dagblog - Comments for "Bowdlerizing for Columbine - or "Living within your (ends justifiying the) Means""

The Mighty (Q) Master of the

jollyroger — Tue, 10 Apr 2012 04:57:59 +0000

In reply to trucknutz. I. can't. stop.

The Mighty (Q) Master of the GIF

trucknutz. I. can't. stop.

bwakkie — Tue, 10 Apr 2012 04:52:04 +0000

In reply to I would just like to

trucknutz.

I. can't. stop. watching. awesome.

Consider this a response to

Verified Atheist — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 22:12:00 +0000

In reply to Here's a good op-ed by Linda

Consider this a response to you and PP (and destor to the degree it matches):

I could be thinking about this wrong, as a serial pipeline when it's really a parallel architecture. I'm thinking there's already a lot of nominees in the pipeline and adding more nominees at this time would just make the pipeline longer. Don't the same Senators have to vote on all of the nominees? Would adding more nominees make a difference? Would it only make a difference if they were nominees more in line with the GOP way of thinking (i.e., exactly the nominees we don't want to see)? I suppose the Senators decide which nominees to even consider, so they could move someone to the front of the line (still implying a pipeline, but one that's not FIFO).

As I noted before, I expect

PeraclesPlease — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 21:47:15 +0000

In reply to Looking at the makeup of the

As I noted before, I expect the Martin case to lead to more nuttery, which seems to be formulating as "Neighborhood Watch carrying Tasers instead" - great, the unappreciated damage of high voltage devices in the hands of even less experienced people who think they don't kill until too late.

(Because Tasers are mistakenly believed to be harmless, deaths from Tasering will be also exempt from murder prosecution because of the Condi Rice "who could have predicted terrorists flying planes into buildings?" I-am-delirious excuse.)

Wow. I totally never knew

jollyroger — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 21:28:07 +0000

In reply to A reminder that Senator Obama

Wow. I totally never knew about that post--it's fascinating, and I haven't even tracked back to get the context. Thx.

Here's a good op-ed by Linda

artappraiser — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 21:25:42 +0000

In reply to He has nominated judges for

Here's a good op-ed by Linda Greenhouse on the whole obstruction of judge nominations problem. It's from late 2010, but I think much of what she said still applies She does note that the Obama administration has been slower on nominations than its two predecessors, but she believes that, as before, the real blame still lies with the Senate games, and points out that Rehnquist chastised them for this in the past. And the main point of the essay is to chew out Roberts for not doing the same:

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/21/calling-john-roberts/

I got the impression that

artappraiser — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 21:07:53 +0000

In reply to Actually, it was 22 out of 44

I got the impression that this post was mostly about being tired of people making stuff up in service of truthiness, so I'm expecting kudos for your comment from the author.

Looking at the makeup of the

rmrd0000 — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 21:00:20 +0000

In reply to I have trouble believing that

Looking at the makeup of the court, I believe the opinion was in the bag no matter what the DOJ said. I also believe that the current 5 wing nuts on the court would find that the stand your ground law made the killing of Trayvon Martin legal.

Thomas would argue that you don't have let a suspected criminal get away to commit a crime. Suspected "criminals" don't have a right to commit a crime. Asking "What are you doing here?" is not a threat if you aren't guilty of something.

Because I have such a low opinion of the Republican Supreme Court jurists and their legislative colleagues, I view voting out elected Republicans as job number 1.

The GOP is actively working to suppress my votes and make my dark skin a target for attack by someone like Zimmerman. It is bad enough to be targeted by police for being black, having "neighborhood watch" captains free to kill is a bridge too far. Many cannot understand the clear and present danger that the GOP represents to some citizens.

The 4 sane justices went against the cavity searches. For me, that is good enough.

A reminder that Senator Obama

artappraiser — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 21:00:14 +0000

In reply to Democrats did not put

A reminder that Senator Obama also did an infamous blog post on this whole topic, entitled "Tone, Truth and the Democratic Party" which among other things, explained why he felt it important not to excoriate those of his Dem colleagues who did vote for the confirmation.

I have trouble believing that

PeraclesPlease — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 20:25:41 +0000

In reply to I was viewing this from a

I have trouble believing that the White House/DoJ arguing with the prisons has no effect, that it's "set in stone" whether they argue for or against - do you really believe this?

The Obama administration is siding with the prisons in the case and urging the court to allow a blanket policy for all inmates set to enter the general prison population.

“When you have a rule that treats everyone the same,” Justice Department lawyer Nicole A. Saharsky argued, “you don’t have folks that are singled out. You don’t have any security gaps.”