jasiu1108 [at] gmail [dot] com

Person #3427: 92 Posts

Recommended: 674 times

Posts   |   Comments

  1. and that is exactly why is IS allowed (1 Reply)


    What I have never understood is using “sports” and “fantasy” in the same phrase.

  2. yet... (0 Replies)

    … he still voted yes, which he explained as promoting a “vehicle for discussion” about the issue. WTF. You can have the discussion regardless.

  3. other social media (0 Replies)

    Keating is not getting much love on Twitter either.

  4. should be required reading for governors, reps, Senators... (0 Replies)

    But I’m unsure it would make any difference. A snip of the article from today’s Globe, page A5 – wish it was A1, but I’ll take it.

    Yet Syrian refugees arriving in the United States are in a separate legal category from the migrants arriving in Europe, and they are processed under a more secure system. The migrants in Europe are seeking asylum, rather than applying for status as refugees.

    This is an important distinction. Syrian migrants to the United States largely come through the international system for settling refugees, the system from which US governors want their states to withdraw. In contrast to those seeking asylum in Europe, these refugees must submit to rigorous checks by federal investigators before they travel here.

    Syrian refugees — and potentially terrorists posing as refugees — would have to wait over two years for an application to be approved, and probably longer. The United Nations, which directs refugees to the United States and elsewhere for resettlement, gives priority to orphans and families headed by women. After the United Nations places a refugee with the United States, security protocols begin, including interviews with agents from the Department of Homeland Security.

    And although many refugees processed by the United Nations do come to the United States, there’s no guarantee they will. Terrorists posing as refugees wouldn’t necessarily know to which country they would ultimately be assigned.

    Coming here disguised as a refugee ‘‘would be quite difficult and would actually be a quite inefficient way to enter a country to commit an attack,’’ said Susan Fratzke, a Migration Policy Institute analyst.

  5. same reaction (0 Replies)

    Funny how particular character sequences are automatic triggers…

  6. need to listen to what vets want / need (1 Reply)

    There was a piece on NPR yesterday about how hollow most of the “thumbs-up” gestures feel to veterans. We all know about those who needs aren’t being met (mental/physical health, homelessness, etc.) but it was also interesting to hear from the more able-bodied veterans who are offended at the hand-outs. Rather than a free meal from a restaurant, they’d rather see a contribution in their name to someone who really needs the meal. Or rather than getting early seating on the plane, why not ask them to help those who really need the assistance? (In some cases, they just want to feel needed again).

  7. creepy Jeb (0 Replies)

    I’ll tell you, between the “hot” Supergirl comment and the thing he said in the debate about wanting to give a “warm kiss” to any Dem who supports a tax cut, I now identify Jeb as the “Creepy” Bush.

    Saw this on TRMS last night (embed help from editors, please).


    I really need to transcribe Bernie’s poem…

  8. On-Point yesterday (2 Replies)

    I listened to a bit of On-Point yesterday (WBUR) where this was being discussed. One situation explained by the surgeon there was an example of an orthopedic procedure where the orthopedic surgeon is only needed for her/his specialty during the “meat” of the operation. So another surgeon might do the initial opening up, then the ortho comes in to do the tricky part, and this is followed by the first surgeon then finishing up while the ortho might go to the next operating room to do something similar.

    That scenario doesn’t bother me. I need to read up (in my copious spare time ;) ) on other scenarios that have been brought up (or feel free to educate me).

  9. just wondering... (2 Replies)

    Does the Clinton campaign need to account for yesterday in its financial disclosure report as an “in-kind” contribution?


  10. short memories (1 Reply)

    Steve Kornacki on MSNBC expressed a thought that I had yesterday afternoon. It was essentially that the Republicans keep forgetting how good the Secretary is in situations like these.

  11. I guess it depends on the issue (0 Replies)

    I believe I heard Clinton say that we needed to join the rest of the world in granting paid family leave.

  12. who knows (1 Reply)

    Someone (didn’t catch who) when asked about this on the Dem side said that the Dems would demand a lot to bail out the Repubs on this – like things including votes on immigration reform, a real budget, debt ceiling, etc. Whatever the deal would be, it would be awful interesting.

    And, of course, Donald Trump has taken credit for all this.

  13. I've been thinking of this... (0 Replies)

    … as “The Revenge of ‘What’s the Matter With Kansas’”.

  14. coalition? (2 Replies)

    Charlie Dent (R-Penn) just said it might take a coalition of Republicans and Democrats to actually elect a speaker. Wow.

  15. OT (1 Reply)

    (It would be helpful to provide as much info as possible in the diary text as the slowness of my computer makes clicking links an exercise in patience.)

    Given that the “world wide web” is defined by links and the fact that any poster can’t anticipate which information is “helpful” for any particular reader, I don’t think that there is much that can be done on this front.

    FWIW, slowness might also be attributable to your Internet connection. In any case, if you can’t fix the slowness, one thing you might consider (if you don’t already do so) is to open links in a new tab or window. This can be done on Windows or Macs with a right-click and/or a control-click. That way, while you are waiting for a link to load, you can still read through what is on the page that contained the link.

  16. you'd need to know the law (0 Replies)

    Unlike our checkbook situations, there are regulations on how the bookkeeping has to occur for things like this. I don’t know the exact law either, but would be interested to hear from someone who does.

  17. store gift cards (1 Reply)

    You can read about Mass law regarding gift card expiration here.

    If there is no expiration date readily available for a Charlie Card, if it were a gift card, it could not expire under this law.

    The seller must clearly indicate the date of issuance and expiration date on either the face of the certificate, or, if it is an electronic card with a banked dollar value, on the sales receipt, or by means of an Internet site or a toll-free number ( M.G.L. c. 200A, s. 5D ). If the expiration date is not made available by these means, the gift certificate/card is to be redeemable in perpetuity.

  18. Just look to other cities for ideas (0 Replies)

    It was two years ago now that we were in London, so my memory may not be perfect and things may have changed (for instance, I think they were going to reduce the staffing at the Underground stations), but what I remember:

    We got regular Oyster cards instead of the “tourist” type. I don’t remember why, but it made more sense when I looked at the options.

    We were able to get cards at our local station. There was a deposit and when we turned in the cards before coming home, we got back both the balance and the deposit.

    I believe there was a way to set up an online account tied to one’s card so that you could deal with all sorts of issues: Adding money, reporting a lost card (and deactivating it), transferring money from one card to another, etc. Heck, anything I can do with a Starbucks card, I should be able to do with a Charlie Card (and that includes not carrying the physical card around and using my phone instead. How about a Charlie Card in Passbook?).

  19. more Borowitz (0 Replies)

    Patriots Never Bothered to Steal Jets’ Playbook

    NEW YORK (The Borowitz Report)—The New England Patriots have found themselves at the epicenter of a new controversy amid a published report that they never bothered to steal the playbook of the New York Jets.

    According to the report, the Patriots soundly defeated the Jets multiple times without access to any inside information about the New York team’s offense or defense.

    In the aftermath of the report, the Jets’ owner, Woody Johnson, blasted the Patriots’ coach, Bill Belichick, and called his lack of interest in the Jets’ playbook “an insult to this organization and our fans.”

    “When our teams meet next, you can bet that the Patriots’ failure to steal our playbook is going to be a big motivator in the locker room,” Johnson said.

    Responding to a reporter’s question on the matter, Belichick gave a typically terse response, saying only that he was unaware that the Jets had a playbook.

  20. No way that's happening (0 Replies)

    Let us here and now end the matter and never speak of it again.

    Goodell has already stated that they will appeal the decision.

    The circus lives on…