Politics Domestic Crime - Berkeley CSUA MOTD
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Domestic:Crime:
Results 301 - 450 of 522   < 1 2 3 4 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2021/12/06 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular

2008/6/14-17 [Politics/Domestic/President, Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:50260 Activity:nil
6/14    The Exile:
2008/6/9-12 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:50204 Activity:kinda low
6/9     i bet this grandma open carries
        \_ "her granddaughter, Debbie, was car-jacked and raped in broad
           daylight by two knife-wielding creeps in a section of town bordering
           on skid row."
           It's a shame the granddaughter couldn't have killed them when they
           attacked her.  Wait, I thought handguns were outlawed in Australia?
           How'd this granny have one?  And is that why the thugs attacked with
           a knife?  Shouldn't I be safe in the middle of the day?  Indeed, the
           law seems a bit out of touch with the people: "What she did was
           wrong, and she broke the law, but it is difficult to throw an
           81-year-old woman in prison, Det. Delp said -- especially when 3
           million people in the city want to nominate her for Mayor."
        \_ [my comment deleted, since this story is an urban legend] -emarkp
           \_ It's in the article, She didn't turn in the gun when the law
           \_ The rest of the story:
           \_ Welcome to Urban Legends:
        \_ As opposed to this one, who has a concealed carry permit. And
           actually exists:
           http://csua.org/u/lqf (SFgate)
2008/6/2-5 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:50121 Activity:nil
6/2     Theories have swirled around Nina's disappearance. Did she embezzle
        money from Reiser's company and run back home to Russia? Was she
        involved with the KGB or the Russian mafia? Did Hans Reiser's cunning
        intelligence help him almost get away with murder?
        48 Hours Mystery correspondent Maureen Maher reports on the case this
        Tuesday, June 3, at a special time, 9 p.m. ET/PT.
2008/5/15 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49957 Activity:high 66%like:49954
5/15    When will this windfall be taxed?
        \_ My favorite quote:
           "You'd be taxing success here," Kevin Casey, Harvard's associate
           vice president for government, community and public affairs
           complained in a quote that will soon be framed and hung in my
           office. "Over time, this would put us at a real competitive
           disadvantage, which would drastically hurt the Commonwealth."
           \_ Amusingly, everyone else seems to have missed this. -op
              \_ Missed what?  Glenn Beck is still a tool. and a troll.
                 I hate you for making me think about him today.  You win.
                 \_ Missed the quote from Kevin Casey you moron.
                    \_ why didnt you point it out, furryboy?
                       \_ I figured "everyone else seems to have missed THIS"
                          pointing to the quote was sufficient.
                          \_ Yes, this is quite ironic.
        \_ my brain is hurting from trying to parse this article.
           Harvard == GIANT UNREGULATED HEDGE FUND!!!!!!!!!!
           you know there are real live unregulated giant hedge funds
           out there who do actual shady documented crap, they probably
           don't concern themselves with giving out degrees.
        \_ The fact that this is from Glenn Beck explains it all.
           \_ But Glenn Beck apologized for misleading America and being
              a cheerleader for an incompetent and corrupt Administration.
        \_ "But while their financial statements may look similar, their
           missions aren't. The Gates Foundation is working to cure malaria,
           develop new tuberculosis vaccines, and stop the spread of AIDS.
           Most of our colleges and universities are only working to spread
           the radical political views of some of their professors."  Oh
           that's right Glen Beck.  Harvard (which he had just been writing
           about a sentance earlier.) just exists to spread radical politics!
           THOSE DAMN FIFTH COLUMNISTS AT HARVARD.  You read this shit and
           take it seriously?  Do you have more braincells than God gave a
           chihuahua?  This dude makes the chewbacca defense seem reasonable.
              \_ toy poodles are even stupider
                 \_ url?
           \_ Yeah. Never mind the universities spend far more money on useful
              research and training in engineering, fundamental sciences, life
              sciences, and yes, also in medicine. Neither the views of
              humanities faculties are necessarily politically radical.
              I have taken 3-4 humanities courses and never felt that
              the instructors were necessarily biased, much less spread
              radical views (although I know such people exist). This man
              discredited himself after that paragraph.
        \_ yeah, whoever posted the url... glen beck is not a noted
           economist.  people pay attention to him.  im not sure why.
           he's not as mean spirited as Rush.  that might be it.
        \_ This windfall is even more disgusting:
           http://csua.org/u/ljp (Times Online)
           \_ Why is ExxonMobil's profit disgusting?
              \_ It's disgusting in terms of the massive subsidies they still
                 get despite these sorts of profits.
                 \_ You're an idiot. Do you know how much they paid in taxes?
                    \_ Probably 35 percent on earned income, minus the
                       gajillion deductions any giant company with an army
                       of tax lawyers at their command should be claiming.
                       if you're talking about that recent email floating around
                       about how Exxon already pays 40 percent in taxes...
                       oh dont get me started.
                       if you're talking about that recent email floating
                       around about how Exxon already pays 40 percent in
                       taxes... oh dont get me started.
                       \_ IIRC, they paid more than 2x in taxes than they had
                          in profit.
2021/12/06 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular

2008/5/15 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49954 Activity:moderate 66%like:49957
5/15    When will this winfall be taxed?
        \_ my brain is hurting from trying to parse this article.
           Harvard == GIANT UNREGULATED HEDGE FUND!!!!!!!!!!
           you know there are real live unregulated giant hedge funds
           out there who do actual shady documented crap, they probably
           don't concern themselves with giving out degrees.
        \_ The fact that this is from Glenn Beck explains it all.
           \_ But Glenn Beck apologized for misleading America and being
              a cheerleader for an incompetent and corrupt Administration.
        \_ "But while their financial statements may look similar, their
           missions aren't. The Gates Foundation is working to cure malaria,
           develop new tuberculosis vaccines, and stop the spread of AIDS.
           Most of our colleges and universities are only working to spread
           the radical political views of some of their professors."  Oh
           that's right Glen Beck.  Harvard (which he had just been writing
           about a sentance earlier.) just exists to spread radical politics!
           THOSE DAMN FIFTH COLUMNISTS AT HARVARD.  You read this shit and
           take it seriously?  Do you have more braincells than God gave a
           toy poodle?  This dude makes the chewbacca defense seem reasonable.
           chihuahua?  This dude makes the chewbacca defense seem reasonable.
        \_ yeah, whoever posted the url... glen beck is not a noted
           economist.  people pay attention to him.  im not sure why.
           he's not as mean spirited as Rush.  that might be it.
        \_ My favorite quote:
           "You'd be taxing success here," Kevin Casey, Harvard's associate
           vice president for government, community and public affairs
           complained in a quote that will soon be framed and hung in my
           office. "Over time, this would put us at a real competitive
           disadvantage, which would drastically hurt the Commonwealth."
2008/5/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:49948 Activity:moderate
5/15    Amateur motd directors, what do you think of the East Bay Express's
        article on why UCB should fire John Woo for just being an all around
        terrible director:
        \_ I was unaware of the purpose of john woo's old office in
           the administration.  now i know!
        \- ths is an interesting and hard problems. much, much discussion
           at brad delong WOB site.
        \_ Anyone who says stuff we don't like should be destroyed!  Free
           speech is only for people who agree with us!
           \_ This might be a little deeper than that.  Read the article
              then come back.  It's not that he says things that are
              unpopular, but he might have either just made up
              law out of his ass, or committed a crime, or perhaps
              he was just following the instructions of someone else.
              I don't think this is a free speech issue.
           \_ Do you think that mob boss who orders a hit is protected
              by a "free speech" defence?
              \_ No, I do not.
        \_ I think that he has tenure and should not be fired until he is
           convicted of a felony. I believe he committed one, but we should
           wait until the legal system has decided that or not. What if
           Bush pardons him though, which looks more and more likely?
           \_ I keep hearing that Bush is going to pardon all these people,
              but I haven't seen him actually do it.
              \_ These pardons usually come in a Presidents last week
                 in office.
                 \- "i have a pardon in my pocket" jyoo@autodafe.berkeley.edu
2008/5/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49901 Activity:moderate 57%like:49908
5/8     Next time a CA politician says we need more moeny for schools, remember
        \_ These guys are lying to you. The school cost $230M, not this
           sculpture. How much did the sculpture cost?
           \_ The sculpture cost over $40M.  The original budget for the high
              school was less than the sculpture alone. See the LA Times story.
              \_ The *theater* with tower cost that much, not the sculpture.
                 Still a tremendous waste when kids don't even have books.
                 Public education is a sham.
2008/5/6-9 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49894 Activity:moderate 75%like:49913
5/6     Hey, Yoo lover: Yale denounces its own
        Thanks for the link, psb.
        \- er, so does berkeley
        \_ It's always better when an entire school suffers from group-think,
           \_ You mean the hippie dippie liberal 'group think' that torture
              is wrong, makes us look like complete idiots to the world,
              and doesn't give us reliable intelligence?  Sign me up
              for group think then.
              \_ No I don't mean that.  It has nothing to do with agendas.  It
                 has to do with the OP talking about a school "deouncing their
                 own".  I'm saying a school is thousands of people.  They
                 don't all have to agree with each other on everything.
                 That's inane.
                 \_ Any turly educated person agrees with me.
                   \_ How tur.
                 \_ Right. Your interpretation would be retarded, and I couldn't think
                    of a better verb than "denounces." I can't imagine anything
                    closer to "Yale denounces its own" having meaning, than the dean
                    of the law school criticizing Yoo on legal, ethical and moral
                    grounds at a large, official gathering of that institution, such
                    as commencement, which is exactly what happened. -op
2008/4/29-5/4 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49853 Activity:kinda low
4/29    How Frederick Douglass addressed the 3/5 issue:
        "I answer.and see you bear it in mind, for it shows the disposition of
        the constitution to slavery.I take the very worst aspect, and admit all
        that is claimed or that can be admitted consistently with truth; and I
        answer that this very provision, supposing it refers to slaves, is in
        itself a downright disability imposed upon the slave system of America,
        one which deprives the slaveholding States of at least two-fifths of
        their natural basis of representation.
        "A black man in a free State is worth just two-fifths more than a black
        man in a slave State, as a basis of political power under the
        "Therefore, instead of encouraging slavery, the constitution encourages
        freedom, by holding out to every slaveholding State the inducement of
        an increase of two-fifths of political power by becoming a free State."
        \_ Quite impressive, the human ability to rationalize.  He practically
           sounds like a Randroid.  -tom
           \_ The irony police are overwhelmed with tom, send in the irony
              national guard!
           \_ The 3/5 compromise was made by abolitionists who wanted to weaken
              slave states.  Go back and read history tom.
              \_ It was actually done by both sides, hence the label used
                 \_ Yes, but the slave states wanted the slaves to count as 1
                    \_ ...with their votes cast by the slave owner.  -tom
                     \_ You are confused.  The slave owner still only had
                        one vote.  The 3/5 rule was for the number of seats
                        that state got in congress.
                        \_ Right, so if the slaves were truly free to vote,
                           and at 1:1 representation, the state of Georgia
                           might have more seats in Congress, but the people
                           in power in Georgia would lose power.  -tom
                           \_ Well, at the time women were counted as 1
                              person but couldn't vote.  People under
                              voting age are still counted as 1 person but
                              obviously can't vote.
                              \_ Parents are the legal representatives of
                                 their children; slave owners and slaves
                                 have diametrically opposed interests.   -tom
                                 \_ And womenfolk?
                                    \_ Personally I think women's suffrage is
                                       a good thing--you disagree?  -tom
              \_ The US had the choice to allow slavery, or not allow
                 it.  It is pretzel logic to claim that, presented
                 with that choice, deciding to allow slavery but make
                 it somewhat less attractive was "encouraging
                 freedom."  There's also no reason to believe that
                 slaves would vote the same way as their masters;
                 giving slaves full votes would likely have led to
                 abolition via democratic processes, for example,
                 rather than civil war.  You could say that the 3/5ths
                 rule meant that "Georgia" had less power than New
                 York, but the people who actually had power in Georgia
                 were strengthened by the fact that their slaves couldn't
                 vote themselves freedom.  -tom
                 \_ The current congress has the choice to continue war or not.
                    And?  I thought you lefties thought it was conservatives
                    that only think in black and white.
                    \_ Do you think that the current Congress deciding to
                       continue to fund the war is "encouraging peace"?  -tom
                    \_ Are you trying to change the topic?
                 \_ Umm, the US had the choice to allow slavery, or not exist.
                    You know when the constitution was written right?
                    \_ I thought you trolls believed in the power of the
                       free market.  -tom
                       \_ Whaa?  Am I talking to some sort of eliza program
                          based on tom rantings here?
                          \_ The idea that the US could not have existed
                             without slavery in 1787 is ridiculous.  -tom
                             \_ It seems pretty obvious that the South would
                                not have signed a constitution that outlawed
                                it.  Hence, the US would not exist, at least
                                as we know it.
                                \_ It's not necessarily obvious. The Southern
                                   Colonies might have conceded, or they might
                                   not have. That they were never forced into
                                   position where they had to make the decision
                                   is not evidence of which way they might
                                   have jumped. Interesting counterfactuals
                                   proceed from both eventualities.
                                   \_ Don't let that whole Civil War thing
                                      stand in the way of your hypothetical.
                                      \_ Don't let a lack of understanding of
                                         the causes of the Civil War or the
                                         nearly century-long gap between it
                                         and the signing of the Constitution
                                         stand in the way of a one-line quip
                                         full of sound and fury signifying
        \_ is there some reason the 3/5ths compromise is suddenly big news on the motd?
           did Hillary finally get behind it?  Did Reverend Wright vow to travel
           back in time and rip Dred Scott limb from limb?  What's going on?
        \_ is there some reason the 3/5ths compromise is suddenly big news on
           the motd? did Hillary finally get behind it?  Did Reverend Wright
           vow to travel back in time and rip Dred Scott limb from limb?
                                              \_ Rev. Wright would more
                                                 likely wish to rip Taney,
                                                 CJ, limb from limb.
           What's going on?
        \_ Assuming this quote is correctly attributed to
           http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Douglass call me crazy, but
           on this one I'm going to go with the smart guy who lived through
           it over tom.
           \_ In what way? Frederick Douglas and tom speak to utterly
              different audiences: FD to a world where legalized slavery is
              still considered a possibility, whereas tom speaks to a world
              where slavery is an abhorrent concept. FD had to be almost
              painfully cautious in expressing his beliefs, whereas tom is
              free to express his with very little fear of danger to his own
              physical person. Had he had his 'druthers, FD might have said
              something more strident and provocative. --erikred
              \_ FD wrote tons of provocative stuff.  Start with the wiki
                 link.  Not buying it.  Also tom is claiming the union could
                 have somehow existed with the south agreeing to end slavery.
                 No.  Ridiculous.  If that were the case there would have been
                 no need of the 3/5th "compromise".  You really think they
                 didn't talk about all this stuff at the time?  Wow!
                 \_ FD also had his house burned down.  I'm sure they talked
                    about it at the time; that doesn't change the fact that
                    deciding to encode slavery in the Constitution is not
                    "encouraging freedom."  -tom
                    \_ /shrug. FD was being politic, working with what he had
                       at the time. It would be interesting to see what he had
                       to say post-Civil War, Emancipation Proclamation, 14th
                       Amendment. Also, pp's point vis-a-vis that the union
                       could not have existed without a 3/5ths compromise is
                       speculative. Carry on. --erikred
2008/4/27-30 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49840 Activity:nil
4/27    FBI investigates rare US abduction case - Yahoo! News:
        "We have a ransom situation here. In the United States, kidnappings
        for ransom are very rare,"
        Very rare?  Really?
        \_ Why is that so hard to understand?  As much as us motd posters
           love to hate America and where it's going, we do have a reasonable
           system of laws and law enforcement.  If you kidnap someone
           for ransom, you're probably not going to be able to use your
           ill gotten gains, and you will probably be caught.  This is not
           the case in certain other parts of the world.
        \_ Rare enough that the FBI's Uniform Crime Report doesn't
           even list it as a category. You may also want to see
           the Wikipedia entry on "kidnapping."
2008/4/21-30 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:49786 Activity:nil
4/19    Bush interrogation program was being used before Yoo memo
        \_ He and Libby will both get a pardon.
2008/4/11-16 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49729 Activity:low
4/11    New UN Human Rights Appointee is a 9/11 truther
        \_ The new UN Human Rights council is worse than the old. They passed
           8 or more resolutions against Israel, and _nothing_ else. Nothing on
           Darfur, nothing on Zimbabwe, nothing on China.
           \_ Yes, because that's what happens when you create an .org like
              the UN that treats dictators, thugs, theocrats and other forms
              of human trash like real people and give them votes on anything.
              Want to do some good in the world?  Shoot all those guys.  If
              their replacements are just as bad, keep shooting.  They'll get
              the message after a few funerals.  Instead we treat them like
              royalty.  As if they were legitimate leaders.
              \_ I'd like to shoot some people that I think suck too.   Let's
                 start with you.  Then the rest of your family!
                 \_ If me and my family were mass murdering butchers then I'd
                    say go ahead.  Since we're not and the people I'm talking
                    about are, how about you try again?  Or better yet, don't
                    bother since your first response was so lame.
                    \_ The UN is all mass murdering butchers? Who, precisely,
                       has the UN murdered?
                       \_ You = reading failure.  We've already covered the
                          UN staff cashing in on the global sex slave trade,
                          but if you had actually read the this thread you'd
                          know it was specifically about the UN HRC.  Try
                          again.  The UN itself is responsible for deaths
                          by inaction, not specifically murder but you don't
                          really care about that either, you just want to
                          play rhetorical gotcha games (and lose).
                          \_ It is not my fault that you are incoherent. The
                             reason your words are so confusing is because your
                             thinking is so muddled. I will give you a second
                             chance to answer the question: who, specifically,
                             do you think is a mass murdering butcher?
                             I assume from some of your rant above that
                             do you think is responsible for mass murdering
                             people? I assume from some of your rant above that
                             you think that these people are on the UN HRC.
                             Who are you talking about? Can you even name one
                             of them?
2008/4/11-16 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:49724 Activity:moderate
4/11    So ummm.... Why the heck is John Yoo a prof at Boalt?
        \_ Because Berekley is a great academic institution with a wide
           diversity of viewpoints?
        \_ Why do you ask? (I keep hearing stuff about Yoo on the motd
           but I don't see why he's controversial.)
           \_ He is the main author of the "torture is okey-dokey" legal
        \_ Perhaps b/c he is an excellent lawyer, teacher and scholar?
           I am not saying that Prof. Yoo is any of those things b/c I
           do not know him. But he could be an exceptional lawyer and
           teacher even if his politics are completely incompatible w/
           yours. My favorite law school prof and I have quite different
           political views on many things but it does not change the fact
           that he is a superb lawyer and teacher.
           \_ If he such a superb lawyer, why did he produce such a
              wrongheaded legal opinion?
              \_ I do not know why Prof. Yoo wrote the torture memo.
                 My experience suggests that someone asked him to
                 write it.  That he reached a conclusion that you
              \_ I did not say that Prof. Yoo was a superb lawyer.
                 Also, I do not know why Prof. Yoo wrote the torture
                 memo. My experience suggests that someone asked him
                 to write it. That he reached a conclusion that you
                 (and perhaps he also) disagree with, does not mean
                 that he is not a good lawyer.  Clients sometimes
                 (often?) ask one to do support positions one thinks
                 are morally, though not legally, unsupportable.
                 (often?) ask one to find legal support for positions
                 one thinks are morally unsupportable.  Fortunately,
                 sometimes the law does not offer such support. In
                 other situations, the law does offer the support a
                 client seeks. And in those case, one has no choice
                 client seeks. And in those cases, one has no choice
                 but to disclose that fact to the client.
                 Anyway, my point was merely that Prof. Yoo may have
                 qualities that qualify him for the job he holds,
                 abilities that qualify him for the job he holds,
                 desipte his political views.
                 [Update: I think the following blog post is
                 particularly relevant:
                 http://preview.tinyurl.com/3g96eg [legal ethics forum]]
                 \_ No, he is a counter-revolutionary and must be sent to the
                    gulags.  There can be no dissent!
                    \_ Do you think torture is something that America should
                       support? Do you think that it is against the law of
                       the land?
                       \_ I personally do not think torture is something
                          America should support. But I do not think that
                          it is against the law of the land in all cases.
                       \_ Anyone who defends a counter-revolutionary is also
                          counter-revolutionary!  We will root out these
                 \_ At a certain point, someone has to be responsible for
                    ass-covering.  "I was only following orders" and all that.
                    \_ Well, he has tenure, which should protect him from
                       being fired for holding unpopular opinions. But since
                       he apparently was primarily responsible for the US
                       violating the Geneva Convention, jail time is not
                       out of the question.
                       \_ I have not followed in detail the USSC's decisions
                          on the GC issue, but as far as I am aware, it is
                          not clear that the GC has been violated by BUSHCO's
                          actions or that a violation of the GC would imply
                          jail time for the principals b/c no applicable
                          privilege exists.
                          Re "following orders" - I agree that someone should
                          be held accountable, but why should it be Prof. Yoo
                          instead of those who commissioned his memo?
                          \_ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_conspiracy
                             \_ It remains unclear that any law has been
                                broken wrt Prof. Yoo and/or those who
                                sought his advice and acted upon it.
                                Even if some crime has occured, it is
                                unclear that some form of executive priv.
                                would not apply.
                                \_ Do you believe the executive has the
                                   privilege to break the law with impunity?
                                   The Supreme Court disagrees with that.
                                   \_ As I said, I have not followed the
                                      USSC's decision wrt the GC. Based
                                      on my very brief reading of the
                                      decisions, it is unclear that any
                                      crime has been committed by Prof.
                                      Yoo or those who sought his advice.
                                      It is also unclear that even if a
                                      crime has been committed an exec.
                                      privilege will not apply. The USSC
                                      has not rule on this particular
                                      issue and likely never will
                                      ("John Marshall has issued his
                                        order now let him enforce it").
                                      \_ Google "United States v. Nixon."
                                         \_ It is not clear to me that
                                            Nixon applies to this
                                            situation. There may be
                                            many kinds of executive
                                            privilege and power.
                                            \_ I think US v. Nixon is very
                                               clear - executive priv. exists,
                                               but it is specifically NOT
                                               immune to judicial review,
                                               particularly in the case
                                               where a crime may have been
                                               committed.  I don't think there
                                               are "many kinds" of executive
                                               priv. - there is the kind
                                               recognized by the courts only.
                                               \_ It is not at all clear that
                                                  Nixon applies when the Pres.
                                                  acts in the arena of foreign
                                                  affairs or national defense,
                                                  which is the situation in
                                                  relevant to Prof. Yoo. The
                                                  Pres. inherent power may be
                                                  overriding in those realms.
                                                  [I was not using "privilege"
                                                  in the technical sense]
                                                  \_ I am doubtful of that
                                                     argument, and I believe
                                                     most legal scholars are
                                                     as well.  Note that
                                                     Congress is given the
                                                     power to ratify treaties.
                                                     \_ Congress is also given
                                                        the power to declare
                                                        war, maintain a navy,
                                                        &c. so clearly there is
                                                        shared power over the
                                                        conduct of foreign
                                                        affairs and national
                                                        security. But it is
                                                        still unclear whether
                                                        the Pres. power trumps.
                                                        BUSHCO clearly believes
                                                        it does. I am not sure
                                                        they are correct. But
                                                        the argument exists.
                                                        And I believe that we
                                                        will never have an
        \_ I wonder how many of the Yoo defenders were calling for that
           stupid "A million little Hitler's" prof's head on a platter.
           (Or some such nazi/9-11 reference)
        \_ They hired him fresh out of the administration in 2004. The torture
           memos weren't revealed until after that. If he were brought up on
           charges as a contributor to undermining and violating the Convention
           Against Torture and war crimes, could he lose his tenure then?
           I was very happy to see him on talk show right after he was hired.
           A prominent conservative from Berkeley! Now I'd like to see him in jail.
           \_ Absolutely, COMRADE!  Those who write or speak statements that
              WE the PEOPLES disagree with shall be imprisoned!  The FIRST
              AMENDMENT only protects POPULAR speach WE like!  Excuse me,
              COMRADE, I must now march on our ENEMIES, the TERRORISTS of
              EURASIA.  Up with the REVOLUTION, COMRADE!
              \_ Uh, is the criminal or incompetent practice of law a first amendment
                 issue? Surely there are standards about whether an argument is a good
                 faith effort or a load of legal bullshit, with no evidence or
                 justification in US jurisprudence. Writing legal opinions
                 to justify the use of torture makes you a party to violating our
                 own laws, and treaties against torture and war crimes to which the US
                 is a signatory.
                 That's why he's in the news. Because his classified memos are
                 finally coming out -- those upon which Gitmo and the Padilla
                 confinement are based -- and they are laughable, to the point of
                 \_ 404 Not Found
                 Bush: "We had legal opinions that enabled us to do it."
                 \_ Bush will pardon the whole lot of them.
2008/3/21-25 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/Crime, Reference/Religion] UID:49530 Activity:high
3/21    Krauthhammer on Obama's speech
        \_ Does Krauthammer still call them Freedom Fries? When is he going
           to apologize for the Iraq War? The guy is a fool.
           \_ So, in other words, he's right and you have no answer to any
              of his points?  Thanks.
              \_ No, he has shown himself time and again to be mendatious
              \_ No, he has shown himself time and again to be mendacious
                 and has shown repeated bad judgement. Why would anyone
                 waste their time bothering to untangle what a proven
                 fool is blubbering on about?
                 \_ It's an opinion piece that *many* people would agree with.
                    Fine if you don't want to read someone's opinions.
                    \_ I don't waste my time reading Ann Coulter's "opinions"
                       either. Some people have worthwhile things to say,
                       this guy has proven, to me at least, that he does not.
                       \- you remember that reporter in manhunter/red dragon?
                          think krauthammer.
                       \_ That's nice.  If you don't want to read something
                          that is fine.  However, that puts you in a poor
                          position to comment on the article.  Your opinion
                          of the writer's previous statements does not create
                          the logical grounds for outright dismissing a later
                          statement.  -!pp  (and no, like you I haven't read
                          it either, but unlike you I am not going to comment
                          on something I haven't read)
                          \_ I didn't comment on his article. I dismissed
                             him as a fool.
                             \_ Exactly.  You gave a zero-content knee-jerk
                                response to seeing his name.  Why bother?
                                Is that really going to convince anyone of
                                anything or just venting?  I see no reason
                                to post content-free rants.  Perhaps you can
                                explain the value of your original post?
                                \_ It is pretty funny that a guy who defends
                                   Krauthammer would complain about a content
                                   free rant.
                                  \_ It's even funnier that a guy who
                                     complains about Krauthammer would engage
                                     so much in content free rants. -!pp
                                     \_ Show me even one column of his that is
                                        not: 1) tendentious 2) partisan and
                                        3) wrong and I will reconsider my
                                        POV. The truth is, I have read over
                                        20 of his columns and not even one of
                                        them was worth the time I spent.
                                        them was worth the time I spent. And
                                        btw, saying "Krauthammer was wrong
                                        about Iraq and I will not consider his
                                        opinion until he recants" is hardly
                                        comment free. Perhaps you don't agree
                                        with the comment, but it is certainly
                                        not comment-free.
                                  \_ I'm at no point defending Krauthammer.
                                     I made it quite clear I didn't read the
                                     article and it doesn't matter at all what
                                     the article says since you didn't read it
                                     either.  You are intellectually dishonest
                                     or possibly just mentally deficient.
                                     Either way you have still failed to make
                                     a point or even attempt to. -pp
                                     \_ No, I made my point just fine, you just
                                        refuse to admit it: some people aren't
                                        worth wasting your time considering.
                                        Do you remember when the motd was
                                        covered with Freeper trolls? I used
                                        to post links to Prof. Thomas'
                                        excellent blog, The Economist's Voice,
                                        excellent blog, The Economist's View,
                                        until some of the Motd Conservatives
                                        complained about the tone of the
                                        comments section. Krauthammer is
                                        far worse.
                                        \_ You didn't make a point.  A point
                                           might have been convincing.  You
                                           expressed a content-free opinion.
                                           There is nothing wrong with that.
                                           It just isn't a point.  Don't
                                           confuse your opinion with fact.
                                        \_ My reply was deleted, so here's the
                                           rehashed version: You posted your
                                           opinion.  Yay.  I'm happy for you.
                                           It still isn't a fact and your
                                           opinion is not something that can
                                           be falsified.  You don't like him.
                                           Ok.  As far as freepers go, if you
                                           were the one posting freeper links,
                                           I was the one saying we don't need
                                           that here.  There's no reason at
                                           all to post a freeper link when all
                                           we're getting is freeper hate plus
                                           a link to the original article.
                                           Just post the original link without
                                           the hate.  I also don't see a need
                                           for dailykos hate either, just so
                                           you understand I'm even handed with
                                           my hate-link complaints.
        \_ The answer to his question (why he stayed in the church) is pretty
           obvious.  A church is primarily about religion and faith.  Politics
           are secondary.  A preacher expressing an opinion he doesn't agree
           with isn't a crime that reflects on him or his judgement.  Unless
           you say he should have left because, cynically, it might be used
           against him for political muckraking and fearmongering purposess.
           \_ A preacher saying the things Wright said should have no
              \_ Well, I'd say any preacher should have no congregation since
                 religion is all a giant pile of bullshit.  But go figure: it
                 seems to help them.  You aren't in that church, you don't
                 know what pros there might be to counter these supposed cons.
                 \_ It's an opinion piece that *many* people would agree with.
                    Fine if you don't want to read someone's opinions.
                 \_ There *is no pro* that can counter these cons.  And what do
                    you mean by 'supposed'?
                    \_ You know everything, why don't you figure it out?
          \_ You know, this kind of shit is amazing to read, given how much
             shit famous ring-wing christians get here. -- ilyas
             shit famous right-wing christians get here. -- ilyas
             \_ Well, I guess to me the thing is that Obama explicitly and
