inappropriate. Seems pretty clean to me. He did not tell about all the people that had asked him to contribute. Not his best move. However, he was giving testimony. I don't know what they asked him but generally they want you to answer the questions presented not to provide information. They probably asked him "Did the Gov ask you to contribute?" No. "Did anybody on the Gov staff ask for a contribution?" No. What they failed to ask is did ANYBODY ask for a contribution? I would say that he is better than the average politician but still would not have been my choice for the seat. Peter Richardson From ignatz at dminet.com Mon Feb 16 11:40:49 2009 From: ignatz at dminet.com (Dave Ihnat) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 11:40:49 -0600 Subject: [Goglog] Roland Burris In-Reply-To: <20090216094621.pib3ykyyskskksk8@richinn.com> References: <200902161436.n1GEaegR015692@mail.zarquon.net> <20090216094621.pib3ykyyskskksk8@richinn.com> Message-ID: <20090216174049.GA14777@dminet.com> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 09:46:21AM -0700, par at richinn.com wrote: > He was asked for money and said it would be inappropriate. Seems > pretty clean to me. It sounds like he said the right thing; all the hooraw is coming from the testimony he gave in which he didn't mention that Blago's brother was shaking him down. BUT... > He did not tell about all the people that had asked him to contribute. > Not his best move. > > However, he was giving testimony. I don't know what they asked him... Exactly. I saw a news report of his conference; they asked him, "Why didn't you bring it up yourself?" Rather exasperated, he replied, "I was answering questions." I would argue that, unlike a courtroom, he probably should have asked to be able to offer clarification, since it was clear what they were looking for. But I also suspect they were pounding on him pretty aggressively, and in a "siege situation" it's not surprising that he didn't do so. I think this is just nasty politics again. -- Dave Ihnat ignatz at dminet.com From sarahksmom at yahoo.com Mon Feb 16 12:19:04 2009 From: sarahksmom at yahoo.com (Miriam Solon) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 10:19:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Goglog] Roland Burris In-Reply-To: <20090216094621.pib3ykyyskskksk8@richinn.com> Message-ID: <305539.84402.qm@web58706.mail.re1.yahoo.com> --- On Mon, 2/16/09, par at richinn.com wrote: > Quoting Bill Taylor : > > "You got me in the mood to use this thing, and by > God, if you don't > > think of something, I'll use it on you! I mean > it." > > > > > www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS//02/15/burris.blagojevich/index.html > > > > You guys were all telling me how clean and honest he was. Now he's > > talking about some fundraising he may have been involved with. > From: par at richinn.com > ... He did not tell about all the people that had asked him to > contribute. Not his best move. ... > I would say that he is better than the average politician > but still would not have been my choice for the seat. No worries. Unless he does something outrageously great in the remaining 2 years of the term, he is not going to get a free pass to the Democratic nomination for the seat. There are too many others out there who want it, some of whom may be better suited for the gig. It's not that he hasn't earned it under the rules in play for filling a vacancy, but he will have to re-earn it as a candidate. By the time that comes around, he may decide that he's too old for this stuff... or he may be as stubborn as he has been all along. I get the feeling that he's the kind of person who would return to work two days after his funeral. And that's not even taking into consideration what sort of candidate the Republicans would field. We only get Ryan/Page once in a generation. They might come up with someone competent. At this point, all I see is a bunch of hyenas, among those making the most noise. Miriam Solon I may return to vote after my funeral, but work? Nah, I'm with Maynard G. Krebs on that. From Cougar at CasaDelGato.Com Mon Feb 16 14:50:07 2009 From: Cougar at CasaDelGato.Com (John G. Lussmyer) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 12:50:07 -0800 Subject: [Goglog] WA State - poor/homeless can't get drivers license Message-ID: <4999D17F.2080205@CasaDelGato.Com> This was discussed a bit on the GT list. I actually went and found the WAC on the requirements for a Drivers license in WA state. Looks like if you can't afford a Phone, you can't get one. (as well as requiring a Residence Address.) From: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=308-104-014 A person applying for an original driver's license, instruction permit, or identification card must provide the following information: (1) The person's full name, current mailing and residential address, and telephone number; -- -- John G. Lussmyer mailto:Cougar at CasaDelGato.Com Electric Vehicle Battery Monitoring Systems, http://www.CasaDelGato.com From sarahksmom at yahoo.com Mon Feb 16 15:07:50 2009 From: sarahksmom at yahoo.com (Miriam Solon) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:07:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Goglog] WA State - poor/homeless can't get drivers license In-Reply-To: <4999D17F.2080205@CasaDelGato.Com> Message-ID: <98871.62624.qm@web58708.mail.re1.yahoo.com> --- On Mon, 2/16/09, John G. Lussmyer wrote: > From: John G. Lussmyer > This was discussed a bit on the GT list. > I actually went and found the WAC on the requirements for a > Drivers > license in WA state. > Looks like if you can't afford a Phone, you can't > get one. (as well as > requiring a Residence Address.) > > From: > http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=308-104-014 > > A person applying for an original driver's license, > instruction permit, > or identification card must provide the following > information: > > (1) The person's full name, current mailing and > residential > address, and telephone number; That doesn't make sense. You can vote where you have a mailing address, and since when is it a requirement to have a phone to drive? What about people who live in mobile homes? Miriam Solon "Things are not as they seem; nor are they otherwise." --Shakyamuni Buddha, "Lankavatara Sutra" From SteveG at swhi.net Mon Feb 16 18:20:36 2009 From: SteveG at swhi.net (Steve Gruenwald) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 18:20:36 -0600 Subject: [Goglog] Roland Burris In-Reply-To: <20090216174049.GA14777@dminet.com> References: <200902161436.n1GEaegR015692@mail.zarquon.net><20090216094621.pib3ykyyskskksk8@richinn.com> <20090216174049.GA14777@dminet.com> Message-ID: Dave Ihnat says: > Exactly. I saw a news report of his conference; they asked him, "Why > didn't you bring it up yourself?" Rather exasperated, he replied, "I > was answering questions." He was doing a lot more than that; he was making a whole lot of speeches about how clean he was and his appointment was. In any event, it appears he may not have answered the questions truthfully. Reportedly he said in a prior affidavit (Jan 5) that "there was not any contact between myself or any of my representatives with Governor Blagojevich or any of his representatives regarding my appointment to the United States Senate" prior to December 26. That's a direct quote. Then on Jan 8 he was asked *specifically* about any contact with Rob Blagojevich and four other named individuals about it, and he denied any contact with all but one of them. Only one contact, only with one of them. He now recalls contact with Rob and three others he was explicitly asked about. If the reports are correct, the only way this may have been literally true - not to say honest - is if none of those contacts was *expressly* about the Senate seat. He is probably going to say that during the search for a Senator, after he had expressed strong interest in the job, these contacts with a private citizen, long out of politics, from representatives of the Governor, about raising campaign funds, were so totally unrelated to any possible position that it never occurred to him to make a connection when he was later asked about such contacts in the context of the impeachment charges. Yeah, right. - Steve G From SteveG at swhi.net Mon Feb 16 18:24:08 2009 From: SteveG at swhi.net (Steve Gruenwald) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 18:24:08 -0600 Subject: [Goglog] Roland Burris References: <200902161436.n1GEaegR015692@mail.zarquon.net><20090216094621.pib3ykyyskskksk8@richinn.com> <20090216174049.GA14777@dminet.com> Message-ID: <201B18D52D2B4A9BB69148A16CEC1D41@StevePC> I wrote: > If the reports are correct, the only way this may have been > literally true - not to say honest - is if none of those > contacts was *expressly* about the Senate seat. And BTW, while in the calls (plural) from the Governor's brother, Rob may not have initially said anything in so many words about the Senate appointment, Burris' new affidavit says he asked about it himself. - Steve G From SteveG at swhi.net Mon Feb 16 18:25:32 2009 From: SteveG at swhi.net (Steve Gruenwald) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 18:25:32 -0600 Subject: [Goglog] Roland Burris In-Reply-To: <20090216174049.GA14777@dminet.com> References: <200902161436.n1GEaegR015692@mail.zarquon.net><20090216094621.pib3ykyyskskksk8@richinn.com> <20090216174049.GA14777@dminet.com> Message-ID: Dave Ihnat says: > But I also suspect they were > pounding on him pretty aggressively, and in a "siege > situation" it's not surprising that he didn't do so. No, instead when asked about calls from Rob Blagojevich about the appointment, he consulted with counsel before denying that there were any. - Steve G From SteveG at swhi.net Mon Feb 16 18:39:09 2009 From: SteveG at swhi.net (Steve Gruenwald) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 18:39:09 -0600 Subject: [Goglog] WA State - poor/homeless can't get drivers license In-Reply-To: <98871.62624.qm@web58708.mail.re1.yahoo.com> References: <4999D17F.2080205@CasaDelGato.Com> <98871.62624.qm@web58708.