looseheadprop @ 171

ptrig @ 137

[snip]

I didn’t see clinton ,and only saw the first half of Obama. However, the thing that struck me was this normally articulate, Harvard educated eloquent man, dropping all the final consonants from his words–all faux folksy.

It was demeaning. To him and to his audience. This is a well educated erudite man trying to sound like a sharecropper. I was surprised at how offensive I found it. Too Steppin’ Fetchit.

For the love of Mike! Haven’t we come further than that in this country?

I thought the same as you at first. But as I listened more, I got into it. It fit the setting. It may not be right for you & me, but perhaps the man knows his audience. I was also put off by the stretched biblical theme at first, but then he developed it well.

I saw the last part of Obama’s and all of Clinton’s. Linguistically, they both have a tightrope to walk. If Obama had used Harvard English, he would have been perceived as talking down to them. (”I’m better than you. I learned how to speak honky.”) I was listening to see how far he went into the cadences of Jesse Jackson or MLK, and he went there a little way, but came off sounding genuine (to me.) Linguistically, it was an “I’ll meet you half-way” speech, and I think the tone was appreciated. In fact, I think he can go a bit further towards Jesse Jackson cadences, and be even more effective. He did use a nice trick: He characterized the present generation of Black Americans as the “Joshua generation.” That was a stroke of genius, and helped the audience bond with him.

Hillary sounded too much like a foreigner. Towards the end of her speech, her audience was receptive to some call-and-response, and I think she sensed that and tried to respond to it, but it didn’t work all that well. I don’t think it worked negatively; she just couldn’t saddle that horse and ride it.

I don’t know how Bill Clinton does it, linguistically, but he has a charisma with Black Church crowds. I think part of it is his laid-back style (Hillary is NOT laid back. She spends too much time in New York.) And I think Bill has a more natural response to an audience, feeding on their attention and feeding it back. Hillary has that with White audiences, but it didn’t look like she has it as much with Black audiences.

Bob in HI

****@ @ 108

(Delurks)

Marcy,
Have you tried Lunesta (one of the newer sleep meds, along with Rozerem)?

How old is it?

Honestly, though, I’ve just given up. I just need to maintain a lifestyle where I can work for several hours at night and then sleep.

Emptywheel, do you still have your ears on?
When you say you’ve tried everything, do you mean that you’ve tried ingesting everything? — pills, sleep aides, etc? What have you tried about looking at whatever it is that you do in the 3-4 hours before you want to sleep– what you eat, drink, or do. For example, consuming anything with caffeine in it after supper will keep a lot of people awake (including me.) Also, alcohol is NOT a good sleep aid . Seems like it oughta be, but it ain’t.

Finally, —and maybe this is the real culprit– as much as we’d like you to, do NOT work on Libby trial matters in the two hours before you want to sleep. You’ll get your mind in overdrive, so when you’re trying to sleep, you’ll instead be going over and over again something that’s stuck in your mind about it. When you want to sleep, best to do something pleasant but not cerebral– like playing with a puppy, or a kitten, or listening to the surf, or crickets chirping, or whatever calms you. Plus maybe mr. emptywheel saying comforting words like “Let it rest, Marcy; you’ll figure it out tomorrow!” or whatever mr. ew can say or do that is soothing and calming for you.

Learning how to relax is an important life skill! Now, everyone, BREATHE! :-)

Bob in HI

If someone claims that they forgot something, others evaluate the probability that the person is being truthful by examining several factors including, but not limited to, the relative importance of the matter they forgot and the amount of time passed since the forgotten matter occurred. Lawyers refer to these considerations as circumstantial evidence.

Direct evidence is I saw, I heard, I felt, etc. Circumstantial evidence consists of inferring that something happened, or didn’t happen by assessing the probability based on personal experience. Contrary to what many believe, circumstantial evidence generally is as reliable as direct evidence and, occasionally, it may be more reliable. There is a stock jury instruction to this effect in every jurisdiction in which I have tried a case, and I suspect that Judge Walton included such an instruction in this case (does anyone know?).

Perhaps, the holdout(s) juror is confused about the value of circumstantial evidence and believes that nothing can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, if it is based on circumstantial evidence alone. Only a few jurisdictions in this country adhere to such a rule. Federal courts do not belong to that club.

lectric lady @ 169

I had 3 shots of tequila once and was later caught peeking in my own windows.

Did you see any gnomes?

The last time I drank Tequila to abuse was 35 years ago, B.C. (before children) All I remember was puking my guts out in the snow while a dear friend tended to me. My two dogs stood just below my head as I heaved and all I could get out is “why they eat my puke”?

Oh those carefree stupid times.

ReneND @ 160

Elliott @ 155

After all this talk about tequila, I’ve decided to take a shot everytime I roll a “No New Comments” when I click on the refresh comments button.

Ha. Not sure that is a good idea in EPU territory.

Geez, it’s good you said that, or I woulda missed the new thread and been found later lying on the bedroomcomputer room floor

Ever dry docked the worm on your tongue?

Reading (or referring to) standard jury instructions is not being unhelpful; these jury instructions have been worked over for ages and have withstood the test of time (and appellate courts), and giving them such is a way to avoid potential avenues for appeal (and possibly, reversal and retrial).

Walton did the right thing by refusing to answer the question as put. Regardless of what exactly triggered that question, the jury was clearly asking him to refine the standard of reasonable doubt, even if just a little, by ‘ruling’ whether or not humanly possible was reasonable. If he had attempted to answer he would have been injecting himself into the deliberations which would have become an exercise in parsing and interpreting his every word as some people parse and interpret the Bible to find whatever they are looking for. If there are one or more jurors who believe being a Republican constitutes reasonable doubt, then it is up to the jury to out them, for better or worse. Any help from Walton would be grounds for an appeal or mistrial.

Jon Kabbat Zinn writes about “Sleep Stress” in “Full Catastrophe Living”. he likens it to not being able to let go

Zinn

Very good point. Of course it indicates a person needs to do serious analysis to learn to let go. For a faster physical remedy, I would suggest detoxing the liver. That’s where we hold our anger/angst/unresolved emotions. (and no, it doesn’t have to be anything big… just life stress). For that, I bet taking a couple of Thisilyn aka Milk Thistle Extract in the mornings. It really clears the liver and allows the rest of the body’s bio processes to function efficiently. Resulting in more sleep. From my experience. Try it Marcy!

Pic reminds me of an old stage trick…watermelon, watermelon, watermelon…

everhopeful @ 184

MSNBC reporting that Cheney has been diagnosed with a blood clot in his leg

IIRC, [Cheney’s] had trouble with the back of his knees. Surgery on the arteries there. Sometimes he uses a cane, but he thinks it makes him look more like The Penguin.

Is that possible?