Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Longmire "Dog Soldier" (spoilers)
384 views
Skip to first unread message
Adam H. Kerman
Jul 3, 2012, 2:29:49 AM7/3/12
to
s
p
o
i
l
e
r
s
p
a
c
e
It looks like it's going to be the uncaring social worker and incompetent
children's welfare system episode, but it feints to the right and manages
to stray from the cliche. First time this show has surprised me.
Starbuck's character isn't terribly important. Branch has more to
do. Henry has a logical role. The election is barely hinted at, just
one line from Walt to Branch. That Branch and The Chin are having sex
or in a relationship isn't hinted at. Matthius is an off-screen character.
We're introduced to a new corrupt Indian. Is he the president of the tribe?
Walt disapproves of both his politics and business practices, but his
business isn't stated. Walt suggests his hand is in various tills.
A corrupt social worker and foster home care giver cook up a scheme to
kidnap Indian children via the welfare system. Seems the federal government
makes higher payments for the foster care of Indian children versus white
children and the foster home operator is kicking back to the social worker.
Someone on the reservation is being paid off "to witness" incidences of
neglect and abuse so that children can be removed from their parents.
The Chin figures out that the foster home operator isn't reporting the
higher payments. Huh? What, she's called up his tax returns? You can't
hide reported payments from IRS, idiot writers, and a local
prosecutor would require a warrant to get a tax return.
There's an ex-boxer on the Indian reservation being paid off by the
new corrupt Indian to avenge the kidnapped children. They don't explain
why he's taking teeth, but it's some sort of trophy. He thinks he's the
title mythological character from the 19th century Indian lore.
At one point, Walt, who is in terrible physical shape and has a bad back,
still manages to subdue the ex-boxer and put him in jail, merely getting
beaten about the head. It happened during a commercial break.
In the continuing non-backstory, Walt gets a letter from Denver police.
We get glimpses of scenes from the backstory, but nothing coherent.
He burns the letter. What utterly uninteresting crap.
I didn't dislike this one as much as the others because it had a less
cliched plot and a few interesting points.
p
o
i
l
e
r
s
p
a
c
e
It looks like it's going to be the uncaring social worker and incompetent
children's welfare system episode, but it feints to the right and manages
to stray from the cliche. First time this show has surprised me.
Starbuck's character isn't terribly important. Branch has more to
do. Henry has a logical role. The election is barely hinted at, just
one line from Walt to Branch. That Branch and The Chin are having sex
or in a relationship isn't hinted at. Matthius is an off-screen character.
We're introduced to a new corrupt Indian. Is he the president of the tribe?
Walt disapproves of both his politics and business practices, but his
business isn't stated. Walt suggests his hand is in various tills.
A corrupt social worker and foster home care giver cook up a scheme to
kidnap Indian children via the welfare system. Seems the federal government
makes higher payments for the foster care of Indian children versus white
children and the foster home operator is kicking back to the social worker.
Someone on the reservation is being paid off "to witness" incidences of
neglect and abuse so that children can be removed from their parents.
The Chin figures out that the foster home operator isn't reporting the
higher payments. Huh? What, she's called up his tax returns? You can't
hide reported payments from IRS, idiot writers, and a local
prosecutor would require a warrant to get a tax return.
There's an ex-boxer on the Indian reservation being paid off by the
new corrupt Indian to avenge the kidnapped children. They don't explain
why he's taking teeth, but it's some sort of trophy. He thinks he's the
title mythological character from the 19th century Indian lore.
At one point, Walt, who is in terrible physical shape and has a bad back,
still manages to subdue the ex-boxer and put him in jail, merely getting
beaten about the head. It happened during a commercial break.
In the continuing non-backstory, Walt gets a letter from Denver police.
We get glimpses of scenes from the backstory, but nothing coherent.
He burns the letter. What utterly uninteresting crap.
I didn't dislike this one as much as the others because it had a less
cliched plot and a few interesting points.
Hunter
Jul 3, 2012, 10:01:26 AM7/3/12
to
On Tue, 3 Jul 2012 06:29:49 +0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>s
>p
>o
>i
>l
>e
>r
>
>s
>p
>a
>c
>e
>
>It looks like it's going to be the uncaring social worker and incompetent
>children's welfare system episode, but it feints to the right and manages
>to stray from the cliche. First time this show has surprised me.
>
>Starbuck's character isn't terribly important.
------
<a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>s
>p
>o
>i
>l
>e
>r
>
>s
>p
>a
>c
>e
>
>It looks like it's going to be the uncaring social worker and incompetent
>children's welfare system episode, but it feints to the right and manages
>to stray from the cliche. First time this show has surprised me.
>
>Starbuck's character isn't terribly important.
Only she just asked the caretaker where Shank's kept his personnel
files and found them after Shanks lied to Branch. And the Ferge was no
where in sight.
>
> Branch has more todo. Henry has a logical role. The election is barely hinted at, just
>one line from Walt to Branch. That Branch and The Chin are having sex
>or in a relationship isn't hinted at.
----
>or in a relationship isn't hinted at.
Yes it was actually, Branch's and Cady's relationship as they giggled
with each other and Vic is probably starting to pic up on it.
>
> Matthius is an off-screen character.
>
>We're introduced to a new corrupt Indian. Is he the president of the tribe?
-----
> Matthius is an off-screen character.
>
>We're introduced to a new corrupt Indian. Is he the president of the tribe?
No, more likely an activist and businessman. If he was Chief he
would've been referred to by his title a couple of times and
corruption could be questionable. He worked outside of the law and
didn't profit from the taking of children but paid for a way to get
them back.
BTW Neel Cody's real parents weren't corrupt Indians for the record.
>
>Walt disapproves of both his politics and business practices, but his
>business isn't stated. Walt suggests his hand is in various tills.
>
>A corrupt social worker and foster home care giver
---
>Walt disapproves of both his politics and business practices, but his
>business isn't stated. Walt suggests his hand is in various tills.
>
>A corrupt social worker and foster home care giver
Ah corrupt white people
>
> cook up a scheme tokidnap Indian children via the welfare system. Seems the federal government
>makes higher payments for the foster care of Indian children versus white
>children and the foster home operator is kicking back to the social worker.
>Someone on the reservation is being paid off "to witness" incidences of
>neglect and abuse so that children can be removed from their parents.
----
>children and the foster home operator is kicking back to the social worker.
>Someone on the reservation is being paid off "to witness" incidences of
>neglect and abuse so that children can be removed from their parents.
Correct.
>
>The Chin figures out that the foster home operator isn't reporting the
>higher payments. Huh? What, she's called up his tax returns? You can't
>hide reported payments from IRS, idiot writers, and a local
>prosecutor would require a warrant to get a tax return.
----
>The Chin figures out that the foster home operator isn't reporting the
>higher payments. Huh? What, she's called up his tax returns? You can't
>hide reported payments from IRS, idiot writers, and a local
>prosecutor would require a warrant to get a tax return.
You call the writers idiots but you are the one who is assuming it is
tax returns Cady subpoenaed. Generally when you are doing something
illegal like skimming off government grants I doubt you report it. In
any event it is very likely that they weren't tax returns but any
moneys that the Federal government gives the group home a organization
under contract to the government has to be reported back to the
government to show what they are doing with it. It is not as if the
government was getting the tax returns from a totally private company
or individuals. They likely have to tell the appropriate Federal
department as part of their contract to run the place. No warrant is
needed. And even if Cady needed one, how do we know she didn't get
one? It is established that she a rule book follower so we can be
assured that she got one if she needed on.
>
>There's an ex-boxer on the Indian reservation being paid off by the
>new corrupt Indian to avenge the kidnapped children. They don't explain
>why he's taking teeth, but it's some sort of trophy.
----
>There's an ex-boxer on the Indian reservation being paid off by the
>new corrupt Indian to avenge the kidnapped children. They don't explain
>why he's taking teeth, but it's some sort of trophy.
They did. Hector gets paid $200 per tooth from whoever pays him for
those he beat up for whatever reason. The two teeth were from the guy
Hector beat the crap out of in the first scene, the informant earned
him $400 dollars paid to him by Jacob which he used in his sacrifice
ritual. Consider them modern day scalps.
>
> He thinks he's the
>title mythological character from the 19th century Indian lore.
-----
> He thinks he's the
>title mythological character from the 19th century Indian lore.
They weren't mythical in that Dog Soldiers were real elite warriors of
the Cheyenne, but what mystical things that they could like morph into
different living things are obviously a myth. For all we know Jacob
Lighthorse could've been descended from one.
>
>At one point, Walt, who is in terrible physical shape and has a bad back,
>still manages to subdue the ex-boxer and put him in jail, merely getting
>beaten about the head. It happened during a commercial break.
-----
>At one point, Walt, who is in terrible physical shape and has a bad back,
>still manages to subdue the ex-boxer and put him in jail, merely getting
>beaten about the head. It happened during a commercial break.
With some projectile blood, but he has a bad back in terms of it being
injured by an outside cause like being whipped not that he has one due
to lifting things and he wrenched permanently or like John F. Kennedy.
And remember he did take down the Hitman in a hand to hand fight so
there is some precedence for it. And I guess getting beaten "about the
head" is no big thing. :
>
>In the continuing non-backstory, Walt gets a letter from Denver police.
>We get glimpses of scenes from the backstory, but nothing coherent.
>He burns the letter. What utterly uninteresting crap.
-----
>In the continuing non-backstory, Walt gets a letter from Denver police.
>We get glimpses of scenes from the backstory, but nothing coherent.
>He burns the letter. What utterly uninteresting crap.
From that and other hints in the episode I suspect he at least tried
to kill someone if not killed someone and got away with it. Which may
explain why Walt referred to himself as probably being moved once by
the spirit of the Dog Soldier once.
>
>I didn't dislike this one as much as the others because it had a less
>cliched plot and a few interesting points.
-------
>I didn't dislike this one as much as the others because it had a less
>cliched plot and a few interesting points.
