I don't see a No vote hurting the Republicans in the next election. They could just point out that they wanted a better plan, something more than bombing something just to bomb something, But not bombing anything of strategic value, because that might escalate things. And then maybe throw in Sarah Palin's critique from a couple of days ago.

You are a bad person if you send your children to private school. Not bad like murderer bad—but bad like ruining-one-of-our-nation’s-most-essential-institutions-in-order-to-get-what’s-best-for-your-kid bad. So, pretty bad.Guess I am a bad person then, but I would do it again if I had the opportunity. Kid just graduated summa cum laude with honors in physics and math, and just started a fully fundrd STEM PhD program. I attribute a lot of that to good study habits learned at that evil private school, along with a boatload of AP classes. Of course, many of the same liberal politicians spouting this sort of nonsense do exactly like I did - sending their kids to the best private schools that they can. Problem with that statement is that it pushes the rest of us to sacrifice what is best for our children in order to support one of the Dems primary constituent groups (teachers' unions), all in the name of bettering their concept of a just society. This is communitarianism, which is contrary to human nature and most people's best interests.

Backing the Muslim Brotherhood throughout this area in the Arab Spring was somewhere between silly and traitorous. MB running Egypt was getting ready to go to war with Israel, while military before and after we're/are very much opposed. They try to keep guns and rockets out of Gaza. They gave/give the US top priority in the Suez Canal, letting us more quickly move our ships back and forth. All willfully given up by the Obama Admin in their backing of the MB over the military.

Janet - my understanding is that the Cherokee were farmers, which apparently why they were dispossessed of their land - they had kept the best farmland, and sold the rest to the non-Indians (or at least this is the story told by some of their descendants). They had also apparently given up much of their Indian dress, instead dressing like white men, developed their own written language, and overall were some of the best assimilated Indians at the time their land was taken and they were marched to OK. One of the corollaries though is that horses were much less important to them, and they were much less common, than for the Plains Indians a half a century later. Could still though probably make moccasins.

I am perfectly happy with global warming, if it indeed exists. I am sitting at the bottom of what was glacial Lake Missoula 13,000-15,000 years ago. Glacier from Canada would plug the end of the Clark Fork River just as it entered Idaho, and the water would back up almost 200 miles, well beyond Missoula. A lake with maybe half the volume of Lake Michigan would form, better than 1,000 feet deep where I am sitting now. Then, the water would eat away the glacier, the dam would burst, and all that water would devastate SE WA and NE OR. Then it would repeat. You can still see the high water marks in the Bighorn Sheep range 25 miles east of here.

BB - you fell into the same trap that the judge fell into with the contents of TM's cell phone. Of course, you can't guarantee 100% that the tweats were those of TM. Twitter may have been hacked sufficiently to introduce past tweats, complete with time stamps, or maybe someone was pretending to be TM during the fall of 2011 and early winter of 2012 (but why would anyone bother, since he was months from being famous?) But, the tweats were self-identified as those of TM, and the photos look like him. So, maybe we are down to 99% likelihood of the twitter account having been TM's. Or, maybe even 99.9%, but not the 100% that you seem to demand. Still, the question that you implicitly raised here is whether we should believe that the tweats, etc. were TM's, and not whether they should have been admissible. And, for us here, 99%, or even 75%, is more than sufficient. TM appears to have self-identify as a thug and gansta wannabe in those tweats, etc., and there is an extremely high likelihood that they were his. Not guaranteed, just very high probability.

Danube - the left (including DD) have to invent scenarios to justify why GZ shouldn't have been able to shoot his attacker. Never mind that there is little, if any, evidentiary support for such, and that the prosecution's star witness essentially corroborated that TM was the initial aggressor, and no evidence was ever introduced that GZ had drawn his firearm before TM was on top of him pummeling him MMA style (or, indeed, that TM ever saw GZ's concealed weapon before then). I love how they state as established truth what was rank speculation by the prosecutors, quickly rejected by most of the jury as lacking any evidentiary support. Or, some of the theories far fetched enough that the prosecution couldn't even mention them. The funny thing for me is that BB was around here a year or so ago when much of the information directly contradicting his recent statements was first discussed. I have to think that he knows better. Maybe. Or, maybe just so inured by listening to far left echo chambers that he can't remember.