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <09D7520DAE9F4F60B8B53966EF304B18@StevePC> Miriam Solon says: > > (1) The person's full name, current mailing and > > residential address, and telephone number; > > That doesn't make sense. You can vote where you have a > mailing address Only if you reside in the state and district. A mere mailing address is not enough. (No, I am not saying the Washington rule as written does make sense.) For the large majority of elections you have to prove residence not only in the state, but within a particular subdivision of it. For instance, Washington has nine Congressional districts and 38 or so counties. Residence specifically in one of them is relevant. I have not seen anything saying whether they do or do not accept a homeless shelter address and phone number. > and since when is it a requirement to have a > phone to drive? What about people who live in mobile homes? What about them? AFAIK most mobile homes have addresses and phones. In any event, there does seem to be something screwy about the WA regulation, *if* it is enforced so as to disenfranchise those who can prove residence without a personal home address or phone number. Maybe it's never been challenged. - Steve G From Cougar at CasaDelGato.Com Mon Feb 16 19:54:56 2009 From: Cougar at CasaDelGato.Com (John G. Lussmyer) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 17:54:56 -0800 Subject: [Goglog] WA State - poor/homeless can't get drivers license In-Reply-To: <09D7520DAE9F4F60B8B53966EF304B18@StevePC> References: <4999D17F.2080205@CasaDelGato.Com> <98871.62624.qm@web58708.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <09D7520DAE9F4F60B8B53966EF304B18@StevePC> Message-ID: <499A18F0.1080305@CasaDelGato.Com> Steve Gruenwald wrote: > What about them? AFAIK most mobile homes have addresses and > phones. > I think she meant Motor Homes. (and there are people who live in them.) > In any event, there does seem to be something screwy about > the WA regulation, *if* it is enforced so as to > disenfranchise those who can prove residence without a > personal home address or phone number. Maybe it's never > been challenged. > As far as my friend can tell, it hasn't been challenged. Which is one of the reasons he is doing so. Of course, he's run out of money and can no longer afford a lawyer. (Most of the money from his last property sale went to lawyers - yes, he could have paid the fine at that point, but he's gotten a bit pig-headed about the whole situation.) For him, it all started back around 2001 when the state suddenly refused to renew his Drivers License since they didn't like his residence address. It was a distance & direction relative to a PO Box. They'd been accepting it for almost 30 years. He lives on a private dirt road, that branches off another private dirt road. His wasn't even named at the time. (several houses on that road.) No house numbers. So he got pulled over for driving without a license. Since he couldn't pay the fine (no income) and refused to setup a payment plan (no income). They then Suspended his drivers license, for non-payment of a fine. (even though he doesn't technically have one.) Then he got pulled over and ticketed for driving on a Suspended license. So, he's now fighting a Criminal Offense caused by a civil penalty, caused by a rule change that may not have been legal. From SteveG at swhi.net Mon Feb 16 20:09:15 2009 From: SteveG at swhi.net (Steve Gruenwald) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 20:09:15 -0600 Subject: [Goglog] WA State - poor/homeless can't get drivers license In-Reply-To: <499A18F0.1080305@CasaDelGato.Com> References: <4999D17F.2080205@CasaDelGato.Com> <98871.62624.qm@web58708.mail.re1.yahoo.com><09D7520DAE9F4F60B8B53966EF304B18@StevePC> <499A18F0.1080305@CasaDelGato.Com> Message-ID: John G. Lussmyer says: > He lives on a private dirt road, that branches off another > private dirt road. His wasn't even named at the time. So did he try asking the post office what his address was? - Steve G From Cougar at CasaDelGato.Com Mon Feb 16 20:35:09 2009 From: Cougar at CasaDelGato.Com (John G. Lussmyer) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 18:35:09 -0800 Subject: [Goglog] WA State - poor/homeless can't get drivers license In-Reply-To: References: <4999D17F.2080205@CasaDelGato.Com> <98871.62624.qm@web58708.mail.re1.yahoo.com><09D7520DAE9F4F60B8B53966EF304B18@StevePC> <499A18F0.1080305@CasaDelGato.Com> Message-ID: <499A225D.6090206@CasaDelGato.Com> Steve Gruenwald wrote: > Replies are directed to the list. > If you wish to respond only to the sender, please edit the To: line! > ____________________________________________________________ > > John G. Lussmyer says: > > >> He lives on a private dirt road, that branches off another >> private dirt road. His wasn't even named at the time. >> > > So did he try asking the post office what his address was? > Umm, why? There isn't any delivery to either of those roads. From wtwilson3 at gmail.com Mon Feb 16 22:31:32 2009 From: wtwilson3 at gmail.com (Bill Wilson) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 22:31:32 -0600 Subject: [Goglog] WA State - poor/homeless can't get drivers license In-Reply-To: <499A225D.6090206@CasaDelGato.Com> References: <4999D17F.2080205@CasaDelGato.Com> <98871.62624.qm@web58708.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <09D7520DAE9F4F60B8B53966EF304B18@StevePC> <499A18F0.1080305@CasaDelGato.Com> <499A225D.6090206@CasaDelGato.Com> Message-ID: <2b35aaaf0902162031g2c3769afy50b26176b4fcd340@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 8:35 PM, John G. Lussmyer wrote: >> Steve Gruenwald wrote: >> So did he try asking the post office what his address was? >> > Umm, why? There isn't any delivery to either of those roads. Sometimes people living in big cities forget how rural some of this country is. Not only are there a lot of homes with no mail delivery or postal address, but even electrical and phone utilities haven't assigned addresses to many properties. When I worked for the phone company we would assign work orders in rural areas the address of "see note" and then write a detailed description of how to find the house, with bills being sent to the P.O. Box or even "General Delivery." Over the last few years as 911 systems have been expanding into more rural areas they have been assigning "911 addresses" to otherwise unaddressed property, a great boon not only to paramedics, but phone technicians as well. -- Bill Wilson "St. Peter don't ya call me cuz I can't go. I owe my soul to the company store." From bentley at crenelle.com Tue Feb 17 14:13:46 2009 From: bentley at crenelle.com (Michael Brian Bentley) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 12:13:46 -0800 Subject: [Goglog] WA State - poor/homeless can't get drivers license In-Reply-To: <499A225D.6090206@CasaDelGato.Com> References: <4999D17F.2080205@CasaDelGato.Com> <98871.62624.qm@web58708.mail.re1.yahoo.com><09D7520DAE9F4F60B8B53966EF304 B18@StevePC> <499A18F0.1080305@CasaDelGato.Com> <499A225D.6090206@CasaDelGato.Com> Message-ID: > > So did he try asking the post office what his address was? >> >Umm, why? There isn't any delivery to either of those roads. To see if they nevertheless have one? My guess is that each house does in fact have an address that is relative to the closest named road. From drsulak at zarquon.net Tue Feb 17 19:28:13 2009 From: drsulak at zarquon.net (Dale Sulak) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 19:28:13 -0600 Subject: [Goglog] Roland Burris In-Reply-To: References: <200902161436.n1GEaegR015692@mail.zarquon.net><20090216094621.pib3ykyyskskksk8@richinn.com> <20090216174049.GA14777@dminet.com> Message-ID: <499B642D.30005@zarquon.net> Burris is on the roof and we can't get him down. Apparently he *did* make some fundraising calls on behalf of Blago but he was a terrible failure at it. Clunk. I can't wait for the rest of the story. Dale. From bentley at crenelle.com Wed Feb 18 01:17:02 2009 From: bentley at crenelle.com (Michael Brian Bentley) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 23:17:02 -0800 Subject: [Goglog] Roland Burris In-Reply-To: <499B642D.30005@zarquon.net> References: <200902161436.n1GEaegR015692@mail.zarquon.net><20090216094621.pib3ykyysksk ksk8@richinn.com> <20090216174049.GA14777@dminet.com> <499B642D.30005@zarquon.net> Message-ID: How do you work to help someone get campaign contributions when you KNOW he's a turkey? This is never going to end, is it... Every time someone opens a mouth over in illinois politics, I wince, and I haven't lived there in four years. From ben at bl.com Thu Feb 26 12:19:18 2009 From: ben at bl.com (Ben Liberman) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 12:19:18 -0600 Subject: [Goglog] Climate science is 'ancient astrology', claims Japan report Message-ID: Japan's boffins: Global warming isn't man-made Climate science is 'ancient astrology', claims report http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/25/jstor_climate_report_translation/ -- ------------------------------ ben at BL.COM Ben Liberman ------------------------------