What crimes do you want to see depicted in the show?
------>Hunter
"No man in the wrong can stand up against
a fellow that's in the right and keeps on acomin'."
-----William J. McDonald
Captain, Texas Rangers from 1891 to 1907
BTR1701
Jul 3, 2012, 10:47:52 AM7/3/12
to
In article <jsu3gt$s04$1...@news.albasani.net>,
> There's an ex-boxer on the Indian reservation being paid off by the
> new corrupt Indian to avenge the kidnapped children. They don't explain
> why he's taking teeth, but it's some sort of trophy. He thinks he's the
> title mythological character from the 19th century Indian lore.
He wasn't the only one. The final scene showed the New Corrupt Indian
all dressed up as the Dog Hunter and howling at the moon.
> You can't hide reported payments from IRS, idiot writers, and a local
> prosecutor would require a warrant to get a tax return.
Subpoena.
> prosecutor would require a warrant to get a tax return.
> There's an ex-boxer on the Indian reservation being paid off by the
> new corrupt Indian to avenge the kidnapped children. They don't explain
> why he's taking teeth, but it's some sort of trophy. He thinks he's the
> title mythological character from the 19th century Indian lore.
all dressed up as the Dog Hunter and howling at the moon.
Adam H. Kerman
Jul 3, 2012, 11:29:44 AM7/3/12
to
Hunter <buffh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>s
>>p
>>o
>>i
>>l
>>e
>>r
>>
>>s
>>p
>>a
>>c
>>e
>>It looks like it's going to be the uncaring social worker and incompetent
>>children's welfare system episode, but it feints to the right and manages
>>to stray from the cliche. First time this show has surprised me.
>>Starbuck's character isn't terribly important.
>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>s
>>p
>>o
>>i
>>l
>>e
>>r
>>
>>s
>>p
>>a
>>c
>>e
>>It looks like it's going to be the uncaring social worker and incompetent
>>children's welfare system episode, but it feints to the right and manages
>>to stray from the cliche. First time this show has surprised me.
>>Starbuck's character isn't terribly important.
>Only she just asked the caretaker where Shank's kept his personnel
>files and found them after Shanks lied to Branch. And the Ferge was no
>where in sight.
She found them by opening a file cabinet drawer in which they were filed
>files and found them after Shanks lied to Branch. And the Ferge was no
>where in sight.
alphabetically, after Longmire decided to search the office illegally.
Fortunately for the show's plot, the perpetrator had already been murdered,
'cuz that little stunt would have thwarted prosecution for some of the
serious crimes he'd committed.
She performed solid police work there, Hunter. Basically, bits of revelation
were assigned to various characters, essentially randomly.
>>Branch has more todo. Henry has a logical role. The election is barely
>>hinted at, just one line from Walt to Branch. That Branch and The Chin
>>are having sex or in a relationship isn't hinted at.
>Yes it was actually, Branch's and Cady's relationship as they giggled
>with each other and Vic is probably starting to pic up on it.
There was a giggling moment? At what time index, pray tell?
>with each other and Vic is probably starting to pic up on it.
>>Matthius is an off-screen character.
>>We're introduced to a new corrupt Indian. Is he the president of the tribe?
>No, more likely an activist and businessman.
They didn't say he wasn't. Longmire talked about him as a politician,
so maybe he's in tribal governance.
>If he was Chief he would've been referred to by his title a couple of
>times and corruption could be questionable. He worked outside of the law
>and didn't profit from the taking of children but paid for a way to get
>them back.
helped to shut it down. Of course, if he hadn't had the phoney witness
nearly beaten to death, the phoney witness could have recanted his
false observations and those children would have been returned to their
parents immediately.
He made a bad situation worse.
>BTW Neel Cody's real parents weren't corrupt Indians for the record.
claimed. The house was small, but well kept, and no one seemed to be
underfed. The guy did pretty well for someone with two minimum wage jobs.
Maybe the "businessman" could have hired a family lawyer to represent
the child's interest, versus an ex-boxer.
>>Walt disapproves of both his politics and business practices, but his
>>business isn't stated. Walt suggests his hand is in various tills.
>>A corrupt social worker and foster home care giver
As I said, this episode had a couple of surprises.
>>The Chin figures out that the foster home operator isn't reporting the
>>higher payments. Huh? What, she's called up his tax returns? You can't
>>hide reported payments from IRS, idiot writers, and a local
>>prosecutor would require a warrant to get a tax return.
>You call the writers idiots
The Emperor of Television Interpretation grants me leave to comment
on the writers. Thank you, oh thank you, your virtuosity.
>but you are the one who is assuming it is tax returns Cady subpoenaed.
was a federal tax return.
>Generally when you are doing something illegal like skimming off
>government grants I doubt you report it.
I'll explain it more slowly. If you get a payment from a legitimate source,
say a government grant, that legitimate source will comply with its tax
code obligations. Such payments cannot be hidden from IRS. Those involved
in illegal schemes know this. As a minimum, their tax returns would reflect
that fact that they received payments known to have been reported, unless
they aren't trying very hard not to get caught.
>In any event it is very likely that they weren't tax returns but any
>moneys that the Federal government gives the group home a organization
>under contract to the government has to be reported back to the government
>to show what they are doing with it.
>It is not as if the government was getting the tax returns from a totally
>private company or individuals. They likely have to tell the appropriate
>Federal department as part of their contract to run the place. No warrant
>is needed.
having received a lesser grant for white children. Think hard. The Indian
children were already reported in order to obtain the payments. Therefore,
the payments have to be reported.
>And even if Cady needed one, how do we know she didn't get one? It is
>established that she a rule book follower so we can be assured that she
>got one if she needed on.
>>There's an ex-boxer on the Indian reservation being paid off by the
>>new corrupt Indian to avenge the kidnapped children. They don't explain
>>why he's taking teeth, but it's some sort of trophy.
>They did. Hector gets paid $200 per tooth from whoever pays him for
>those he beat up for whatever reason. The two teeth were from the guy
>Hector beat the crap out of in the first scene, the informant earned
>him $400 dollars paid to him by Jacob which he used in his sacrifice
>ritual. Consider them modern day scalps.
Missing the point. He has the teeth at the end of the episode when he
>those he beat up for whatever reason. The two teeth were from the guy
>Hector beat the crap out of in the first scene, the informant earned
>him $400 dollars paid to him by Jacob which he used in his sacrifice
>ritual. Consider them modern day scalps.
plays the title character. We don't exactly see how it fits into the
ritual, although we do see he's tied himself to the ground. I didn't
get that part of the ritual either.
>>He thinks he's the title mythological character from the 19th century
>>Indian lore.
>They weren't mythical in that Dog Soldiers were real elite warriors of
>the Cheyenne, but what mystical things that they could like morph into
>different living things are obviously a myth. For all we know Jacob
>Lighthorse could've been descended from one.
Hunter, you're an idiot for arguing that there's nothing mythical about
>the Cheyenne, but what mystical things that they could like morph into
>different living things are obviously a myth. For all we know Jacob
>Lighthorse could've been descended from one.
a shape-shifting creature. You're just devolving into your usual
argumentative obnoxious self.
>>At one point, Walt, who is in terrible physical shape and has a bad back,
>>still manages to subdue the ex-boxer and put him in jail, merely getting
>>beaten about the head. It happened during a commercial break.
>With some projectile blood, but he has a bad back in terms of it being
>injured by an outside cause like being whipped not that he has one due
>to lifting things and he wrenched permanently or like John F. Kennedy.
Oh, thank you. Please provide his medical records to back up that
>injured by an outside cause like being whipped not that he has one due
>to lifting things and he wrenched permanently or like John F. Kennedy.
idiotic theory. We've never seen the guy exercise, just drink. Yes,
it makes perfect sense that he'd be able to beat up a younger man
who is an ex-boxer.
>And remember he did take down the Hitman in a hand to hand fight so
>there is some precedence for it.
>And I guess getting beaten "about the head" is no big thing. :
>What crimes do you want to see depicted in the show?
Indian children taken away decades earlier to be raised "white". These
children were taken away by missionaries, but the script didn't state that.
I don't want to see the murders at all. Robberies, burglaries, family
violence, the usual crimes that a sheriff of the least densely populated
county in the continental United States would see.
Yes, even cattle rustling would be more interesting.
I can get murder anywhere else.
Adam H. Kerman
Jul 3, 2012, 11:31:42 AM7/3/12
to
the teeth for the ritual could be contracted out to someone else.
Obveeus
Jul 3, 2012, 11:50:27 AM7/3/12
to
"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
> Hunter <buffh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>Branch has more todo. Henry has a logical role. The election is barely
>>>hinted at, just one line from Walt to Branch. That Branch and The Chin
>>>are having sex or in a relationship isn't hinted at.
>
>>Yes it was actually, Branch's and Cady's relationship as they giggled
>>with each other and Vic is probably starting to pic up on it.
>
> There was a giggling moment? At what time index, pray tell?
was Starbuck that was noticing the interaction all the way from the other
room. I offer you no time index since that would be doing your homework for
you, but it was the scene where Starbuck found the key information in the
high school yearbook that showed that the two men knew each other.
>>BTW Neel Cody's real parents weren't corrupt Indians for the record.
>
> Another fuck up. They didn't even appear to be as poor as the script
> claimed. The house was small, but well kept, and no one seemed to be
> underfed. The guy did pretty well for someone with two minimum wage jobs.
afford to fix his car even though it apparently just needed an alternator.
SIDE NOTE: It is very annoying to drive around on a reservation and see
home after home after home where people have vehicles worth more than their
homes.
> Maybe the "businessman" could have hired a family lawyer to represent
> the child's interest, versus an ex-boxer.
handle cases where a dozen or more of their children have been 'stolen'.
> I don't want to see the murders at all. Robberies, burglaries, family
> violence, the usual crimes that a sheriff of the least densely populated
> county in the continental United States would see.