BB - you are forgetting TM's social media accounts, where he portrayed himself as a thug and gangsta wannabe, showing illegal guns, drugs, bragging about fighting, etc. I think that most of us here looked at a lot of the tweats, etc. of the self-titled "No Limit Nigga" (@NO_LIMIT_NIGGA). One of the great things about the Internet is that it doesn''t forget anything. Rather, there are plenty of places still where you can still find those tweats.

The one thing that might have been different if the races were reversed is that Martin might have a criminal record for burgllary or at least receiving stolen goods. See How a Miami School Crime Cover-Up Policy Led to Trayvon Martin's Death, and the jury more likely would have seen that information than the contents of Martin's phone. Apparently, the MDSPD (Miama-Dade School Police Department) had implemented a policy of reporting crimes as disciplinary matters to show a decrease in crime in the schools. And, it worked, with the chief of the MDSPD getting recognized for significantly reducing (reported) crime in the school system. One of those benefitting from this policy was apparently TM who had been caught on video doing grafitti, and stolen jewelry was discovered in his bag as a result. The jewelry appears to have been stolen earlier than month, acccording to a police report. TM refused to implicate the person who supposedly gave him the jewelry. (And, the meme that it was costume jewelry is likely disproven by the fact that a police report was filed on the theft). In any case, the reason that TM didn't have an arrest on his record for either receiving stolen goods or burgary appears to because the MDSPD was intentionally not reporting crimes as crimes in order to make its (reported) crime rate look better. While this likely would have also benefitted a (mostly white) Hispanic attending the same school system, if the kid had been attending a school district without the chronic inner city crime problem that Miami-Dade has, the jewelry would have been reported as a crime, and not a disciplinary matter.

The problem that I think will become more and more apparent is that health care is going to get more and more expensive, and is going to cost governments more and more money. Purpose of these mandates was to force people to carry approved insurance coverage, spreading out the cost over a national pool of subscribers. The point of vulnerability has always been free riding in the form of waiting until one needs insurance to get it. Which turns the system from insurance to pooled reimbursement.

I'm curious to see what the judge and prosecution will do if they're confronted with blatant misconduct. A mistrial, with the State proclaiming it's inability to retry this farce due to having lost its "star" witness would be a suitable outcome. I think that that would greatly prejudice Zimmerman, which is why I doubt that it would work. If a prosecutor could engineer a mistrial through his own behavior, as he would have somewhat here (knowing the circumstances of Jeantel's original statement, etc.), and then gets a redo based on that, there would be little incentive to play things ethically and honestly. I am sure that the prosecution would very much like to retry a lot of their case. And, many of us wondered why the defense never requested a SYG self-defense hearing before trial, and this could be part of it - that the defense didn't want the prosecution to see the holes in their own case. With a retrial, they would have a much better handle on such, while it would not seem to advantage the defense at all. So, I think that they would argue that jeopardy had attached, and so, tough, the problem is with the prosecution, and partially of their own making.

Haven't seen this before here, so I appologIze if it was. Here is a reenactment video. It answers a lot of questions about what happened that night. Yes, it was done by Zimmerman, so may be self serving, but it was done apparently the next day before he layered up. It is also consistent with the evidence we have seen at trial so far.

Agree with Jim that the Good testimony that he didn't actually see Martin hitting Zimmerman is a not a blow to the defense. He saw from the back Martin's arm movements like he was repeatedly striking GF, but couldn't see his fists actually strike, because of his position. Yes, maybe he was pulling his punches at the last, as martial arts experts are taught to do, but is that likely? Esp. in view of GF's injuries? I think that the prosecution did what they had to there, in trying to minimize damages, but couldn't do much. The jury is likely, I think, to think just as we did here, that the prosecution is trying to make a distinction here that really doesn't matter.