                publically rejects the controversial statements at hand. The
                only real controversy with him then is his church membership
                and apparent friendship with this man.  I don't recall the
                right wing politicians rejecting wacky religious right stuff.
                Actually they (Bush etc) invoke it in public policy matters.
             \_ Slightly off-topic, but if you take a closer look at Wright's
                philosophy, he's far more of a conservative than a liberal.
             \_ Hey, I think he is a kook, but I think that about most
                religious people, so I think my opinion doesn't really matter
                religious people, so my opinion doesn't really matter
                here. What is going on, imho, is that religious conservatives
                are waking up to the fact that there are other strains of
                Christian faith and it kind of freaks them out.
2008/3/12-13 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49436 Activity:high 80%like:49431
3/12    Spitzer's Kristen, 5'5" 105lbs revealed. Don't drool!
        \_ ANOREXIA!!!
        \_ No way is that woman 105 pounds.
           \_ How about this one:
              I'm guessing 5'5" 100lbs.
              \_ More like 115-120.
                 \_ Depends on how tall she is. 115-120 is not thin for a
                    woman who is 5'2". More like 95-100. Models are
                    usually about 5'9" 120.
                    \_ Well look at the MOTORCYCLE!!! The in-seam height
                       of a CBR600RR is about 32-32.5". Extrapolate, and
                       you'll get the actual height. I can't do it now
                       because I'm at work.
        \_ http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/13/nyregion/12cnd-kristen.html
          \_ Liberal new york times.
             \_ You crack me up.  So, when the NYT reports the biggest scandal
                of the moment, and it happens to be to a hypocrite Dem, that
                means they're not Liberal?  Or what does your post mean?
        \_ http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0312084kristen1.html
           \_ Wait he paid $5K a trip for her? WTF I wouldn't pay over
              $285/session for this woman. I can get better looking
              women for only $300-500/session.
              \_ Why do you go to hookers?
        \_ C?  Looks more like a B to me.
           \_ Some of us have seen real breasts. That's a nice full C in that
              \_ My ex had D and my wife has A.  I've seen and touched them
                 countless times.  IMHO the ones in the pic look closer to A
                 than to D.  So I guessed they're B.  -- PP
                 \_ So in other words you have very little boob experience.
2008/3/12 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49431 Activity:nil 80%like:49436
3/12    Spitzer's Kristen, 5'10" 105lbs revealed. Don't droll!
2008/3/3 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49316 Activity:nil
3/2     So I'm tired of stupid city/suburb generalizations and took a few
        sample points from a popular web site and found interesting
        data. Cities in general have significantly higher crime index
        (SF vs San Mateo, LA vs Irvine). Ratio of residents to sex
        offender is similar. So yes, cities have more reported % of sex
        offenders than suburbs. Higher %, higher #, end of story.
        [Crime index and population data from: http://www.city-data.com/]
        Fremont: 1894 resident to 1 sex offender (224 crime index)
        San Francisco: 1176 to 1 (519 crime index)
        Sunnyvale: 1362 to 1 (151 crime index)
        San Mateo: 1690 to 1 (225 crime index)
        Santa Ana: 1397 to 1 (306 crime index)
        Irvine: 8521 to 1 158 crime index)
        Los Angeles: 1015 to 1 (384 crime index)
        Arcadia: 5619 to 1 (236 crime index)
2008/2/28-3/4 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49295 Activity:nil
2/28    "more than one in every 100 American adults is in jail or prison,"
        \_ We're number 1!
2008/2/25-26 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:49232 Activity:low
2/24    CBS affiliate in northern Alamaba "mysteriously" goes dark during
        Karl Rove/Don Siegelman segment:
        \_ How do you think Rove was going to create a Permanent Republican
           Majority? You don't really think he expected to win electiond
           Majority? You don't really think he expected to win elections
           did you?
           \_ This segment on this one affiliate in northern Alabama going
              dark was key to Karl Rove's plan to rule the world!
              \_ Someone didn't read the url or watch the video, yay!
              \_ keyword: ignorant
2008/2/17-21 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49172 Activity:nil
2/16    NY Times review of "The Age of American Unreason":
        http://preview.tinyurl.com/292uxg (nytimes.com)
2008/2/14-18 [Reference/Law/Court, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49144 Activity:moderate
2/14    good reiser trial blog
        \_ His defense seems to center around "my wife went to russia".  Can't
           he hire someone in Russia to find her and take some pictures of
           her at lunch or something?
           \_ OJ is still looking for Nicole's killers
           \_ Well, without a body can there really be a crime? Yes, but
              there's a huge element of doubt introduced.
              \_ People get convicted of murder without the body sometimes.
                 I bet it'll be a mistrial
                 \_ Sure they do, but it makes it really tough.
                 \_ If he takes the stand, he'll be found guilty.  If he
                    doesn't, he'll probably get a hung jury.  -tom
              \_ There's no body but he's claiming she fled to russia.  The
                 case will be dropped instantly if he could prove that.  It
                 makes me suspicious that we haven't heard a single thing about
                 investigating his claims she's living there now.
                 \_ He's just saying that he has no idea where she is and
                    that she may have gone there. How do you investigate
                    that? It's hard enough to find someone in the US.
                    \_ If she's there where she has family and other roots she
                       shouldn't be that hard to find.  It isn't the heart of
        \_ Unless you think Nina's family are masters of manipulation, it's pretty
           clear her side of the family thinks she's dead.  I guess she could have
           accepted her new job, gotten groceries, taken the battery out of
           her cell phone, THEN hopped skipped and jumped to a secret hole
           in Russia and resolved to never talk to her beloved children
           again.  Oh yeah this is after she planted her blood, and Hans' blood,
           on the stairport of Hans' house.  Remember Nina hasn't lived in that
           house in over a year.
                       \_ It's hard to find someone who doesn't want to
                          be found. Thats my point. If she's just living
                          a normal life there then sure.
        \_ Unless you think Nina's family are masters of manipulation, it's
           pretty clear her side of the family thinks she's dead. I guess she
           could have accepted her new job, gotten groceries, taken the
           battery out of her cell phone, THEN hopped skipped and jumped to a
           secret hole in Russia and resolved to never talk to her beloved
           children again.  Oh yeah this is after she planted her blood, and
           Hans' blood, on the stairport of Hans' house.  Remember Nina hasn't
           lived in that house in over a year.
           \_ Actually, the way it went down was that ext3 was feeling the heat
              from reiserfs so it ordered a combo hit/frame-up on the Reisers.
              Nina was killed and Hans was framed so that reiserfs would wither
              and ext3 could go on try to take over the world.
           \_ From what I know I think he killed her.  I'm just saying that
              if his defense is that she's is Russia, how much effort has he
              put into finding her?  Seems kinda important, no?
2008/2/6-11 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49078 Activity:high
2/5     How about this instead of the BS below:
        I found out my school district spends $16K per child and it's
        ranked in the bottom 1/3 in the State. Please explain why the
        State deserves more of my dollars. A family of four is not getting
        their $32K worth. In fact, many people in my city put their kids
        in private school even though the government is spending $16K/kid.
        That's a shitload of money for the government to waste. This is
        how well the government manages your money and the education of
        your kids. --dim
        \_ Nice. You forgot to mention that we need to deport Mexicans
           who are leeching off of tax dollars, that we need to be
           tough on crimes, and that we need to build bigger jails.
           \_ As opposed to... giving amnesty, being soft on crime,
              and shutting down jails?
              \_ Yay! Binary worldview!
        \_ You know, countries that don't provide social services end up
           having other problems like huge crime rate, mafia, gangster,
           child gangster, prostitution (e.g. Brazil) and that affects
           everyone from the middle class all the way to the upper class.
           I guess this huge disparity is one of the main reasons why
           nice LA/OC/SD homes are mostly gated communities with private
           security guards.
           \_ How about the State spend that $16K/pupil in a way that
              makes sense instead? Many private schools educate for less
              than $10K/pupil and even the best are at no more than
              $24K/pupil. Please tell me why the education is substandard
              at those rates. If the education was better maybe some of
              the poor kids stuck in public schools would contribute more
              to society and feel better about their prospects.
              \_ You can't compare costs of private and public schools
                 directly, because of the selection bias of private schools.
                 (Kids of poor families with uninvolved parents don't go to
                 private school).  -tom
                 \_ Ah. This is the hew and cry of the liberal. When one
                                    \- did you go to private or public school?
                                       it's "hue and cry". --your common law
                                       \_ Seems to be both now, although
                                          originally "hue and cry":
                                          \_ If you're going by current usage,
                                             that's a pretty liberal definition
                                             of "seems to be both".  Google has
                                             548,000 hits for "hue and cry" vs.
                                             888 for "hew and cry", a ratio of
                                             about 600:1.  For comparison,
                                             "their" vs. "thier" gives 58:1.
                                          \- no, "hue" is correct.
                                             if hew is commonly used in
                                             error, it is still an error,
                                             \_ That's not really how our
                                                language works.
                                                \- i said "commonly used in
                                                   error" not commonly used.
                                                   common usage as slang or
                                                   as a short cut is one
                                                   thing ... there isnt
                                                   a requirement to use
                                                   say "whom" ... but in the
                                                   case of a word with a known
                                                   origin, there is a right
                                                   and wrong. somebody can
                                                   call herself "candee" but
                                                   if you spell the sweet
                                                   that way, it is wrong.
                                                   say "shall" vs will ...
                                                   but in the case of a word
                                                   with a known origin, there
                                                   is a right and wrong.
                                                   eventhough geeks like
                                                   virii, that is not correct
                                                   since its not from a latin
                                                   word for one.
                                                   either in latin nor english
                                                   \_ And it's not even
                                                      commonly used in error,
                                                      according to the Google
                                                      stats above.
                                             as with "toe/tow the line".
                                             note that your second link is
                                             not to the "official" nyt,
                                             where "hue" is used.
                    of the schools in my district scored highly even with
                    mostly black and Hispanic students people like you
                    said the same thing. It's self-selecting, the principal
                    shipped out the bad kids, and so on. Nevermind the school
                    was a shithole for 20 years before that. Now parents want
                    their kids to attend there and the effect is snowballing.
                    You have to start somewhere and putting kids in an
                    environment conducive to learning is part of that.
                    You cannot allow a few disruptive kids to destroy the
                    entire system and the education of millions. The
                    teachers and administrators are very upset that that
                    school is doing well, which shows how sick the system is.
                    \- look i dont disagree with you that $16k/student is a
                       lot, but a couple of points:
                       1. the selection bias is a huge issue. my private
                          high school spend something like half what public
                          schools spent but they could choose who to take.
                          they didnt have govt mandates to meet special
                          education needs of of either handicapped students
                          or the pain in the ass factor of difficult
                       2. surely you realize you can be matched one for one
                          with outrages in the private sector. the bart
                          supervisor making +$150k or the NYC school janitor
                          who is filed fishing on his boat during school hours
                          is trivial compared to corporate welfare, and the
                          or the golden parachutes for incompent but not
                          criminal executives in the private sector. private
                          industrury make be more efficient at many things
                          and one of them is extracting resources from the
                          \_ red herring: there is corporate graft so gvt
                             graft is ok.  it isn't.  gvt graft is far worse
                             because they extract my money by force and they
                             choose how much to extract.  if a corporation
                             is run poorly they will go out of business.  i
                             do not have to give them my money if they provide
                             a poor product or service or charge too much.
                             "surely you realize" this.
                             \- corporate graft [agaist shareholders] isnt
                                the same as corporate welfare or graft agaist
                                the govt. i'm not talking about high CEO
                                salaries, backdating options etc. more things
                                like no bid contracts, "socializing losses" etc
                                that is "theft from the taxpayers" just like
                                fraud in the oakland school district ...
                                except they are better at it and the amounts
                                are more. see savings and loan bail out,
                                agriculture subsidies etc.
                                \_ Uh huh, and this happens *only* because
                                   the gvt has that money available because
                                   it has taken it from tax payers.  once the
                                   gvt takes your money, it matters little if
                                   they piss it away on public or private
                                   theft.  a corporation can not take
                                   anything from me in a clean-gvt environment.
                                   clean the gvt and the rest automatically
                                   follows.  you can not clean your sort of
                                   gvt-aided corporation theft while the
                                   gvt is dirty.
                                   \- this "starve the beast" analysis is
                                      ridiculous. you are choosing between
                                      what is possible not what is platonic.
                                      "the main reason american soldiers get
                                      killed is because we sent them to war"
                                      -> people in favor of war hate the troops
                                      BTW, if the corporations can influence
                                      what the standard is for breach of
                                      fiduciary duty and can get directors and
                                      officers insurance, then they certainly
                                      can rip you off. you should read
                                      barbarians at the gate for example.
                                      do you know how conflicts of interest
                                      work in practice during LBOs? you might
                                      also want to read james surowiecki.
                                      \_ I never said starve the beast.  The
                                         rest of your stuff has nothing to do
                                         with what I said.  I said a clean gvt
                                         will not give my tax dollars to corps
                                         for stupid/corrupt things.
                                   \_ I don't think you will find too many
                                      people arguing for a corrupt gov't. There
                                      have been arguments about how to best
                                      allocate resources for as long as their
                                      have been gov'ts, which is to say since
                                      the beginning of recorded history. What
                                      kind of things do you advocate to help
                                      clean up gov't, other than your somewhat
                                      ambiguous notion that it should be
                                      smaller? It seems to me that campaign
                                      finance reform might be a better place
                                      to start.
                                      \_ I didn't say it should be smaller,
                                         just that what they do have should be
                                         spent more wisely and less wastefully.
                                         If there was real oversight of budgets
                                         we stopped all earmarks, and corps
                                         were no longer 'citizens' with rights
                                         and were not allowed to donate money
                                         to politicians, that would go a long
                                         way to clean gvt.  What is your
                        again, read somebody like martin wolf.
                        i think there are a number of outragous cases
                        where "sepcial need" students have disporprotionate
                        resources spent on them, but just like heavy public
                        medical subsidies of "lost causes", it's a hard
              \_ Like the birth-right citizenship person before you, it
                 sounds like your issue is with problems in how the education
                 system is run, not necessarily the system itself. Although
                 it may be more work, fixing the system is likely to prove
                 less expensive and more beneficial to society as a whole than
                 simply abandoning the system entirely and jumping to vouchers
                 spent at private schools or academies (many of which are
                 founded by people looking to make a quick buck by preying on
                 parents who are frightened of a public education, and many
                 of which are destined to go out of business in less than five
                 \_ It's impossible to fix the system. It doesn't want to
                    be fixed. The solution we are proposing is to form our
                    own school district and secede. I guess you can call
                    that 'fixing'.
                    \_ It's not impossible to fix the system. It will, however,
                       take a lot of work, dedication, and determination. I
                       understand that this is not as sexy as, say, vouchers
                       for private schools and military academies, but the
                       end result is a stable, beneficial system.
                       \_ People have been trying to fix this problem for
                          20 years now. There's a point where you just say
                          'Screw it' and start from scratch.
                          \_ For most people, this point is when their kids
                             have graduated, which means we have to count on
                             a new crop.
           \_ We should forcibly bus the kids from gated communities to
              ghetto public schools. That way we ensure a level playing
              \_ I see you are a budding Jonathan Swift, but FWIW we did this.
                 That's how the schools got screwed up to begin with. Then the
                 parents who really cared took their kids out and sent them
                 private, leaving behind only those too poor or unconcerned. It
                 had a devastating effect. Now our 'racially integrated'
                 schools have no caucasian or Asian students and the other
                 kids who want to learn are screwed. It's so much better now.
              field. We should ban private schools. We should also ban
              marriage, so that gays, bisexuals, and non-sexuals will
              not be disadvantaged, and kids with single parents won't
              be disadvantaged over kids with married parents. Actually we
              should take kids away at birth and randomly assign parents
              for them. We should make food and housing free for all,
              and energy for heating and cooking and lighting and hot water,
              and health care, because all those things are basic human rights
              needed for survival. We should ban automobiles and ban wasteful
              single family housing structures. All housing structures shall
              be randomly assigned but with economic and ethnic backgrounds
              balanced, and mandatory "community learning sessions" shall take
              place 3 days per week. Community job centers shall provide
              equal-opportunity employment, with jobs to be defined by
              each employee.
              \_ This is truly brilliant.
        \_ at least school districts are more incompetent at stealing
           your tax dollars than halliburton. i do think we should
           stop glorifying school teachers ... i've some school teachers
           who were smart but quite a few seem to be glorfied day care
           personnel. but at least the rank and file teacher arent as
           venal as school administrators. but again even they arent
           ken lay, dennis kozlowski etc. you should read martin wolf.
        \_ Oh, you're just selfish and hate children.
        \_ Motd says you're contributing to the common social good and you
           should be happy to be paying these taxes because there is no
           other possible way to educate children other than turning them
           over to the state for several hours a day.  The schools can get
           better only by raising your taxes even more.  Teachers are
           starving.  Students are failing and not learning the right
           things.  It is all your fault.
           \_ Incorrect: it's not op's fault, it's your fault.
              \_ I'm in favor of 100% tax rates and therefore maximum
                 government revenue for maximum social good.  how is it my
                 fault, comrade?
                 \_ Not your comrade, you filthy communist bastard, and
                    there's your problem in a nutshell: some regulation and
                    government organization != communism. Embrace compromise.
                    \_ This isn't about regulation.  This is about control.
                       The power to tax is the power to destroy.  And you,
                       comrade, obviously are in need of higher taxes.  For
                       the common social good, of course.  Embrace social
                       \_ Marriage is slavery! All men are rapists! Dems
                          tax and spend! You're missing a lot of !!!
        \_ Where did you find this out? Considering the general veracity
           of the "facts" you state on the motd, I would need verification
           before I would believe it, especially considering average per
           pupil spending in CA is half that. -ausman
           \_ Average spending per pupil does not account for things like
              facilities. From CA DOE:
              "This amount includes the cost of employee salaries and
              benefits, books and supplies and replacement of school
              equipment. The current expense of education does not include
              non-instructional expenses such as construction and
              acquisition of facilities, benefits for retired employees
              and food services."
              CA spends about $70B dollars each year to educate 6M K-12
              students, or almost $12K per student per year - not the $7K
              you often see quoted.
              you often see quoted. Maybe more. Not sure if $70B considers
              locally voted indebtedness or funding sources like PTA.
              Our district has a lot of facilities for the number of kids
              (since so many have been lost to private over the last 40 years)
              and has been shuttering schools, which is ridiculous in itself
              when you consider that almost everywhere else they are building
              more schools and complaining about a shortage of space. --dim
              \_ Your math is off quite a bit as there are really 6.4M K-12
                 students and some of the Dept of Education budget is for
                 adult education. The best I can figure the real numbers are
                 67.5B/6.4M kids = $10.5k/student, not the $12k you bandy
                 about. But you have a point that the Dept of Education takes
                 \_ You are splitting hairs here. $10.5K is still a lot of
                    money. You can go to a good private school for that money
                    and actually receive an education. The best public
                    school districts spend more than $10.5K I'm sure.
                    That's just what they get from the state and federal
                    governments as far as I can tell.
                    \_ Plenty of people go to public schools and get a perfectly
                       fine education. Things could always be better, but
                       there is lots of evidence that the schools in CA are
                       getting better. I will probably send my daughter to
                       improving. I will probably send my daughter to
                    \_ Plenty of people go to public schools and get a
                       perfectly fine education. Things could always be
                       better, but there is lots of evidence that the schools
                       in CA are improving. I will probably send my daughter to
                       public school (and I can afford private). The best
                       public schools rival the best private schools in
                       education quality, so I am not sure what point you
                       are trying to make, except perhaps that a great
                       education costs quite a bit of money.
                       \_ 1. The best public schools do not rival the best
                             private schools. There are some very good
                             public schools, but no one is ever going to
                             confuse those with an Exeter or Groton. Of
                             course, those schools cost quite a bit more, too.
                             I realize that.
                             \_ Compare Stuyvesant's Ivy League admission
                                rate to Exeter's.
                                \_ Can I send my kid there? I live in CA.
                                   Also, talk about self-selecting.
                                   Also, talk about self-selecting. BTW,
                                   I think Exeter's rate is higher. Stuyvesant
                                   sends more in terms of numbers because it
                                   is larger. Why would one want to go to
                                   a private university anyway? I am offended
                                   that you would use that as a metric
                                   instead of looking at the rate of
                                   acceptance to glorious UC.
                                   \_ Exeter is probably a bit higher, but
                                      they are in the same league anyway.
                                      I don't think I would want to send my
                                      child to boarding school anyway, but
                                      maybe I will feel differently once she
                                      is a teenager. If you really want UC
                                      admission send them to Lowell High
                                      which is in SF.
                          2. No one has a problem with the top 10% of
                             public schools. It's that bottom 90% (and
                             especially bottom 30%) that's the real problem.
                          3. Personally (and this is just my preference) I
                             wouldn't send by kid to even the best public
                             wouldn't send my kid to even the best public
                             school. However, I still think a quality
                             "public" education is important, because not
                             everyone has that choice in the current system.
                 a large "tribute." You still haven't provided any evidence that
                 they spend $16k/student in your district.
                 a large "tribute." You still haven't provided any evidence
                 that they spend $16k/student in your district.
                 \_ Sorry, but I cannot find this online. Is it really
                    far-fetched when the average is $10.5K? Like I said,
                    we have a lot of schools and a shrinking number of
                    kids which makes the overhead higher than most places.
                    (I read it is 2x higher than the state average.)
                    \_ Why does everyone else's esstimate of per pupil spending
                    \_ Why does everyone else's estimate of per pupil spending
                       in CA differ so widely from yours. You are the one
                       making the outrageous claim here, back it up.
                       \_ What do you want me to do? I can't find it online.
                          Take it or leave it. I don't think $16K is
                          outrageous when the average is $11K.
           \- ausman: the range in CA is really wide. that number is plausible
              for a state school district, but it is hard to imagine it is
              in such a poorly perfomring school district ... i.e. not
              saratoga or CA. i can believe high spending per student with
              poor performance in a place like SF (NYC spends something
              like 14k per student ... but the top hedge fund guy made more
              money last year than all the NYC teacher put together ... for
              three years). but all that being given, i was wondering if the
              number was correct as well.
              \_ SF has generally good results and does not spend that much
                 per pupil. link:preview.tinyurl.com/2jxbxb (PDF)
                 \_ Hmm, I forgot SF public schools was very heavily
                    asian. I am guessing that keeps costs down. I was
                    just thinking about the white flight and minitory-heavy
                    side. Might be interesting to look at oakland hills vs
                    oakland flats.
                    \_ The experiment has already begun. Google "oakland
                       school district demographics"; the first hit is a 2007
                       report noting that OUSD is hemorrhaging students,
                       particularly African-American students; they're "out-
                       migrating" to non-bankrupt School Districts (cf.
                       articles on fraudulent enrollment in cities like
        \_ Perhaps you should move to San Francisco:
           \- special announcement: there is another long piece on ADRIAN
              FENTY and MICHELLE RHEE's Washington DC school reform program
              on TV tonight. it is about halfway through the MACNEIL-LEHERER
              SHOW today. n.b. FENTY and RHEE are respectively the mayor and
              school chief for DC. they are also both about 37! the evil
              arlene ackerman was in DC before she came to SF. ok tnx.
2007/12/17-20 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:48818 Activity:nil
12/17   First Scott Peterson, now Drew Peterson.  What's wrong with the
        \_ Learn to use apostrophes.
           \_ Fixed.  However, once when I wrote "VMs" when I meant virtual
              machines, someone thought I had a typo for VMS.  -- OP
              \_ Common usage in English is to use the apostrophe after an
                 acronym if it's necessary to disambiguate.
                 \_ I see.  Thx.  -- OP
                 \_ Umm, by that logic, you should be making all sorts
                    of spelling/grammar/punctuation errors. Commonly,
                    people are not that good at English.
                    \_ Common accepted usage.
2007/12/16-19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:48814 Activity:nil
12/15   A guide to the official U.S. torture system
2007/11/5-8 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:48539 Activity:nil
11/5    Free Reiser!
        Trial starts this morning.
        \_ You think he didn't kill her?
           \_ where is the body?
              \_ probbaly vacationing in Russia.
              \_ you don't need a body.  by your question you imply that by
                 properly disposing of a body you can't be convicted of
                 murder.  and good question:  if she's alive, where is she?
                 I've followed this on and off since it started.  Unless
                 something really amazing comes out at trial in his favor,
                 he's going up the river.
                 \_ something amazing like his wife's lover (and his friend)
                    ADMITTING to killing like 8 people already?  I'm not
                    saying he's innocent, but there is plenty of "amazing"
                    to go around.
                    \_ That was just in the Wired intervidew!  Who reads that
        \_ Maybe he will end up like this cop:
2007/11/2-4 [Reference/Law/Court, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:48521 Activity:nil
11/2    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071102/lf_nm_life/usa_highways_sleep_dc

        '"Maggie's Law," is named after a 20-year-old college student, Maggie
        McDonnell, who was killed by a drowsy driver in 1997. The driver
        admitted to being awake for 30 hours after smoking crack cocaine.

        His lawyer successfully argued that there was no law in the state
        against falling asleep at the wheel. The judge barred the jury from
        considering the driver's sleep deprivation as a factor in the
        crash. He was fined $200.'