>
> Yes, even cattle rustling would be more interesting.
>
> I can get murder anywhere else.
Obveeus
Jul 3, 2012, 11:53:37 AM7/3/12
to
"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
> BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>>>There's an ex-boxer on the Indian reservation being paid off by the
>>>new corrupt Indian to avenge the kidnapped children. They don't explain
>>>why he's taking teeth, but it's some sort of trophy. He thinks he's the
>>>title mythological character from the 19th century Indian lore.
>
>>He wasn't the only one. The final scene showed the New Corrupt Indian
>>all dressed up as the Dog Hunter and howling at the moon.
>
> I thought it was the ex-boxer; my error.
acknowledgement.
BTR1701
Jul 3, 2012, 4:49:53 PM7/3/12
to
BTR1701
Jul 3, 2012, 4:49:53 PM7/3/12
to
was, they could search that office without a warrant. Government employees
have no legal expectation of privacy in their offices or equipment (phones,
computers, etc).
> Maybe the "businessman" could have hired a family lawyer to represent
> the child's interest, versus an ex-boxer.
legitimately?
Adam H. Kerman
Jul 3, 2012, 5:07:01 PM7/3/12
to
But I was thinking that under no circumstances should the police have
looked in those files as the children have privacy. The police shouldn't
have taken the files. Maybe that wouldn't have thwarted a prosecution
against him.
BTR1701
Jul 3, 2012, 7:58:42 PM7/3/12
to
In article <jsvmtl$bdf$2...@news.albasani.net>,
It's not clear. Hence the use of the word "if".
> He said "The file is at county," making it a contract facility.
Not necessarily. The file could have been at the main offices in the
county seat, but that doesn't mean the group home is automatically a
private enterprise.
> But I was thinking that under no circumstances should the police have
> looked in those files as the children have privacy. The police shouldn't
> have taken the files. Maybe that wouldn't have thwarted a prosecution
> against him.
It definitely would not have thwarted it. The guy running the place has
no standing to assert someone else's privacy rights in order to suppress
evidence against him in his own trial.
> He said "The file is at county," making it a contract facility.
county seat, but that doesn't mean the group home is automatically a
private enterprise.
> But I was thinking that under no circumstances should the police have
> looked in those files as the children have privacy. The police shouldn't
> have taken the files. Maybe that wouldn't have thwarted a prosecution
> against him.
no standing to assert someone else's privacy rights in order to suppress
evidence against him in his own trial.
Obveeus
Jul 3, 2012, 8:06:25 PM7/3/12
to
privacy rights? It seems to me that the right not to have your medical
records searched by the police exists even if you aren't personally hovering
over your medical records to protect them 24/7.
BTR1701
Jul 4, 2012, 1:03:00 AM7/4/12
to
In article <jt01e3$5p9$1...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus" <Obv...@aol.com>
wrote:
Yes, the cops might have gotten into some trouble if the kids filed a
suit alleging invasion of their privacy but that wouldn't have made the
evidence inadmissible in a kidnapping trial against the guy running the
group home.
It's a variation on the classic law school Crim-Law exam question:
The police go to Bob's house looking for evidence in a murder.
Bob refuses them entry and they have no warrant. They search
Bob's house anyway and find evidence that Frank committed the
murder. At trial, Frank moves to suppress the evidence as
fruits of a warrantless search.
Answer: The evidence is admissible against Frank because although
the cops violated Bob's rights, Frank has no standing to assert
violations of someone else's rights in order to suppress evidence
against himself.
The only person whose rights were violated were Bob's and he's
not on trial. Bob has a great basis for filing a Section 1983
civil suit against the cops, and he'll probably win, but the
evidence is still admissible against Frank.
wrote:
suit alleging invasion of their privacy but that wouldn't have made the
evidence inadmissible in a kidnapping trial against the guy running the
group home.
It's a variation on the classic law school Crim-Law exam question:
The police go to Bob's house looking for evidence in a murder.
Bob refuses them entry and they have no warrant. They search
Bob's house anyway and find evidence that Frank committed the
murder. At trial, Frank moves to suppress the evidence as
fruits of a warrantless search.
Answer: The evidence is admissible against Frank because although
the cops violated Bob's rights, Frank has no standing to assert
violations of someone else's rights in order to suppress evidence
against himself.
The only person whose rights were violated were Bob's and he's
not on trial. Bob has a great basis for filing a Section 1983
civil suit against the cops, and he'll probably win, but the
evidence is still admissible against Frank.
Ian J. Ball
Jul 4, 2012, 2:23:33 AM7/4/12
to
In article <jsu3gt$s04$1...@news.albasani.net>,
use of all of the characters (rare for this show, so far!), except for
the incompetent deputy (who's not in every episode anyway).
--
"Surf-crazed aliens... Of course." - Amber, "Alien Surf Girls",
Episode #1.1, "Wipeout".
Wait a minute... "Of course"?! "*Of course*"?!! Did I miss a step here??!!
> I didn't dislike this one as much as the others because it had a less
> cliched plot and a few interesting points.
I actually thought it was probably the best episode yet - it made good
> cliched plot and a few interesting points.
use of all of the characters (rare for this show, so far!), except for
the incompetent deputy (who's not in every episode anyway).
--
"Surf-crazed aliens... Of course." - Amber, "Alien Surf Girls",
Episode #1.1, "Wipeout".
Wait a minute... "Of course"?! "*Of course*"?!! Did I miss a step here??!!
Ian J. Ball
Jul 4, 2012, 2:26:52 AM7/4/12
to
In article <jsv4i1$kn6$1...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus" <Obv...@aol.com>
No, it was definitely A Martinez (who played the Indiana
politician/rabble-rouser) - I've seen the guy enough over the years that
I'd recognize him anywhere, even with native make-up and headgear on.
politician/rabble-rouser) - I've seen the guy enough over the years that
I'd recognize him anywhere, even with native make-up and headgear on.
anim8rFSK
Jul 4, 2012, 11:11:37 AM7/4/12
to
In article
<ijball-NO_SPAM-D70...@news.eternal-september.org>,
--
"Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
<ijball-NO_SPAM-D70...@news.eternal-september.org>,
"Ian J. Ball" <ijball-...@mac.invalid> wrote:
> In article <jsu3gt$s04$1...@news.albasani.net>,
> "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>
> > I didn't dislike this one as much as the others because it had a less
> > cliched plot and a few interesting points.
>
> I actually thought it was probably the best episode yet - it made good
> use of all of the characters (rare for this show, so far!), except for
> the incompetent deputy (who's not in every episode anyway).
Which incompetent deputy?
> In article <jsu3gt$s04$1...@news.albasani.net>,
> "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>
> > I didn't dislike this one as much as the others because it had a less
> > cliched plot and a few interesting points.
>
> I actually thought it was probably the best episode yet - it made good
> use of all of the characters (rare for this show, so far!), except for
> the incompetent deputy (who's not in every episode anyway).
--
"Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
Ian J. Ball
Jul 4, 2012, 11:25:24 AM7/4/12
to
In article <anim8rfsk-07748...@news.easynews.com>,
The chubby guy that almost got them all killed by the assassin/faux U.S.
Marshall a couple of episodes ago.
Marshall a couple of episodes ago.
anim8rFSK
Jul 4, 2012, 1:58:16 PM7/4/12
to
In article
<ijball-NO_SPAM-4EC...@news.eternal-september.org>,
this show. :)
<ijball-NO_SPAM-4EC...@news.eternal-september.org>,
"Ian J. Ball" <ijball-...@mac.invalid> wrote:
> In article <anim8rfsk-07748...@news.easynews.com>,
> anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <ijball-NO_SPAM-D70...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > "Ian J. Ball" <ijball-...@mac.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <jsu3gt$s04$1...@news.albasani.net>,
> > > "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I didn't dislike this one as much as the others because it had a less
> > > > cliched plot and a few interesting points.
> > >
> > > I actually thought it was probably the best episode yet - it made good
> > > use of all of the characters (rare for this show, so far!), except for
> > > the incompetent deputy (who's not in every episode anyway).
> >
> > Which incompetent deputy?
>
> The chubby guy that almost got them all killed by the assassin/faux U.S.
> Marshall a couple of episodes ago.
Ah. You have to admit, 'incompetent deputy' covers a lot of ground on
> In article <anim8rfsk-07748...@news.easynews.com>,
> anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <ijball-NO_SPAM-D70...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > "Ian J. Ball" <ijball-...@mac.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <jsu3gt$s04$1...@news.albasani.net>,
> > > "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I didn't dislike this one as much as the others because it had a less
> > > > cliched plot and a few interesting points.
> > >
> > > I actually thought it was probably the best episode yet - it made good
> > > use of all of the characters (rare for this show, so far!), except for
> > > the incompetent deputy (who's not in every episode anyway).
> >
> > Which incompetent deputy?
>
> The chubby guy that almost got them all killed by the assassin/faux U.S.
> Marshall a couple of episodes ago.
this show. :)
suzeeq
Jul 4, 2012, 8:12:00 PM7/4/12
to
the files were, she told them. She didn't say they needed a warrant,
which they would have if permission had been refused.
suzeeq
Jul 4, 2012, 8:14:23 PM7/4/12
to
Ian J. Ball wrote:
> In article <anim8rfsk-07748...@news.easynews.com>,
> anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> In article
>> <ijball-NO_SPAM-D70...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> "Ian J. Ball" <ijball-...@mac.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <jsu3gt$s04$1...@news.albasani.net>,
>>> "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I didn't dislike this one as much as the others because it had a less
>>>> cliched plot and a few interesting points.
>>> I actually thought it was probably the best episode yet - it made good
>>> use of all of the characters (rare for this show, so far!), except for
>>> the incompetent deputy (who's not in every episode anyway).
>> Which incompetent deputy?
>
> The chubby guy that almost got them all killed by the assassin/faux U.S.