Well,, the trial isn't about race any more, but maybe is about homophobia on the part of Martin, then maybe the MSM and the left can recast this as a young homophobe physically attacking someone he views as possibly gay, knocking him down, and beating his head into the concrete, MMA style, all because of his homophobia. So, poor gay looking Zimmerman had to shoot the homophobic Martin to protect his life. Despite how far LGBT (etc.) rights have come, esp., after DOMA was struck down last week, we should look at how much further we still have to go in this country. Something like that as the new Narrative, esp. if Zimmerman is acquitted, as many, if not most, here expect. Sure, the whiplash is going to be brutal for some on the left here, but that is what you get when you have a party based on identity party interests, and some of the identity parties have fundamental disagreements (e.g. that Blacks tend to be more anti-gay than almost any other demographic group).

Sorry if this gets double posted. Clarice - don:'t think that we are in disagreement when it comes to it not being manslaughter if there is a credible claim of self defense (and I think the the police testimony today may be sufficient evidence to raise the issue, and, thus require that it be overcome beyond a reasonable doubt). Danube - yes, it appears that lesser included charges are automatically available if requested by the prosecution in jury instructions in Florida. Which I understand it means that the jury instructions read something like: If you find x, y, and z (beyond a reasonable doubt), then 2nd degree murder; Else if you find y and z, then manslaughter; Else if you find z, then assault with a deadly weapon. (Don't know exactly how self defense instruction fits in there). Florida standard criminal jury instructions. In particular, note: 3.4 When there are lesser included charges 3.6(f) Justifiable use of deadly force 7.1 Introduction to homicide 7.4 Murder - Second degree 7.7 Manslaughter 33 Schedule of lesser included offenses (also see bottom of 7.4)

Derwill - my theory right now is that they knew from the first that 2nd degree murder was a stretch, and were really going for manslaughter, which they can probably get if they can overcome GZ's defense of self-defense. After all, Martin is dead by gunshot by GZ. I think that the thing that was confusing for so long was that they didn't formally charge GZ with manslaughter, along with the 2nd degree murder. Apparently though in Florida, juries almost automatically get instructions for lesser included offenses, and manslaughter is a lesser included offense within 2nd degree murder (there is a chart of such). Think of it this way, assault with a deadly weapon plus death equals manslaughter (in this case), and manslaughter plus depraved mind (in this case) equals 2nd degree murder.

In my defense, I had heard the theory that Martin had seen GZ's undrawn handgun, but will admit the drawn of the gun makes more sense, except, of course that there is no evidence whatsoever to support it. If Martin had survived, he might have testified to it, but no one else saw GZ confronting Martin with a gun, and Jeantel seemed to imply that Martin would more likely attack when he thought he thought he would win, and run when confronted with a gun.

More devastating testimony today. Neighbor opening his door and seeing a black guy in a black hoodie over a white/Hispanic dude with red top, whaling on him MMA style. And one of the first cops on the scene having GZ tell him he was still armed, and removing GF's handgun in holster, and putting on his own belt to secure them. And then admitted that he couldn't see GF's concealed handgun until the jacket was pulled back. There goes the claim that Martin attacked GF in self-defense upon seeing the gun - if a trained officer didn't see the gun until it was pointed out to him, then Martin was even more unlikely to have seen it.

(I think) Cecil - I have long suspected that Martin indeed had been casing the area. He apparently had possession earlier of stolen jewelry, which suggests that he may have been involved in burglary in the past. Of course, we will never know, since he is dead. Nevertheless, his behavior that night does seem suspicious.

NK - have read it some, and they seem somewhat in agreement with me, though I didn't go back far enough to see if they thought that AGCC was falsifiable. They do seem to spend a lot of time discrediting AGW models. If you follow them fairly regularly, you probably have a better handle on this debate.

I think that the thing that drives me crazy the most about "climate change" is that it is almost completely unfalsifiable. When global cooling was the rage, we were in a warming phase. So, the switched to global warming not much before measured global temperatures flattened out. So, now if hurricanes go up we have climate change. Then, a year or two later when. They go down, we then again supposedly have evidence of climate change. Ditto with tornados, warm winters, cold winters, arctic ice pack, Antarctic ice, etc. if something changes year to year, they claim evidence of man caused global climate change. Since pretty much anything that changes for a bit in the climate is considered evidence of climate change caused by man released CO2, there can be no null hypothesis, and thus it is unfalsifiable