        Two-hundred dollars for killing someone.  WTF?
        \_ Names named after innocent girls are always stupid
           \_ yeah.. like yer-mom
        \_ Laws named after innocent girls are always stupid
        \_ Was she riding a bicycle or something?
        \_ This is stupid. What if it was not due to drowsiness, but
           just accidential? The driver made a mistake? How can he
           possibily be off by just paying $200? So next time I hit
           someone I'll just say I am sleepy and that's it? America is
           great isn't it? At least in China you get executed. -troll
        \_ Let me guess, no general "driving under the influence" law, just
           a "driving while ETOH intoxicated" law?
2007/10/25-29 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:48447 Activity:high
10/25   http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/10/25/innocence.project/index.html
        If a man wasted 1/2 of his life for a crime he didn't commit,
        will the party that was responsible (e.g. the "state")
        compensate him?
        \_ The state only compensates white men.
        \_ Yes, but only when ordered to by a judge. However, many individuals
           incarcerated for crimes they didn't commit were already wanted for/
           guilty of other crimes they did commit; the charges for those things
           are generally lumped into the sentence for the thing they didn't
           commit, so when the time is computed, they often end up barely
           ahead. Also, when confronted with evidence of other crimes, most
           agree to not push the issue.
           \_ uh.... what are you talking about?  the people who spent
              20 years in jail for a rape or murder they didnt commit seem
              plenty angry and aren't just going along with their crimes
              being lumped into a sentence somewhere.  guess i got trolled.
              \_ No troll. While some people who have been wrongly
                 incarcerated will seek (and be rewarded) compensation,
                 many others will not on the basis that they were
                 likely suspects for other crimes. This is not to
                 condone police techniques or excuse bad police work.
                 \_ I'm interested in why you think this actually occurs.
                    The Innocence Project cases I have read about are
                    almost always $BROWN_GUY fingered in some shady
                    police lineup or was picked up by the cops after
                    a crime was committed and they needed a $BROWN_GUY
                    because a witness to a crime said a $BROWN_GUY did
                    something terrible and all @BROWN_GUYS look alike.
                    Where the hell are you getting this "most of these
                    guys don't complain because they did something bad
                    anyway."?   I'm not a lawyer, but I think you're a
                    sheltered idiot.
                    \_ And you're a fuckwit. However, I understand your
                       point about how the wrongly convicted should be
                       compensated. I'm suggesting that in a significant
                       number of cases, when the cops go the route of
                       least effort (i.e., laziness) and pin it on a
                       patsy, they pick their patsy on the basis of
                       likeliness to convict, which is to say they
                       put it on someone who's done other things and
                       is likely to serve time for another crime
                       anyway. The Innocence Project is a great idea,
                       but remember that the candidates are pre-
                       screened to weed out the "I got jailed for X
                       when I should have been jailed for Y" crowd.
                       \_ I hope you the next time you drive a cop pulls you
                          over and decides it's just your day and impounds
                          your car and abandons you since you've probably
                          broken a few traffic laws in your life but no one
                          saw you and you merrily went along your way.
                          \_ And I hope you realize that pointing out that
                             things happen is not an endorsement of the way
                             they happen. I support the Innocence Project.
        \_ Just torture him until he confesses.  It's the American Way!
        \_ Yes, but no amount of monetary compensation can make up for
           spending half your life in prison.
        \_ Google: wrongly convicted compensation
           Lots of good material out there.
2007/10/23-26 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:48421 Activity:moderate
10/22   I haven't trolled emarkpd in a while.  How's that Mormon thing
        coming along?
        \_ He still supports Bush and his Iraq War in the glorious name
           of freedom. Troll on that.
        \_ Wow.  Now I'm a daemon process? -emarkp
        \_ Hey emarkp, why are Republicans against renewal energy and weed?
           \_ Because all Republicans are evil neanderthals and all Democrats
              are living incarnations of the essence of Good.  This is the
              motd, there is no other fact you need know.  Run along.
              \_ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metalocalypse
              \_ you know there is a lot of current evidence that Republicans
                 and their media machine and all the noisy right wing blogs
                 are really run by insane, evil neanderthals bent on destroying
                 all that is good in this world.  democrats just aren't that
              \_ Straw man. No one on the motd believes the latter statement
                 (though perhaps many believe the former).
                 \_ They don't believe it but they sure say it on the motd
                    a lot.  Are they all trolls?  No, there are people right
                    here on the motd who actually believe it.
                    \_ I have never seen anyone post to the motd that Democrats
                       are all perfect, except in satire. Can you find one for
                       \_ This is the place to be to see Democrat politico
                          stupidly defended to the bitter end.  The most
                          recent case being "Reid+40 other (D) Senators wrote
                          a smearing lie letter to a radio show host's boss
                          in an effort to help charity".  But really you know
                          that and many other things I don't have to dig out
                          of the archives.  There's no point.  Go post your
                          final comment if you like.  I won't respond any
                          futher to such an obvious troll.  You've been fed
                          enough today.
                          \_ can we please classify dans as "idiot" rather
                             than "democrat"?
                             \_ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
                                  -- ilyas
                                \_ But ilyas, isn't the wikipedia composed by
                                   the crowds of unwashed masses?  Isn't it a
                                   tool for unsuspecting fools and morons
                                   doomed to be duped by faux inexpert
                                   wisdom; the blind leading the blind if you
                                   will?  I'm shocked.  Shocked I say that you
                                   would quote from such a source. -dans
                                   \_ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman
                                        -- ilyas
                                     \_ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm
                              \_ Nope, more like his idiocy trumps everything
                                 else.  It's not that he isn't a true democrat,
                                 it's that he is also a true egotistical moron
                                 as well.
                                 \_ Clearly I'm doing sometthing right if I'm
                                    pissing people off this much. -dans
                            \_ I don't think dans would consider himself a
                               Democrat, but am ready to concede here if wrong.
                               How about it dans, are you a Democrat?
                               \_ No, but I have voted for Democrats in the
                                  past. -dans
2007/10/16-18 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:48333 Activity:moderate
10/16   Haha, I like how quickly Jon Elliott 'connects the dots' from 'she was
        injured' to 'she was mugged' to 'it's a right wing conspiracy.'
        \_ Turns out she wasn't mugged after all
        \_ How 'bout we wait until actual details come out (As Elliot should
           have done.. But hey, he's got airtime to fill).  BTW, the Daily
           News is a small step above drudge on "breaking" stories.
           Like from her herself:
           \_ Sorry I didn't scour the internet for a source you approve.
              \_ Seriously, you count the daily news as a reputable news
                 source?  Please start signing your posts with a unique
                 identifier so we can ignore you.
                 \_ Same to you blowhard.  Seriously, If I have a list of 10
                    sites all reporting exactly the same thing, you expect me
                    to get really worried about the one you like best?
                    \_ I dub thee Suckhard. -!pp
2007/10/12-15 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:48298 Activity:high 52%like:48303
10/11   Clearly, the Nobel Peace Prize has a well known liberal bias.
        \_ Truth has a well known liberal bias as well.
           \_ Despite all the evidence!
              \_ http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm
           \_ Arafat won a peace prize too.
              \_ Arafat was a liberal?
                 \_ No, Arafat was the kind of brutal killer a certain brand
                    of liberals love to fawn over for some weird reason.
                    \_ You know that Arafat did not actually win the peace
                       prize himself, right? You do understand that it was
                       shared with Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin. Why, do
                       you imagine, the Nobel Comittee would award a peace
                       prize to a group of three people like that?
        \_ Oh of course.  I have to wonder what Gore has actually done for
           peace.  He made a movie with significant factual errors?  Wow.
           \- i'm not a big fan of ALGOR but he's a better choice than that
              dumb tree planting woman or rigoberta menchu, massive liar.
              the should have co-awarded it to BLOMBORG for "spearheading
              a debate on environmental change".
              \_ What does GW have to do with peace?
           \_ Let's time travel back to 1973 and have this discussion about
              Kissinger's award, mmmmmkay?
              \_ Name one war Gore stopped.
           \_ It is your opinion that the movie contains significant
              factual errors. A majority of climate scientists would
              disagree with you. It is pretty much impossible to make
              a documentary without any piddling errors. Do you believe
              in Creation Science, too?
              \_ Or in Al's case very serious errors.
                 \_ I notice you are avoiding the question.
        \_ If you look at the list of NPP winners over the last 30-40 years
           you'll find so many idiotic decisions that it is difficult for a
           rational person to take them seriously anymore.  It just doesn't
           \_ Many rational people take them seriously. Perhaps you think
              that the Nobel Prizes don't matter, but if you do, you
              would be wrong.
              \_ Uhm yeah.  Well said.  Next up: I know you are but what am I?
              \_ 'Regular' Nobel prizes are very prestigious.  The Nobel Peace
                 Prize became a joke when Arafat won. -- ilyas
              \_ The conventional Nobel prizes are very prestigious.  The
                 Nobel Peace prize was a joke ever since Arafat won. -- ilyas
                 \_ In your opinion, which of course everyone in the whole
                    wide world shares. Do you honestly believe that your
                    opinions are mainstream, ilyas? -ausman
                    \_ "That's like, your opinion, man."  Why did you even
                       write that post?  -- ilyas
                       write that post?  No content. -- ilyas
                       \_ There is a very small group of pro-war people,
                          mostly people who despise any non-violent effort
                          at conflict resolution and whose livelihood depends
                          on warfare, who think that the Nobel Peace Prize
                          is "a joke." To the overwhelming majority of
                          humanity, it is a very presitigious award, perhaps
                          humanity, it is a very prestigious award, perhaps
                          the most prestigious award a human being can win.
                          There, is that better? -ausman
                          \_ Surprisingly, it is actually possible to
                             not take the Nobel Peace prize seriously, and
                             also NOT hate kittens.  The Nobel committee gave
                             the award in question to a known butcher, without
                             bothering to check if the 'agreement' would hold,
                             in the face of decades of similar agreements
                             failing to work.  Naturally, the 'peace' didn't
                             take, but you know.  Who cares about peace.
                             Would you support giving Kim Jong Il the Peace
                             prize?  The fellow runs a nightmare gulag state,
                             but I am sure he can sit down for a peace accord
                             too.  Especially if there is no requirement that
                             he keep his word.  Incidentally, did you know
                             that at least one Nobel committee member resigned
                             over Arafat?
                             P.S. Are you familiar with Larry Ellison's phrase
                             'Bozo explosion?'  It's a way in which startups
                             \_ Yes case in point Google. Start shorting
                                man, you'll thank me for it.
                             eventually succumb to inertia as they grow and
                             mature.  'Bozo explosion' is a general phenomenon,
                             it affects not just corporations but traditions
                             (consider the Olympic games corruption scandals),
                             non-profit orgs (consider what happened to LA's
                             Griffith Observatory), and apparently even
                             prestigious prizes.  -- ilyas
                             \_ You know, I am a pretty careful student of
                                Middle Eastern history and I have never before
                                heard of a Palestinian-Isreali peace treaty
                                heard of a Palestinian-Israeli peace treaty
                                that was signed by leaders from both sides
                                before. Can you give me some more information
                                about this treaty? As for your confused notion
                                about constitutes a prestigious or important
                                prize, I will say that historical figures almost
                                always seem more important after they are dead.
                                I am sure the award to MLK was pretty
                                about what constitutes a prestigious or
                                significant prize, I will say that historical
                                figures always seem more important after they
                                are dead. I am sure the award to MLK was pretty
                                controversial in 1964, as well. -ausman
                                \_ Are you comparing Arafat to MLK now?  Wow.
                                   Prizes are a social signal, nothing more.
                                   The process by which prizes are awarded is
                                   a noisy one.  If this process gets so noisy
                                   that 'obviously bad people' get the prize,
                                   the prize is no longer a meaningful signal,
                                   e.g., "This prize recipient is a good
                                   person/productive contributor, etc. ...
                                   unless we happened to fuck up and the person
                                   is actually a murderer/thug/moocher/
                                   political stooge."  Bad award decisions
                                   reflect on the award, I am afraid. -- ilyas
                                   \_ I notice you are unable to provide me with
                                      any similar peace treaty, in spite of your
                                      earlier claims to the contrary. You are
                                      aware that the Nobel Peace Prize is an
                                      international prize, right? And you are
                                      aware that Arafat is one of the most
                                      highly regarded people ever in the Arab
                                      world, right? I personally do not regard
                                      Arafat as on the level of MLK, but would
                                      not be surprised if he is by most people
                                      in twenty or thirty years: it all depends
                                      on how the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
                                      works itself out. I think that Rabin and
                                      Arafat took great personal and political
                                      risks to come to an agreement, which they
                                      should be commended for. Rabin was
                                      assassinated for it, as was Sadat a decade
                                      earlier, for daring to come to a similar
                                      accord. Remember, there are still a bunch
                                      of fanatical peace hating extremists on
                                      both (many?) sides in the ME, who are
                                      willing to kill leaders on their own
                                      side who try to come to a peaceful accord.
                                      Did you approve of the assassination of
                                      Rabin and Sadat? Want Arafat and Peres
               \_ Let's see: Linus Pauling, Martin Luther King, UNICEF,
                  Andrei Sakharov, Amnesty International, Anwar Sadat &
                  Menachim Begin, Mother Teresa, Lech Walesa, The UN
                  Peacekeepers, Nelson Mandela & Fredrik De Klerk,
                  Medecins Sans Frontieres. What a worthless bunch!
        \_ Yeah, we need a Nobel War Prize, so some Republicans can win some.
        \_ What I find sad about this is that there *had* to be someone out
           there who has actually done something about making the world a
           more peaceful place instead of turning the prize into a political
           award for correct behavior.  How many truly worthy people were
           passed over to give Al a hat tip?
           \_ Name one.
           \- BTW, it's not only the Peace prizes with a mixed record.
              The Lit prize is criticized for poor choices too.
2007/10/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:48223 Activity:nil
10/2    Back to OJ Simpson: anyone want to explain how you can get away with
        killing 2 people but get 30 years on burglary? Is there
        something wrong with our justice system?
        \_ 1) Can't.  2) Yes.
2007/10/1-5 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:48216 Activity:moderate
10/01   Murtha is sued by Marine cleared in Haditha case for defamation.
        Federal judge refuses dismissal and orders Murtha to testify.
        \_ I am sorry, but this is idiotic. This is like filing defamation
           charges against a DA because he calls someone a drug dealer.
           \_ If you're not convicted, even a DA is not allowed to call someone
              \_ "even" = "especially"
              \_ What do you call what the DA does every single day of the
                 week, when he files charges against people?
                 week, when he files charges against people? He has what is
                 called "absolute privilege" when he is doing his job as a
                 DA and so does a Senator. This judge is a nut case.
                 \_ His court room job is to find out the truth of the case,
                    not to assume guilt.  How sad that our system has come to
                    this.  He is not supposed to run around calling unconvicted
                    people criminals.  They're not.
                    \_ Google "absolute privilege" and get back to me. Murtha
                       was doing his job from the floor of the Senate. It is
                       an open and shut case.
                       \_ Murtha is a criminal scumbag and slamming innocent
                          American soldiers from the senate floor is an abuse
                          of his senate privileges.  Google "Murtha scumbag"
                          and get back to me.  He called innocent men murderers
                          and that's ok with you, apparently.
                          \_ No, I don't think it is okay. I also don't think
                             it is illegal. Do you understand the difference?
2007/9/18-22 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:48093 Activity:moderate
9/18    So why isn't Mr Oh So Dissapointed in the Dems because Jefferson
        was corrupt so obviously all Democrats are corrupt spouting the
        same line about Ted Stevens and the Republicans?
        \_ There's a difference between finding $90K in the freezer and an
           ongoing corruption investigation.  By all means though, get rid of
           Stevens.  When will you call for Jefferson to be ousted?
           \_ The guy admitted in open court to bribing Stevens.  If that's
              not as damning or more than Jefferson's cold cash, you're smoking
              shit you shouldn't be.
           \_ I called from him to be ousted from day one.  Both of them
              are not yet found guilty, but for both of them the evidence
              is pretty fucking damning.  Both should not be in the Senate.
              \_ His "bridge to nowhere" was enough for me to want him out.
                 Glad we can agree on something. -pp
                 \_ And so why isn't Stevens not a stunning example of
                    why all Republicans are corrupt?
                 \_ And so why is Stevens not a stunning example of
                    how all Republicans are corrupt?
                    \_ Can you decide how many negatives you want there?
                       \_ Bad edit, fixed now.
                    \_ He's an example of *him* being corrupt.  And I'm
                       dissapointed the R's aren't removing him from the
                       appropriation committee.  Good thing I'm not an R.
                       \_ I agree with you 100%.  I just want to point out
                          that the all dems are evil dude is a pathetic
                          hypocrite.  -op
                          \_ If only such a person existed as more than straw.
        \_ I guess I've not seen the "All Dems are Evil guy."  I seen the "all
           Rs are evil guy" a lot....
           \_ You must be new around here.
              \_ Are you sure it isn't just a case of only seeing what you
                 want?  The motd is a huge lefty echo chamber of dittoness.
                 Anyway, op is a troll since there is no "All Dems are Evil
                 guy" here.  There *is* "Dems are no better guy" and there
                 is "A pox on both your houses, you're all Evil guy", though.
                 \_ Yeah, I remember during the runup to the War, me and one
                    other guy were arguing against it and like 10 people were
                    arguing for it. Such a lefty echo chamber.
                    \_ Yeah I remember this one time 4 years ago when there
                       were like a few people in favor of something that most
                       of the country was also in favor of... yeah.  Whatever.
                       \_ And now that almost everyone in the country is
                          against it, guess what opinion on the motd seems
                          to be? Whatever, indeed! But yeah, the most
                          vitrolic right-wingers seem to have abandoned
                          the field. Maybe they are out shooting photos
                          to put up on zombietime.
                          \_ Whats your point?
                             \_ That the motd is reflection of society, not
                                a "lefty echo chamber."
                                \_ You *really* believe that the motd which
                                   is all college educated *berkeley* students
                                   is a good reflection of society?  Oookaaay.
                                \_ That would explain why the motd is
                                   a seething mass of stupid.  Of course the
                                   lefty echo chamber theory would explain that
                                   too.  -- ilyas
                          \_ Out of curiousity am I considered a vitriolic
                             right-winger? -- ilyas
                             \_ No, just a libertarian kook. Not the same thing.
                             \_ more of a vitriolic nut case
2007/9/17-19 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:48089 Activity:nil
9/17    Go OJ Simpson! You rule!
2007/9/14 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Reference/Military] UID:48059 Activity:nil
9/12    CLEANSE.
                 \_ Sure, you can counteract the effects if you actually have
                    the time and discipline to do so, but how many have that?
                    Are you familiar with the studies correlating miles
                    driven with heart disease and obesity?
        \_ Where do you live?  In some counties you can get a CCW without too
           much trouble.
           \_ What is CCW?
              \_ Carry Concealed Weapon.
2007/9/11-12 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:48028 Activity:kinda low
9/11    Replaced with direct url to crime alert:
        \_ I would totally have just kicked his ass.
           \_ Please do.
              \_ More and more, I wish for some vigilantism. Of course, one
                 that is perfectly just - something that can't exist. Watch
                 Boondock Saints!
2007/9/10-13 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:47999 Activity:moderate
9/10    Will Hsu have as much fallout as Abramoff?
        \_ No
        \_ Abramoff was a criminal working for other criminal republicans
           in an ongoing effort to subvert the usc and all that is right and
        \_ Abramoff wa s a criminal working f or other criminal republicans
            in an ongoi ng effort to subvert t he usc and all that is right and
           good in the world.
           Hsu is a victim of racism and an overzealous hostile prosecutorial
           system that seems to oppress and limit his natural free speech
           right to assist his chosen and righteous candidate obtain high
           office so she can fight the good fight for the entire village
           against the barbarians.
            Hsu is a vic tim of  racism and an overzealous hostile prosecutori
           system that se ems to  oppress and limit his natural free speech
            right to assist his c hosen and righteous candidate obtain high
           o ffice so she  can fig ht the good fight for the entire village
           ag ainst the bar barians .
           So, no.
           \_ I know you think you're funny, but I can't figure out
              how Hsu may have benefited from all of contributions.
           \_ I  kno  w you think you're funny, but I can't figure out
              ho w Hs  u may have benefited from all of contributions.
              This is an important distiction.
              \_ You can't figure out how a businessman benefits from
                 contributing lots of money to politicians?
                 contrib  uting lots of money to politicians?
                 \_ Yeah, I can't actually.  What was he selling besides
                    suckering people into a Ponzi scheme in CA 15 years
                    ago?  Exactly how does holding fundraisers jump start
                    my Ponzi scheme business that I can't tell anyone about
                     suck ering people into a Ponzi scheme in CA 15 years
                    a go?    Exactly how does holding fundraisers jump start
                    my  Ponz i scheme business that I can't tell anyone about
                    because if they figure out who I am I'll go to jail?
                    \_  If y o u can't see how bundled cash has destroyed our
                       s  yst e m of government then please don't vote.
                    \_ If you can't see how bundled cash has destroyed our
                       system of government then please don't vote.
                 \_ Sorry, is there a quid-pro-quo actually being alleged?
                    I haven't seen anything other than "convicted felon
                    gave money, politicians give it away".
                    I haven 't  s een anything other than "convicted felon
                    gave money,  p oliticians give it away".
                    \_ If yo u ca n 't see how bundled cash has destroyed our
                       system  of  g overnment then please don't vote.
                    \_ If you can't see how bundled cash has destroyed our
                       system of government then please don't vote.
                       \_ But... But... Money is SPEECH!  You don't want to
                          LIMIT SPEECH, do you?!  Until we have public funding
                          of elections, bundled money will persist.  And
                          unsavory characters will pop up.  You seem to be
                          insinuating, though, that taking Hsu's money auto-
                          matically means that politician is corrupt.  If you
                          can't see that's not necessarily true, you're the
                          one in need of the civics lesson.
                          \_ Money corrupts.  Bundled money corrupts absolutely
                             and has for a long time.  Was there quid pro quo
                             on this particular bundled cash?  I don't know and
                             I don't care and I don't think it matters.  It is
                             a systematic problem.  I have never stated a
                             preference either way on public funding or the
                             'money is free speech' concept so I don't know
                             why you're going there.  Money = corruption.  Big
                             money = big corruption.  This isn't that hard to
                             understand.  If you're still looking at this as
                             a "I must defend Hillary from her evil attackers!"
                             issue then don't bother.  She isn't that
                             important.  She's just one symptom of a greater
                             illness in the government.
                             \_ So what are you doing about it and what do you
                                think a solution would be? Just complaining
                                doesn't do much to help, if anything at all.
                                \_ This wasn't about what I am personally
                                   doing about it.  This is about "does
                                   bundled money corrupt government or not?"
                                   And my answer is "yes it does".
                                   \_ I agree with you 100%. I am just (mostly)
                                      at a quandry as to what to do about it.
                                      Got any suggestions?
                             \_ What he said, and also, this "pox on both
                                their houses crap" is for the weak.
                                \_ How very black and white Bush of you. "You
                                   are either with us or against us!".  I'm a
                                   politically aware moderate and if your
                                   party (whichever that may be) keeps pushing
                                   your one sided idiocy your asses will be
                                   out of office.  The real power is at the
                                   center in the hands of swing voters.  Your
                                   party will displease us at their peril.
        \_ Hu is Hsu?
2007/8/30-9/3 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:47831 Activity:nil
8/30    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20467347
        10-minute police interview with Sen. Craig (D)
                \_ You realize that Sen. Craig is a republican, right?
        IE only, click "Hear an audio recording"
        \_ I got it to work in Firefox.
2007/8/6-22 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:47538 Activity:nil
8/5     How the HB1B Visa program really works:
        \_ "H-1B"
        \_ Common knowledge. So what are you gonna do?
        \_ Is this a hoax?
           \_ http://www.cohenlaw.com/attorneys-81.html
        \_ If all these were true, why would an exployer go through all these
           trouble and the associated expenses (attorney fees, HR expense, time
           for managers to inverview those "very qualifed" candidates) just to
           hire an H-1B worker?  What's the upside for the employer?
           hire an H-1B worker?  What's the upside for the employer?  (Unless
           those employers are all trying to hire their friends and relatives.)
           \_ (a) the H-1B is usually pretty qualified for the job
              (b) it's difficult for the H-1B to leave - you obviously have not
              seen firsthand the desperation of an H-1B trying to push the
              green card process forward with their employer
              (c) better leverage over the H-1B because of (b)
              \_ Regarding (b), on the contrary I was under the H-1B visa
                 myself a decade ago.  --- PP
2007/8/1-3 [Computer/HW/Laptop, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:47498 Activity:nil
8/1     Laptops may decrease your sperm count.
        \_ We don't need to use protection, I'm a computer geek!
2007/7/27-31 [Politics/Foreign/Europe, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:47445 Activity:nil
7/27    This is one crazy story.
        One of the suspects is the scion of a wealthy Russian family.
        I like how seomeone went through wikipedia already and linked
        their pages to the younger suspect.
2007/7/26-27 [Politics/Foreign/Europe, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:47440 Activity:nil
7/26    at least it wasn't black people this time
2007/7/25-27 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:47422 Activity:nil
7/25    http://billoreilly.com being investigated by Secret Service
        \_ Huh, I guess I don't really see that as a direct threat.  Stupid
           thing to say though.
           \_ It's mostly just ironic because Bill is currently on television
              calling certain websites "hate speech sites" because of certain
              stupid comments made by some of their members.
              \_ Such as?
2007/7/24-26 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:47401 Activity:low
7/24    The polls are in. Edwards tried his best and did ok, but in the
        end he has no chance. It's either a woman or a black man. Which
        one would you choose and why? (YouNeedToVoteToSeeResults)
        \_ His being a slimeball personal injury lawyer may have something to
           do with that.
           \_ I think he did some good work.  Do you really want all
              of your children's intestines sucked out by a pool?
              \_ Do /you/ want him channeling children to get a sympathetic
                 jury to trump good science in CP cases?
                 \_ And this is better or worse than Frist channeling a
                    brain dead woman for political grandstanding?
                    \_ False dichotomy.  They could be equally bad.  I don't
                       recall him channelling her though.
        \_ Hmmm, the criminal or the racist, what a choice!
           \_ Just like a cracker to think that all black men are criminals.
              \_ I think you're joking, but just to clarify, Hillary is the
                 \_ Yawn. Baseless accusations are so boring. Perhaps you can
                    organize a website to collect both your tinfoil hat and
                    your "proof"?
                    \_ Funny, I considered the "Obama is racist" claim to be
                       more controversial...
                    \_ Didn't Hillary kill Vince Foster?
                       \_ Just to watch him die.
                       \_ With her bare hands. In front of a busload of nuns.
        \_ Bro's before ho's
           \_ Thank you Butler.
        \_ It's a poll about a 'debate' on youtube.  There is no 'there' there.
2007/7/20-26 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:47363 Activity:low
7/20    "Marine spared prison time in Iraqi death"
        Wow!  What justice is that?
        \_ Which part are you talking about?
           \_ The part that he doesn't even go to prison after a murder.
              \_ You skipped that part where they dropped the murder charge,
                 huh?  So it wasn't murder.  At least read your own links
                 before posting, please.
                 \_ you're begging the question
                    \_ Enlighten me.  The court decided he wasn't a murderer
                       so he didn't get the penalty for murder.  And?  Are you
                       one of the people who think Libby is a liar solely
                       based on the fact that he was convicted of it despite
                       all facts to the contrary?  Hope not, it would be so
                       disheartening to think there were hypocrites on the
                       motd. ;-)
                    \_ please describe your parameters
2007/7/19-21 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:47340 Activity:nil
7/19    from http://talkingpointsmemo.com
        From Maria Bartiromo's interview of Condi Rice in the current issue
        of BusinessWeek:

        MB: Would you consider a position in business or on Wall Street?
        CR: I don't know what I'll do long-term.
            I'm a terrible long-term planner.
2007/7/13-14 [Reference/Law/Court, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:47275 Activity:moderate
7/13    "Under the president's reasoning, any while-collar defendant should
        receive no jail time, regardless of the reprehensibility of the crime."
        U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White, a Bush appointee, said before
        sentencing attorney Troy Ellerman to prison.
        \_ I was confused when reading that in the paper today.  I couldn't
           figure out why the judge would bring up Scooter while sentencing
           someone.  I mean I can see why, but legally... it shouldn't
           \_ Eh, please read more carefully?  The defense lawyer cited
              the commutation in asking for a lighter sentence.
           \_ Because Bush explicitly said that the sentance was too high.
              That was his rational.  Not that the crime wasn't exactly as
              the prosecution claimed but that jail time was too much for
              the crime.  Therefore jail time should be too much for someone
              else charged with the same crime, no?
              \- i just want to point out this is bullshit ... kinda
                 like when MSFT wanted to pay a fine in donated software.
                   White gave Ellerman until Sept. 13 to report to
                   prison. He did not impose a fine, saying it would be
                   a hardship for Ellerman's family, but ordered the
                   attorney to give talks at 10 California law schools
                   about "the importance of being a fair and honest
                   advocate" in the three-year period after his release.
                 1. i dont want an ethics lecture from a criminal
                 2. he will probably put "lectured at X law school"
                    on his resume
                 3. this is hardly unpleasant work
                 4. he should have to do something involving a
                    a orange jumpsuit and used chewing gum.
                    \_ He still has to go to jail for 2 years doesn't he?
2007/7/7-10 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:47214 Activity:nil
7/7     One lawyer's opinion on the fed government's use of
        conspiracy charges:
        \_ Unless you are Scooty Libby or some other well connected GOP
           insider, in which case you are above the law.
2007/7/2-5 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:47149 Activity:low
7/2     Three more judges (two of them Republican) join the
        MSM/Karl Rove/Dick Cheney conspiracy to put Libby behind bars:
        \_ 'The three-judge panel of the appeals court rejected Libby's
           request in a one-paragraph order, ruling he has not shown that
           his appeal "raises a substantial question."'
        \_ Hell, even John Dean called this one:
           \_ "...as are the steady stream of personal threats the judge
               has received from the right-wing nuts who have called and
               written him." Remember, they aren't terrorists, just good
               patriotic Americans who are trying to correct an error.
        \_ No one here said it was a conspiracy.  They said he got screwed
           which has happened to many innocent people in our justice system.
           Why is it so hard to believe it happened to Libby?
           \_ 'Cos he's an evasive scumbag who worked for a man who redefined
              moral ambiguity to mean "anything I want to do"?
              \_ Covered this a dozen times already.  He didn't evade and he
                 didn't even have to talk to the grand jury.  He volunteered
                 to do so.  But don't let facts get in the way of your bias
                 and agenda.  Carry on.
                 \_ Why would a panel of 3 judges, 2 of them Republicans,
                    then say there was "overwhelming" evidence to his guilt
                    if he's innocent?  The fact is he lied about the events
                    surrounding the outing of an undercover CIA agent.
                    If you think committing perjury
                    when it comes to treasonous activity is not a big deal
                    then say so.  For instance, I admit 100% Clinton lied
                    about his relationship to Lewinsky under oath.  I just
                    don't think lying about your sex life under oath is a
                    big crime.
                    if he's innocent?
                    \_ Why do you keep bringing up the political affiliation
                       of the various parties?  If this is about real justice
                       then it shouldn't matter.  If this is political then
                       justice and truth has nothing to do with it.  As far as
                       treasonous activity and outing agents goes, *HE DIDN'T
                       DO THAT*.  The guy who did do that was *known to the
                       prosecutor* _before_ Libby testified.  This never had
                       anything to do with finding who talked about Plame.
                       If it did why was Armitage never prosecuted?  Because
                       she wasn't undercover and no crime was committed re:
                       Plame's identity.  Even if Libby lied his ass off, it
                       is no more a crime to lie about something that wasn't
                       a crime than it was to get nooky in the Oval Office
                       and lie about that.  Sheesh, you really don't know
                       anything about the details of his case, huh?  I guess
                       that never stopped anyone from posting to the motd.
                       \_ There were (at least) three leakers.  Armitage,
                          Libby, Rove.  Armitage didn't know plame's name
                          until it was brought to him.  They (bush? cheney,
                          more likely.  he likes [mis]using intel) wanted
                          the name out there.  They got it.  Libby took
                          the fall to protect "them".  And now he's getting
                          his kickback, with the side bonus that he can still
                          plead the 5th if called before congress.
                          \_ Uh huh, and where is the prosecution of Armitage,
                             again?  Riiight.  The rest is just conspiracy.
                       \_ I guess you know more about the law than those
                          \_ Yummy, arguing from authority.  I know the case
                             better than anyone here seems to.
                       \_ Lying to a Grand Jury is always a crime.
                          \_ Have you been with us today?  That is exactly
                             what I've been telling you he didn't do.
                       \_ Perhaps your psychic powers could help us to find
                          Jon-Benet Ramsey's killers as well?
                       \_ I strongly encourage you to post your theories about
                          the "true Libby case" to The Economist's View blog
                          where they can be examined more thoroughly.
                          \_ I don't have theories.  I followed the case which
                             no one else here apparently did.  I've only
                             repeated documented facts about what happened in
                             front of the Grand Jury.
                             \_ They asked him about conversations and know-
                                ledge. He told them he couldn't remember. They
                                didn't believe him, and his own notes, memos,
                                and such indicated otherwise. Hence, they
                                charged him with perjury, and a jury of his
                                peers found him guilty. The Judge reviewed the
                                basis of the case and didn't find it wanting
                                enough to grant dismissal. He now has a chance
                                at appeal, but he still has to go to jail just
                                like anyone else who has been convicted.
2007/6/26-28 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:47070 Activity:nil
6/26    "that poor girl [Jessie Davis] should have stuck with her own kind"
        \_ yeah, humans rather than freepers.
        \_ She shouldn't have commented that his dick is not as big as it's
           supposed to be.
           \_ He sure showed her how big a dick he was.
        \_ stuck with women? Hawt Lesbo action!  Such an odd thing to see
           homosexuality promoetd on a freeper site.
2007/6/25-28 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:47056 Activity:nil
6/25    "Jessie Davis is not a hate crime because a hate crime by
        definition is committed by a tyrannical majority against an
        oppressed minority."
        \_ It's homicide. He murdered this woman. Full stop.
        \_ Defined by who?  And no, I'm not going to visit the freepers to
           find out.
2007/6/24-28 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:47052 Activity:nil
6/24    Partha alert, you have mentioned this issue before, here an
        Economist has done a study on it (splitting the check):
        \- your capitalizing "Economist" caused problems for my high
           speed parser. i thought you were talking about The Economist.
           Unwinding from that local minima, was very expensive.
           otherwise it didnt say much that wasnt obvious i thought
           [although thanks for posting it]. i think in practice,
           dealing with the check splitting problem relies more on
           social skills rather than econ theory ... the freeriding
           problem is totally obvious in the case of strangers.
           the realistic problem is how to split with friend and
           friends of friends, and how to balance between fairness
           and awkwardness ... like how far does somebody have to
           drift from 1/n split to make special arrangements.
           in general, i think people get off too easily because
           too many people buy into the "being judgemenal is bad ...
           it is intolerant" view.
2007/6/20-24 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:47020 Activity:nil
6/20    OJ Simpson exploratory creative writing book
        "IF I DID IT" book leaked online
        \_ Can't be arsed myself, but would someone here please read it and
           report back on how closely it matches how the prosecution says it
           \_ no.
2007/6/12-15 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46929 Activity:nil
6/12    Hans Reiser trial postponed
        \_ Do the crime, do the time.  Nice FS for certain data sets but
           writing a nice FS doesn't get you off a murder rap.
        \_ Kill your ex-wife.  Go to jail.  Writing an interesting FS does not
           earn you a get out of jail card.
2007/6/12-15 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46923 Activity:nil
6/12    Courtroom of the absurd (this seriously had me LOL):
        \_ I like the old lady Godwinning.
        \_ Between this and Bork's "You made me fall down" lawsuit, it's quite
           the week for legal laughs.
        \_ If anything, today's is even better.
2007/6/11-13 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46915 Activity:high 57%like:46907
6/11    Death penalty deters homicide (AP story)
        (If you have comments on the study, make your comments below, don't
        alter the OP.)
        \_ Oh but this is so politically incorrect ......
        \_ `The studies' conclusions drew a philosophical response from a
           well-known liberal law professor and death penalty critic, Cass
           Sunstein ...... "Abolitionists or others, like me, who are
           skeptical about the death penalty haven't given adequate
           consideration to the possibility that innocent life is saved by the
           death penalty."'
           Mocan: "The results are robust, they don't really go away," he
           said. "I oppose the death penalty. But my results show that the
           death penalty [deters], What am I going to do, hide them?"
        \_ http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=928649
           "We address this error by focusing on the subset of
           homicides that have been defined statutorily as
           capital-eligible to provide a more sensitive indicator of
           the deterrent effects of the death penalty. We use a
           public-use data archive based on police descriptions of
           homicides from 1976-2003 to construct rates of potentially
           death-eligible killings. We estimate that less than 25% of
           total criminal homicides are eligible for the capital
           sanction under the range of current state statutes. We find
           no changes over time in the rate of these capital-eligible
           homicides in death penalty states, despite fluctuations in
           capital punishment over time. "
           \_ The vast command of homicide law possessed by an average
              potential murderer combined with these findings is sure to
              debunk the study in OP's link!  A more serious objection would
              be to point out that no purely statistical study can determine
              effect, period. -- ilyas
        \_ The problem is that the presentation of the study if used as a
            pro-death penalty argument neglects two major factors:  first,
            the objective logistical impossibility of ensuring that no
            innocent persons are executed, and the entirely subjective
            question as to whether it's right or wrong for a collective to
            decide on life or death.  -John
           pro-death penalty argument neglects two major factors:  first, the
           objective logistical impossibility of ensuring that no innocent
           persons are executed, and the entirely subjective question as to
           whether it's right or wrong for a collective to decide on life or
           death.  -John
           \_ Those are legitimate issues to debate.  However, critics commonly
              say of the death penalty that it's not a deterrent.  I'd be
              interested to see how this compares to (say) life without parole
              (which is a sentence I'm increasingly seeing as favorable to the
              death penalty). -emarkp
              \_ I personally feel the "death penalty as a deterrent" point is
                 as irrelevant as the "death penalty as a disposal" or "death
                 penalty as a punishment" arguments.  That was kind of what
                 I was getting at.  -JOhn
                 \_ If you don't believe in the DP, then you won't find any
                    pro-DP points with merit.  Just like abortion, God
                    existing/religion, evolution, and gun control, some issues
                    are not determined by logic, reason, statistics, facts, etc
                    but by people's personal philosophies and feelings.  And
                    that is ok.  We are not robots or computers and should not
                    always guide or measure society by pure logic and reason.
                    \- that's not true. i went from pro-DP to anti. although
                       i wasnt very strong pro and an not strong-anti,
                       for example i think while it is on the books, it's
                       resonable to ask for it in some cases, like timothy
                       mcveigh. i think it is too bad robert hanssen and and
                       alderidge ames didnt get the death penalty. if it was
                       more fairly applied, i might have switched back to pro.
                       my position: it is ok per constitution. i dont think
                       the cost of DP is that much of an issue. it's worth
                       researching the deterrence question ... like maybe
                       we can have DP for while collar crime above $10m and
                       see if it is detweent ... and i suppose society has
                       see if it is deterent ... and i suppose society has
                       the right to "take life". but the "machinery of
                       death" runs in a really disturbing way ... like non-
                       functioning electric chairs, leathal injections
                       incompetently administered to more subtle things like
                       statistical biases of death certified juries. but by
                       far the biggest thing is the disparate application.
                       it's like talking about the draft or school vouchers:
                       the details matter. i were king i would put many
                       people to death. and society would be better off
                       for it ... at least for the first 6mos. then it might
                       get out of control. french rev and all that.
                       \_ I think your last line is the real issue.  What is a
                          true DP offense?  Who decides?  How can we be sure?
                          I'm perfectly ok with most folks getting life in
                          prison because there are too many times where a
                          death row inmate is found innocent, often after
                          years in prison.  But I've got no problem putting
                          someone like Manson and numerous others where there
                          can be no doubt and no concept of rehabilitation on
                          the chair and frying them.  And yes I agree the
                          chairs should work, procedures should be followed,
                          etc, but if it takes a few extra zots to off a
                          Charles Manson or he goes out suffering I'm not going
                          to shed any tears over it.
                          \_ And this is why I'm neither Pro- or Anti-DP: I
                             view it as a tool, and as such I want it to work
                             work reliably and well when needed, but I don't
                             want it applied to every situation (cf. Maslow,
                             hammer, nails). I'm not pro- or anti-screwdrivers,
                             either. --erikred
2007/6/11 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46907 Activity:very high 57%like:46915
6/11    (Questionable study says) Death penalty deters homicide (AP story)
        \_ Oh but this is so politically incorrect ......
        \_ `The studies' conclusions drew a philosophical response from a
           well-known liberal law professor and death penalty critic, Cass
           Sunstein ...... "Abolitionists or others, like me, who are
           skeptical about the death penalty haven't given adequate
           consideration to the possibility that innocent life is saved by the
           death penalty."'
           Mocan: "The results are robust, they don't really go away," he
           said. "I oppose the death penalty. But my results show that the
           death penalty [deters], What am I going to do, hide them?"
        \_ http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=928649
           "We address this error by focusing on the subset of
           homicides that have been defined statutorily as
           capital-eligible to provide a more sensitive indicator of
           the deterrent effects of the death penalty. We use a
           public-use data archive based on police descriptions of
           homicides from 1976-2003 to construct rates of potentially
           death-eligible killings. We estimate that less than 25% of
           total criminal homicides are eligible for the capital
           sanction under the range of current state statutes. We find
           no changes over time in the rate of these capital-eligible
           homicides in death penalty states, despite fluctuations in
           capital punishment over time. "
           \_ The vast command of homicide law possessed by an average
              potential murderer combined with these findings is sure to
              debunk the study in OP's link!  A more serious objection would
              be to point out that no purely statistical study can determine
              effect, period. -- ilyas
2007/6/10-13 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:46902 Activity:nil
6/10    More on the Libby case from a decidedly liberal econ prof:
        \- i dont understand why more people dont see the "procedural aspect"
           to this libby case. i mean the burden on second guessing spectators
           has to be pretty high given: 1. republican prosecutor 2. libby had
           best defense money could buy 3. bush appointee judge. given that
           he was still found guilty, unless you somehow think he was hurt
           by the "friend of the sack of shit" letters from wolfowitz,
           kissinger, bolton, etc it you have to say more than "i dont like
           the outcome".
           by the "friend of the sack of shit" briefs from wolfowitz,
           kissinger, bolton, et al you have to say more than "i dont like
           the outcome". anybody who argues "do we want our tax dollars
           going to incarcaerate LIBBY" should just be beaten on the spot.
           i am quite happy to have my tax dollars going to this end.
           i am quite happy to have my tax dollars going to this end. much
           more so than small scale potheads or notorious asslords, neither
           of whom i have much natural affinity for.
           of which i have much natural affinity for.
2007/6/6-10 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46871 Activity:nil
6/6     Substitute Teacher whose computer popped up porn spam in class and
        was facing 40 years in jail (the stress caused her to have a
        miscarriage) is having a new trial.  I donated $20 to her defense
        fund, she & her husband are deeply in debt now to pay legal bills.
        Typical bullshit puritan overreaction to PROTECT TEH CHILDREN!
        You can get probation or a light sentence for rape and murder
        but spend the rest of your life in jail if some kids see someone
        \_ Is this a hoax?
           \_ No: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julie_Amero
              \_ Gee, which idiot jury convicted her?
        \_ I think this is more of a zero-tolerance thing.  I can't imagine
           there are no other people who've been hit by porno pop-ups.
           \_ which points out how stupid zero-tolerance things are.
2007/6/5-10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46861 Activity:kinda low
6/5     http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0605071libby1.html
        Mr. Libby takes one for the team ... too smart, and too loyal.
        \- this is disgusting. but on a mildly humorouss note ... "hi this is
           henry kissinger. i was secretary os state. scooter is ok. but let's
           get back to me. i am great. let me tell you some more about me."
        \_ There is a time when I thought blow the cover of an undercover
           agent is considered a threat to national security...  Then again
           I am not a Republican.
           \_ Let me guess. You think Clinton got impeached for getting a BJ.
              \_ That didn't came into my mind when I posted it.  IMHO, Libby
                 should get executed for what he is willing to do to advance
                 his party's political gain.
              And, now you mentioned, since we are willing to impeach someone
              for a BJ, then, may be we should impeach our current commander
                 And, now you mentioned, since we are willing to impeach
                 someone for a BJ,
                 \_ I was correct. You're an idiot.
                 then, may be we should impeach our current commander
                 in chief for treason.  AND/OR turn him over to International
                 War Crime Tribunal for all sort of war crime he has commited.