> Marshall a couple of episodes ago.
That's 'the Ferg' and he's not all that incompetent; he turned up some
> In article <anim8rfsk-07748...@news.easynews.com>,
> anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> In article
>> <ijball-NO_SPAM-D70...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> "Ian J. Ball" <ijball-...@mac.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <jsu3gt$s04$1...@news.albasani.net>,
>>> "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I didn't dislike this one as much as the others because it had a less
>>>> cliched plot and a few interesting points.
>>> I actually thought it was probably the best episode yet - it made good
>>> use of all of the characters (rare for this show, so far!), except for
>>> the incompetent deputy (who's not in every episode anyway).
>> Which incompetent deputy?
>
> The chubby guy that almost got them all killed by the assassin/faux U.S.
> Marshall a couple of episodes ago.
leads for them in the last episode. He's just inexperienced and insecure.
Hunter
Jul 5, 2012, 1:16:47 AM7/5/12
to
True; he'll get better as they go along.
Adam H. Kerman
Jul 5, 2012, 1:19:59 AM7/5/12
to
Hunter
Jul 8, 2012, 1:00:48 PM7/8/12
to
On Tue, 3 Jul 2012 15:29:44 +0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
The female care taker gave them permission son to look in Shank's
office for the case files.
See above. They got per mission.
Yeah, she asked for the files when the story was the files were
downtown
The play talk between Branch and Cady when Branch brought Cady coffee
with one or two lumps of sugar for her.
If he has a office or used to be in a governmental office they
would've used his title like "Chief Jackson" in "The Killing", if only
in contempt. Walt only said to Branch that Jacob wanted to talk
politics as a sarcastic jab at both Branch and Jacob. As I said in
another post Jacob is probably an Al Sharpton type, an activist.
Social Activist deal in politics He could be a business man as well
and they involve themselves in politics as well.
You have evidence of that? There is nothing to say he would do that.
If he was he would probably be trying to muscle in on the action, even
take it over not stop it. And the end when he was in Dog Soldier
attire it shows his dedication to his people
That depends on how one would've got him to recant. But yes if he
trusted the system more he could've gone that route. After all Cady
did uncover the fact that the same person made the accusations.
He sure got the authorities attention.
Then you don't know the definition of poor in the United States. Yes
there are truly destitute people in the county but because a house is
well kept and the kids fed that doesn't mean they aren't poor. If you
can't pay you bills and/or have to choose between paying the rent and
buying new shoes for your kids you are poor.
In any event he had two part time jobs and he still couldn't pay for a
lawyer to fight the charges because he was saving up money to fix the
car. He and his family were poor.
Very likely. But he has no faith in the White man's system.
You are dong just as much interpreting since neither of us knows the
procedure Group Homes need to do to report the extra funds they get.
Perhaps they have to submit a monthly report on their incomes from the
state. We don't know but you assume it was tax returns she looked at.
A wrong assumption or at least an unknowing assumption, and if we
don't know what documents Cady was seeing we don't know if it was a
mistake or not, but given that we know that Cady follows the law to
the letter unlike her dad, it is a good bet that she got a warrant if
one was needed.
Unlikely that Shanks and Crystal were morons.
And I could agree with you. Which makes it less likely that it was tax
returns Cady was talking about.
Only if you assume it was tax returns Cady was talking about which you
leaped to without knowing what are the procedures that Group Homes
have to do in regards to the disposition of government monies.
And yet the money wasn't reported as Cady found out, The sequence of
events is the Grroup Home tells the feds about the Indian kids they
are taking care of. The Feds send the money. The Group home doesn't
tell the relevant agency about the extra money they received from the
Feds for the number of Indian kids they have, only reporting the funds
regarding the number of kids total regardless of the race of the kids
leaving out the extra money..
Or she got a search warrant off screen just like Walt did in " Duh.
Hector gave Jacob the teeth. Jacob pays Hector his $400. Jacob puts on
his Dog Solider vestments and does his sprit dance with the teeth in
his hand. It was an offering to the spirits. That is why he was
holding the teeth up to the sky at the end.
And that was explained in the show to. When a Dog Solder was in a
hopeless battle he would tie himself to the ground to show defiance.
In Jacob's ritual he was showing defiance. That is why Jacob did that
at the end.
I guess you didn't understand what I wrote:
"...like morph into different living things are obviously a myth."
That said Dog Soldiers were a real military elite among the Cheyenne:
"The Dog Soldiers or Dog Men (Cheyenne Hotamétaneo'o) was one of six
military societies of the Cheyenne Indians. Beginning in the late
1830s, this society evolved into a separate, militaristic band that
played a dominant role in Cheyenne resistance to American expansion in
Kansas, Nebraska, Colorado and Wyoming. Its members often opposed
policies of peace chiefs such as Black Kettle. Today the Dog Soldiers
society is making a comeback in such areas as the Northern Cheyenne
Indian Reservation in Montana and among the Cheyenne and Arapaho
Tribes in Oklahoma."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_Soldiers
Morphing into a dog is a myth of course, but the warrior elite were
real. As I said for all we know Jacob could be descended from one.
I am going by what we saw in the second episode flashback when Walt's
back was being stitched up by an old Indian in a house instead of a
hospital and Henry was there watching. Since we don't know how long
ago that was-I speculate nearly a year-he has healed in the meantime.
Now please provide evidence of your JFK type bad back assumption.
But he was a reasonably big and he would have to know how to handle
him self f the target gets the best of him for some reason. And being
a boxer and a street fighter are two different things. Heck we don't
know Walt's background yet.
The point was the fraud of taking Indian children from their homes was
an echo reminiscent of when white society was taking Indian kids from
Indians for centuries Hell, it happened on a regular basis right up to
the 1970s with kids forced to go to boarding schools so it wasn't that
long ago. Henry's quote "Kill the Indian, save the man" comes from the
founder of the boarding school system:
http://tinyurl.com/86oadnd
Further, this episode's particular plot is based on something that is
happening *today*:
Native Foster Care: Lost Children, Shattered Families
Laura Sullivan and Amy Walters
October 25, 2011
Overview of a three-part investigation
Nearly 700 Native American children in South Dakota are being removed
from their homes every year, sometimes under questionable
circumstances. An NPR News investigation has found that the state is
largely failing to place them according to the law. The vast majority
of native kids in foster care in South Dakota are in nonnative homes
or group homes, according to an NPR analysis of state records.
Years ago, thousands of Native American children were forcibly removed
from their homes and sent to boarding schools, where the motto of the
schools' founder was "Kill the Indian, Save the Man." Children lost
touch with their culture, traditions and families. Many suffered
horrible abuse, leaving entire generations missing from the one place
whose future depended on them - their tribes.
In 1978, Congress tried to put a stop to it. They passed the Indian
Child Welfare Act, which says except in the rarest circumstances,
Native American children must be placed with their relatives or
tribes. It also says states must do everything it can to keep native
families together.
But 32 states are failing to abide by the act in one way or another,
and, an NPR investigation has found, nowhere is that more apparent
than in South Dakota.
"Cousins are disappearing; family members are disappearing," said
Peter Lengkeek, a Crow Creek Tribal Council member. "It's kidnapping.
That's how we see it."
State officials say they have to do what's in the best interest of the
child, but the state does have a financial incentive to remove the
children. The state receives thousands of dollars from the federal
government for every child it takes from a family, and in some cases
the state gets even more money if the child is Native American. The
result is that South Dakota is now removing children at a rate higher
than the vast majority of other states in the country.
Native American families feel the brunt of this. Their children make
up less than 15 percent of the child population, yet they make up more
than half of the children in foster care.
Critics say foster care in South Dakota has become a powerhouse for
private group home providers who bring in millions of dollars in state
contracts to care for kids. Among them is Children's Home Society, the
state's largest foster care provider, which has close ties with top
government officials.
[edit]
http://tinyurl.com/3rufyob
Here is another version of the same story but it lays out how much
money the state gets per Indian (Excerpt):
[edit]
"Every time a state puts a child in foster care, the federal
government sends money. Because South Dakota is poor, it receives even
more money than other states - almost a hundred million dollars a
year.[...]
Then there's the bonus money. Take for example something the federal
government calls the "adoption incentive bonus." States receive money
if they move kids out of foster care and into adoption - about $4,000
a child. But according to federal records, if the child has "special
needs," a state can get as much as $12,000.
A decade ago, South Dakota designated all Native American children
"special needs," which means Native American children who are
permanently removed from their homes are worth more financially to the
state than other children.
In 10 years, this adoption bonus program has brought South Dakota
almost a million dollars.
http://tinyurl.com/7vj8bto
The specter of a white institution taking Indian kids unjustly
triggered memories of this. It helps illustrates why the fictional
Indians of Jacob and Mathias and to a much lesser extent Henry are
very suspicious of the white establishment including law
enforcement and handle things their own way, outside of established
white institutions even if it looks suspicious to us outsiders.
Their actions may seem corrupt to us because we aren't as
knowledgeable to their history as to why they do not rust the system
and look to their methods of justice. .
Then you will be disappointed because all those things happen out west
as well as in the cites and large towns.
Maybe once and a while but if you think you are going to see less
robberies, burglaries family violence etc. you won't because those
things are exciting and those crimes are exciting. There would be some
variations but with most of the scripts you will be disappointed in if
you think it will be different because we are dealing with a small
town sheriff's department. Yes the crime rate is exaggerated but those
plots are the most excting.
Now how he handles it could be different but most of the crime stories
will be the same.
Unfortunately murder happens everywhere. If you just want to see
crimes that are more or less unique to Wyoming (or Colorado or Iowa or
Idaho, the Dakotas) it is going to be a very short list.
And I went and checked the book series that the TV show is based on
All but two maybe three are murder mysteries:
http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/63607.Craig_Johnson
I suspect the series will be the same. So while you may get a cattle
rustling plot almost certainly someone is going to be murdered or at
least die because of it.
<a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>Hunter <buffh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>>>s
>>>p
>>>o
>>>i
>>>l
>>>e
>>>r
>>>
>>>s
>>>p
>>>a
>>>c
>>>e
>
>>>It looks like it's going to be the uncaring social worker and incompetent
>>>children's welfare system episode, but it feints to the right and manages
>>>to stray from the cliche. First time this show has surprised me.
>
>>>Starbuck's character isn't terribly important.
>
>>Only she just asked the caretaker where Shank's kept his personnel
>>files and found them after Shanks lied to Branch. And the Ferge was no
>>where in sight.
>
>She found them by opening a file cabinet drawer in which they were filed
>alphabetically, after Longmire decided to search the office illegally.
-----
>Hunter <buffh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>>>s
>>>p
>>>o
>>>i
>>>l
>>>e
>>>r
>>>
>>>s
>>>p
>>>a
>>>c
>>>e
>
>>>It looks like it's going to be the uncaring social worker and incompetent
>>>children's welfare system episode, but it feints to the right and manages
>>>to stray from the cliche. First time this show has surprised me.
>
>>>Starbuck's character isn't terribly important.
>
>>Only she just asked the caretaker where Shank's kept his personnel
>>files and found them after Shanks lied to Branch. And the Ferge was no
>>where in sight.
>
>She found them by opening a file cabinet drawer in which they were filed
>alphabetically, after Longmire decided to search the office illegally.
The female care taker gave them permission son to look in Shank's
office for the case files.
>
>Fortunately for the show's plot, the perpetrator had already been murdered,
>'cuz that little stunt would have thwarted prosecution for some of the
>serious crimes he'd committed.
-----
>Fortunately for the show's plot, the perpetrator had already been murdered,
>'cuz that little stunt would have thwarted prosecution for some of the
>serious crimes he'd committed.
See above. They got per mission.
>
>She performed solid police work there, Hunter. Basically, bits of revelation
>were assigned to various characters, essentially randomly.
-----
>She performed solid police work there, Hunter. Basically, bits of revelation
>were assigned to various characters, essentially randomly.
Yeah, she asked for the files when the story was the files were
downtown
>
>>>Branch has more todo. Henry has a logical role. The election is barely
>>>hinted at, just one line from Walt to Branch. That Branch and The Chin
>>>are having sex or in a relationship isn't hinted at.
>
>>Yes it was actually, Branch's and Cady's relationship as they giggled
>>with each other and Vic is probably starting to pic up on it.
>
>There was a giggling moment? At what time index, pray tell?
------
>>>Branch has more todo. Henry has a logical role. The election is barely
>>>hinted at, just one line from Walt to Branch. That Branch and The Chin
>>>are having sex or in a relationship isn't hinted at.
>
>>Yes it was actually, Branch's and Cady's relationship as they giggled
>>with each other and Vic is probably starting to pic up on it.
>
>There was a giggling moment? At what time index, pray tell?
The play talk between Branch and Cady when Branch brought Cady coffee
with one or two lumps of sugar for her.
>
>>>Matthius is an off-screen character.
>
>>>We're introduced to a new corrupt Indian. Is he the president of the tribe?
>
>>No, more likely an activist and businessman.
>
>They didn't say he wasn't. Longmire talked about him as a politician,
>so maybe he's in tribal governance.
-----
>>>Matthius is an off-screen character.
>
>>>We're introduced to a new corrupt Indian. Is he the president of the tribe?
>
>>No, more likely an activist and businessman.
>
>They didn't say he wasn't. Longmire talked about him as a politician,
>so maybe he's in tribal governance.
If he has a office or used to be in a governmental office they
would've used his title like "Chief Jackson" in "The Killing", if only
in contempt. Walt only said to Branch that Jacob wanted to talk
politics as a sarcastic jab at both Branch and Jacob. As I said in
another post Jacob is probably an Al Sharpton type, an activist.
Social Activist deal in politics He could be a business man as well
and they involve themselves in politics as well.
>
>>If he was Chief he would've been referred to by his title a couple of
>>times and corruption could be questionable. He worked outside of the law
>>and didn't profit from the taking of children but paid for a way to get
>>them back.
>
>Only by virtue of the fact that the scheme didn't occur to him, so he
>helped to shut it down.
------
>>If he was Chief he would've been referred to by his title a couple of
>>times and corruption could be questionable. He worked outside of the law
>>and didn't profit from the taking of children but paid for a way to get
>>them back.
>
>Only by virtue of the fact that the scheme didn't occur to him, so he
>helped to shut it down.
You have evidence of that? There is nothing to say he would do that.
If he was he would probably be trying to muscle in on the action, even
take it over not stop it. And the end when he was in Dog Soldier
attire it shows his dedication to his people
>
>Of course, if he hadn't had the phoney witness
>nearly beaten to death, the phoney witness could have recanted his
>false observations and those children would have been returned to their
>parents immediately.
------
>Of course, if he hadn't had the phoney witness
>nearly beaten to death, the phoney witness could have recanted his
>false observations and those children would have been returned to their
>parents immediately.
That depends on how one would've got him to recant. But yes if he
trusted the system more he could've gone that route. After all Cady
did uncover the fact that the same person made the accusations.
>
>He made a bad situation worse.
------
>He made a bad situation worse.
He sure got the authorities attention.
>
>>BTW Neel Cody's real parents weren't corrupt Indians for the record.
>
>Another fuck up. They didn't even appear to be as poor as the script
>claimed. The house was small, but well kept, and no one seemed to be
>underfed. The guy did pretty well for someone with two minimum wage jobs.
------
>>BTW Neel Cody's real parents weren't corrupt Indians for the record.
>
>Another fuck up. They didn't even appear to be as poor as the script
>claimed. The house was small, but well kept, and no one seemed to be
>underfed. The guy did pretty well for someone with two minimum wage jobs.
Then you don't know the definition of poor in the United States. Yes
there are truly destitute people in the county but because a house is
well kept and the kids fed that doesn't mean they aren't poor. If you
can't pay you bills and/or have to choose between paying the rent and
buying new shoes for your kids you are poor.
In any event he had two part time jobs and he still couldn't pay for a
lawyer to fight the charges because he was saving up money to fix the
car. He and his family were poor.
>
>Maybe the "businessman" could have hired a family lawyer to represent
>the child's interest, versus an ex-boxer.
------
>Maybe the "businessman" could have hired a family lawyer to represent
>the child's interest, versus an ex-boxer.
Very likely. But he has no faith in the White man's system.
>
>>>Walt disapproves of both his politics and business practices, but his
>>>business isn't stated. Walt suggests his hand is in various tills.
>
>>>A corrupt social worker and foster home care giver
>
>>Ah corrupt white people
>
>As I said, this episode had a couple of surprises.
>
>>>The Chin figures out that the foster home operator isn't reporting the
>>>higher payments. Huh? What, she's called up his tax returns? You can't
>>>hide reported payments from IRS, idiot writers, and a local
>>>prosecutor would require a warrant to get a tax return.
>
>>You call the writers idiots
>
>The Emperor of Television Interpretation grants me leave to comment
>on the writers. Thank you, oh thank you, your virtuosity.
-------
>>>Walt disapproves of both his politics and business practices, but his
>>>business isn't stated. Walt suggests his hand is in various tills.
>
>>>A corrupt social worker and foster home care giver
>
>>Ah corrupt white people
>
>As I said, this episode had a couple of surprises.
>
>>>The Chin figures out that the foster home operator isn't reporting the
>>>higher payments. Huh? What, she's called up his tax returns? You can't
>>>hide reported payments from IRS, idiot writers, and a local
>>>prosecutor would require a warrant to get a tax return.
>
>>You call the writers idiots
>
>The Emperor of Television Interpretation grants me leave to comment
>on the writers. Thank you, oh thank you, your virtuosity.
You are dong just as much interpreting since neither of us knows the
procedure Group Homes need to do to report the extra funds they get.
Perhaps they have to submit a monthly report on their incomes from the
state. We don't know but you assume it was tax returns she looked at.
>
>>but you are the one who is assuming it is tax returns Cady subpoenaed.
>
>The Chin didn't explain how she miraculously obtained what I assume
>was a federal tax return.
------
>>but you are the one who is assuming it is tax returns Cady subpoenaed.
>
>The Chin didn't explain how she miraculously obtained what I assume
>was a federal tax return.
A wrong assumption or at least an unknowing assumption, and if we
don't know what documents Cady was seeing we don't know if it was a
mistake or not, but given that we know that Cady follows the law to
the letter unlike her dad, it is a good bet that she got a warrant if
one was needed.
>
>>Generally when you are doing something illegal like skimming off
>>government grants I doubt you report it.
>
>If you're a moron, sure.
------
>>Generally when you are doing something illegal like skimming off
>>government grants I doubt you report it.
>
>If you're a moron, sure.
Unlikely that Shanks and Crystal were morons.
>
>I'll explain it more slowly. If you get a payment from a legitimate source,
>say a government grant, that legitimate source will comply with its tax
>code obligations. Such payments cannot be hidden from IRS. Those involved
>in illegal schemes know this. As a minimum, their tax returns would reflect
>that fact that they received payments known to have been reported, unless
>they aren't trying very hard not to get caught.
------
>I'll explain it more slowly. If you get a payment from a legitimate source,
>say a government grant, that legitimate source will comply with its tax
>code obligations. Such payments cannot be hidden from IRS. Those involved
>in illegal schemes know this. As a minimum, their tax returns would reflect
>that fact that they received payments known to have been reported, unless
>they aren't trying very hard not to get caught.
And I could agree with you. Which makes it less likely that it was tax
returns Cady was talking about.
>
>>In any event it is very likely that they weren't tax returns but any
>>moneys that the Federal government gives the group home a organization
>>under contract to the government has to be reported back to the government
>>to show what they are doing with it.
>
>Your theory makes even less sense.