        \_ He'll write a book.  I think he was too dumb and too naive.  He
           didn't have to talk to the prosecutors.  He did so voluntarily
           and now is going to prison + $250k fine for trying to be a good
           samaritan, the fool.  And when he does *not* get a GWB pardon I
           have a $1 million bet with someone on the motd I'm going to put
           away for my early retirement.
           \_ I will bet you, anonymous h0zer. Not $1M but I am happy
              to put real money on this. Contact me. -ausman
              \_ I've already got my $1M bet.  If you can't play with the
                 big boys, you can't play.
                 \- fine, we can form a syndicate to bet again you.
                    who are you. --psb
                 \_ Uh huh.
2007/6/4-10 [Health/Disease/General, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46848 Activity:moderate
6/4     Enron exec gets only 2yr jail time for screwing up so many people's
        \- the real punishment issue is they got to "club fed" type
           prisons, not ass prisons. how many years in non-ass prison
           would you be willing to do to avoid 1 yr or ass prison?
           would you be willing to do to avoid 1 yr of ass prison?
           \_ Just send him to Iraq and tell him to patrol the city
              neighborhood for road side bomb...
           \_ As much as I hate Enron, I hate the idea that repeated gang
              rape is an acceptable punishment, especially one to joke
              around about, even more.
                \_ Quite aside from the gang rape and psych. trauma
                   there is the very high risk of infection.
              \- who is joking? i think it is a very serious inequity
                 in "the system" along the lines of the crack vs cocaine
                 sentencing disparity, some weird pathologies in the
                 mandatory sentencing guidelines etc. is your ass/non-ass
                 prison multipler less than 5? or maybe we should phrase
                 it in terms of "how many months are you willing to trade
                 for change in marginal risk of hepatitis, hiv etc." are
                 you willing to add a year to your sentence to take the
                 risk of hiv/hep from 5% to .1%?
                 \_ The prison system is broken.  The sentence itself should
                    be the punishment.  Getting raped, getting a disease, or
                    getting abused in some other way by the other inmates is
                    not justice and should not be part of the system.
                    \_ Agreed, but the solution is not softer sentencing for
                       corporate pirates.
                       \- Again, eliminating the abuses in the prison
                          system is a separate issue than the sentencing
                          disparity. For example you can feel the penalties
                          for drugs are overly harsh *across the board* but
                          it is a separate issue to look at the (racial)
                          disparate impact of the sentencing guidelines.
                          A better example, also turning on race, concerns
                          capital punishment. Again being pro/con capital
                          pusiment is a separate issue from the fact that
                          black people killing white people have VASTLY more
                          likely to get the death penalty than black people
                          "only" killing another black person. [and of course
                          this is a spearate issue than quality of repre-
                          sentation etc. but of course money makes a difference
                          whether it is law or medicine].
                          \_ OJ Simpson vs. Scott Peterson.
                           \_ The plural of ancedote is not data.
                          \_ I agree with you on the sentencing guidelines for
                             things like crack vs. cocaine.  It's all coke and
                             should be treated the same.  But is it?  Isn't
                             crack a much stronger version of the same basic
                             stuff?  Shouldn't a more serious substance get a
                             more serious penalty?  If not, then why treat
                             pot use as a decriminalised activity but send
                             coke users to jail?  Some lines?  No lines?  Or
                             just one big line that treats all drug offenses
                             the same?
                             \_ Coke and crack are both Sched. II substances;
                                as such, sentencing for possession/dealing
                                should be the same. However, judges have a
                                tendency to view coke-heads as still socially
                                redeemable, whereas crackheads are considered
                                irredeemable, and so sentences tend to be
                                harsher for crackheads. This is not consistent
                                with the espoused purpose of establing Scheds.
                                to begin with.
                                \- often there are arguments like "crackheads
                                   are more likely to commit other crimes"
                                   as opposed to upstanding wall street
                                   coke users, or suburban upper middle
                                   class coke heads etc. but it seems like
                                   you should only be able to convict people
                                   for what they did rather than statistical
                                   propensities ... like if the crack head
                                   paid for the crack by stealing car stereos
                                   you need to convict him of that rather than
                                   just infer it from "no visible means of
                                   support". on the flip side, you also have
                                   to wonder about "hate crime" laws with
                                   harsher pentalities, under the theory that
                                   hate-fuelled beatings are worse than run-
                                   of-the-mill beatings ... if a hate beating
                                   averages in 50stiches rather than 25 stiches
                                   surely there is a way to have the sentencing
                                   reflect the "actual damage" and dispense
                                   with the "thought crime" aspect. although
                                   i acknowledge something like hate-graffitti
                                   may be different from "<my gang> rules"
                                   type graffiti ... but once it advances to
                                   something like arson, i dunno if you really
                                   have to consider the "hate" element so
                                   \_ The why is always important in crime.
                                      For instance look at the difference
                                      between a premeditated mob hit and
                                      a crime of passion.
                                      \- fair point. but some whys matter.
                                         like premeditation. does it matter
                                         whether the premediated mob hit was
                                         for financial reaasons [like say
                                         remove competition/turf war ...
                                         fundamentally about money] or say
                                         to prevent a witness from testifying.
                                         but i think we agree sentencing is
                                         complicated and hard to make a
                                         determiistic function of n-variables.
                                         like for white collar crime how do
                                         you factor in the magnitude of the
                                         harm [embezzing $50k, vs $10m in
                                         some kind of securities fraud],
                                         what should be criminal vs civil
                                         penalties etc.
                                \_ Crack and coke are the same thing, one is
                                   not inherently stronger than the other,
                                   though the method they are used leads to
                                   slightly differrent effects. They may
                                   finally be eliminating the sentencing
                                   disparity, btw:
                                   \_ If the method of use of one leads to a
                                      greater (or less socially acceptable)
                                      effect then I'd claim it is "stronger".
                                      \- so for say assault, there should be
                                         different sentencing guidelines
                                         based on whether you are a welter-
                                         weight or heavyweight or a black-
                                         belt? how about just focusing on
                                         the actual damage. if somebody
                                         embezzles $2000 and buys math books
                                         vs. mexican drinking binge, should
                                         they get differnent sentences?
                                         \_ In the case of drug sentencing the
                                            charges are related to possession
                                            not your blood content.  So they
                                            have to look at the potential
                                            damage of selling 2kg of crack vs.
                                            2kg of coke.  If the potential
                                            damage is the same, then yes they
                                            should be punished the same.  If
                                            the crack is going to do more harm
                                            to the community than the coke then
                                            it should be punished more harshly.
                                            Does one actually have the
                                            potential to do more harm than the
                                            other?  I don't know.  But the
                                            judges dealing with these things
                                            seem to think so.
                                            \- drunk driving in a yugo vs a
                                               humvee are treated differently?
                                               yes, if the humvee drink driver
                                               kills somebody and the yugo
                                               driver just dents a mailbox,
                                               that should be treatement
                                               that should be treated
                                               differently but saything there
                                               are schedule I and schedule II
                                               cars for DUI, is kinda odd.
                                               \_ cars aren't drugs.  car
                                                  possession is not (yet) a
                                                  crime.  for a car wreck we
                                                  punish the effect.  for drug
                                                  possession we punish based on
                                                  potential effect.
                                                  \- in the case of drunk
                                                     driving you can go
                                                     after them without a
                                                     car wreck happening.
                                                     it's being in posession
                                                     of a car while driving
                                                     because that might lead
                                                     to a car wreck, a pot-
                                                     ential effect.
                                                     \_ And for that potential
                                                        effect, the punishment
                                                        is extremely high.  It
                                                        presumes that "this is
                                                        not your first time
                                                        doing it, so we'll
                                                        throw the book at you"
2007/6/4-10 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46846 Activity:moderate
6/3     Dirty Congressman Jefferson finally indicted.
        \_ Good --scotsman
           \_ Seconded. --erikred
        \_ About time.  Let's see some real jail time and a felony conviction
           from this one.
        \_ He's innocent I tell ya, just like DeLay and Libby! Selfless public
           \_ Libby is going to jail for *not* leaking any secrets.  He got
              totally fucked over on some BS trumped up garbage charge and
              sent to the wolves so *someone* could take the fall.
              \_ Somehow I don't see "Free Scooter!" t-shirts being big
                 \_ You fail to understand how delusional the Bushies have
                    \_ You fail to have the facts at hand when posting.  See
                       below for what Libby was convicted of and while you're
                       at it, compare what happened to Libby vs. Sandy "Stuffed
                       Shorts" who got probation and a trivial fine for
                       stealing and destroying national security documents
                       related to the Clinton administration's policies re:
                       Al Qaeda in the 90s.  If Libby deserves jail then SB
                       deserves a treason charge with life or hanging on those
                       scales of justice.
                       \_ Thanks for making my case for me (btw, I think
                          SB got off too light as well, but that is tangential
                          to the Libby case).
                          \_ Your case was what exactly?  A vague slam against
                             all "Bushies"?  Whatever.  DailyKOS awaits your
              \_ Libby is really going to jail for obstructing justice. He
                 still doesn't understand that what he did was wrong, and
                 apparently neither do a number of his supporters.
                 \_ Libby obstructed justice how exactly?  Specifically what he
                    got nailed for was this: the prosecution asked ~8 reporters
                    for their version of events and asked Libby as well.  The
                    reporters gave varying versions, different time lines, etc
                    that didn't match each other.  Libby didn't and in fact
                    could not have matched what the reporters said so he got
                    nailed for what exactly?  Not matching all 8 reporters who
                    didn't match themselves?  Give it a rest, the man is a
                    \_ "It's important that we expect and demand a lot from
                       people who put themselves in those positions," Walton
                       "Mr. Libby failed to meet that bar. For whatever
                       reason, he got off course." From the sentencing judge.
                       They outed a spy and then obstructed the investigation
                       into it. You are right that more than just Libby
                       should have paid, but he was the only case that
                       Fitzgerald felt was going to stick in a court of law.
                       \_ Yes, and?  He's still going to prison for not having
                          the same story as 8 reporters who also had different
                          stories from each other.  And let's not forget the
                          $250k fine on top of 30 months in prison.  This is
                          not justice.
                          \- i am pretty sure he'll be "made whole"/taken care
                             for for his loyalty. obstruction of justice by
                             the powerful is a serious problem and deserves
                             serious penalties. the plea bargaining system
                             has some strage pathologies ... e.g. the guy
                             facing a serious charge with a lame public
                             defender vs. the guy who can pay his legal bills
                             though ill gotten gains or directors/officers
                             insurance or otherwise has deep resources or
                             something truly bizzare like the fbi/cia mole
                             cases where the death penalty was taken off
                             the table in return for cooperation or the
                             OLYMPIC BOMBER case where death penalty was
                             taken off the table because he hid a bunch
                             of explosives in the hills and would not
                             disclose where unless non-death ... those
                             are good candidates for waterboarding.
                             since we've decided to torture people, i think
                             there is an argument to be made that they are
                             "consenting" to torture ... i dont think these
                             people are "entitled" to this arrow in their
                             legal quiver. anyway, libby got the best of the
                             legal process. good lawyer, credible judge,
                             jury, prosecutor. if you want to claim he
                             was railroaded, the very very heavy burden is
                             on you to make the case.
                             \_ Again I ask: *exactly* what did he do that was
                                illegal, in plain English, please?
                                \- can you list you name so we can laugh
                                   at you?
                          \_ The reason he was given such a harsh sentence
                             is because he used his power and authority in
                             an effort to pervert justice and he continues
                             to show no remorse for it (much like his
                             supporters). No one is above the law, not you,
                             and not even the White House. A harsh lesson
                             to have to learn, but one that I wish more
                             WH crooks would get the opportunity to have.
                             \_ With Bush's Pardon in his pocket, Scooter
                                will be above the law.  Sucks, don't it?
                                \_ He isn't going to get a pardon.
                                \_ Well there is that. I guess he really
                                   is above the law.
                             \_ Again I ask: *exactly* what did he do that was
                                illegal, in plain English, please?
                                \_ Obstruction of justice isn't clear enough
                                   to you? He deliberately lied to the FBI and
                                        \_ no.  that's the legal charge.  it
                                           doesn't say what he *did*.
                                   the Grand Jury in an attempt to derail the
                                   investigation. According to Fitzgerald,
                                   this actually had the intended effect of
                                   making the Grand Jury unable to make the
                                   case against the true perpetrators of the
                                   crime of revealing a CIA agents identity.
                                   According to the judge the evidence was
                                   "overwhelming" and according to all 12
                                   jurors, it was "beyond a reasonable doubt."
                                   \_ I'll give you an example of "plain
                                      English": Sandy Burglar went into the
                                      national archives, stuffed a bunch of
                                      Clinton era NSA documents related to
                                      Al Qaeda in his socks and underwear,
                                      hid them a few blocks away then returned
                                      later, took them elsewhere and destroyed
                                      them.  Libby did what exactly?
                                      \- i think sandy burger is a lamer and a
                                         fool and you have to wonder "what was
                                         he thinking" but i'll be happy to
                                         see him burned at the stake IF the
                                         CIA or NSA or somebody other than
                                         a partisan player says he damaged
                                         national security, which has they
                                         took the trouble to say in the Plame
                                         case. In fact I would be kinda
                                         happy to see that. However, I'm open
                                         to the possibility that what he
                                         took out had no national security
                                         importance [as you may not know,
                                         the govt has often classifies a
                                         lot of things en masse and will only
                                         "lazily evaluate" if they should
                                         not declassified. for example there
                                         are documents that are essentualy
                                         just strings of number from sensitive
                                         simulations which are classified
                                         [possible in the relating-to-nuke
                                         classification, which is differnt
                                         from the Secret, Top Secret etc one],
                                         so just the fact that they were
                                         classified isnt quite enough for a
                                         air assessment. If Plame was say
                                         a IT Manager or Food Services manager
                                         at the CIA, even if it was strictly
                                         by the letter not legal to disclose
                                         her identity, I'd be more willing to
                                         think this might have been something
                                         unreasonable at the food of the tree,
                                         but again, the issue is you dont get
                                         to decide when to cooperate with the
                                         FBI and when you cant.
                                         \_ Sandy Burglar: it doesn't matter
                                            what value the documents had.  If
                                            you or I had done it our lives
                                            would have been destroyed over it.
                                            And since he destroyed them we
                                            *can't* know, since that is the
                                            point of destroying them.  We are
                                            forced to assume they did have
                                            value or he wouldn't have bothered.
                                            As far as Libby goes since no one
                                            here seems to actually know what
                                            he is accused of, I'll tell you.
                                            In plain English: Libby voluntarily
                                            talked to the grand jury investi-
                                            gating Plame's ID revealing.  His
                                            story didn't match ~8 reporters'
                                            stories.  Those 8 reporters'
                                            versions of events and timelines
                                            not only did not match Libby, they
                                            did not match each other, and did
                                            not match their own written notes
                                            and did not match their previous
                                            testimony when brought back and
                                            questioned again on the same
                                            topics.  Libby's only crime was
                                            trying to do the right thing.  Now
                                            here are two kickers for you on top
                                            of everything else: Richard Arma-
                                            tage was *known to the prosecutor*
                                            on *day 1* to be the Plame leaker.
                                            Before he ever talked to Libby,
                                            the prosecutor *knew* who the
                                            leaker was.  His entire investiga-
                                            tion was supposed to be about
                                            finding the leaker, but slamming
                                            Armatage wasn't politically useful.
                                            He wanted Cheney, Rove and others
                                            who we now know had *nothing* to
                                            do with it.  He couldn't get them
                                            but he was able to get Libby on a
                                            complete crap charge.  And the
                                            second kicker: Libby's lawyers
                                            tried hard to get Plame's actual
                                            official status clarified in court
                                            but the judge agreed with the
                                            prosecution that whether or not
                                            she was in fact a "secret agent"
                                            or not was not relevent to the
                                            case!  Wow.  And then in the
                                            sentencing phase, the judge then
                                            allows the same prosecutor to
                                            argue that Libby should get super
                                            smashed for revealing a "secret
                                            agent's identity" but never allowed
                                            the defendant to examine that in
                                            court or answer those charges.  A
                                            giant "fuck you" to Libby and any
                                            sense of real Justice.  *THAT* is
                                            the 'plain English' version of
                                            what happened to Scooter libby.
                                            And now we've already started to
                                            see other people refusing to
                                            testify in front of various
                                            congressional committees because
                                            they're afraid they're get Libby'd.
                                            Having one branch of government
                                            literally afraid to *talk* to
                                            another branch of government out of
                                            fear of malicious prosecution is no
                                            way to run a government.
                                            \_ Malicious prosecution, huh...
                                               Sigh.  Aren't you guys the
                                               "if they haven't done anything
                                               wrong, they have nothing to
                                               fear" crowd?  Or is that just
                                               for us laypeople?
                                             \_ To actually believe all that BS
                                                you have to believe that a
                                                guy who indicted Democrats,
                                                Al Qaeda and Republicans
                                                suddently went nuts. Libby
                                                lied and got caught. His lies
                                                totally screwed up a federal
                                                case (remember various
                                                reporters went to jail to help
                                                keep Libby's lies secret) and
                                                damaged national security and
                                                he paid the price. Get over it.
                                \_ What the above guy said:  but let me dumb it
                                   down a bit more:  he lied under oath about
                                   matters relevant to national security.
                                   \_ Yes, nice.  See my above example of
                                      "plain English".  Thanks.
        \_ Rep. Henry Hyde (R-IL) "So for my friends who think that
           perjury, lying and deceit are in some circumstances acceptable
           and undeserving of punishment I respectfully disagree." [House
           Judiciary Committee, 12/1/98].
           Rep. John Mica (R-FL) "If you commit perjury or obstruct justice,
           you will be held accountable. If you are a member of Congress or
           president . . . you will be held accountable. Even if you . . .
           do a thousand good deeds, you will be held accountable." [Orlando
           Sentinel, 12/20/98]
           Former House Majority Leader Rep. Dick Armey (R-TX) "But Mr.
           Speaker, perjury before a grand jury is not personal and it is
           not private. Obstruction of justice is not personal and it is
           not private. Abuse of the power of the greatest office in the
           world is not personal and it is not private." [ABC Special
           Report, 12/19/98]
           Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) "Perjury and obstruction of justice
           are serious offenses which must not be tolerated by anyone in
           our society." [Washington Post, 2/12/99]
           Senator Sam Brownback (R- KS) "Perjury and obstruction of justice
           are crimes against the state. Perjury goes directly against the
           truth-finding function of the judicial branch of government."
           [Congressional Record, 2/12/99]
           Oh yeah, that was lying about a BJ, obviously a much more serious
           crime than outing a CIA agent.
2007/5/15-17 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46652 Activity:nil
5/15    AG Gonzales thinks "attempted" copyright infringement should be
        a crime and that it should be easier to get wiretaps to figure
        out if you are attempting to commit copyright infrigement:
2007/5/10-14 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46582 Activity:nil
5/10    Apparently entrapment is hunky dorey if it catches terra-ists!
        \_ Doesn't look like entrapment to me.
        \_ Entrapment is generally "hunky dorey" is most contexts. It
           is a very weak defense that is mostly used as a last resort
           b/c nothing better is available. To argue entrapment is to
           concede that not only did one do the crime but also that the
           cops acted constitutionally under the 4th, 5th and 6th amend.
           (at least wrt to the particular suspect).
           Furthermore, entrapment is not a constitutional defense,
           and the federal statute (applicable here) is limited. The
           standard used in federal court is subjective predisposition
           (see JACOBSON v. US, 503 US 540 (1992)), which is *very*
           defendant unfriendly b/c it allows the prosecutor bring in
           all sorts of bad character to show evidence that the suspect
           was subjectively predisposed to commit the crime before the
           cops approached him/her. In addition, some courts take the
             \- yes, but it allows for the
                "bitch set me up" defense!
                \_ I suppose, but what is
                   the point of arguing
                   that one was setup, if
                   one will mostly likely
                   loose the argument?
           view that the police don't even need reasonable suspicion
           that crime is afoot before conducting a sting (see US v.
           GRENDON, 18 F3d 955 (1st Cir. 1994) - opinion by BREYER).
           Although in theory one can always argue that the police acts
           were so egregious that the violated the 5th/14th amend. due
           process rights of the suspect, it is hard to win under that
           unless the cops basically did everything (e.g. in the drug
           context, the cops need to do something like provide the
           buyer, the seller and the drugs).
           \_ But hey, maybe if these guys are real lucky they'll be able
              to BRING THIS UP in a court of law!  Oh woops, off to Gitmo
              with you.
2007/5/7-9 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46541 Activity:low
5/6     Reiser case gets crazier:
        \_ Wha?  Reiser is friends with a serial murderer?
2007/5/7-9 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:46540 Activity:high
5/6     Mon Dieu, Sarkozy wins:
        http://urltea.com/i89 (cnn.com)
        \_ I told you CONSERVATISM is spreading throughout the world and
           nothing is going to stop it! Privatization, pro-business, less
           tax, less immigrants, tough on crime, less communism, less
           social programs, & more self reliance!
        \_ A surprise, I know.  What do you think of the result?
           \_ Freedom Fries! Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys! Acck! Phht!
2007/4/22-25 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Reference/Military] UID:46409 Activity:nil
4/21    the Gun debate will be settled in the SCOTUS
        \_ The Supreme Court will only decide on what they think the
           comma means; they won't decide on whether it's a good idea or
           not.  -tom
        \_ ^will^may^ - Review by the USSC is discretionary. The above
           is also somewhat inaccurate b/c a split existed before the
           D.C. Cir. weighed in - the 9th and 5th have had opposing
           views for several years. Also the D.C. Cir.'s opinion only
           address Congressional regulation not State regulation. It
           is conceivable that different rights/rules apply (e.g. 7th
2007/4/20-24 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46384 Activity:nil
4/20    Yee-haw! 25 murder-free years in 'Gun Town USA'
        \_ There are a cases in Africa where certain people with certain
           genes are immune to AIDS/HIV infections. This example proves
           that there is no correlation between HIV and infections!!!
           PS. Sarcasm tone used above, in case you don't "get it"
        \_ Wikipedia, which is arguably more accurate in the long run than
           WND, on the same town:
2007/4/16-18 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:46322 Activity:nil
4/16    Why are the VT shootings being described as "worst in US history"
        by the media?  This seems like useless hyperbole where none is needed,
        and besides:
        \_ well, wikipedia says worst "civilian" shooting in U.S. history
        \_ The TV news says it's the worst "school shooting" in US history.
2007/4/16-19 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Reference/Military] UID:46320 Activity:nil
4/16    For emarkp: Extensive debunking of John Lott's "More Guns, Less Crime"
        \_ Hi troll!  Sign your name.  Oh, and just by chance, have you looked
           for any response to Lambert, and weighed it against the paper?  Or
           did you just pick the first reference that fit your agenda? -emarkp
           \_ Maybe we should do what Lott did, which was to create multiple
              accounts in online forums to invent people to support his
              ridiculous position.  -tom
              \_ More on Lott:
                 "In his published research analysis, John Lott has
                 claimed that a 1997 survey he conducted found that
                 concealed handguns deterred crime without being fired
                 an astoundingly high 98% of the time. That claim
                 allowed Lott to explain away the fact that extremely
                 few self-defense uses of handguns are ever
                 reported. But when scholars began questioning his
                 survey results, Lott began a series of evasions that
                 culminated in the claim that his computer had crashed
                 and he had "lost" all the data. The University of
                 Chicago, where Lott claims he conducted the study,
                 has no record of it being conducted so Lott began
                 claiming that he funded it himself (and kept no
                 records) and that he used students to make the survey
                 calls (though no students have been identified who
                 participated). Indeed, no records of the survey exist
                 at all. Lott is now facing serious questions about
                 whether he fabricated the entire survey - raising
                 serious questions about his ethics and credibility."
                 \_ Wow, so a political group which opposes gun ownership
                    disagrees?  Stunning. -emarkp
                    \_ So essentially, any document or study which doesn't
                       support your position, or comes from a group which
                       doesn't support your position, is inherently
                       fraudulent?  Your job as a scientist in the Bush
                       Administration is secure!
                       \_ Sigh. No, I'm not arguing that. My point is that
                          rather than simply quoting mindlessly from the
                          proponent and critics is to read them both or search
                          for a third party.  For instance, the National
                          Acadamy of Science looked into the issue, and while
                          they say they can't support the conlusion that "more
                          guns = less crime" they *can* conclude that "more
                          guns != more crime". Since I've never read the book,
                          nor was I claiming it was correct, I really don't
                          care much, except the "debunking" cited above is from
                          a "lecturer" of CS (particular graphics--and his Java
                          applet has bugs) whereas Lott has more experience
                          with statistics.  Michelle Malkin has criticized Lott
                          as well, even though she agrees with him
                          ideologically. -emarkp
                          \_ Does that equal sign mean 'logical implication,'
                             'algebraic equality' or is it the equal sign they
                             use in structural equation models? -- ilyas
2007/4/10-11 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46248 Activity:nil
4/10    And the winner of the Half-Billion Swimming Contest is: Birkhead!
        http://www.csua.org/u/ifr (Yahoo! News)
2007/4/1-3 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46171 Activity:kinda low
4/1     David Hicks gets 9-month sentence in Australia through blatant
        political deal to save John Howard's electoral bacon:
        \_ Australia?  Who?  What?  Not living there or being a citizen I
           don't see why their internal politics matters to outsiders.  If
           they were having a coup or changed from a capitalist system to
           a socialist one or something, sure, but whatever.
           \_ You might want to read the article before you come off sounding
              like an idiot.  Oops, too late.
              \_ It's the motd, it doesn't matter.  It's Australia, it doesn't
                 matter.  If it was important you would've told us why we
                 should take the time to read the article.  Apparently no one
                 else read it or thought it was worth replying to so idiot I
                 may be but at least I didn't waste my time on your article.
                 \_ it's not my article, but you're an idiot.
                 \_ Echoing the previous poster, you are definitely an idiot.
                    The whole subtext of the article is a Cheney-crony
                    manipulating the Gitmo "courts" to produce a favorable
                    political outcome for the leader of Australia.  If you
                    don't see how this relevant to the US, I really can't
                    help you.
                    \_ See?  Now that was helpful and if the OP had posted
                       that I might have bothered reading it.  Since the motd
                       just isn't that important, I don't take the time to
                       read every random link that no one else has bothered
                       to reply to.  It is clear to me now that if I was not
                       an idiot I'd read every motd link and that would make
                       me smart!  Thank you very much for pointing me in the
                       direction of smartness.  Every trash link to a big boob
                       pic, lame youtube video, and random blog diatribe now
                       tops my get-smart-like-you reading list.
                       \_ you're an idiot not because you didn't read the
                          link, but because you commented on a link you
                          didn't read.  idiot.
2007/3/29-31 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46138 Activity:moderate
3/28    Good thing the GOP has leaders like Tom DeLay:
        \_ I assume this is a "Tom DeLay is evul!" article.  Seriously, get
           over the whole "our guys are angels, your guys are the devil" thing.
           You've got land scammers, bribe takers, nation security document
           destroyers and various other assorted and sundry felons walking
           around free and in power in the majority party.  Few things are
           uglier than hypocrites.
           \_ Pot, kettle, black. Your "defence" for Tom DeLay's hatred and
           \_ Pot, Bongwater, Hash. Your "defence" for Tom DeLay's hatred and
              corruption is that Democrats do it too? I am actually an
              independent and despise (and actually do something about,
              which is probably more than you can say) corruption in
              both parties. You "assume"? You can't even be bothered to
              read the article, but you feel qualified to offer up your
              opinion on it? On second thought, this is actually pretty
              funny and emblematic of why the GOP is in such bad shape.
              \_ can we please stop the use of "Pot, kettle, black"?  It's
              \_ I don't defend Delay at all.  I point out hypocrisy.  If
                 DeLay is evuul, so be it, but to turn a blind eye to (D)
                 corruption or write it all off as 'not as bad' or to say
                 'charges haven't been filed so no problemo!' is painfully
                 and ridiculously intellectually dishonest.  And no, I can't
                 be bothered to read the article.  Tell me, was I wrong about
                 what was in it?
                 \_ You "pointed out hypocrisy" because I didn't condemn
                    both Democrats and Republicans in the same motd entry?
                    You are the hypocrite, padawan.
              \_ can we please stop the use of "Pot, Bongwater, Hash"?  It's
                 hackneyed, awkward, and stupid.  -tom
                 \_ Pot, kettle, black.
                 \_ Pot, Bongwater, Hash.
                    \_ Pot, Bongwater, Hash.
                       \_ Pot, Bongwater, Hash.
              \_ See, you're misunderstanding the post.  The pp didn't say he
                 was defending DeLay.  He said "stop attacking everyone on the
                 right while ignoring the corruption on the left".  Expose the
                 problems on the left as well. -emarkp
                 \_ Name a corruption problem on the left.  "Voter fraud"
                    will lose you -2 troll points.
                    \_ First of all, I have to ask, do you really thing there's
                       no corruption on the left.  Secondly, look up "William
                       Jefferson"--the guy caught with $90K in his fridge.
                       \_ 1. That guy was not a major leader of his party.
                             \_ so what?
                          2. There is always corruption, but there are levels.
                             \_ *cough* No!  There are no levels!  Your
                                office holders are corrupt or they're not.  If
                                they are corrupt they are undeserving of your
                                support and should get kicked out and
                                prosecuted.  No level of corruption is ok.
                                \_ You obviously have not thought about this
                                   too hard. Is Halliburton getting no bid
                                   contracts an example of corruption or not?
                                   How about companies giving big contributions
                                   to office holders and then lobbying them
                                   after they win office. Both of these are
                                   legal, but borderline cases of corruption.
                                   And not everyone is going to agree with
                                   your black and white definition of what
                                   corruption is, so you should stop trying
                                   to force your vision of it on the world,
                                   to force your vision of it on the motd,
                                   and accept that there are going to be
                                   grey areas in the real world.
                             The modern republican leadership has raised
                             the level of corruption to where something
                             like $90K is pocket change.  William Jefferson
                             is more like Cunningham, not like Delay.
                             \_ Stuffing raw hard cash in your fridge is the
                                most base form of corruption possible.  Even
                                if your 'relativist corruption' view point was
                                valid, it doesn't seem to bother you at all.
                          \_ So you're limiting corruption t leadership?  Okay,
                             then refer beck to the pp about Harry Reid and his
                             shady land deals.  Oh, and I agree that William
                             Jefferson is more like Cunningham.  So why is
                             Cunningham in jail and Jefferson isn't? -emarkp
                             \_ Um, time?  AFAIK, Jefferson has not been
                                charged with anything yet.  He maintains his
                                innocence and was recently reelected.  Now, I
                                personally would love to see him resign both
                                for the horrible appearance of impropriety, and
                                for the fact that his still being in the House
                                serves as a football for people like you who
                                want to say "Democrats do it too!" as cover for
                                the corrupt party you support.  But for now,
                                he is a duly elected representative of the
                                people of his district.  --scotsman
                                \_ The fact that months have gone by with no
                                   prosecution or charges while some shmuck
                                   like Libby is facing prison time for nothing
                                   is insane and the root of the problem.  His
                                   own party has not only not disowned him but
                                   put him on the DHS committee.  Sure makes me
                                   feel so much safer knowing he's only a few
                                   bucks away from screwing over the entire
                                   nations security to the best of his ability.
                                   \_ He asked to be on the DHS committee.  He
                                      has not been seated yet.  He may never
                                      be.  So just chill yourself.
                             \_ Someone had evidence on Cunningham, presented
                                such in court, and had him arrested; Jefferson
                                has been accused, and evidence has been alleged
                                but neither evidence nor charges have been
                                forthcoming. This is why C is in jail and J is
                                not. I agree that "cold hard cash" in his
                                fridge is fishy, but if he committed a crime,
                                charge him. --erikred
                                \_ Fishy?  It's only fishy?  If it was a (R)
                                   you'd be calling for his political death
                                   along with the rest of the left.  *shakes
                                   head* at thought of $90 in the fridge being
                                   merely 'fishy'.
                                \_ Forgot to mention, why the silence about
                                   Harry Reid's shady land deals? -emarkp
                                   \_ Is there an indictment?  Is there
                                      anything beyond allegations?  Are you
                                      going to bring up the boxing thing
                                      again?  How 'bout Vince Foster again?
                                      \- i shot vince foster, just to watch
                                         him die. --wjc@organ.org
                                      \_ Caught with hand in cookie jar.  If
                                         he was a (R) you'd be calling him
                                         the worst sort of criminal.  Getting
                                         lawerly is the last sign of a lost
                                         \_ Cookie Jar?  Where?  Would you
                                            like to cite evidence, an
                                            investigation, anything?
                                \_ So why is congress in uproar about AG when
                                   they haven't said word one or done anything
                                   to investigate WJ?  They can police their
                                   own members. -emarkp
                                   \_ Politics and priorities, duh.
                                   \_ As noted by above response, for the same
                                      reason that RDC wasn't censured and
                                      ejected when the GOP ran Congress. I will
                                      certainly grant you that. But remember
                                      that uproar over the AG need not preclude
                                      investigation of WJ; these things are not
                                      mutually exclusive as though there were
                                      limited resources to investigate ethical
                                      violations. A lack of political will to
                                      pursue WJ until the charges are leveled
                                      has nothing to do with the investigation
                                      of whether the AG fired US Atys in order
                                      to punish them for not embarassing the
                                      opposition party. --erikred
                                      \_ The USAGs can be fired for any reason
                                         at all.  They are politically
                                         appointed positions.  How you can say
                                         their firing is worse than stuffing
                                         your fridge with hot cash is beyond
                                         my ability to understand.  $90k in
                                         your fridge is just fishy, though.
                                         WJ is not defensible yet you defend
                                         it.  The USAG firing were handled
                                         poorly but are in no way illegal, yet
                                         you find this outrageous.
                                         \_ Actually, what I find outrageous is
                                            the idea that the Admin was so
                                            blatant about firing these people
                                            for not launching fruitless and
                                            embarassing investigations of its
                                            political rivals. I find partisan
                                            use of the US Atys as your own
                                            Gestapo utterly outrageous, but
                                            I find the lack of circumspection
                                            and careful planning insulting.
                                            What they're saying is, we'll do
                                            what we like, and you'll shut up
                                            and take it. At least the Reagan
                                            White House went through the
                                            motions; these guys are strictly
                                            amateurs. As for WJ, unlike you,
                                            my capacity for outrage is not
                                            limited to the opp. party; if he's
                                            done wrong here, he's a scumbag,
                                            and he should be censured. I've
                                            got no problem with that. But at
                                            least show me some proof. Also,
                                            am I still talking to emarkp or
                                            just to some AC? --erikred
                                            \_ That swath of entries reeks of
                                               reiffin. --scotsman
                 \_ Since the Democrats have been out of power in Washington
                    for so long, there is probably not a lot at the national
                    level to expose. I have (literally) campaigned for more
                    oversight at the local level, where the politicians are
                    all Democrats. Believe me, there is plenty of Democratic
                    machine corruption in San Francisco, but at least
                    Newsome is doing someting about it finally.
                    Newsom is doing someting about it finally.
                    \_ Newsom is the benefactor of the SF political machine.
                       He was Willie Brown's boy.  I don't live in SF though so
                       I'm curious what he is doing to cut his own support?
                       \_ No, he is not really Willie's boy. Willie endorsed
                          him, but Gavin's "base" is in the Marina/Pac Heights
                          crowd, where Willie's was in Hunter's Point and
                          the Projects and the City's municipal unions. Newsom
                          fired the old corrupt Police Chief and Fire Chief
                          fired the old corrupt Police of Chief and Fire Chief
                          and replaced them with reasonably competent
                          technocrats, has upended the planning dept and
                          indicted a number of corrupt building inspectors,
                          and cleaned out the whole rat's nest of corruption
                          that surrounded placement in public housing.
                          I am sure there is more that I am unware of.
2007/3/27-29 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:46112 Activity:nil
3/26    Bush's kangaroo court gets its first "conviction":
        http://www.csua.org/u/ibj (SF Gate)
        \_ "Under the evolving rules of the Military Commissions Act
            passed by Congress in September..." i.e. after five years
           we're still making it up as we go along.
           "civilian criminal defense lawyer Joshua Dratel was barred
            from participating because he refused to promise to adhere
            to procedural rules that have yet to be defined.
            Kohlmann also declined to approve a second civilian lawyer,
            Rebecca Snyder, on the grounds that commission rules allow
            civilians only if their representation incurs no expense to
            the U.S. government. Snyder is a Pentagon employee." Awesome.
2007/3/21-26 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:46046 Activity:nil
3/21    Has anyone seen a transcript of the Gore hearing today?  I checked
        on cspan, cnn, google, epw.senate.gov, and a few other places.  I can
        find video but not text.  Video is a no-go.  Thanks.
        \_ I'm hunting for Boxer's smackdown of Inhofe.  Whether or not he's
           a nutjob (and boy is he), he's one bitter motherfucker.
           link:preview.tinyurl.com/yuz478 (thinkprogress.org)
           \_ Gore sure is a hypocrite, but it is nice to see Boxer find
              her backbone.
              \- I am not a big fan of ALGOR, I certainly argued with a
                 fair number of knee jerk liberal aquaintances that he is
                 a hypocrite when it comes to his personal energy use and the
                 "i pay my way out of it" excuses nothing, but I believe that
                 issue has no place in the "senate environment cmte hearings
                 on global climate change". on a crossfire type talk show
                 you can bring up stuff like this, or william bennett being
                 a gambling addict, or ted kennedy being a hypocrite and
                 murderer, but it's not approproate here. although i dont
                 know how to have shut him down except another republican
                 saying something (and they never do .. witness TEED "the
                 hulk" STEVENS). on the other hand, maybe everytime
                 dick "i had other plans" cheney opens his mouth about iraq
                 we should call him on his elaborate moves to avoid war
                 service. but some of te mediocrities like TEED STEVENS
                 and INHOFE being in the senate is just unreal. it speaks
                 to the power of "reptilian intelligence" and low cunning.
2007/3/20-24 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:46035 Activity:nil
3/20    Valorie Plame's oral testimony last week contradicts her oral testimony
        before the Senate Intelligence Committee:
        http://www.csua.org/u/ia1 (National Review)
        \_ awful, slanted article.
           \_ awful, stupid comment
              \_ awful, stupid comment
        \_ Thanks for confirming that Plame was a covert CIA agent when
           Cheney and Libby outed her. Even the National Review admits it.
2007/3/17-20 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:46004 Activity:moderate
3/16    So who do you believe, Plame and the CIA or Novak and Cheney?
        Let's put to rest the canard that Plame was not undercover when
        Novak published her identity:
        \_ I automatically begin to ignore any admin official who points out
           'plame was in the society papers' and 'everyone knew what she
           looks like'.  The point of Plame's 'cover' was that she out
           and about and managing business entities in other countries
           that needed a figurehead for a CIA front business.  The CIA
           spends years building up this business to provide cover for
           their other activities.  If you blow away the cover of the
           people running it, all of that years of effort is down the
           drain, and any foreign nationals involved with it are probably
           on a hit list somewhere now.  Thanks Cheney.  If he had
           just calmed down and realized no one analyzes NYTimes editorials
           as much as he does, none of this would have happened.
        \_ Trust No One. -fmulder
        \_ Of course, this link only shows that she claims she was covert.
           \- can you imagine if the dems had outed her and started claiming
              "she wasnt really covert". you all know the repply would be
              "oh the treasonous dems now are supposed to decide who is
              covert and who isnt? see we told you they were soft on defense
              and wont support out intelligence profressionals dedicating
              their lives for the country. the democrats are going to get
              your children killed in this age of brown terror."
           \_ http://tinyurl.com/369ert (crooksandliars.com)
              Clear logic on why she was covert
              \_ Of course that clear logic points right back to her own
                 \_ And the CIA's statements. Whose job it is to know this
2007/3/15-20 [Politics/Domestic/President, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:45986 Activity:nil 88%like:45980
3/15    I repeat, Dems are pussies
        http://preview.tinyurl.com/yqcoz7 (thehill.com)
        \_ You are right, they should start a war to prove how manly they are.
           \_ Yeah that didn't happen August 1964.
           \_ No, I think debating would be fine.
        \_ I love Colbert, but he can be murder on an unprepared politician
           no matter how sympathetic you may be toward them.
           \- the "cocaine and hookers" interview was great.
              \_ Agreed. Too bad the humor was lost on so many. Btw, Colbert's
                 rebuttal to his guest's critics was also great.
2007/3/10-12 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:45928 Activity:nil
3/11    Reiser to stand trial for murder:
        \_ No surprise.  Have you seen the evidence against him?  My favorite
           was finding her blood in his car and house and the front seat of
           his car is still inexplicably missing.
2007/3/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:45886 Activity:high
3/6     "Scooter" Libby: Guilty.
        \_ Bush will pardon him.
           \_ Want to make a bet?
              \_ Tradesports has "pardon Libby" trading at only 20%, so you
                 might be right...
           \_ Probably, but not until after the Nov 2008 elections.
              \_ I don't think he'll do it at all.
           \_ No pardon, but:  "You'll be the next Ollie North!"
           \- I am not going to bet on it since it might be my cynicism
              speaking but i think Bush will pardon him if it is not
              a moot issue before he leaves office. --psb
              \- somewhat ironically: Scooter Libby was one of
                 pigdog Marc Rich's lawyers. at 5:1, i'd take the
                 libby gets a pardon bet, assuming it is not a
                 moot question by the time the 2008 election is over.
2007/2/28 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45838 Activity:high
2/28    Quick quiz:  Which kills more Americans?
        A) Insurgents in Iraq attacking US soldiers
        B) Illegal Aliens in the US committing murder
        C) Wankers on the motd and other media sources creating overtly
           slanted, self-serving shill quizzes to make their points using
           dishonest and bad rhetorical techniques.
        \_ It depends on what your definition of "more" is.
           We've had this discussion before.  You're very clearly
           an idiot.
        \_ Our laws governing automotive safety are as every bit as
           retarded as our foreign policy in the Middle East. Both
           need our attention and some solution. What makes Iraq
           particularly important is that it's putting an enormous
           strain on our resources (economically and militarily).
        \_ You're right, if we moved every single soldier from Iraq,
           Japan, Korea, Germany and Cuba to the Mexican border,
           we might stop all illegal immigration.  Kill.
           \_ That wasn't something I was suggesting. Try again. -op
              \_ It's about a sensical as your quiz. -!pp
                 \_ Or not. -op
        \_ Hey!  Thanks to the asshole who chnaged my post. choice B) is
           supposed to be Illegal Aliens committing murder.
        \_ I like how when lefties here don't like facts, they hide them.
2007/2/23-27 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45810 Activity:nil
2/23    UCD Law Review Symposium on 4th Amend. Search & Seizure law:
        \_ If anybody here has EBOLA, please go to this and lick JOHN YOO.
2007/2/23 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45809 Activity:nil
2/23    http://www.news.ucdavis.edu/search/news_detail.lasso?id=8048
2007/2/23 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45803 Activity:nil
2/23    http://www.news.ucdavis.edu/search/news_detail.lasso?id=8048
Event Focuses on Surveillance, Wiretapping, Terrorism

February 21, 2007

John Yoo -- who spearheaded the Bush administration's legal response
to the 2001 terrorist attacks -- and other constitutional scholars
will debate the National Security Agency's surveillance program,
warrantless phone wiretapping and the war on terror at UC Davis March

The event, titled "Katz v. U.S: 40 Years Later -- From Warrantless
Wiretaps to the War on Terror," will focus on how the U.S. Supreme
Court's landmark "search and seizure" decision in Katz applies in a
modern age of global terrorism.