-----
>>In any event it is very likely that they weren't tax returns but any
>>moneys that the Federal government gives the group home a organization
>>under contract to the government has to be reported back to the government
>>to show what they are doing with it.
>
>Your theory makes even less sense.
Only if you assume it was tax returns Cady was talking about which you
leaped to without knowing what are the procedures that Group Homes
have to do in regards to the disposition of government monies.
>
>>It is not as if the government was getting the tax returns from a totally
>>private company or individuals. They likely have to tell the appropriate
>>Federal department as part of their contract to run the place. No warrant
>>is needed.
>
>The scheme was that they got a grant for Indian children but counted it as
>having received a lesser grant for white children. Think hard. The Indian
>children were already reported in order to obtain the payments. Therefore,
>the payments have to be reported.
------
>>It is not as if the government was getting the tax returns from a totally
>>private company or individuals. They likely have to tell the appropriate
>>Federal department as part of their contract to run the place. No warrant
>>is needed.
>
>The scheme was that they got a grant for Indian children but counted it as
>having received a lesser grant for white children. Think hard. The Indian
>children were already reported in order to obtain the payments. Therefore,
>the payments have to be reported.
And yet the money wasn't reported as Cady found out, The sequence of
events is the Grroup Home tells the feds about the Indian kids they
are taking care of. The Feds send the money. The Group home doesn't
tell the relevant agency about the extra money they received from the
Feds for the number of Indian kids they have, only reporting the funds
regarding the number of kids total regardless of the race of the kids
leaving out the extra money..
>
>>And even if Cady needed one, how do we know she didn't get one? It is
>>established that she a rule book follower so we can be assured that she
>>got one if she needed on.
>
>It's tv. She called Whitey between acts. Duh.
------
>>And even if Cady needed one, how do we know she didn't get one? It is
>>established that she a rule book follower so we can be assured that she
>>got one if she needed on.
>
>It's tv. She called Whitey between acts. Duh.
Or she got a search warrant off screen just like Walt did in " Duh.
>
>>>There's an ex-boxer on the Indian reservation being paid off by the
>>>new corrupt Indian to avenge the kidnapped children. They don't explain
>>>why he's taking teeth, but it's some sort of trophy.
>
>>They did. Hector gets paid $200 per tooth from whoever pays him for
>>those he beat up for whatever reason. The two teeth were from the guy
>>Hector beat the crap out of in the first scene, the informant earned
>>him $400 dollars paid to him by Jacob which he used in his sacrifice
>>ritual. Consider them modern day scalps.
>
>Missing the point. He has the teeth at the end of the episode when he
>plays the title character. We don't exactly see how it fits into the
>ritual,
------
>>>There's an ex-boxer on the Indian reservation being paid off by the
>>>new corrupt Indian to avenge the kidnapped children. They don't explain
>>>why he's taking teeth, but it's some sort of trophy.
>
>>They did. Hector gets paid $200 per tooth from whoever pays him for
>>those he beat up for whatever reason. The two teeth were from the guy
>>Hector beat the crap out of in the first scene, the informant earned
>>him $400 dollars paid to him by Jacob which he used in his sacrifice
>>ritual. Consider them modern day scalps.
>
>Missing the point. He has the teeth at the end of the episode when he
>plays the title character. We don't exactly see how it fits into the
>ritual,
Hector gave Jacob the teeth. Jacob pays Hector his $400. Jacob puts on
his Dog Solider vestments and does his sprit dance with the teeth in
his hand. It was an offering to the spirits. That is why he was
holding the teeth up to the sky at the end.
>
>although we do see he's tied himself to the ground. I didn't
>get that part of the ritual either.
-----
>although we do see he's tied himself to the ground. I didn't
>get that part of the ritual either.
And that was explained in the show to. When a Dog Solder was in a
hopeless battle he would tie himself to the ground to show defiance.
In Jacob's ritual he was showing defiance. That is why Jacob did that
at the end.
>
>>>He thinks he's the title mythological character from the 19th century
>>>Indian lore.
>
>>They weren't mythical in that Dog Soldiers were real elite warriors of
>>the Cheyenne, but what mystical things that they could like morph into
>>different living things are obviously a myth. For all we know Jacob
>>Lighthorse could've been descended from one.
>
>Hunter, you're an idiot for arguing that there's nothing mythical about
>a shape-shifting creature. You're just devolving into your usual
>argumentative obnoxious self.
------
>>>He thinks he's the title mythological character from the 19th century
>>>Indian lore.
>
>>They weren't mythical in that Dog Soldiers were real elite warriors of
>>the Cheyenne, but what mystical things that they could like morph into
>>different living things are obviously a myth. For all we know Jacob
>>Lighthorse could've been descended from one.
>
>Hunter, you're an idiot for arguing that there's nothing mythical about
>a shape-shifting creature. You're just devolving into your usual
>argumentative obnoxious self.
I guess you didn't understand what I wrote:
"...like morph into different living things are obviously a myth."
That said Dog Soldiers were a real military elite among the Cheyenne:
"The Dog Soldiers or Dog Men (Cheyenne Hotamétaneo'o) was one of six
military societies of the Cheyenne Indians. Beginning in the late
1830s, this society evolved into a separate, militaristic band that
played a dominant role in Cheyenne resistance to American expansion in
Kansas, Nebraska, Colorado and Wyoming. Its members often opposed
policies of peace chiefs such as Black Kettle. Today the Dog Soldiers
society is making a comeback in such areas as the Northern Cheyenne
Indian Reservation in Montana and among the Cheyenne and Arapaho
Tribes in Oklahoma."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_Soldiers
Morphing into a dog is a myth of course, but the warrior elite were
real. As I said for all we know Jacob could be descended from one.
>
>>>At one point, Walt, who is in terrible physical shape and has a bad back,
>>>still manages to subdue the ex-boxer and put him in jail, merely getting
>>>beaten about the head. It happened during a commercial break.
>
>>With some projectile blood, but he has a bad back in terms of it being
>>injured by an outside cause like being whipped not that he has one due
>>to lifting things and he wrenched permanently or like John F. Kennedy.
>
>Oh, thank you. Please provide his medical records to back up that
>idiotic theory. We've never seen the guy exercise, just drink. Yes,
>it makes perfect sense that he'd be able to beat up a younger man
>who is an ex-boxer.
------
>>>At one point, Walt, who is in terrible physical shape and has a bad back,
>>>still manages to subdue the ex-boxer and put him in jail, merely getting
>>>beaten about the head. It happened during a commercial break.
>
>>With some projectile blood, but he has a bad back in terms of it being
>>injured by an outside cause like being whipped not that he has one due
>>to lifting things and he wrenched permanently or like John F. Kennedy.
>
>Oh, thank you. Please provide his medical records to back up that
>idiotic theory. We've never seen the guy exercise, just drink. Yes,
>it makes perfect sense that he'd be able to beat up a younger man
>who is an ex-boxer.
I am going by what we saw in the second episode flashback when Walt's
back was being stitched up by an old Indian in a house instead of a
hospital and Henry was there watching. Since we don't know how long
ago that was-I speculate nearly a year-he has healed in the meantime.
Now please provide evidence of your JFK type bad back assumption.
>
>>And remember he did take down the Hitman in a hand to hand fight so
>>there is some precedence for it.
>
>Hit men who use weapons don't need to be boxers.
------
>>And remember he did take down the Hitman in a hand to hand fight so
>>there is some precedence for it.
>
>Hit men who use weapons don't need to be boxers.
But he was a reasonably big and he would have to know how to handle
him self f the target gets the best of him for some reason. And being
a boxer and a street fighter are two different things. Heck we don't
know Walt's background yet.
>
>>And I guess getting beaten "about the head" is no big thing. :
>
>People heal too quickly on tv.
>
>>What crimes do you want to see depicted in the show?
>
>The fraud was fine and in context, since they were comparing it to
>Indian children taken away decades earlier to be raised "white". These
>children were taken away by missionaries, but the script didn't state that.
------
>>And I guess getting beaten "about the head" is no big thing. :
>
>People heal too quickly on tv.
>
>>What crimes do you want to see depicted in the show?
>
>The fraud was fine and in context, since they were comparing it to
>Indian children taken away decades earlier to be raised "white". These
>children were taken away by missionaries, but the script didn't state that.
The point was the fraud of taking Indian children from their homes was
an echo reminiscent of when white society was taking Indian kids from
Indians for centuries Hell, it happened on a regular basis right up to
the 1970s with kids forced to go to boarding schools so it wasn't that
long ago. Henry's quote "Kill the Indian, save the man" comes from the
founder of the boarding school system:
http://tinyurl.com/86oadnd
Further, this episode's particular plot is based on something that is
happening *today*:
Native Foster Care: Lost Children, Shattered Families
Laura Sullivan and Amy Walters
October 25, 2011
Overview of a three-part investigation
Nearly 700 Native American children in South Dakota are being removed
from their homes every year, sometimes under questionable
circumstances. An NPR News investigation has found that the state is
largely failing to place them according to the law. The vast majority
of native kids in foster care in South Dakota are in nonnative homes
or group homes, according to an NPR analysis of state records.
Years ago, thousands of Native American children were forcibly removed
from their homes and sent to boarding schools, where the motto of the
schools' founder was "Kill the Indian, Save the Man." Children lost
touch with their culture, traditions and families. Many suffered
horrible abuse, leaving entire generations missing from the one place
whose future depended on them - their tribes.
In 1978, Congress tried to put a stop to it. They passed the Indian
Child Welfare Act, which says except in the rarest circumstances,
Native American children must be placed with their relatives or
tribes. It also says states must do everything it can to keep native
families together.
But 32 states are failing to abide by the act in one way or another,
and, an NPR investigation has found, nowhere is that more apparent
than in South Dakota.
"Cousins are disappearing; family members are disappearing," said
Peter Lengkeek, a Crow Creek Tribal Council member. "It's kidnapping.
That's how we see it."
State officials say they have to do what's in the best interest of the
child, but the state does have a financial incentive to remove the
children. The state receives thousands of dollars from the federal
government for every child it takes from a family, and in some cases
the state gets even more money if the child is Native American. The
result is that South Dakota is now removing children at a rate higher
than the vast majority of other states in the country.
Native American families feel the brunt of this. Their children make
up less than 15 percent of the child population, yet they make up more
than half of the children in foster care.
Critics say foster care in South Dakota has become a powerhouse for
private group home providers who bring in millions of dollars in state
contracts to care for kids. Among them is Children's Home Society, the
state's largest foster care provider, which has close ties with top
government officials.
[edit]
http://tinyurl.com/3rufyob
Here is another version of the same story but it lays out how much
money the state gets per Indian (Excerpt):
[edit]
"Every time a state puts a child in foster care, the federal
government sends money. Because South Dakota is poor, it receives even
more money than other states - almost a hundred million dollars a
year.[...]
Then there's the bonus money. Take for example something the federal
government calls the "adoption incentive bonus." States receive money
if they move kids out of foster care and into adoption - about $4,000
a child. But according to federal records, if the child has "special
needs," a state can get as much as $12,000.
A decade ago, South Dakota designated all Native American children
"special needs," which means Native American children who are
permanently removed from their homes are worth more financially to the
state than other children.
In 10 years, this adoption bonus program has brought South Dakota
almost a million dollars.
http://tinyurl.com/7vj8bto
The specter of a white institution taking Indian kids unjustly
triggered memories of this. It helps illustrates why the fictional
Indians of Jacob and Mathias and to a much lesser extent Henry are
very suspicious of the white establishment including law
enforcement and handle things their own way, outside of established
white institutions even if it looks suspicious to us outsiders.
Their actions may seem corrupt to us because we aren't as
knowledgeable to their history as to why they do not rust the system
and look to their methods of justice. .
>
>I don't want to see the murders at all. Robberies, burglaries, family
>violence, the usual crimes that a sheriff of the least densely populated
>county in the continental United States would see.
------
>I don't want to see the murders at all. Robberies, burglaries, family
>violence, the usual crimes that a sheriff of the least densely populated
>county in the continental United States would see.
Then you will be disappointed because all those things happen out west
as well as in the cites and large towns.
>
>Yes, even cattle rustling would be more interesting.
-----
>Yes, even cattle rustling would be more interesting.
Maybe once and a while but if you think you are going to see less
robberies, burglaries family violence etc. you won't because those
things are exciting and those crimes are exciting. There would be some
variations but with most of the scripts you will be disappointed in if
you think it will be different because we are dealing with a small
town sheriff's department. Yes the crime rate is exaggerated but those
plots are the most excting.
Now how he handles it could be different but most of the crime stories
will be the same.
>
>I can get murder anywhere else.
------
>I can get murder anywhere else.
Unfortunately murder happens everywhere. If you just want to see
crimes that are more or less unique to Wyoming (or Colorado or Iowa or
Idaho, the Dakotas) it is going to be a very short list.
And I went and checked the book series that the TV show is based on
All but two maybe three are murder mysteries:
http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/63607.Craig_Johnson
I suspect the series will be the same. So while you may get a cattle
rustling plot almost certainly someone is going to be murdered or at
least die because of it.
suzeeq
Jul 8, 2012, 12:26:10 PM7/8/12
to
Hunter (Hunter) wrote:
> Then you don't know the definition of poor in the United States. Yes
> there are truly destitute people in the county but because a house is
> well kept and the kids fed that doesn't mean they aren't poor. If you
> can't pay you bills and/or have to choose between paying the rent and
> buying new shoes for your kids you are poor.
>
> In any event he had two part time jobs and he still couldn't pay for a
> lawyer to fight the charges because he was saving up money to fix the
> car. He and his family were poor.
Forget the lawyer, he didn't have enough money to get the part needed to
> Then you don't know the definition of poor in the United States. Yes
> there are truly destitute people in the county but because a house is
> well kept and the kids fed that doesn't mean they aren't poor. If you
> can't pay you bills and/or have to choose between paying the rent and
> buying new shoes for your kids you are poor.
>
> In any event he had two part time jobs and he still couldn't pay for a
> lawyer to fight the charges because he was saving up money to fix the
> car. He and his family were poor.
fix the car.
William December Starr
Jul 8, 2012, 3:25:56 PM7/8/12
to
In article <atropos-4AD520...@news-europe.giganews.com>,
I've gotta ask: is that anything like the New Soviet Man?
-- wds
I've gotta ask: is that anything like the New Soviet Man?
-- wds
Smokie Darling (Annie)
Jul 8, 2012, 4:21:34 PM7/8/12
to
Though truthfully, I've not heard of a tribe offering anything taken by force from another person (like the teeth were). Doesn't mean it didn't/doesn't happen, just not real common.
Adam H. Kerman
Jul 8, 2012, 4:30:54 PM7/8/12
to
>The female care taker gave them permission son to look in Shank's
>office for the case files.
Hunter, can you read? I've made this point already. Case files are
>office for the case files.
subject to privacy law. She cannot give permission. A legal secretary
cannot give the police permission to search client files. A school clerk
cannot give police permission to search student files. A medical secretary
cannot give police permission to search patient files.
BTR1701 made the point that even though the search was illegal, it
wouldn't be supressed against the criminal operator of the home as he
can't assert someone else's privacy rights.
This has been thoroughly discussed in this thread. You're completely
and utterly wrong, Hunter. Just apologize.
>>>>Matthius is an off-screen character.
>>>>We're introduced to a new corrupt Indian. Is he the president of the tribe?
>>>No, more likely an activist and businessman.
>>They didn't say he wasn't. Longmire talked about him as a politician,
>>so maybe he's in tribal governance.
>If he has a office or used to be in a governmental office they
>would've used his title like "Chief Jackson" in "The Killing", if only
>in contempt.
Chief Jackson was comparable to a state governor. Tribes have legislative
>would've used his title like "Chief Jackson" in "The Killing", if only
>in contempt.
bodies. Maybe the executive officer is selected from among the elected
legislators, or maybe it's elected directly. Why would a legislator be
addressed as "chief"?
You're making stuff up.
This is an unauthorized guess on my part. You could very well be right
that he was merely an activist with respect to this issue.
>>>If he was Chief he would've been referred to by his title a couple of
>>>times and corruption could be questionable. He worked outside of the law
>>>and didn't profit from the taking of children but paid for a way to get
>>>them back.
>>Only by virtue of the fact that the scheme didn't occur to him, so he
>>helped to shut it down.
>You have evidence of that?
I'm offering an opinion without having first obtained your permission.
>There is nothing to say he would do that. If he was he would probably
>be trying to muscle in on the action, even take it over not stop it. And
>the end when he was in Dog Soldier attire it shows his dedication to
>his people
if as viewers who are not you we are supposed to accept Longmire as a
truthful observer.
>>Of course, if he hadn't had the phoney witness nearly beaten to death,
>>the phoney witness could have recanted his false observations and those
>>children would have been returned to their parents immediately.
>That depends on how one would've got him to recant. But yes if he
>trusted the system more he could've gone that route. After all Cady
>did uncover the fact that the same person made the accusations.
The system was shown to be broken, so I don't blame him for mistrust.
>trusted the system more he could've gone that route. After all Cady
>did uncover the fact that the same person made the accusations.
Nevertheless, even when systems are broken, forcing the witness to
recant in public would have been helpful.
>>He made a bad situation worse.
>He sure got the authorities attention.
So you recommend conspiracy to commit serious felonies as the route
to justice? The man hadn't recovered from the coma by the end of
the episode, and we don't know if he ever will. The two of them
should have been prosecuted, but there's no way to do that in the
Longmire universe where all Indians are corrupt and the powerful ones
get away with their corruption.
>>>BTW Neel Cody's real parents weren't corrupt Indians for the record.
>>Another fuck up. They didn't even appear to be as poor as the script
>>claimed. The house was small, but well kept, and no one seemed to be
>>underfed. The guy did pretty well for someone with two minimum wage jobs.
>Then you don't know the definition of poor in the United States. Yes
>there are truly destitute people in the county but because a house is
>well kept and the kids fed that doesn't mean they aren't poor. If you
>can't pay you bills and/or have to choose between paying the rent and
>buying new shoes for your kids you are poor.
Even that wasn't established. All the father said was a lawyer was
>there are truly destitute people in the county but because a house is
>well kept and the kids fed that doesn't mean they aren't poor. If you
>can't pay you bills and/or have to choose between paying the rent and
>buying new shoes for your kids you are poor.
unaffordable, so he couldn't take on new obligations. He never stated
he couldn't pay his recurring bills.
>In any event he had two part time jobs and he still couldn't pay for a
>lawyer to fight the charges because he was saving up money to fix the
>car. He and his family were poor.
repeat this three more times, or do you just acknowledge what I'm getting
at and stop your idiotic arguing for the sake of arguing?
>>Maybe the "businessman" could have hired a family lawyer to represent
>>the child's interest, versus an ex-boxer.
>Very likely. But he has no faith in the White man's system.
No. He's corrupt. Perhaps he could have hired an Indian who is a
licensed attorney. Perhaps he could have tried an honest method prior
to choosing to beat a man almost to death.
>>>>The Chin figures out that the foster home operator isn't reporting the
>>>>higher payments. Huh? What, she's called up his tax returns? You can't
>>>>hide reported payments from IRS, idiot writers, and a local
>>>>prosecutor would require a warrant to get a tax return.
>>>You call the writers idiots
>>The Emperor of Television Interpretation grants me leave to comment
>>on the writers. Thank you, oh thank you, your virtuosity.
>You are dong just as much interpreting since neither of us knows the
>procedure Group Homes need to do to report the extra funds they get.
>Perhaps they have to submit a monthly report on their incomes from the
>state. We don't know but you assume it was tax returns she looked at.
I'll repeat the point as to why the writers were idiots so that maybe
>procedure Group Homes need to do to report the extra funds they get.
>Perhaps they have to submit a monthly report on their incomes from the
>state. We don't know but you assume it was tax returns she looked at.
you'll understand what I'm getting at.
If she looked at state reporting, those are reconciled. You can't hide a
child from the state. You could make up a child that doesn't exist, but
that wasn't the scam. The Chin couldn't have discovered that they were
claiming Indian children for support payments and white children on
regular in-care reports; the state would have already discovered that.
Reconciliation takes place within a few months.
If she looked at a tax return, gross receipts are reconciled to actual
state payments. IRS won't know the specific nature of payments made.
The payor makes information returns to IRS. The payee's tax return is
reconciled to these reported payments. Can't underreport, otherwise
IRS assesses taxes and interest and penalties when it performs
reconciliation.
I guessed it was a tax return because no information is reported
beyond gross receipts, but the scam still couldn't have worked
as presented.
Now, do you just care to accept that you didn't think this all the way
through and move on, or do you choose to keep arguing for the
sake of arguing?
>>>but you are the one who is assuming it is tax returns Cady subpoenaed.
>>The Chin didn't explain how she miraculously obtained what I assume
>>was a federal tax return.
>A wrong assumption or at least an unknowing assumption, and if we
>don't know what documents Cady was seeing we don't know if it was a
>mistake or not, but given that we know that Cady follows the law to
>the letter unlike her dad, it is a good bet that she got a warrant if
>one was needed.
You're the one making wrong assumptions here that the scam could have
>don't know what documents Cady was seeing we don't know if it was a
>mistake or not, but given that we know that Cady follows the law to
>the letter unlike her dad, it is a good bet that she got a warrant if
>one was needed.
been continuing for a long time because payments are never reconciled
with reports. You haven't thought it through, but you're still arguing.
Typical and expected Hunter behavior. Apologize for sucky writing
and never admit to error.
>>>Generally when you are doing something illegal like skimming off
>>>government grants I doubt you report it.
>>If you're a moron, sure.
>Unlikely that Shanks and Crystal were morons.
Whoosh.
They would have reported every single payment made so reports would
have reconciled. You're the one who refuses to understand that payments
must be reconciled.
>>I'll explain it more slowly. If you get a payment from a legitimate source,
>>say a government grant, that legitimate source will comply with its tax
>>code obligations. Such payments cannot be hidden from IRS. Those involved
>>in illegal schemes know this. As a minimum, their tax returns would reflect
>>that fact that they received payments known to have been reported, unless
>>they aren't trying very hard not to get caught.
>And I could agree with you. Which makes it less likely that it was tax
>returns Cady was talking about.
Keep ignoring the need to reconcile state payments against reports of
>returns Cady was talking about.
individual children.
>>>In any event it is very likely that they weren't tax returns but any
>>>moneys that the Federal government gives the group home a organization
>>>under contract to the government has to be reported back to the government
>>>to show what they are doing with it.
>>Your theory makes even less sense.
>Only if you assume it was tax returns Cady was talking about which you
>leaped to without knowing what are the procedures that Group Homes
>have to do in regards to the disposition of government monies.
Only if you assume that government reports are never reconciled. Your
>leaped to without knowing what are the procedures that Group Homes
>have to do in regards to the disposition of government monies.
assumption is false.
>>>It is not as if the government was getting the tax returns from a totally
>>>private company or individuals. They likely have to tell the appropriate
>>>Federal department as part of their contract to run the place. No warrant
>>>is needed.
>>The scheme was that they got a grant for Indian children but counted it as
>>having received a lesser grant for white children. Think hard. The Indian
>>children were already reported in order to obtain the payments. Therefore,
>>the payments have to be reported.
>And yet the money wasn't reported as Cady found out,
She couldn't have found out prior to the state or federal welfare agency
finding out. You're wrong.
>The sequence of events is the Grroup Home tells the feds about the Indian
>kids they are taking care of. The Feds send the money. The Group home
>doesn't tell the relevant agency about the extra money they received
>from the Feds for the number of Indian kids they have, only reporting
>the funds regarding the number of kids total regardless of the race of
>the kids leaving out the extra money..
That can't be hidden. Individual children must registered. There aren't
payments for unidentified children, as the writers may have been assuming.
What the hell is the matter with you?
>>>And even if Cady needed one, how do we know she didn't get one? It is
>>>established that she a rule book follower so we can be assured that she
>>>got one if she needed on.
>>It's tv. She called Whitey between acts. Duh.
>Or she got a search warrant off screen just like Walt did in " Duh.
I don't know that it's just that simple and just that instantaneous to
get a federal tax return, as seen on tv. I truly doubt it.
You didn't appreciate my Whitey joke (not a reference to a generic
white bureaucrat with all the answers); oh well.
>>I don't want to see the murders at all. Robberies, burglaries, family
>>violence, the usual crimes that a sheriff of the least densely populated
>>county in the continental United States would see.
>Then you will be disappointed because all those things happen out west
>as well as in the cites and large towns.
You're deliberately obtuse. You don't have that rate of murder in a
>as well as in the cites and large towns.
tiny place like this. The unreality makes it less interesting.
>>Yes, even cattle rustling would be more interesting.
>Maybe once and a while but if you think you are going to see less
>robberies, burglaries family violence etc. you won't because those
>things are exciting and those crimes are exciting. There would be some
>variations but with most of the scripts you will be disappointed in if
>you think it will be different because we are dealing with a small
>town sheriff's department. Yes the crime rate is exaggerated but those
>plots are the most excting.
Unrealistic, constantly high murder rates in tiny, unpopulated places
>robberies, burglaries family violence etc. you won't because those
>things are exciting and those crimes are exciting. There would be some
>variations but with most of the scripts you will be disappointed in if
>you think it will be different because we are dealing with a small
>town sheriff's department. Yes the crime rate is exaggerated but those
>plots are the most excting.
are dull, Hunter.
Oops. I forgot who I'm talking to. I don't have your permission to
offer that contrary opinion.
Adam H. Kerman
Jul 8, 2012, 4:32:35 PM7/8/12
to
Smokie Darling (Annie)
Jul 8, 2012, 4:47:38 PM7/8/12
to
It gives some comfort (heck, gives me comfort). Don't like it when religion is used to browbeat others (or kill 'em), but then I don't believe that's what it's about. I prefer "spiritually inclined" <grin>.
Hunter
Jul 19, 2012, 1:00:45 PM7/19/12
to
Exactly.
epste...@gmail.com
Sep 16, 2015, 2:05:44 PM9/16/15
to
On Tuesday, 3 July 2012 02:29:49 UTC-4, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> s
> p
> o
> i
> l
> e
> r
>
> s
> p
> a
> c
> e
>
> It looks like it's going to be the uncaring social worker and incompetent
> children's welfare system episode, but it feints to the right and manages
> to stray from the cliche. First time this show has surprised me.
>
> Starbuck's character isn't terribly important. Branch has more to
> s
> p
> o
> i
> l
> e
> r
>
> s
> p
> a
> c
> e
>
> It looks like it's going to be the uncaring social worker and incompetent
> children's welfare system episode, but it feints to the right and manages
> to stray from the cliche. First time this show has surprised me.
>
> do. Henry has a logical role. The election is barely hinted at, just
> one line from Walt to Branch. That Branch and The Chin are having sex
> or in a relationship isn't hinted at. Matthius is an off-screen character.
> one line from Walt to Branch. That Branch and The Chin are having sex
>
> We're introduced to a new corrupt Indian. Is he the president of the tribe?
> We're introduced to a new corrupt Indian. Is he the president of the tribe?
> Walt disapproves of both his politics and business practices, but his
> business isn't stated. Walt suggests his hand is in various tills.
>
> A corrupt social worker and foster home care giver cook up a scheme to
> business isn't stated. Walt suggests his hand is in various tills.
>
> kidnap Indian children via the welfare system. Seems the federal government
> makes higher payments for the foster care of Indian children versus white
> children and the foster home operator is kicking back to the social worker.
> Someone on the reservation is being paid off "to witness" incidences of
> neglect and abuse so that children can be removed from their parents.
>
> The Chin figures out that the foster home operator isn't reporting the
> higher payments. Huh? What, she's called up his tax returns? You can't
> hide reported payments from IRS, idiot writers, and a local
> prosecutor would require a warrant to get a tax return.
>
> The Chin figures out that the foster home operator isn't reporting the
> higher payments. Huh? What, she's called up his tax returns? You can't
> hide reported payments from IRS, idiot writers, and a local
> prosecutor would require a warrant to get a tax return.
>
> There's an ex-boxer on the Indian reservation being paid off by the
> new corrupt Indian to avenge the kidnapped children. They don't explain
> why he's taking teeth, but it's some sort of trophy. He thinks he's the
> title mythological character from the 19th century Indian lore.
>
> new corrupt Indian to avenge the kidnapped children. They don't explain
> why he's taking teeth, but it's some sort of trophy. He thinks he's the
> title mythological character from the 19th century Indian lore.
>
> At one point, Walt, who is in terrible physical shape and has a bad back,
> still manages to subdue the ex-boxer and put him in jail, merely getting
> beaten about the head. It happened during a commercial break.
>
> In the continuing non-backstory, Walt gets a letter from Denver police.
> still manages to subdue the ex-boxer and put him in jail, merely getting
> beaten about the head. It happened during a commercial break.
>
> We get glimpses of scenes from the backstory, but nothing coherent.
> He burns the letter. What utterly uninteresting crap.
>
> I didn't dislike this one as much as the others because it had a less
> cliched plot and a few interesting points.
Touch critic, dude. I think the show is intriguing, and I don't mind some mystery, to be filled in later. Foreshadowing is our friend, unless it never pays off.........
> I didn't dislike this one as much as the others because it had a less
> cliched plot and a few interesting points.
- Robert
0 new messages