The UC Davis Law Review and the School of Law will host the free,
public event. The program runs from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. in the Wilkins
Moot Court Room of King Hall on the UC Davis campus.

"The issue of warrantless wiretaps and personal privacy has resurfaced
from under the current NSA surveillance program," said David
Richardson, editor-in-chief of the law review. "This symposium will
allow some of the greatest legal minds in the country to discuss both
sides of this controversy."

Jennifer Chacon, a UC Davis professor of law and faculty adviser to
the event, said, "Growing concerns over crime and terrorism in the
United States have sparked a national conversation about the
trade-offs between individual privacy and security."

"Read against a modern backdrop," she added, "the case of Katz v.
United States provides an ideal framework for discussing privacy
expectations, effective law enforcement and anti-terrorism

In Katz, the court ruled that the Fourth Amendment protects "people,
not places" and provides protection of a "reasonable expectation of
privacy," effectively curtailing the use of warrantless wiretaps by
law enforcement agencies.

John Yoo, now a UC Berkeley law professor, and Glenn Sulmasy of the
U.S. Coast Guard Academy, will co-present a paper questioning the
viability of Katz in the war on terror in a session at 2:45 p.m. Yoo
served as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Office of Legal
Counsel of the U.S. Department of Justice from 2001 to 2003.

Sessions are as follows: "Katz in Context: Privacy, Policing
Homosexuality and Enforcing Social Norms," 9:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.;
"Katz: Rights and Remedies," 12:45 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.; "Katz in the Age
of International Crime and Terrorism," 2:45 p.m. to 4:15 p.m.; and
closing remarks, 4:15 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

Celebrating its 40th anniversary, the law review ranks in the top 50
most cited legal periodicals in the United States. Each year it hosts
a symposium on current legal topics.
2006/11/8-9 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:45269 Activity:kinda low
11/8    Hah.  Dems win and Rummy steps down.  Suddenly all those people who felt
        guilty about voting Dem feel a whoooooole lot better.
        \_ Watch those Democrats implode!
        \_ I just realized Rummy was also Secretary of Defence when he was in
           his forties.
                \_ I think Rummy has been both the youngest and oldest sec
                   of defense.
2006/11/7-8 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:45245 Activity:kinda low
11/7    What party are they counting Joe Lieberman as?
        \_ (I - Running for Secretary of Defense)
        \_ yeah, and he /says/ he will caucus with Dems for Senate majority
           \- and then he added "unless they dont honor my seniority
              perqs" ... which means that asshole is basically saying
              "if you try to punish me, i will punish you".
              \_ Even the Dems aren't that stupid.  They will give Joe
                 anything he wants so that the Dems can be in control.
                 \_ I hate him, i guess that makes me anti-sematic.
                    \_ And I hate him too, which makes me a self-hating Jew.
2006/11/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:45178 Activity:low
11/6    On the timing of the Saddam verdict.  Hmm ... what to think?
        "The idea's preposterous. This is one of these tinfoil hat sort of
        things." -WH press sec Snow
         - http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2006/s1781719.htm
        "Only the naive believe it's a coincidence."
         - http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1940534,00.html
        \_ What to think?  Think for yourself.
        \_ Its all part of a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, you know the
           one that is run by the Bush BrownShirts and is responsible
           for the "hundreds" of warcrimes against dissidents across
           the country. The Cabal will do anything to keep itself in
           power. We are just cattle to them. They are preping us for
           colonization. Trust No One. -fmulder
           \- i really do think the Cockroach Republicans are only limited
              by imagination and are not at all ethics. now if some "crypto-
              anarchist" would get a job at diebold and put in a virus to
              cause mass failure on election day, instead of cracking DMA
              technology, that would be interesting. you have to wonder
              what the aftermath would look like if there simply was no
              result to a large fraction of the elections in the country.
              [i think this is a really tricky area to come up with remedies.
              it's one when when basically the election is solid with a few
              one off problems, but mass problems would be unprecidented].
              \_ yes all corruption is republican.  democrats are all squeaky
                 clean and golden.  you are brilliant.  your solution to your
                 false sense of republican-only corruption is voter machine
                 anarchy.  great.  all that will happen is setting a new date
                 and doing them on paper followed by lawsuits about how the
                 ballot format disenfranchised stupid people.
                 \- i didnt say the democrats were clean. i did say the new
                    breed of cockroach republicans have charted new terrain
                    in corruption and sleaze. sure it's possible some Dems
                    have it in them, but until they do it, it's a thought
                    crime. here i include things like inter-census
                        \_ $90k in your fridge isn't a thought crime.  and
                           he's still in office and has his committe position
                           too, btw.
                    gerrymandering, signing statements, something like the
                        \_ gerrymandering is a cooperative two party effort.
                    cheney energy tast force is vastly more secretive than
                    the hillary health care one. i thought Billhary had plenty
                        \_ secrets are not corruption nor a sign of it in and
                           of themselves.
                    of sleazy with filegate and travelgate and such or
                    rostenkowsky stealing postage stamps but delay, brownie,
                    are all taking it to a new level. this is a far cry from
                        \_ not really. same old, same old.  i see no real
                           difference.  they just have different sub-
                           specialties of corruption and an equal share of
                           the generic stuff.
                    the part of people like warren rudman, for example ... or
                    even alan simpson or o hatch. at least mccain is
                    apologetic over the keating five episode.
                        \_ mccain is a scum bag.  i dont want his apology.
                           i want his head on a pike with all the rest of
                           the corrupt scum bags in DC.  his apology has
                           no value.  apologise for a joke gone bad? sure.
                           apologise for criminal activity?  sorry, pal, try
                           prison instead.
                           \_ So McCain gets the death sentence for bribery
                              but Cheney gets a pass for colluding to offer
                              no-competition contracts to Halliburton? If it's
                              death for the goose, it's at least prison for the
                              \_ Pike em all but I'd settle for prison.  And
                                 I do mean *all* regardless of party.  The
                                 Congress would be mighty close to empty if
                                 we really took corruption seriously.
                                 \_ Agreed. --erikred
                                    \- if you think mccain and cheney are
                                       comparable, i dont think we can
                                       really have a conversation [speaking
                                       personally]. mccain has done some
                                       fucked up things [agan keating 5],
                                       but he's also done some thing waaaaay
                                       beyond almost all others and they are
                                       things you cant make up or posture.
                                       i mean not only was he tortured but
                                       was super connected and could have
                                       gotten himself out of it. he adopted
                                       child from bangladesh ... that probably
                                       wasnt motived by it being good press,
                                       his son is in the marines etc.
                                    \_ So do you guys believe that the
                                       politicians presently in power are
                                       somehow born bad, and we just need
                                       to replace them with Good(TM) people?
                                       This makes no sense to me.  The problem
                                       is not that we happen to have bad
                                       people in Washington, but rather
                                       that we have a culture in Washington
                                       that brings out the worst in people.
                                       I have no idea how to fix this culture,
                                       and I'm not convinced it will ever
                                       be fixed, but I'm positive that just
                                       changing the face of the corruption
                                       won't do it.
                                       \_ I can't speak for pp, but I don't
                                          think they're all bad people. I think
                                          we have a system in place now that
                                          encourages corruption and moral
                                          ambiguity (i.e., a disincentive to
                                          avoid conflicts interest). There are
                                          tools that could be used to fix this
                                          (or at least make it unattractive),
                                          but there's a culture of back-
                                          scratching and mutual-benefit cover-
                                          ups that makes real reform unlikely.
                                          Campaing finance reform would be an
                                          excellent step in the right direction
                                          but a non-partisan, independent body
                                          to investigate corruption might be a
                                          better idea. The problem is that even
                                          a "Grand Inquisitor" office is
                                          vulnerable to corruption and
                                          political stacking, and so the entire
                                          cycle keeps rolling. --erikred
                                       \_ I don't know.  My current working
                                          theory is that, for the most part,
                                          only power-hungry megalomaniacs
                                          are willing to go into politics.
                                          Normal honest people would quit
                                          before they ever got to even the
                                          state level.
                                       \_ I believe that line about power
                                          corrupting and absolute power, etc.
                                          Term limits and none of this merry-
                                          go-round stuff to a different
                                          district stuff.  Serve your time as
                                          a *public service* and get the hell
                                          out.  It sickens me everytime some
                                          senator retires after 6+ terms in
                                          office and they have him voting from
                                          his death bed wheeled into the
              \_ Non-event. The media would bluster about it for a week or
                 so, until some juicy sex scandal popped up. Most people
                 would just say let's do it over w/ paper ballots and the
                 country would go about its business. I'm all for this plan
                 b/c it would surely return us to paper ballots and delayed
                 election results. Delayed results means the media would
                 have nearly nothing to pontificate about and we would have
                 to be subjected to endless drivel about red-blue state
                 "seismic" shifts on election day.
2006/11/2-4 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:45112 Activity:nil
11/02   http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=39&Itemid=110
        shows that medicare is 19% of "mandatory" federal spending.  It also
        lists "health" as being another 13% of off budget spending.  What
        does this consist of ?
        \_ VA dept?
2006/10/27-30 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:45010 Activity:kinda low
10/17   Neocolonialists take note, even in Chile they go after torturers:
        \_ We do not torture.
        \_ In Soviet Russia, ...... never mind.
        \_ The shitbag had it coming.  Fantastic, thx for the link.  -John
           \_ i am a bit confused on what is your point.  If anything,
              Pinochet is another example of the failure of US policy of
              installing puppet governments world wide.  It is hard to imagine
              why Pinochet get axed for what he did, while Kissinger gets
              Nobel Peace price for it?
              \_ What's confusing about my point?  Pinochet is a murdering
                 shitbag thug.  Like Stroessner was, like Hussein, like
                 any number of other murdering shitbag thugs.  I was not
                 referring to Kissinger.  Are you implying that being
                 installed by a US-sponsored coup makes Pinochet any less of
                 a reprehensible turd?  -John
        \_ I'm sure all the neocolonialists on the motd have taken note.
           Thanks for the link.  --neocol
2006/10/17-18 [Reference/Law/Court, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:44849 Activity:nil
10/17   http://csua.org/u/h8f (washingtonpost.com)
        Ken Lay gets the last laugh:  By dying with pending appeals, his
        convictions are vacated and all litigants will need to sue the estate
        via civil action
2006/10/15-17 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:44825 Activity:nil
10/15   Tell me the difference in power and ability and
        importance of the Israeli Prime Minister and the
        Israeli President.  thanks
        \_ The Israeli President is mostly a figure head position.  The real
           power belongs to their Prime Minister.  Why do you ask?
           \_ THE JOOOOOS!!!!!111one have ALL the power, what are you talking
        \_ news says he's about to be charged wtith multiple rape counts
2006/10/11-13 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:44763 Activity:nil
10/11  http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/11/0142216&from=rss
        Hans Reiser arrested on suspicion of murder :-(((.   --phr
        \_ At least slashdot got the really important part of this story right
           up there: "While the disappearance (and possible murder) of his
           wife is tragic, Linux users will wonder where this will leave
           Reiser 4. If Reiser is found guilty, will Novell or IBM pick up the
           pieces and finish up Reiser 4 for inclusion in the kernel or is
           this the end of the Reiser filesystem project? Will there be any
           future for the Reiser filesystem, and if Hans is found guilty and
           the project is continued, will the project be renamed to avoid
           notoriety?"  Because gosh too bad about that dead chick and all,
           but who is going to finish 4.0?
           \_ "News for nerds.  Stuff that matters."
           \_ You're right.  Because a person is dead we can't discuss anything
              else about the incident.  Thanks for the correction.
              \_ It was crass and unnecessary.  You're welcome.
        \_ The references section of the wikipedia article on Hans Reiser
           has more info:
        \_ Goes a long way towards explaining why ReiserFS is a steaming
2006/10/5-7 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:44702 Activity:high
10/5    Ok, found the Michelle Malkin video youtube banned.
        Someone tell me why this got banned.
        \_ You realize her video "first they came" is available on youtube,
           right?  Uploaded Feb. 2006.  Not by her, granted, but still, it's
           not like this isn't on youtube or is in any way non-trivial to find.
        \_ Because she is ugly.
          \_ No she's not.
          \_ Ok, thanks.  So there's no reason to have banned the Malkin video.
             That's what I thought.
             \_ Actually, that's not true. Here's YouTube's Terms of Use on
                what submitters agree they will not do:
                "(ii) publish falsehoods or misrepresentations that could
                 damage YouTube or any third party;
                 (iii) submit material that is unlawful, obscene, defamatory,
                 libelous, threatening, pornographic, harassing, hateful,
                 racially or ethnically offensive, or encourages conduct that
                 would be considered a criminal offense, give rise to civil
                 liability, violate any law, or is otherwise inappropriate;
                 (iv) post advertisements or solicitations of business"
                Ignoring the first two, the video is clearly an advertisement
                for Michelle Malkin's website. Now, if the submitter had left
                off the last bit of the video, the other two sections might
                have come into play, but submitter didn't, so they don't.
                \_ So all the OTHER videos that show a website should be
                   removed as well?
                \_ If it was just that then why didn't they tell her that
                   instead of sending her a generic note and ignoring her
                   attempts to find out which policy she violated?  It seems
                   very simple to tell someone they violated the advertising
                   clause so they can fix it and continue being a user in good
                   standing.  Banning someone without telling them which of
                   many policies they violated is, at best, unfair and
                   unprofessional.  And as the above says are they removing
                   all videos that violate the advertising clause?  I think
                   not.  Sorry, not buying it.
                   \_ I salute your idealism but goddamn Michelle Malkin
                      is an evil troll with an amazing command of rhetoric
                      who needs to be destroyed.
                   \_ It's likely that not all videos that violate the ad
                      clause are being flagged as inappropriate by users.
                      MM is a high profile nutjob^H^H^H^Hperson, and as such
                      is more likely to get scrutinized (and ratted out).
                      As for professionalism and such, sure, I'll grant that
                      the organization should answer her requests for more
                      info. And (now watch carefully, this is where the magic
                      happens) as for professionalism, MM should stop being a
                      hatemongering harpy and should try to construct useful
                      and logical arguments that don't begin and end with
                      \_ Did you see the video that got banned?  What is
                         wrong with it?  Where is the evil?  And if Malkin
                         or anyone else wants to use their free service she
                         should be able to.  If not then they should add
                         something to the terms of service that would exclude
                         her kind of videos without targetting her personally
                         and then enforce that policy across the board.  Policy
                         exists to enforce rules equally so people's personal
                         opinion doesn't factor in to enforcement.  I'm sure
                         you can agree that would be a good thing.
                         \_ A good thing?  Yes.  But I think it's pretty clear
                            that terms of use like those on youtube are written
                            in part to cover the asses of the owners when they
                            choose to selectively censor.  It's the private
                            sector equivalent of laws that everyone is
                            in violation of that give cops the legal cover
                            to harass whoever they want.  I've personally
                            dealt with this with Cafe Press.  Fucking assholes.
                            \_ Man, I couldn't agree more. Fucking Rupert
                         \_ According to the person who posted the Terms of
                            Use, she did. Either way, there are hundreds of
                            people who post their crap on ebay, myspace, or
                            youtube who gets their stuff banned and all they
                            youtube who get their stuff banned and all they
                            get is nothing more than a form
                            letter^H^H^H^H^H^Hemail. I'm sure some of them
                            are quite egregious while others are just
                            straddling the line. But it doesn't matter. These
                            companies cater to thousands of free -loaders and
                            they don't have time to put with the childish
                            whining of Malkin orto whipe her ass. She should
                            whining of Malkin or to wipe her ass. She should
                            be thankful that she was allowed to host her
                            other videos at no cost.
                            \_ It isn't costing them anything.  She and all
                               the rest of the users are the youtube product.
                               She is providing content, not getting a free
                               ride.  If she got banned she has the right to
                               question it.  It isn't childing whining.  If
                               youtube has an editorial policy I'm totally
                               ok with that *if* they are honest about it,
                               which they're not.  And no, it isn't ok because
                               they do it to other people, too.  And no I
                               don't think putting your URL for 3 seconds at
                               the end of a 3 minute video is advertising,
                               especially in the case of a public figure like
                               Malkin.  Let's be honest and stop ignoring the
                               elephant: she got banned because she's a
                               \_ It does cost youtube something. Youtube has
                                  a telecom bill to pay. They also need to pay
                                        \_ A core cost their core business
                                           model. Pft.
                                           \_ And if you have a bandwidth
                                              quota, you want to make sure
                                              that your link is being used
                                              by things that conform to
                                              your business model.
                                  for lawyers and insurance in case some ass
                                  fucker goes crazy on them for something
                                  offensive that was posted on youtube. Being
                                        \_ All corporations have lawyers on
                                           retainer.  Pft.
                                           \_ And attracting hate mail from
                                              crazy terrorists is probably
                                              something their lawyers told
                                              them not to do. The moment
                                              you have another incident like
                                              the Danish cartoon one, you're
                                              going to be paying huge legal
                                  a private entity, youtube also has the right
                                  to decide which "products", as you call them,
                                  to put out or reject for whatever reasons
                                  they want. Yes, she has the right to question
                                        \_ Her content and that of many others
                                           is not the direct product.  It is
                                           what attracts people to the site so
                                           they can sell ads or do whatever
                                           with their customer database.  Of
                                           course they have the right to reject
                                           whatever they want.  No one has ever
                                           said otherwise.  Red herring.
                                           \_ And the yanking of her video
                                              seems to be generating even
                                              more traffic than her video
                                              did by herself. You're asking
                                              why MM's video got yanked and
                                              I'm saying they based it on
                                              their terms of use. You think
                                              otherwise and I'm saying it
                                              doesn't matter because they
                                              can decide however they want
                                              what's appropriate or not and
                                              they don't have to explain in
                                              Moby Dick form to every reject
                                              why X got yanked.
                                  what youtube did but youtube also has the
                                  right to send her a form letter and tell
                                  her to screw off. Personally, if I was
                                        \_ They do, yes.  No dispute there.
                                           Their reason for doing so in this
                                           case is her politics, not any
                                           bogus violation of policy.  That is
                                           the issue.  Their unprofessionalism
                                           and cowardice is a distinct issue.
                                           \_ Unprofessionalism? Okay, think
                                              about it this way. How many
                                              videos do you think has to be
                                              rejected every day? How many
                                              people do you think youtube
                                              has to approve or reject videos?
                                              How much time do you think it
                                              would take for one of these
                                              guys to wipe someone's ass
                                              everytime their video gets
                                              rejected? You do the math. And
                                              if you're going to be talking
                                              about unprofessionalism, why
                                              not take a look at Malkin
                                              herself. What is her profession?
                                              Last time I checked, nutjob
                                              wasn't a profession.
                                  running a site like youtube, I would find
                                  MM's "products" devaluing to my site. I also
                                        \_ You'd be wrong.  She attracts
                                           visitors which is your core product.
                                           \_ Already made my point before.
                                              Yanking an MM video == more
                                  wouldn't have my staff put up with MM's
                                  whining because if they had to wipe every
                                  reject's ass the way you and MM are
                                  suggesting, they wouldn't have time for more
                                  productive things like wiping their own ass.
                                        \_ If your company can't afford a form
                                           letter for each of the half dozen
                                           possible policy violations and send
                                           the correct one then your company
                                           is dead anyway.  There's this silly
                                           thing called "customer service" that
                                           actually matters in the real world.
                                           \_ which is of course why every
                                              company is outsourcing it to
                                              people in Bangalore who don't
                                              speak English.  -tom
                                              \_ And getting crushed in the CS
                                                 satisfaction ratings.  Which
                                                 is why the smart places are
                                                 bringing CS back to the US.
2006/10/4-6 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:44674 Activity:kinda low
10/4    According to Drudge, the Foley intern was 18 at the time.  If true,
        it still makes him a sicko but non-criminal... "DEVELOPING..."
        \_ Did they out Drudge yet?
        \_ Drudge was also the one who said the kids seduced Foley.
           \_ Because his dick was so large and tax free?
              I know when I was a teen nothing was hotter. I'd beat off
              to C-SPAN reruns in the wee hours.
           \_ The transcripts I've seen imply that some of them were at least
              playing along...
        \_ so why would he have resigned?
        \_ Mr. Accuracy strikes again!
        \_ whoever said it was criminal anyway?  age of consent is 16 in DC.
        \_ whoever said it was criminal in the first place?  age of consent is
           16 in DC.  it doesn't stop freepers around the country from going
           ape over the left-wing MSM DemocRAT conspiracy, though.
           \_ Yes, George Soros has been breeding a master race of nubile
              young boys, installed as moles in the page program to tempt
              innocent conservative knights!  The horror!
              \_ Why can't George Soros breed a master race of nubile young
                 girls to install as moles in high tech fields to tempt
                 innocent geekish knights?
              \_ Leak came from a GOP aide:
                 http://tinyurl.com/fy9mg (hillnews.com)
                 \_ obWhyDoesThisAideHateAmerica?
2006/10/2-4 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:44637 Activity:nil
10/2    I knew somehow the Scientologists were involved
        in this Foley business:
2006/9/30-10/2 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:44612 Activity:kinda low
9/30    Question for the Motd:  If you see someone being held up by someone
        with a gun, and you attempt to help that person (aka attacking thier
        attacker, grabbing the gun, throwing something at the attacker etc).
        If the person gets shot, can they sue you for negligence?  If the
        person dies, can you be charged criminally with murder, what about
        civilly?  This was bugging me as I was thinking about it the other
        day on my way home.  -mrauser
        \_ Answers:
           1) Yes, anyone can find a sleazy plaintiff's attorney to sue for
              just about anything, including negligence.  This is assuming
              that you as the Good Samaritan have deep pockets, or an insurer
              steps in to foot the bill.  But they'll lose on this one.
           2) Very little likelihood of any criminal charges against you.  In
              California, we have the felony-murder rule, which means that if
              a criminal is in the act of committing a felony (like an armed
              robbery), and a victim gets killed during that felony, then that
              criminal is responsible for both the felony (here, armed robbery)
              and murder.  So as the Good Samaritan, you generally will not be
              charged with murder or any of its lesser variants (like negligent
              homicide, aka involuntary manslaughter), but the criminal can and
              will get charged with both armed robbery and murder.
           3) Yes, anyone can find a sleazy plaintiff's attorney to sue for
              just about anything, inluding wrongful death.  This is assuming
              that you as the Good Samaritan have deep pockets, or an insurer
              steps in to foot the bill.  But they'll lose on this one.
        \_ If the person getting killed as a result of your failed heroic
           attempt is a normal citizen, then you'd be ok. If however that
           person is famous, is connected to a wealthy family (16-year old
           girl whos dad is well connected), has enough money to buy the
           Dream Team, so on and so forth, then yes they can sue your ass
           and you'd be totally fucked.
        \_ I imagine that they could sue you.  You can sue for just about
           anything in this country - it's part of what makes America great.
           That's not saying that you will win, of course.  Why were you
           thinking about it?  Those sorts of heroics are almost always a
           Really Bad Idea (tm).
        \_ 1) pp is correct that a) anyone can sue or 2) anyone can bring
           criminal charges against you and that the real question is "can
           these charges/suits be pursued successfully" and that 2) this
           sort of thing is usually ill-advised.  But, the law permits
           one to protect oneself against threats to life/limb when there
           is no opportunity to escape (other states dont have the "must
           take opportunity to escape" condition), and allows that right
           to be extended to loved ones, family, and even bystanders in
           certain cases.  An almost as big question is "did you take
           reasonable action?"  If you have reasonable belief that you
           have time to call the police so that they will arrive in time
           to be of use, and you just charge in, you have a problem.  The
           general criteria for "reasonable action" consists of training,
           ability, safety of others.  You are clearly acting with a
           reasonable expectation that your action will increase the
           safety of others, but are you trained/able/equipped to deal
           with this in a way that will not unreasonably exacerbate the
           situation beyond what would otherwise happen?  And if we're
           talking about the assailant getting hurt, they lose any legal
           recourse for injury/loss sustained while they commit a felony.
           \_ You mean if somebody robs me and I throw a brick at their
              head as they are leaving they cannot sue me?
              \_ No.  At that point you're no longer in danger.
        \_ Civil negligence requires the following four elements to exist:
           1. Duty: Does the defendant owe duty of care to the plaintiff?
           2. Breach: Was that duty breached?
           3. Cause: a. Actual: "But for the breach..." and also
                     b. Proximate: Was the injury reasonably foreseeable?
           4. Injury: Was the plaintiff injured as a result?
           I think this would be a hard case for the plaintiff to win. --dim
        \_ Re Negligence: dim is correct re the elements. The question
                          really is then, did you breach your duty of
                          reasonable care under the circumstances? Maybe,
                          maybe not - it really depends on the facts. [I
                          do not really think causation is a big problem
                          here, b/c it is reasonably foreseeable that an
                          attacking an armed assailant can cause the gun
                          to go off.
           Re Murder: Doubtful that you would be charged for murder. The
                      armed robber was the murder. Probably in CA he would
                      be charged w/ 1st degree murder b/c he was committing
                      a enumerated felony. You might be considered an acco-
                      mplice to his murder, but it is doubtful unless you
                      acted recklessly (ie didn't really take into account
                      the effect of your actions).
                      If charged as an accomplice, you really only have one
                      defense open to you - defense of others. But this is
                      a sketchy defense b/c it doesn't apply if the person
                      who was being held up wasn't really in danger.
           Re Wrongful Death: Similar to negligence. Probably hard to win
                              unless they can show that you acted w/o
                              regard for the consequences of your actions.
           [ I could have some of the details wrong b/c it has been 2 yrs
             since I took these courses and I haven't refreshed for the
             bar yet ]
        \_ California has a 'good samaritan' law to cover situations like this.
           \_ No, it doesn't.  Just ask David Cash, one of the more infamous
              undergraduate students to attend UC Berkeley in recent years.
              If you are too young or too old to remember who he is, just
              google "Jeremy Strohmeyer Sherrice Iverson David Cash".
2006/9/30-10/2 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:44611 Activity:moderate
9/30    HAW HAW HAW
        "It's vile. It's more sad than anything else, to see someone with
         such potential throw it all down the drain because of a sexual
        -Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL), commenting on President Clinton, following
        release of the Starr Report, September 12, 1998.
        \_ Maybe it's just me but when anyone molests a child or attempts to
           it doesn't make me laugh.
           \_ Oh, I'm crying as much as laughing.  I'm mostly laughing because
              it's the only thing you can do, besides cry.  These guys really
              are just pathetic and horrible.
              TPM has great coverage of the whole sorry mess, by the way:
              \_ tpm?  So you see this as a political event?  Sigh....  Anyway,
                 child molesting shouldn't make you laugh or cry.  It should
                 piss you off.
                 \_ Make no mistake, this IS a political event.
                    \_ My question of the day is, was Democrat behinded all
                       this?  ABC is not known for its "liberal bias," and
                       so far, more explicit SMS and AOL IM has not yet being
                       released.  Let say Mark Foley did send nasty emails,
                       SMS, AOL IM and try to penetrate some 16 years old's
                       ass, so what?  Is he doing anything illegal?
                       Yes, he is a hyprocrite (along with much of those who
                       kept "traditional family value" on their mouth), but
                       I simply don't see anything he did which he need to
                       resign for.
                       \_ Solicitation of a minor is a crime. Get your head
                          out of your ass.
           \_ Maybe it's just me, but I'd like to stick _real_ child molestation
              in a different category than mailing lewd emails to a 16-year-old.
               \_ Especially considering that in DC the age of consent is 16.
                  The only real crime is that he used the evil internet to
                  send the messages.  -Not a GOP fan, not a over-reacting and
                  calling everything skeezy that involves children "child
                  molestation" fan.
                  \_ Oh and for the irony of it all, Foley was the co-sponsor
                     of the bill that made it a crime.
                  \_ Isn't there a federal law now that says if under 18 it's
                     a crime, no matter what the age of consent is in the
                     state?  I agree it's dumb.
        \_ I think the media has a Conservative bias.  The Starr Report
           gave all the glory details.  How come the more explicit SMS
           and IM messages are not made public?
           \_ Are you the same tool who thought Pearl Harbor was biased against
              the Japanese because the memorial there doesn't talk about the
              atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
2006/9/27 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44556 Activity:nil
9/26    Leftist Department of The Army refuses to submit budget,
        tries to embarass El Presidente in the GWOT:
2006/9/24-26 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44514 Activity:nil
9/23    Liberal CIA undermining American resolve in the Global War On Terror:
2006/9/21-24 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:44482 Activity:nil
9/21    Oh look, the fucking UN agrees that Bush is a War Criminal:
        The proposed legislation was "in breach with United States' human
        rights obligation as identified in our report and with the fucking requirement
        of article 3 of the fucking Geneva Conventions," they said, referring to the
        1949 treaty which lays down basic guarantees of protection for detainees
        \_ is this a report from the human rights council chaired by libya or
           the one chaired by the sudan?  i get my butchering mass murdering
        \_ is this a report from the fucking human rights council chaired by libya or
           the fucking one chaired by the sudan?  i get my butchering mass murdering
           dictators so confused.  please help.
2006/9/18-20 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44418 Activity:nil
9/18    Raving lefty warns that lefties don't get the danger we're facing:
        http://csua.org/u/gwx (LATimes)
        \_ More accurately, "man with generally liberal views believes
           world religions are genuinely incompatible, thinks liberals don't
           'get it.'" Cf. Orson Scott Card, other libs who went virulent after
           \_ Orson Scott Card and "other liberals"???  Your credibility=0.
              \_ Prior to 9/11, OSC was fairly liberal. Post-9/11, not so
                 \_ Prior to 9/11 OSC was a rabbid nutcase.
                    Post 9/11 he just started raving louder.
        \_ Sam Harris rocks.  End of Faith was a good read, right up to the
           unsubstantiated touchy-feely crap at the end.
                \_ Yes the ending starting going into too much philoso-babble
2006/9/15-19 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Computer/Theory] UID:44392 Activity:nil
9/15    Math professor suspended over allegedly racist test question
        \_ "This punishment is not only unfair and a violation of the First
           Amendment, but also totally unnecessary."
           The questions you put on a test that you create as part of your
           paid employment is "free speech"?
           \_ the argument has been made that the gubment doesn't have a
               right to restrict speech, even if they are paying you.
               (This was a public institution), if it had bee a private
               school, it would have been different.
        \_ Aren't these FIRE guys part of that nutter Horowitz's group?
2006/9/12-15 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44356 Activity:nil
9/12    How did they get that 46 percent drop in the murder rate in Baghdad?
        Easy, just don't count deaths from "bombs, mortars, rockets or other
        mass attacks -- including suicide bombings."
        \_ "If you take out the killings, Washington actually has a very very
            low crime rate." -- Marion Barry
            \_ "Bitch set me up!" -- Marion Barry
        \_ It makes sense to define ordinary murders from warlike activity--but
           then it should be made clear, and not claim a decrease simply
           because of redefinition.
                \_ It makes even more sense that the administration would want
                   to spin their quagmire any way they can.
2006/9/5-7 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:44283 Activity:nil
9/5     http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/09/05/cook.charged.ap/index.html
        31-year-old cook living in Maine B&B, for some reason kills 50-year-old
        neighbor from Arkansas, burns dismembered remains 15 miles away.  Two
        days later, kills 65-year-old female owner of inn, probably after she
        inquires about the 50-year-old guy.  Owner's daughter and female friend
        show up unannounced, and they too are killed.  Three dogs shot.  Cook's
        stepmother summons police to inn, and cook leads police to first body.
        \_ It's all Bill Clinton's fault.
           \_ Nahh, it's the fault of his penis.
           \_ It's Maine, so it must be Stephen King's fault.
        \_ Send ... more ... humans
        \_ And so goes the plotline of the new Texas Chainsaw Massacre
           prequel, starring Jordana Brewster.
        \_ Where's the bit about the dogs?
        \_ All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.
2006/9/1 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:44239 Activity:nil 90%like:44243
9/1     Cal Thomas, "Al Gore is Right About the Media"
2006/8/28-29 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:44174 Activity:low
8/28    "Former Marine who sparked Okinawa furor is dead in suspected
        http://www.csua.org/u/gsd (http://www.estripes.com
        \_ Why is this newsworthy?
           \_ Because some of us were paying attention when this asshole
              went and tarnished the reputation of Marines everywhere. -!op
2006/8/17-19 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:44061 Activity:low
8/17    Entire media pwned over Ramsey "confession?"
        \_ The guy's story was a bit odd on day 1.  Once more details came
           out it became really clear this guy had nothing to do with her
           death.  He's a sicko and a crank but he didn't kill her.
        \_ That photo on the left looks like a still straight out of a movie.
           \_ Yeah, with hair light and all.
2006/8/17 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:44054 Activity:nil
8/17    JonBenet case solved!  Former school teacher admitted killing her.
        The parents are clear after all.
        \_ obWhoGivesAShit
           \- the parents may not be murderers, but they are all freaks
        \_ At this point it seems quite likely that this guys is lying, and
           it is a false confession.  He won't state anything verifiable
           about the case, (that wasn't in the news), and he was a strong
           alibi.  (His ex-wife claims he was with her in Alabama that day.)
           \_ Next time when you jack off to her pics you know which bastard
              took your sweetheart away from this world.
2006/8/10-14 [Reference/Law/Court, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:43958 Activity:nil
8/10    Martinez murder, the weirdest part is the todo list
        \_ Nicole Brown Simpson's "real killers" strike again. -Mark Fuhrman
2006/8/2-6 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Foreign/Asia/China] UID:43869 Activity:kinda low
8/2     Lawrence Livermore Natl. Lab employee arrested on child porn
        The thing I think is iteresting here is that the Lab has gone into
        damage control mode.  (Press releases that say things like, "We
        are fully cooperating with the police," etc.)  Do you really need
        damage control in a case like this?
        \_ I don't know what grant or funding politics are like for
           that sort of organization, but I assume there is quite a bit
           of nastiness that goes on when competing for govt. money.  It
           would be pretty easy to insinuate shit like "well, their people
           are just surfing for kiddy porn on taxpayer dough" to the press.
           I've seen worse.  -John
           \- Livermore is an employer with +10k employee ... dont you think
              this is just a matter of statistics? It's not like they were
              running a massive bittorrent p0rn server. Resources spent
              playing Big Brother costs real money, and imposes real costs
              [should the computer security people run "find *.jpg"
              in people homedirs and have somebody spend 10hrs a week
              looking these over?]
              \_ You're preaching to the saved.  Pr0n at the workplace, if
                 you consider it a problem, is not something you can solve
                 technically, and I argue this constantly (it's a management
                 issue.)  Unfortunately, there's a combination of factors,
                 such as many managers not wanting to take ownership of
                 talking to employees whose work is being affected by non-
                 work stuff, over-zealous HR people, legal guys worried about
                 harassment suits and senir management who see this sort of
                 thing in a very binary manner, that often results in demands
                 for excessive "pre-emptive" measures.  But in this case I
                 was just commenting on the logic behind the "damage control"
                 that op asked about--I don't know the politics that surround
                 LLNL, and was assuming that this was just pre-emptive to
                 avoid the case being misused by someone overly zealous or
                 with a political agenda.  -John
              \_ It's odder than that, all the porn was at home, none
                 was at work.  So to my mind, LLNL has absolutely nothing
                 to do with this.  Never the less, I think John has a
                 point about politics. (Digression from above: LLNL DOES
                 put a lot of man power into watching out for porn at
                 work.) -op
                 \- i didnt look at the details carefully, but if what you say
                    is true, this is a good example of "if the press wants to
                    do a hatchet job on you, no matter what steps you take,
                    thay can allways paint it as unreasonable" [save the
                    thay can always paint it as unreasonable" [save the
                    children, your tax dollars at work etc]. which isnt to say
                    "do nothing" but dont let "the standard of care" be "what
                    will satisfy a reporter with a small brain". [at various
                    times i have been involved in "appropriate use" compliance
                    issues and there is a very strong correlation with the
                    overall resonableness and cleverness of people working in
                    this area and their distate for being involved ... the one
                    person who was enthusiastic about this was a lying, incom-
                    petent sack of shit, who did a lot of underhanded political
                    things here, had no respect of anybody reasonable and some
                    what creepily made it part of his job to visit some of
                    the tagged WEEB site to make sure they were perverted/

        \_ Wen Ho Lee got reamed for far less. -proud American
           \_ To be fair, leaving around diskettes of nuclear secrets
              is a lot worse than child porn.
              \_ And your basis for saying he did is...?
                \_ I thought he pled guilty to carelessly copying
                   classified nuclear crap to data cassettes and leaving
                   it in unclassified areas, probably for a job interview?
                   I don't think he was out there selling our secrets
                   to the Chinese, he was just really careless.  Feel
                   free to prove me wrong.
                   \_ No, he didn't plead guilty to that.
                   \_ he was being single out because he is Chinese.
                      There are plenty of people in the lab do exactly the
                      same thing or worse but they end up in... hmm...
                      \_ I bet they don't anymore!
                      lecture hall of MIT instead of solidary comfinment
                      for 23 hours a day, shackled from waist down, for
                      9 month.  May be you should really work for Christopher
                      Cox (author of "The Cox Report", now Chairman of SEC).
                      \_ and dude I don't know Chinese but I KNOW your
                         English is better than this, what is your problem?
2006/7/25-27 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/SIG] UID:43799 Activity:nil
7/25    Big Brother is here to stay
        \_ "He also said Terkel and the other plaintiffs in the lawsuit, which
            sought class-action status, had not shown that their own records
            had been provided to the government. As a result, they lacked
            standing to sue the government, he said."
           So, in order to sue to prevent AT&T handing over my records to the
           government in a super-secret and classified program, I must prove
           that AT&T handed over my records to the government in a super-
           secret program despite the fact that the government is not going to
           honor my FOIA requests until they've declassified this super-secret
           program. Brilliant!
           \_ How many fingers do you see?
              \_ There are FOUR lights!
                 \_ Hmmm, I can see we have some more work to do.
           \_ c.f. Orwell, Kafka.  Government hasn't come very far in 80 years.
2006/7/12-16 [Transportation/Car, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:43641 Activity:low
7/12    Edith Delgado, the Redwood City teenager who single-handedly stemmed
        democratic reforms in the island kingdom of Tonga.
        http://www.csua.org/u/geo (http://www.matangitonga.to
        Neither http://images.google.com nor http://images.yahoo.com found this photo.
        \_ So you can kill royal family members and go to jail for only 8
           years?  Automobiles-- the best instrument for murder.
           \_ I think there's this little issue of intent.  Without intent,
              it's not technically murder.  OTOH, if you try to run down
              someone with your car with clear intent to hit them, that's a
              whole different ball park.
        \_ Stemmed?  Perhaps stymied would be closer to the truth....
        \_ she's already dead.. just a matter of time a couple of
        samoans approach her if they find her..
        \_ the pic is from her myspace profile, which appears to have been
           shut down
        \_ I thought Americans are pro-democracy.
           \_ Yup, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Russia... all of them are fine
              example of democracy.
        \_ Going 100mph with a five-month old license.  What a bitch.  (I'm not
           saying experience drivers can go 100mph.)
           saying experienced drivers can go 100mph.)
           saying experienced drivers can go 100mph, though.)
        \_ I don't know the details, but from the description, it sounds like
           it should have been a survivable crash. I guess Ford Explorers suck.
           \_ And Mustangs totally kick ass.
              \_ Well it sounded like she just sideswiped the Explorer, which
                 then swerved and rolled. I wonder how fast it was going.
                 Not excusing the idiot girl in any way btw...
              \_ Incidentally, both Explorers and Mustangs are Ford.
                 \_ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1593640188/sr=8-7/qid=1152754629/ref=sr_1_7/104-0932206-6103116?ie=UTF8
                 \_ http://csua.org/u/gev
        \_ please stop putting up fotos of fat girls, ok thx.
           \_ She's got boobs.
2006/7/8-10 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:43597 Activity:nil
7/8     No flame wars about the Mexican election??! Damn.
        \_ How can Mexicans be so interested in politics, yet still have
           such a massively corrupt govenment?
           \_ Who said they're interested in politics anymore than anyone
              in any country.  Mass demonstrations are dime a dozen in
              Mexico, Central and South America.  And what do you expect
              them to do about it anyway?  Mexico isn't a democracy and
              has a cultural history of corruption just like the rest of
              the world.  It is the United States that stands out for our
              relatively minimal corruption and our unwillingness to accept
              that as standard practice when discovered.  You won't find the
              governments of other countries regularly investigating their own
              political leaders a la Abscam or Jefferson's fridge.
              \_ Yes, shoveling tons of money to the lawyer class helps those
                 who are too uneducated to follow fucking directions.
                 \_ What?  What does this have to do with anything?  Did you
                    mean to post this somewhere else?
2006/7/5-7 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:43566 Activity:nil
7/5     Ken Lay dead, reportedly of a heart attack.
        \_ Apparently, I'm not the only one who's suspecting this to be a
           big cover up for him to escape his sentence:
           \_ Has the price of tin gone up recently?
        \_ piss me off.  I want this guy go to jail.  And i am really mad
           about how news articles kept saying he is a spiritual person...
           I just love this logic.  "he goes church, therefore, eventhough
           he have stolen millions from the poor, he still deserve a place in
           \_ He's dead of a massive coronary.  He's dead.  He didn't escape
              to South America with his ill gotten gains.  He's dead.  Dead.
              He's dead, Jim, dead, dead, dead.
           \_ Yeah, but that's pretty much what the Bible says.  Good deeds are
              totally irrelevant.  Faith trumps all.
2006/7/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43561 Activity:moderate
7/5     http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1659910/posts
        Recall two U.S. soldiers were kidnapped a couple weeks ago and killed.
        Reports are now that they were mutilated beyond recognition and
        beheaded.  Recall that another U.S. soldier was charged with rape and
        quadruple murder last week.  It turns out that all three soldiers were
        in the same platoon.
        \_ jblack, is that you? Do you still call them "Freedom Fries"?
           \_ Just watch the coverage disparity.
              \_ This is non-responsive. Just answer the question please.
                 \_ there wasn't a question.  why do you hate so much? -!jblack
                    \_ "Do you still call them Freedom Fries", is not a
                       question? What do you call it then?
                       \_ blunt hostility serving no useful purpose.  have you
                          stopped beating your wife?  -!jblack
                          \_ Hey, you are the idiots who alienated our allies
                             with the whole "Freedom Fries" thing. Along with
                             triumphant aircraft carrier landings, "Cheese
                             Eating Surrender Monkeys", "Old Europe", "Bring
                             'Em On!" and all the rest of the loudmouthed,
                             trash talking. Now that things have not gone your
                             way, you want to pretend like it all never
                             happened. Sorry, three years ago is not ancient
                             history and we need to be reminded of your
                             arrogant foolishness, so as to learn from your
                             mistakes and not repeat them.
        \_ "you are either with us, or against us."  remember that line?
           and then, we invaded Iraq.  Those who are resisting our occupation
           are by definition terrorist and should not be pardoned.
           Is this all thing warped?  or it's just me?
           \_ "You are either with us, or you are with the terrorists" was
              how I remember it. Which is worse, I don't know...
        \_ how big is a platoon?
           \_ commanded by a lieutenant, a combat platoon typically has 30-40
        \_ Compare the US non-reaction of this with the Israeli reaction of a
           kidnapping of *one* soldier in Gaza.  No wonder our troops might as
           well have target circles painted on their uniforms.
           \_ think of why there is no reaction from our part?  may be
              these US Soldiers deserve to be killed?
2006/6/15-17 [Consumer/Camera, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:43398 Activity:nil
6/15    Dear MOTD apprentice lawyers, I sent in a camera to be repaired
        under a third-party warranty.  When I filled out the repair
        website, after indicating that I am in South America, it indicated
        that return shipping would cost $10 (the company's in the US.)
        Now I receive a mail telling me it will cost $72 to get my camera
        back, and that the $10 is only for US shipping addresses.
        Aside from the fact that this is b.s. (I could see $25-$30), does
        anyone have any advice on how to best get my camera back without
        forking over?  It's more a matter of principle...  -John
        \_ Where are you? My friend is going to Peru with her girlfriend and
           they are wondering how scary it is for two girls to be wandering
           Peru alone.
           \_ I think the state department has regular updates/releases
              about safety for Americans travelling abroad.  I'll see if I
              can dig up a URL if I have the time.     -mice
              \_ Some travel links:
                 (US State Department Travel Warnings)
                 (Consular information about Peru -- the section on crime
                 seems pretty detailed, while the Safety and Security
                 section gives a good overview of the general political
                 (General List of Countries)
                 I hope this helps!               -mice
           \_ Chile.  Most S. American tourist stuff is perfectly safe.
              A friend of mine took a budget bus tour into Bolivia, and
              had absolutely nil problems.  I think if you stay out of
              most parts of Colombia/Venezuela and exercise caution in
              most urban areas (mainly Buenos Aires and Brazilian cities,
              according to friends) you should be fine.  From what I hear,
              Peru is very safe.  A good site for info about more exotic
              destinations (beyond "where not to go as an American") is the
              Lonely Planet BB at http://thorntree.com--I also assume your friends
              are not going to be running around in neon shorts and fanny
              packs talking in loud nasal American tourist voices.  -John
                \_ I thought FARC and the shining path had their
                   own Disneyland area in Peru
                   \_ FARC, maybe in way Northern Peru, who knows, but SL
                      were supposedly pretty well castrated by Fujimori and
                      his goons.  -John
2006/6/13-14 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:43375 Activity:nil
6/13    http://www.wbir.com/news/national/story.aspx?storyid=35168
        "Judge Frank Damrell said the minted words amount to a secular
         national slogan, and don't force Michael Newdow to believe in one
        Whether or not you agree w/ the ruling, how can that possibly be
        considered a secular slogan?
        \_ In much the same way that Xmas has become a commercial holiday?
           I'm quibbling, perhaps....
           \_ commercial != secular  (e.g. "megachurches")
              \_ Church'N'Munch!
        \_ Maybe the judge needs to see the definition of 'secular' in the
           dictionary.  Didn't Stephen Colbert say something like "I don't
           care if you're Muslim or Hindu or Jewish, there are many ways to
           accept Jesus as your savior"
2006/6/12-14 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:43354 Activity:nil
6/12    http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/06/12/crime.rate/index.html
        Violent crime rate takes first big jump since '93. The
        murder rate in the United States shot up 4.8 percent last year,
        and overall violent crime was up 2.5 percent for the year,
        \_ Remember, it's all Clinton's fault.                  -Conservative
        \_ It's because Massachusetts legalized gay marriage.
2006/6/6-9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:43289 Activity:nil
6/6     How many voted for prop 82?  Did you see the bit about having a
        parent tax if the income tax doesn't generate enough revenue yet
        no one will be denied access for lack of ability to pay?  So where
        does the shortfall come from?  The general fund?  A bonus tax for
        \_ The fact of the matter is, our government is poor. We don't
           have enough money in the education system and everyone has to
           suffer more crime and somehow make it up, like paying for more
           jails. We're freeloaders leeching from our past social projects
           such as our transit systems and power grids. We no longer build
           anything these days, thanks to our tax-cutting loving Republicans
           who have two things in mind-- privatizing everything that our
           government can't afford, and cut even more tax. Thanks to them,
           we have to suffer from sky rocketing crime rates much of it
           due to the lack of education our kids have. We are forced to
           build one of the largest jail systems in the world, and the quality
           of living has been going down since the 80s when conservative
           movements became popular. Fuck all this tax-cutting conservative
           movements. Stop thinking about yourself and just raise the fucking
           tax. It'll be better for everyone.
           \_ Where do you keep pulling this "sky rocketing crime rates"
              line from?  Everything I've seen has crime dropping for the
              last 20 years.
           \_ Interesting theory since CA has some of the highest taxes in
              the US but worst education system, bad jail system, and as you
              say is living off the public works of the past.  How do you
              justify more taxing going into what we agree is a broken syetem?
              How will throwing good money after bad make anything better?
              Also, are you ok with hidden taxes like prop 82 creates?  All
              those parents who think they're getting free day care at the
              expense of the wealthy will end up paying for it in the end.
              That's a crappy way to write law or a proposition.
              \_ How do you fix the system when you don't have enough
                 money to fix it? The only other alternative to not
                 taxing is privatizing everything and let the
                 free market take its course. Is that what you want?
              \_ CA is 15th in state tax burden.
                 \_ 21st if you count only state taxes...
           \_ 1 in 5 US workers is employed in some form by the government.
              This giant mass of leeches, who demand anachronistic pension
              and benefit plans and only ever grow in size, is a worthless
              drag on the nation. I'm in favor of privatizing every public
              school in the nation, and the postal service.
              \_ Ah yes, fuck the system that attempts to give a flatter level
                 of playing field because survival of the fittest is how
                 the world should work. Let the free market take its course
                 because everything in life is be measured by efficiency,
                 profits, and making stock holders happy. I get it now.
                 Thank you very much!
                 \_ Ah yes let's make unfounded assumptions! The current
                    field is not flat. Privatising the schools wouldn't
                    necessarily make it worse given a voucher-like
                    system. In fact, odds are good that things would
                    be improved. Everyone would have more choice.
                    There would be more competition among the different
                    private schools with voucher money making them
                    more affordable for people. The private school I
                    had for 3 years was soooooo much better than any
                    public school I ever saw. And no, not everything
                    in life is measured by efficiency etc. That is
                    a stupid statement. Schools would be measured
                    the same as otherwise. Thanks for playing.
              \_ This monolithic government that supposedly employs 20% of
                 working Americans does not exist. Each level of govt. (city,
                 state, federal) has its own system of employment benefits;
                 within those, different departments and branches have their
                 own systems and even different unions. Note also that govt.
                 jobs not tied to political appointments pay roughly 10-20%
                 less than equivalent private sector positions. I agree with
                 you that there is room for reform, but your sweeping
                 generalization does not do the situation justice.
                 \_ Actually, even political jobs pay less. For an example,
                    look at the pay of the President. However, the government
                    is also a lot more inefficient and wasteful than the
                    private sector. That is, in many positions (except the
                    most prestigious and for things like nuclear physicists
                    which depend on the DOE), the government is also
                    getting what it pays for - or often not even that.
                    \_ Yes the government is inefficient, there is no doubt
                       about that. Take the firefighters in New Enland
                       for example. Prior to the 1900s people paid private
                       firefighter insurance and when there were blocks of
                       homes on fire, the firefighters would extinguish fire
                       nearby homes that had special signs that they paid
                       for, while letting everything else burn down. It was
                       profitable and efficient, but it obviously didn't
                       provide a consistent service to everyone. It is NOT the
                       goal of the government to be profitable, it is to
                       provide everyone a consistent service at some monetary
                       loss which hopefully will benefit everyone in the
                       end. Most of the tax-cut loving conservatives will
                       never understand this, because their world is entirely
                       measured by efficiency and profits.
                                \- also plenty of "tax cut loving
                                   conservatives" are ok with "mercantilist"
                                   inititatives like: import-export bank,
                                   subsidized research in their area of
                                   interest, making private interests matters
                                   of public policy [RIAA], or changing
                                   more natural priorities of govt resources
                                   allocated to things like trade negotions
                                   in IP, agricultural subsidies, govt
                                   allocating public resources without seeking
                                   to maximize the return to the public
                                   [sketchy ways of selling rights to say
                                   airwaves, frequency, western grazing lands,
                                   mineral rights etc].
                       \_ It is not the goal of government to be profitable,
                          but it should be efficient. The amount of red
                          tape that doesn't even make any sense is
                          staggering and constantly growing. It's why this
                          country produces more lawyers than the rest of
                          the world combined. Example from NASA: I want to
                          buy a supercomputer. The vendor agreed to provide
                          3 years warranty on the quote. However, one of
                          the five tasks funding the computer ends in one
                          year. (The rest continue past three years.)
                          Regulations say that we cannot accept the three
                          year warranty, as that is longer than one of the
                          funding tasks will be in existence (or maybe
                          not, because it could be extended perhaps).
                          Therefore, we had to ask vendors to provide only
                          one year of warranty, essentially throwing away
                          two free years. This is highly inefficient and
                          as a taxpayer, too, I am horrified. --dim
                    \_ Having survived the dotcom bubble and govt. jobs at
                       the city, state, and federal level, I respectfully
                       disagree with your assessment insofar as I think you're
                       being much too generous to private sector employees.
                       \_ <DEAD>Dot.com<DEAD> was just a big party. To be fair,
                          compare to *profitable* companies.
                          \_ What, like Enron? WorldCom?
                             \_ Are you suggesting the employees at Enron
                                and WorldCom were not hard-working and
                                efficient? I would guess that most were.
                          \_ I don't think there's any real evidence that
                             private companies as a whole are more efficient
                             than government as a whole.  Good private
                             companies are more efficient than bad government,
                             and vice versa.  If Orange County had been a
                             corporation, it would have laid everyone off,
                             bilked its investors, and sold pieces of itself
                             out for pennies on the dollar, as Enron and
                             WorldCom did.  That's highly inefficient.  -tom
                             \_ Private companies are efficient at maximizing
                                ***PROFITS*** without regard to anything else
                                such as the quality of service, unless of
                                course there is enough competition to drive
                                them to be less profitable. Government
                                services on the other hand have initial
                                noble intent of creating services for the
                                people but many fail because of a lack of
                                accountability (FEMA, CIA, etc). In the end,
                                neither pure free-market nor strict government
                                controlled programs work well on a
                                consistent basis for a long period of time.
                             \_ "In particular, studies of garbage collection,
                                water utilities, electric utilities, office
                                cleaning, firefighting, and transportation
                                (airlines, railroads, buses) found that
                                private providers were more efficient under
                                conditions of competition and accountability
                                (Donahue 1991; Spann 1977).
                                Notably, though, in several instances public
                                provision was more efficient than private
                                provision, even under competitive market
                                conditions (Donahue 1991)."
                                There are instances where it doesn't make
                                sense to privatize a service (e.g.
                                duplication of infrastructure involved in
                                electricity transmission) but I think it's
                                obvious that in most cases the private
                                sector is more efficient because it has an
                                incentive to be. What incentive does the
                                government have to be efficient?
                                \_ Civilian and press oversight; not something
                                   corporations generally need to worry
                                   about in this country.  -tom
                                   \_ The point is not that it has no incentive
                                      to be efficient. The problem is that
                                      lack of competition and choice is less
                                      efficient. The government can just do
                                      stupid things and there is no market
                                      to punish their stupid decisions.
                                      They just get more money when they
                                      squander what they have. They set up
                                      idiotic and corrupt contract deals.
                                      Oversight doesn't prevent mediocrity.
                                      It doesn't really do anything at all,
                                      just generates discussion when something
                                      particularly egregious comes up, or
                                      laws are broken. Corporations do still
                                      obey laws in this country.
                                      \_ You think competition is inherently
                                         more efficient?  Tell me, how many
                                         programming languages does your
                                         company's main product use for
                                         development?  Would your development
                                         be more efficient if you had two
                                         different groups, one using Java and
                                         one using Ruby, competing to develop
                                         the same product?
                                         Competition between companies doesn't
                                         prevent mediocrity.  And there is
                                         a market that punishes stupid
                                         governmental decisions; it's called
                                         "voting."  -tom
                                         \_ Voting can't handle this. Voters
                                            are worried about gay marriage.
                                            They don't have the time nor
                                            inclination to dig through stuff
                                            and analyze... and even if they
                                            did, it still doesn't help. A
                                            real market, at least ideally,
                                            selects the best performers.
                                            I read about govt fuckups all
                                            the time and never hear about
                                            heads rolling. Everything is
                                            aggregated. If you try to punish
                                            poor performance in one area it
                                            is lost in the noise. And you
                                            have small way of knowing if
                                            the new guy is any better than
                                            the old.
                                            \_ And even if he is, term
                                               limits mean he won't be around
                                               long. This helps when there's
                                               an idiot like Bush in office,
                                               but it's bad when there's
                                               someone sincere and capable.
2006/6/3 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:43265 Activity:low
6/2    "You don't need papers for voting"
        Busby on defense, says she misspoke
2006/5/27-31 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:43208 Activity:nil
5/26    I was looking at the article of the constitution which discusses
        congressional apportionment and the 14th ammendmant and I had 2
        1. Are there any more "Indians not taxed", and are they left uncounted
        for figuring a state's representation?
        2. It says persons disenfranchised for criminal conviction should not
        be counted for representation.  Is this actually honored?
2006/5/26-31 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Crime, Science/GlobalWarming] UID:43197 Activity:nil Cat_by:auto
5/26    http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/54921_energy18.shtml
        "Enron has been the largest single doner to GWB"
        Is this really true? I thought Walmart was.
        \_ Kenny who?
2006/5/24-28 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:43176 Activity:nil
5/24    Final report on Miami air marshal shooting released, finding that
        marshals were legally justified in use of force, and no criminal
        charges will be filed.
2006/5/22-28 [Transportation/Airplane, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:43150 Activity:nil
5/22    http://www.white-history.com/hwrdet.htm
----------stupidity above this line----------
        \_ These posts are here as a joke, right?  Please?       -mice
2006/5/17-22 [Reference/Law/Court, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:43082 Activity:nil
5/16    Sowell on the Duke rape case
        \_ I don't see anything wrong with any of his points; they just come
           down to the truth of what really happened.  That opening quote from
           the "young man at NCCU" really is reprehensible.  Whether this is as
           much of a shared attitude as Sowell claims is another matter.
           \_ I guess you've read "Bonfire of the Vanities"  -John
           \_ I like how he conflates one idiotic statement by one stupid
              college student with the attitude of the entire civil rights
                \_ that's a pretty common pundit tactic these days.
        \_ When I get bored I leap to the defense of scummy rich white
           guys from Duke who run around raping black women.
           \_ allegedly raping... or maybe we should skip the whole trial?
              \_ Was the victim attractive?
                 \_ She was dressed in a provacative manner!
                    \_ Remember, strippers' testimony isn't worth as much as
                       that of "normal people"
                       \_ No, but getting your story straight is important.
2006/5/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:43064 Activity:nil
5/15    http://www.nysun.com/article/32727
        "The story is a complete fabrication," the spokesman for Mr. Rove, Mark
        Corallo, told The New York Sun. "It is both malicious and disgraceful."
        [Rove reportedly served with an indictment]
2006/5/15-18 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:43057 Activity:nil
5/15    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/more/05/15/duke.lacrosse.ap
        Third Duke jock indicted. Let's all celebrate!!! May all the jocks
        and frat boys go to hell. Justice has been served.      -nerd
        \_ Uhm, I think there has to be a conviction before your revenge
           for all those wedgies in highschool is complete.
           \_ Ok I'll pray for that to happen. By the way do you want to hear
              my side of the story in high school and why I hate them?  -nerd
              \_ You'll pray for that to happen?  ...And if they're innocent
                 of this crime?  Does that even matter to you?
        \_ Much as I like to think of all athletes as borderline criminal
           types at best, this is a really confusing case.  DNA evidence
           indicates no involvement, the guy passed a lie detector test...
           Victim says it'd be Evans "if he had a mustache", but he says
           he has never had one.
           \_ 'all athletes as borderline criminal types at best'?  That's
              kind of bizarre.
              \_ C'mon, half of them are on steroids to try to cheat their
                 way into success, and the rest are getting arrested for
                 violence, rape, or illegal drug use.  Just read the news.
                 \_ We're talking about *lacrosse players*.  -tom
                        \_ It will be at least 20 years until they are
                           pillaging the assets of major corporations ...
           \_ Don't forget that everyone she was shown in the lineup was
              on the team.
2006/5/14-17 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:43053 Activity:nil
5/14    http://saveoceanbeach.org/stopthefireban
        proposed ban on fires on ocean beach.
        \_ Why do they ban beachfires in CA?  FL, Carolinas, Vi Bch, etc
           don't seem to care?
           \- i assume because people burn stuff like pallats with
           \_ they want to ban it in SF because assholes leave their
              detritus on the beach.
           \- i assume because people burn stuff like pallets with
              nails and people who do obnoxious things like throw
              glass bottles in the fires.
        \_ Heh, why not just put stone-enclosed "fire areas" there?  That
           way you could burn what you wanted... -John
           \_ It could be an air quality thing.
2006/5/11-15 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:43017 Activity:nil
5/11    http://csua.org/u/fti (wsj.com)
        Star conservative judge J. Michael Luttig gives up lifetime federal
        appeals court seat to become General Counsel for Boeing, partly because
        of disillusionment by the encroachment of politics on the judiciary
        sources say
        How to resign without ruining your career prospects:
        link:csua.org/u/ftn (timesdispatch.com)
        "[by phone] I've been on the court 15 years. It's a long time. This
        opportunity came up, as I said in my letter to the president, by
        serendipity and I thought about it a long time with my wife and we just
        decided that it was time for a change. [via letter] I want to express
        my heartfelt thanks to your father ..."
        \_ Maybe it's just true?
2006/5/2-5 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:42893 Activity:nil
5/2     ojuang: don't bust up the massage parlor if you think you got robbed:
        \_ oj, are you interested in anything except money, porn and technology
           \_ And how exactly does this differentiate oj from the majority of
              sodans, exactly?
              \_ Some people here care about say politics or research.
2006/4/5-7 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:42684 Activity:kinda low
4/5     http://news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/chldprn/fladoyle32806cr2.html
        Dept of Homeland Security Deputy Press Secretary Brian J. Doyle charged
        with 23 felony counts involving Internet pr0n, Bill O'Reilly style
        telephone conversations with a detective posing as a 14-year-old girl.
        I knew I recognized his name from somewhere ...
        \_ Remember, the reason that we need to stop bitching about all this
           Civil Liberties crap is because the people who work to protect our
           nation's security are 100% trustworthy!  Checks and balances are for
           blocking Congress' power, not executive power.  Oh, and atheists..
           remember, they're neither citizens or patriots.
                \_ People who don't believe in fairy tales cannot be fully
           \_ Maybe you missed the core concept here: he got caught and busted
              not protected and excused.  You want checks and balances, you got
              them.  This guy is now in jail.  What more could you want?  I
              know ebing knee-jerk is more fun, but really.
              \_ And you miss his core concept.  He's saying we _actually do_
                 have to worry about our civil liberties and abuses thereof
                 is that people like this are in the machine.  His argument
                 is not with you.  His argument is with the president and his
                 "Trust me" argument.  That this guy was caught doesn't make
                 the system any more trustworthy.
                 Funny fact: Do you know he's the third DHS employee in the
                 last three months arrested for sex-with-children charges?
                 \_ Oh no, I understood his point perfectly.  You again miss
                    mine.  People are people.  Any system will always have fuck
                    heads like that guy in it.  That's why we have other people
                    looking for people like that and when they're found they
                    get tossed in prison and never get put in any position of
                    trust ever again.  What system could you possibly create
                    that wouldn't require some level of trust of the people
                    who run it and would magically pre-filter fuck heads out
                    before they commit a crime?  In this case there was no
                    victim because he was caught and filtered before he found
                    a *real* 14 year old girl (as far as we know).  And now
                    he's a dead man and rightly so.  The system worked.  I see
                    no problem here.
                    \_ I, and the previous poster, are not saying "we need to/
                       can make the system trustworthy."  We are speaking to
                       the President's claim that his actions (warrantless
                       wiretaps, extraordinary rendition, et.al.) are
                       implicitly trustworthy.  As you say, the system worked
                       to catch this guy.  What we're talking about are the
                       systems that have recently been constructed that don't
                       have the necessary checks.
                       \_ you missed the big one: label someone as
                          "enemy combatent" and lock them in torture
                          chamber somewhere in Egypt/Pakistan and doesn't allow
                          Red Cross to examine them :p
                    \_ That's right every system will have fuckups and
                       criminals and power hungry bastards which is why when
                       Bush starts talking about the "unitary executive" and
                       being able to ignore any law Congress passed because
                       he's on a never-ending quest to rid the world of terra,
                       and ignore any court oversight too, people start to
                       worry about "the system" no longer policiing itself
                       worry about "the system" no longer policing itself
2006/4/4-6 [Health/Disease/General, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:42656 Activity:moderate
4/4     "The [black] kids here have no hope. They have nothing to aspire to
         other that being a rapper or an athlete, and that's a million-to-one
         shot. In my neighborhood the only people recruiting are the gangs."
          \_ http://www.lyricsfreak.com/d/dead-kennedys/38151.html
             "Empty plastic
             Culture slum suburbia
             Is a war zone now
             Sprouting the kinds of gangs
             We thought we'd left behind
             This could be anywhere
             This could be everywhere"
             \_ Everything I know came from a lyrics site on the net, too.
         \_ after centuries of oppression, what do you expect?
            "here is your freedom from slavery, not get the fuck out
            "here is your freedom from slavery, now get the fuck out
             of here"
            \_ Yeah, right.
               \_ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study
                   We gained so much valuable medical information from
                   these experiments.
                   And don't forget all blacks love that guy Jim Crow!!
        \_ And up above you can see anonymous people arguing like idiots! -dans
           \_ why are you not hanging out with your hot gf instead of
              nuking the motd?
              \_ UCSC is back in session.  She has school, I have work to do
                 for clients. -dans
                 \_  You work for a think tank that studies the crazy political
                     positions of computer industry professionals?  That's cool.
                     Are they hiring?
                     positions of computer industry professionals?  That's
                     cool. Are they hiring?
                     \_ Get in line, buddy!  I've been here way longer than
                        you!  There's a seniority system in place.
        \_ I totally agree that black kids have no hope. I mean until ROTJ
           black kids could hope to become a Dark Lord of the Sith w/
           unrivaled force powers and other 1337 mad skillz, but then Lucas
           screws it all up by revealing that the badest black man in the
           history of the universe was really a pastey old white geezer. That
           is the real crime. Now all black kids have to hope for is to become
           Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Sec. of State or a Justice of the
           Supreme Court. Not one lightsaber amongst them, talk about a total
           let down. -stmg
           \_ But they can be like Lando Calrissian and drink Colt 45!
              \_ Lando sold out to a pastey old white guy. =(
              \_ "I'm altering our deal. Pray I don't alter it any futher."
           \_ Uh, so until then you thought Luke might be part black?
              \_ "You don't know the power of the Dark Side."
                 Besides in a galaxy, far far awy, Black + White could
                 equal whiny, long haired blond luser. -stmg
2006/4/4 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:42655 Activity:nil
4/4     http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4866964.stm
        The Culture of Corruption making headlines. Any more on the list?
2006/4/3-4 [Recreation/Computer/Games, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:42640 Activity:nil
4/3     Michigan Video Game Law ruled unconstitutional:
2006/4/3-4 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:42639 Activity:moderate
4/3     Corrupt thieving scum, Tom DeLay, withdrawing from his 2006
        congressional bid.  (cnn.com breaking news)
        Story from Time:
        (and goddammit, stop overwriting, sprawl bitch)
        \_ He needs to leave so that his colleagues can do a better job
           gerrymandering, laundering, and funneling campaign cash.
        \_ "I am not a federal employee. I am a constitutional officer. My job
           is the Constitution of the United States, I am not a government
           employee. I am in the Constitution." Tom DeLay, in a CNN interview
           \_ Mr. "I am the Law!"
              \_ In the cursed Earth where the mutants dwell
                 There is no law just a living hell
                 Anarchy and chaos and the blood runs red
                 This would change if it were up to Dred
                 The book of law is the bible to him
                 Any crime commited is a sin
                 He keeps peace with his lawgiver ...
                 Judge, jury, and executionerrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!
                 RESPECT THE BADGE!
                 He earned it with his blood
                 FEAR THE GUN
                 Your sentence may be death because
                 I AM THE LAW!!!!!!
        \_ Frankly he doesn't seem to be any more corrupt and thieving than his
           434 colleagues.
           \_ I would disagree.  He appears to be the most organized
              and effective of his 434 colleagues when it comes to
              gerrymandering and laundering^^^^^funneling campaign
              cash to his cronies.
              \_ Oh granted he's one of the most partisan of the house, and for
                 that reason I'm happy that he's leaving, but he certainly
                 doesn't seem measurably worse than the others.
                 \_ partisan?  uhm, duh?  you know what the party system is
                    all about right?
                 \_ Um, do a little research.  His partisanship is not what
                    got him named in multiple indictments.
           \_ He's a Republican.  That alone makes him Evil and Corrupt.  No
              need for a trial or anything to prove that.
              \_ Find me a Dem who demanded that Terry Schiavo be kept on
                 life support despite pulling the plug on his own father, and
                 I'll boo him, too.
                 \_ I told you he was evil on his party alone.  What more do
                    you want?
2006/3/23 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:42388 Activity:nil
3/22    OJ
        \_ Simpson
           \_ guilty
              \_ Chewbacca Defence
        \_ juice
           \_ vitamin C
        \_ Oliver Juang
           \_ hello kitty
              \_ Japan
           \_ TRACI LORDS
           \_ engineer
              \_ LIBERTARIAN!!1!!
              \_ nerd
           \_ Oliver Klozoff
2006/3/20-21 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Foreign/Asia/India, Reference/Religion] UID:42331 Activity:moderate
3/20    religion of peace - or intolerance?
        \_ bad decision on the gov.'s part.  best case is they
           should just exile the poor guy.  it sucks that people
           magically pull laws out of their ass and say
           "it's Islamic law!" when it was really only in the hadith,
           not the koran.
        \_ let's kick some middle east butt then
        \_ if you dont believe in islam, you are attacking it
        and therefore you have to die.. paraphrasing the judge
        so.. everyone who is not muslim must die then..
           \_ that explains the 99% muslim rate in afghanistan.
             \_they maintain a 1% hindu population in order
                to maintain their shooting skills
        \_ They'll get what's coming to them after we've exploited
           all their countries' natural resources (e.g., oil)
           - passive aggressive man
           \_ the liberal view is to just wipe them out first
           and then take their oil freely?
        \_ Mission Accomplished!
        \_ From the BBC version:
           "The editor of a women's rights magazine was convicted of insulting
            Islam and sentenced to death last year - but was later released
            after an apology and heavy international pressure."
           Expect a similar result here. Executing apostates would
           significantly undermine Karzai.
2006/3/12-14 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:42199 Activity:nil
3/12    If there is a draft, what's the best way to avoid it? Get a tatoo.
        Yep, you can't have them in the military!
        \_ Draft?  There is no draft and there won't be one without some sort
           of catastrophy like the US mainland getting invaded or a nuke
           exchange or some other unlikely scenarios.  If we ever do have
           another draft, there won't be an easy way to avoid it because the
           circumstances will be so dire.  Drafted soldiers are against
           everything the top brass believes in for the last 30 years.
           \_ The "military experts" on the motd are just as annoying as the
              draft hysterics.
              \_ You don't have to be an expert to read newspapers and
                 understand the most trivial aspects of current military
                 \_ Ahh yes, newspapers.  Let's just fire all the generals
                    and leave the military decisions to the Sodans armed with
                    the New York Times!
                    \_ That's a weak strawman.  I said nothing of the sort.
                       If you can't address what was said, then don't.  It
                       is ok to be wrong sometimes.
                       \_ You weren't addressing my point either, which was
                          general annoyance at all the ridiculous undergrad
                          pontification that goes on around here.  Certain
                          topics seem to attract this sort of thing, like
                          flies on shit.
                          \_ The irony here is rich:  you're criticizing
                             the other guy for maybe having clue when you
                             clearly have none.  Nice.   Train harder,
                             young trollhopper.
                    \_ Sounds better than firing the generals and leaving
                       military decisions up to a moron frat boy who doesn't
                       even read the paper.
                       \_ Ahh, name calling.  Thanks for playing!
                          \_ Right, and likening people to "flies on shit"
                             is sooooo much better.  Grow up, man.
        \_ "I am gay."
2006/3/3-6 [Reference/Law/Court, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:42091 Activity:nil
3/3     http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-palomares3mar03,0,7560875.story
        "While this story sounds like a script from 'The Shield' or 'Training
        Day,' it actually happened."
        \_ What's a "civilian custodial officer"?
2006/3/3-6 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:42089 Activity:high
3/3     http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/03/03/cunningham.sentence.ap
        Take a bribe for $2 mil for only 10 years in prison. That's
        still over 2X the amount I make a year as an engineer and
        1.5X the amount average Harvard MBAs make. Moral of the story:
        it's ok to take a bribe as long as the amount is big enough,
        because it pays off.
        \_ You think being in prison, even a country club prison, for 10
           years is worth it?  I'll take my freedom thanks.  The price for
           freedom is way higher than 2x your salary.
                \_ Seriously. this douchebag op thinks prison can't be
                   any harder than a day away from his computer, and
                   actually doesn't realize how he'd likely die within
                   one week, literally, of prison life. people the likes
                   of us on the motd don't last long in prison.
                   \_ My old CS250 TA did a year in county lock-up.  It wasn't
                      fun, but he survived ok.  He's a really sweet guy too.
        \_ Did you read the article?  First off, it's all in gifts, it's
           not like they just handed him $2.4mil.  Two, he probably
           doesn't get to keep the stuff.  Three, he's old and in poor
           health.  I don't think I'd take $2mil to die in prison.
           \_ He's also probably going to face a big fine as well.  An earlier
              version of that article claimed $1.6M, but the current article
              on CNN doesn't say....
           \_ He's also probably going to face a big fine as well.  According
              to Yahoo News, he was ordered to pay $1.8M and return $1.85M
              in valuables.  I'm inclined to think that this contradicts the
              "Moral of the story" you've asserted, OP.
           \_ He doesn't get to keep it.  In fact, it's being auctioned off.
              He got 100 months, btw.  (8y4m)  In sheer dollar amounts, his
              is the largest set of bribes discovered in the history of the
              \_ I don't buy this crap about being the largest set of
                 bribes. Surely the money Bush or Cheney personally
                 gained from the Iraq war would make this seems like
                 pocket change.
                 \_ Perhaps they mean the largest in the sense of "the
                    largest where there's been a conviction".
                 \_ How much did they each make?
                 \_ I'm glad you think rich people conspire "illegal"
                    ways to get richer.
2006/3/2-5 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:42076 Activity:nil
3/2     http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/03/02/homeschool.growth.reut
        Home Schooling more and more popular in the US. Many of the parents
        do so to teach diversity in politics, religion, moral/ethics,
        family values, and such. Go conservative America!
        \_ I'm a liberal, and I'm tempted to do it, because without vouchers
           the only school I could afford to send my child to (without moving
           to a different neighborhood) is the local crapshack Union-run moron
                \- or you could SUE and send your kid to school in Switzerland!
           \_ down with lazy teacher's unions!
              \_ Yes! down with the lazy and corrupt union.
                \_ yes! (except it's not just the teacher's union that's lazy)
                    \_ why do you guys HATE the CHILDREN ?
2006/3/2-4 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Academia/GradSchool] UID:42062 Activity:nil
3/2     Nancy Grace is the new James Frey
2006/3/1-4 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Recreation/Media] UID:42058 Activity:nil
3/1     http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060301/od_nm/cannibal_film_dc
        Proof that Germans are the weirdest people in the world.
        \_ http://snltranscripts.jt.org/90/90asprockets.phtml
2006/2/26-27 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:42010 Activity:low
2/26    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1583995/posts
        Legal and illegal immigrants booted out of the country because
        of drugs, money laundering, bank fraud, fake IDs
        \_ Were any of the people booted out Caucasian?  How about
           criminal and money penalties against famers employing
           illegal aliens? Maybe illegal aliens should try the
           "i was confused (and thought i was still in mexico)"
           defense ... i mean it is good enough for highly compensated,
           well-educated business executives.
           \_ Farmers are fined when they're caught employing illegal aliens.
              \- the point is how vigorous is enforcement. duh.
                 and see point about criminal penalties in addition to
                 \_ Why do you hate pro-business America? It's not business'
                    fault they hired an illegal, it's the illegal's fault
                    for being illegal. Figuring out who is legal and who is
                    not is too hard for the small business owners like Tyson
                    Chicken or Walmart. Get government regulators off the
                    backs of the business man.
                    \_ Err, is this post intended to be satirical?  I'm
                       honestly not sure....
                    \_ it *IS* the business' fault if they didn't follow legally
                       mandated requirements for  checking proof of eligibility
                       to work.
        \_ "...charged in New York with drug possession and trafficking,
           money laundering, bank and credit-card fraud or producing false
           identities."  Sounds like the IIRAIRA in action.  Passed in 1996,
           came out of a commission set up by Clinton and chaired by Barbara
           Jordan, to make it easy (among other things) to deport "aggravated
2006/2/21-23 [Reference/Law/Court, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:41945 Activity:low
2/21    Michael Morales, convicted of brutally murdering a 17-year-old
        A-student who had sung in church choir and who was working part-time to
        earn money for college, has had his execution indefinitely postponed.
        FYI, his sentencing judge formally recommended commutation from death
        to life-in-prison w/o parole last month, after it was found that the
        prosecution's star witness had lied about a Morales making a
        \_ Uhm, yeahhh.....
           http://tinyurl.com/l2yua    (reuters)
           \_ "Killer's Execution is Postponed Indefinitely"
              http://csua.org/u/f1l (latimes.com)
              Original post implied it was postponed because of the trial
              judge recommendation.  This was incorrect.  Delay is for
              review of execution procedures, hearing scheduled May 1. -op
           \_"The sworn statements of six jurors supporting the clemency bid
              and another statement from a prosecution witness recanting her
              testimony were proved to be forgeries by the prosecuting team."
             Dude, Ken Starr is fucking tool.
              \_ Yeah, but even so, the trial judge supports commutation
                 to life w/o possibility of parole because of the star witness
                 to life w/o possibility of parole because the star witness
        \_ But didn't he also claim to have "turned his life around" and
           "sought forgiveness"?  Doesn't that imply he, at least after his
           initial trial, was admitting guilt?
           \_ I think there is no doubt he did it, but I also think that there
              is a question whether the jury would have went with death w/o
              the star witness.  I think that's why the trial judge said
              what he said.
2006/2/12-13 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:41811 Activity:moderate
2/11    "Oh, and the President was arrested for murder.  More on that
        tomorrow night, or you can turn to another channel." -Kent
        \_ Truth stranger than fiction:
        \_ It can't be a murder. It gotta be a suicide, by two control
           shots in the back of his head.
           \_ He fell down an elevator shaft and landed on some bullets.
        \_ I don't know much about hunting, but I thought it's standard bird-
           hunting procedure to never point your shotgun near level or lower
           when you're aiming, let alone when pulling the trigger.
           \_ Pretty much.  But they were Quayle hunting, and I think
              Quayle tend to stay fairly low to the ground.
           \_ Pretty much.  But they were quail hunting, and I think
              quail tend to stay fairly low to the ground.
2006/2/12-15 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:41809 Activity:nil
2/12    Islam is the Vic-20 of cultures:
        \_ I miss JUMPMAN
           \_ These days it's called "BEHEAD MAN"
2006/2/7-9 [Reference/Law/Court, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:41743 Activity:nil
2/7     Who gave this guy a nano?
        http://tinyurl.com/b525g - danh
        \_ That looks like a cell phone to me
        \_ Is this an in-jail pic? 'Cos that looks like a knife handle to me.
           \_ It would be funny if we have a picture of Bin Laden listening
              on the iPod.
           \_ without a blade ... http://csua.org/u/ex6 (yahoo.com)
              \_ Good eye. Thanks
2006/2/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:41728 Activity:nil
2/6     Uh, so why is Gonzales not testifying under oath?
        \_ Because congressional Republicans have decided that castrating
           themselves at the altar of Bush is a fine way to run a country.
        \_ It's a crime to lie to Congress whether you're under oath or not.
           But not putting him under oath means no symbolic photo of him
           raising his right hand.  Propaganda war is everything.
        \_ U.S. Code, Statements http://tinyurl.com/7p7q6
           U.S. Code, Perjury http://tinyurl.com/9shkt (both http://cornell.edu)
           Okay, I am not a lawyer, someone pls figure out the diff.
           "I think what we did was legal." (but you actually think it wasn't)
           It turns out to be legal, but proof is found showing you didn't
           actually think it was legal (you knowingly lied about what you
             Perjury:  Yes.
             Materially false/fictitious/fraudulent/misrep statement:  No.
           Gonzales was not sworn in, so cannot be found guilty of perjury, but
           can be for false statements.  I am not a lawyer. -op
2006/2/2 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:41677 Activity:nil
2/2     http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060202/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/cia_leak_1
        Ignore who is the source of which quote, but what's the difference
        between the sentences below:
        (1) In an abundance of caution, we advise you that we have learned
        that not all e-mail of the Office of Vice President and the Executive
        Office of the President for certain time periods in 2003 was preserved
        through the normal archiving process on the White House computer
        (2) Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald is raising the possibility that
        records sought in the CIA leak investigation could be missing because
        of an e-mail archiving problem at the White House.
2021/12/06 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
Results 301 - 450 of 522   < 1 2 3 4 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Domestic:Crime: