Thursday assorted links


7. Scott Sumner on bubbleheads:

2. Russ Roberts problem is that the No Defect strategy is known to fail in a world of predators. It is exactly this sort of unilateral disarmament that is dooming the moderates to irrelevance.

Me, I sort of like the fact that mainstream libertarians are now considered "moderates".

...sounds more like a devout religionist than libertarian. How would one recognize a genuine libertarian if you bumped into one?

Ask him what the income flat tax should be. "Zero" is what you'll want to be listening for.

Also, ask him which seasteading island he lives on

Pick two controversial topics - one in which the tribal positions of the left aligns with libertarian policies, and one in which the tribal positions of the right aligns with libertarian policies. Controversial topics like immigration and gay marriage, where there are stark divisions between left and right.
If they advocate the libertarian position in both cases they might be a real libertarian.


1. Smells like wet pussy
2. Smells like my butthole

Amusingly Hazel is hard left on both of those issues thus demonstrating yet again her fealty to leftism.

Yesterday I went for a walk in the park and literally said hello to "everyone and their dog." I recommend that to anyone who thinks the veneer of civilization is thinning. People (and their dogs) are nice.

Also, take bipartisan legislation wherever you can find it.

Did you try to engage them in a conversation about politics? See what happens then.

That's kind of the point, in real life we don't try to immediately identify differences .. and if people have differences they don't usually express them with much ferocity to an adult male(*).

The internet inplugs all sorts of inate wiring designed for social cooperation and cohesion.

* - the only place this is not true is in the lower strata, where no one has much to lose by a trip to the hospital or the police station.

Speaking of things that can send you to the hospital or the police station, an unfortunate example above.

They say such trolls are "normal" in other regards, but I say they've just got one screw loose, rather than the two or three that would get them an involuntary psych exam.

They keep it under control in real life, because consequences.

If imitation is the highest form of flattery, what's the second highest?

How'd they like your "Make America Great Again" cap?

Because I know you wore one. ;-)

I was wearing my yellow running shoes with blue laces. I do think those things make me more accessible. Or perhaps in need of assistance.

Reminds me of Noah Smith's line .. that the internet used to be refuge from real life, but now real life is refuge from the internet.


But we are not in a Prisonners Dilema game here. What does Russ personally lose from his strategy just because his ideological enemies other people ramp up the volume? He only loses anything to the extent that he identifies his own good with an ideology.

#3: should be described better as "random guy steals identity from licensed architect to get jobs as licensed architect".

The guy was convicted of larceny. The personal property that was unlawfully taken was architect's license of another person.

That seems quite a stretch. How exactly was the other architect injured? Was he prevented from using the license himself? Was his reputation damaged? And would you favor convicting and imprisoning all undocumented workers who have 'stolen' the social security numbers in order to work in the U.S. Notably absent from the article, BTW, was any evidence that his work as a 'small-A' architect was substandard or dangerous. It's curious that it didn't even seem to come up one way or the other.

Dangerous? the article provides a link to the prosecutor's investigation:

"Newman also allegedly took the Professional Engineer Stamp of a licensed engineer that he worked with on one or more projects and fraudulently affixed a copy of the stamp, with a forged signature, to over 1,000 pages of building plans for the projects listed above. Finally, Newman allegedly affixed fraudulent stamps and used the title “architect” on energy compliance certificates, foundation inspections, field reports, and AIA certificates."

An ignorant guy designed structures (building plans) pretending to be an engineer. The same ignorant guy conducted foundation inspections and made field reports. So, it's not about a green or yellow facade, it's about the structural integrity of buildings.

The victim here is not the architect whose license was stolen, but the clients that paid too much for trash produced by a high-school graduate.

Ps. next time you get an speeding ticket try the next line: "I did not hurt anyone and did not damage any property". Report your results later =)

As far as anybody knows, none of the buildings he designed fell down, everybody but one client got what he wanted. Engineers and other licensed professionals screw up all the time yet still retain their license. See this one:

It hasn't been established that he was ignorant, only unlicensed. His training was the same as most architects through history -- namely, apprenticeship. It's possible that his lack of formal training and certification resulted in specific structures that are dangerously substandard and, therefore, clients who will have to tear apart buildings for extensive re-work. But nobody seems to be claiming that. As a part of the case, did they have licensed architects and engineers review his past work? And did they find serious problems? I have to believe that if that were true, it would have been part of the case against him and would have been mentioned in the article. But I didn't see any of that.

BTW, I often drive 5-10 over and haven't been stopped for decades. You may have noticed that authorities don't enforce every law to the letter.

"next time you get an speeding ticket try the next line: “I did not hurt anyone and did not damage any property”. Report your results later =)"

A better argument is, "next time you get arrested for failing to appear in court for my speeding violation resulting from me stealing your identity..."

Hey, I didn't harm anyone by speeding so why should you be penalized for speeding by identity theft.

But did the architect whose licence # he used suffer any negative consequences as a result? None are mentioned in the article.

I had a licensed architect (not a fake) design a building that could not be built. The site boss changed the drawings until the parts fit.

Telling the cop "I did not hurt anyone or damage any property" usually results in a $175 fine instead of a jail sentence.

Turn him loose.

@Larry Siegel: that's sensible.

Jailtime is excesive, fines are optimal for mistakes were no one is hurt.

"would you favor convicting and imprisoning all undocumented workers who have ‘stolen’ the social security numbers "

Why the scare quotes around ‘stolen’? That is what they are doing.

And, yes, is the correct answer to your question [before deporting them].

" license, no work for you" ... said NY attorney general, Eric T. Schneiderman

Obviously the current civil & criminal penalties for the core offense of working without specific government permission... are insufficient to deter evil-doers. Much stronger penalties are needed ... perhaps water-boarding or capital punishment?

The law is the law. That said, he actually appears to have fallen into the category "talented-but-unlicensed" rather than "scam-artist-selling-snake-oil". I mean, there don't appear to have been any complaints about his work up until the dispute in Florida, and he actually won one award. Again, the law is the law, and it's certainly possible that he was not merely faking stamps but faking the expertise in inspections that is supposed to go along with the stamps, but at the moment it seems like a waste.

Whether he was “talented-but-unlicensed” is besides the point. He could have very well been “incompetent-and-unlicensed”. Its just luck he was talented.

He was punished to deter the “incompetent-and-unlicensed”.

Like I said, the law is the law....

"Das Gesetz ist das Gesetz, as Himmler, Eichmann or Goering might well have said.

"He was punished to deter the “incompetent-and-unlicensed”. Sadly, there are no licensing requirements or competency tests for the legislators that enact laws.

The important question here is whether the law is just - not whether the law should be upheld. And repeat work (or lack thereof) has a way of punishing the incompetent. He wouldn't have been able to run a successful business with repeat work if he was bad at what he did. Clearly the law is good at deterring talented new entrants and restricting the supply of architects, but it's less clear that it's in interests of consumers.

Also, Tadao Ando (that's Pritzker Prize Winning Architect Tadao Ando to us mere mortals) is also a self taught (read unqualified) architect. Nobody has jailed him for his work. Or denied him the title of architect either.

He was punished to deter the “incompetent-and-unlicensed”.

My wife works in medicine. She deals with cleaning up the mistakes of 'incompetent-but-licensed' practitioners all the time. I have little to no confidence that state licensing assures competence in medicine, architecture or really any field at all.

3b) So that is it. The gods are, as Anatole France pointed out, thirsty. Revenge is paramount. No recovery allowed. It can not stop until a life is completly ruined.

Eh, we've seen plenty of lives ruined for far less. It's probably not a great outcome, but neither is it the worst injustice I've ever witnessed. I mean, she murdered her kid, and it sounds like she still has plenty of options besides Harvard. (We will leave aside Kipling's question of "before or after the birth", since as he also noted it is of only academic interest.)

She murdered her 4 year old child and hid the body.

4 years old. Her own child.

She should have been let to rot.

Harvard, for once, did the right thing. Her defenders are moral monsters too.

I thought America had laws on the books to deal with murderers. I did not notice Harvard was the country's law enforcement/punishment apparatus of the country.

"I'm not suggesting Harvard is the answer to juvenile delinquency. " - Ronald Reagan
Maybe, after all, Harvard is he answer to deliquence. We just have to prevent former jailbirds from being accepted there. Well, who cares about Justice when one can get revenge?

Its not a "law enforcement/punishment apparatus" but it is capable of making moral judgments.

She is a depraved monster and no number of plays or research projects will make up for her crime.

"who cares about Justice when one can get revenge"

I care about justice for her murdered son.

So that is what Americans have becone: a lynching mob who cares nothing about meritocracy as long s they can drink all their bile. I can not imagine a Brazilian university looking anything other than a candidate's merit when assessing his/her suitability. I can not imagine Brazilians being taken by such lust for revenge at any price.

I will say that as a liberal, I am heartened by Harvard's decision. Murder is a heinous crime, and murdering a child even more so, to say nothing of murdering one's own child. Also, Harvard is the most prestigious university in the US, perhaps even the most prestigious university in the world. To admit someone as a PhD candidate at Harvard isn't just giving them a job, it is to exalt them and elevate them to the elite in academia. Harvard shouldn't let convicted rapists into its PhD programs, because to do so would send the message that rape does not bar one from public exaltation and admission into the halls of power. The same should be true for murder. If only the voting public had enough rectitude to consider criminal behavior a bar to high office.

Yep, if only those who know better than the people were in charge of our lives... I can not imagine Brazilians becoming a mob, hunting down their peers, tormenting a person who paid his/her debt to societ. I can not imagine revenge trumping meritocracy.

To quote Mr. Sophocles, "I was born to join in love, not hate--that is my nature".

So you are saying that a murderer is more deserving of entrance to the halls of power than someone who isn't a murderer, and that Trump is more deserving of the presidency than Hillary? Although I will grant that in past times, when the social hierarchy and economy were based around serfdom or slavery, being a murderer was probably a prerequisite for being an effective member of the elite. However, I thought that the modern world was better than that. I guess Pinker was wrong, after all.

P Burgos well said

"So you are saying that a murderer is more deserving of entrance to the halls of power than someone who isn’t a murderer"
I am saying free citizens should be judged on their merits under the law, not your whims or your lust fro blood.

The morality of America's founders, the Puritans, continues to guide contemporary thinking after over 400 years. The foundation of Christian belief, forgiveness and redemption, was ignored and forgotten by the warped Puritans, coincidentally founders of Harvard University, who delighted in hanging witches. With that line of thinking, why not life imprisonment for all crimes?

Or public executions for all crimes... Sad.

You're a parody of a sick priest: "all that produces affects and blood is revenge."

"So that's it: "cast the first stone, cast all stones, that is Moses and the Prophets"

Moses wiped out whole cities including "the little ones" (on God's orders of course), so I wouldn't hold him up as a shining example of forgiveness. (As a pagan, I wouldn't have shed many tears had she been thrown to the lions.)

I was using him more in the biblical sense (which Christ quote and Marx mocked) of summing up the law of the land. Apparently, revenge is now America's foremost commandment. Woe to you, America!

Thiago, bruh, seriously...

I don't see that there's a clearly right decision either way for Harvard.

She committed a really awful crime, and then served many years in prison and finally was released. The crime itself does not seem like something that she would be likely to repeat while at Harvard, and she doesn't seem like an obvious threat to the students or faculty there. One thing you'd want to know, before hiring her, is whether she is now likely to be dangerous to people around her, or whether this horrible crime she committed was probably a one-off.

She would probably be the only person on campus with some experiences (probably not many people who've spent 20 years in prison), and that might be interesting to have. There are perspectives she'd probably have that nobody else would. This is the interesting kind of diversity--people whose lives have been so different from yours that they see the world in entirely different ways.

On the other hand, she did commit a really horrible crime. In a world where people will protest your presence on campus because they're mad at you about a book you wrote 20 years ago (which they haven't bothered reading), it seems likely that many people might refuse to have anything to do with her.

And Harvard probably wants to make some moral statements with its hires. They can decide whether they'd rather send the message "we believe in rehabilitation" or "murdering helpless people in your care is really bad."

Is she a sociopath? Her son's body - did she reveal what she did with it? Does she demonstrate any convincing remorse? Claiming a single "reason" for a decision is delusional, but my guess is that it is concern for the Snowflakes that are nearly all of Harvard's student body, and most of its staff. They would be sheep waiting to be slaughtered surrounding a hungry wolf - a hardened criminal who has spent the last 20 years learning how to survive in a brutal, remorseless institution. Maybe she could room with your daughter. Going from an institution with practically zero academic pressure (but enormous pressures in other areas) to an institution with enormous academic pressures (and little structure/expectations in all other areas of personal and social conduct) seems like quite a leap - even assuming she's rehabilitated, which can't be known. I'd think a less academically challenging and slower transition from prison to graduate school might be best for her.

There is no redemption without (Christian) religion (pagan justice would generally be much harsher), so the real hypocrisy is secular historians blathering on about it. And redemption does not necessarily mean that a murderess (how cissexist of TC!) of her 4 year old child gets to go on to Harvard, get a nice job, and all but forget about her crime.

It's an obnoxious idea to suggest that the members of civil society surrender their private moral judgments to the state and allow the state to be the sole means of holding people morally responsible for their crimes. The only debt that has been discharged has been to the citizens acting in their collective capacity to deprive a criminal of life, liberty, and property--only. Any additional sanctions are precisely the preserve of civil society. (Somehow, I don't think that they would have been as eager to admit a murderer with very different intersectional identities.)

"It’s an obnoxious idea to suggest that the members of civil society surrender their private moral judgments to the state and allow the state to be the sole means of holding people morally responsible for their crimes."

The mob won't surrender its rights to a vendetta. America reverts to before Moses, before Hammurabi. Until all that is left is the war of everyone against everyone else.

Only for illegal activities (I take it murder is illegal in the USA)? Or for any activity Harvard deems immoral?

"Until all that is left is the war of everyone against everyone else." Very Hobbesian of you. Of course Hobbes denied the right to any private judgments of good and evil and not coincidentally denied that there is such a thing as tyranny.

I suppose you think that a university should not bar a convicted rapist either because that too would be a "mob vendetta." Somehow I doubt that the oh-so-charitable faculty would be quite so quick to agree.

In Brazil, it surely would. Meritocracy is supreme, and a person who has paid their debt to society would never be hunted down like an animal.

So Jones got certified as a paralegal and did historical research about how the Quakers allegedly mistreated female prisoners. All that shows is that she's now better able to manipulate the legal system and to whine about the conditions of prisoners. That's selfish narcissism masquerading as redemption.

No one with any true sense of moral obligation believes that her bloody hands were wiped clean after leaving prison. That is merely the first step to re-entry into civilized life.

You will always be able to whine about her re-entrying "civilized life" no matter what she does or how much time goes by.

3: why not? Surely wouldn't be the first time.

You're an idiot.

Chicago hired Bill Ayers as a professor, surely a bigger step than admitting a student.

The body count from Harvard Alumni is probably pretty damn high honestly.

'the [Harvard] graduate school “is committed to recruiting and enrolling students from all backgrounds”' excluding murderers of small children, obs.

'with Harvard her first choice because of [insert preposterous excuse]'

'“Michelle was sentenced in a courtroom to serve X years, but we decided — unilaterally — that it should be X years plus no Harvard”: what's hard to understand about 'Ms. Jones was sentenced to 50 years in prison, but was released after 20'?

She should have changed her name to Michael and claimed to be transgendered: they'd have let her in then. It's no more crooked than making a fake claim to be a Cherokee.

Personally I'd have rejected her too: bloody dance compositions indeed.

"what’s hard to understand about ‘Ms. Jones was sentenced to 50 years in prison, but was released after 20’?"


One would expect better of Indiana.

I guess the SJW rot is very widespread.

-- 2: "The current state of the country and the current state of political and intellectual conversation depresses me in a way that it never has before."

Translation: "My tribe lost an election and I am too childish to cope. Let me whine for awhile. Hopefully some other liberals will link to me."

Another case of not bothering to RTFA. The guy bends over backwards to be fair to Trump supporters.

The dude is signaling Grey-Red tribe hard. He's calling out college campus sensitivity and bringing up Jordan Peterson. He's also a libertarian.

Yes, what's up with citing Jordan Peterson as some kind of calm moderate. Doesn't he have a YouTube channel where is rants about SJWs?

It sounds like you've looked into the matter sufficiently to satisfy your own smugness, which I'm guessing is plenty for you.


Fuck you, Adam.

While I think I understand your point and agree with it, I'd also not that whole charm of Peterson is that he is *immoderate*.

That is, he has a presentation style that is exciting because it is unconstrained, and somewhat bombastic. Yet it makes sense for Roberts to cite him because Peterson is a genuniely independent thinker who contributes to the independence of his audience.

People like Peterson are a good example of why I am suspicious of blanket calls for civility and moderation in discourse.

#2: What's worrying to me is that there doesn't appear to have been a major trigger for all the antagonism. There's no Vietnam or Cold War to trigger the bitter partisanship. The financial crisis is a decade in the rear view mirror and it wasn't all that big a deal, anyway. Today's brain-bashing episodes in Berkeley, Portland and wherever else really do seem to be driven by the narcissism of small differences, as discussed in the SSC piece Russ linked to, and amplified by social media. Not sure what can be done about that, but my instinct is to say that RR's entreaties for us all to focus on improving ourselves might be a bit pie in the sky. Instead, I would ask Americans to just distract themselves more. Watch more football, play more golf, ride that motorcycle more often. If your idea of recreation is insulting people on Twitter or whatever (hi, prior!), you should probably reallocate your time, anyway, because that's a pretty juvenile activity.

It seems a more convincing argument would be that politics is for losers. People who have a life don't have time to be outraged about politics; they have better things to spend their time on. Likewise, as they have real things in their life that they care about, they don't really care about other people's political views. If you love playing golf, is it more important that your golf buddies have the same political views as you or is it more important that they are quick with a joke and can help you lower your handicap?


Failure to provide proof of self-awareness.


This effort is trite and poorly aimed. Target is a snarky troll, not an outraged political fanatic. 1 1/2 out of 5 stars.

I blame social media. Hopefully it's only temporary while people get used to it.

And another +1

One of my pet theory is that Russia is running a psy-ops operation against us and most of the alt-right is composed of paid russian trolls.

My guesses:

Politics has become a zero sum game.
The personal has become the political, therefore everything is political.

The more power the government has, the higher the stakes get.

Yes, the more government can exert influence over your life the more people will fight for control of the government.

Not just your life, but other people's live too. A lot of people like pushing other people around.

We are reaching a demographic tipping point that will fundamentally change the nation. Not just racial replacement but family breakdown and other measures.

I don't see this breakdown in Asia where they don't have the same demographic problems. Social media isn't causing the same problems over there.

Well, they have different demographic problems in Asia, namely no one is having kids. Social media isn't as much a problem because everyone is too old to use it :-)

Nations are always changing, sometimes even fundamentally. Relax.

Low TFR is a problem in Asia, but they are also very crowded as it is. As long as they don't import replacements it will eventually turn around.

Rome was always changing in the 5th century...

It was changing in the 1st century too. And the US has been changing since 1776.

Thanks comrade, "racial replacement" is just the sort of divisive meme we are trying to sell.

"If your idea of recreation is insulting people on Twitter or whatever (hi, prior!), you should probably reallocate your time, anyway, because that’s a pretty juvenile activity."

It is, of course, worse than that. The flaw was not just potentially exploitable, it was exploited.

Hillary was just a bad candidate, dude.

Hillary was a bad candidate!

But I hope you have an open mind as you read the reams of direct evidence.

Direct evidence that they have Facebook in Russia? Seems a reasonable assertion to me.

You know, I know you are right partisan, but I thought you could hold it together on the objective reality. Be better than congressmen playing dumb.

I got so many links its ridiculous. Keep the questions coming!

"Instead, I would ask Americans to just distract themselves more. Watch more football, play more golf, ride that motorcycle more often"

"Eat, drink, be merry, for tomorrow we die". File under "Life in America".

But I guess convincing the rabid monkey to give up the wrench and back up from the control panel is a good idea, after all. How America became a rabid monkey-controlled country?!

Brazil is totes awesome

You are a perfect candidate for playing more golf.

No real Brazilian plays golf, and I am proud to say there is no good golf field in the state I am stationed at.

I think on some level most of the alt-right, Trump supporters know that they are the bad guys. It's just that they're so pissed off from years of trying to be reasonable and engage an unreasonable left, that they've decided to embrace objectively stupid, evil, and crazy positions, just to piss off their intellectual enemies. In a way, it's nice how they've enlarged the Overton window so radically that libertarians come across as sane, reasonable moderates.

On the other hand, the left is also getting crazier in response, and because this is all going on in the echo chamber environment of social media, there's a certain lack of self-awareness on both sides that their underlying motivation is basically because they just want to give each other the finger, and not because they are deeply serious about all of the positions they advocate in online arguments. So you end up with people on the right insisting that adults born in the US to illegal aliens should have their citizenship revoked and be deported, vs. people on the left screaming that school choice advocates secretly want to reimpose racial segregation. And then the layer of conspiracy theories on top of this in which Obama is a secret Muslim and James Buchanan invented public choice theory as part of a racist conspiracy.

At some point the sane moderates start getting attacked from both sides, because each side believes there are only two possible camps and if you aren't with them, you are against them. The concept of a third alternative, that one might accept only certain aspects of a narrative but not others, is incomprehensible. The narrative is complete and can only be understood and digested as a whole - it can't possibly be only partly true. Objecting to any part of it signals a secret alliegiance to the other side. And anyway, loyalty demands supporting the narrative of one's tribe, no matter how ridiculous it seems. What are you some sort of traitor? Get in line.

I don't the answer is Russ Robert's "just be civil". I think the answer is more to narrow the Overton window to exclude the rabid partisans of both sides. Narrow the window so that both of the tribal identities are outside of it and thus locked out of polite society until they learn how to behave.

"So you end up with people on the right insisting that adults born in the US to illegal aliens should have their citizenship revoked and be deported"

Birthright citizenship is an unusual immigration rule and many first world countries around the world would deport such a person. This isn't an extreme position, its extremely moderate. If you can't tell what the Overton Window should even be, you shouldn't be policing it.

We can grant kinds of residency status that are not permanent citizenship or even permanent residency.

The fact that other countries consider it normal to exclude people who were born and raised in their country based on who their parents or ancestors were doesn't mean it's moral or just or should be considered so.

Then don't talk about Overton Windows. I get that a lot of this is just sloppy thinking on your part and you don't even realize how slipshod your logic is- but if you are going to post a wall of self-stroking text about Overton windows expect responses about Overton Windows not your own bored housewife morality.

Good comment. I think DACA is about childhood arrivals though, so not citizens.

I think Trump got it right by throwing it back to Congress to decide what's happening to them rather continue the illegal DACA. Good precedence on reverting lawmaking back to the lawmakers rather than presidential overstepping of boundaries.

So far, Trump has been better than I expected. He deserves credit for ignoring the campaign play book and winning, and now he deserves credit for showing Washington how it can work. DACA via Congress is much better than executive order, Trump gets his 'wall', and the Dems get cover cuz it ain't a 'wall'.

This is pretty low-hanging fruit. Virtually everybody who has thought about immigration policy has proposed some sort of legalization for illegal immigrants in exchange for tighter border security. And, indeed, that appears to be the exact nature of the deal that was struck. Trump is lucky to have enough Democrats and moderate Republicans in Congress willing to vote on reasonable legislation.

Brian's point (I think), which I agree with, is for many the expectation was Trump was so totally unfit for office that he wouldn't even be able to pick the low hanging fruit. I still don't think a guy like that should be anywhere near the presidency, but he's there, and when he does something right he deserves credit. Also goes to show that the hysteria whenever one tribe sees the other tribe's guy get elected is just stupid. CDS, BDS, ODS, TDS....all so so stupid.

We've yet to see what the ultimate outcome of Trump's DACA decision is. Laws have not yet been passed, and there's still plenty of time for the right-wing inclination to round em up and deport them to take over.

Get a grip. I would guess a large majority of Americans supports DACA. Many Trump voters don't. They get their 'wall'. See how politics works?

It's really hard to tell what a "large majority" of Americans support in today's political climate.
Also, I'm not sure it matters. What matters is what Trump thinks will get him reelected.

Nope. The harsh truth is that early warnings like "stupid party" and "crazy party" were not heeded.

Rather than self-correct, they bottomed out.

Which is a dark comedy in itself:

No, not at all, whatever you call the alt right or the hard right, we are the only ones protecting the precious flame of Western civilization. we genuinely see ourselves as the good guys. I actually think that you want the mass murder of whites just like is happening in South Africa. I think you are the barbarian. Now, if you are talking about Nazi Larpers, they are just having fun getting a rise out of people, I don't think they have any genuine ideology.

America should adopt a parlamentary system.

3b. Reminds a bit of that affair back in the 1980s when Norman Mailer campaigned for the release of Jack Abbott, a murderer whose writings Mailer fancied. Abbott committed another murder a few weeks after his parole.

On some level, liberals truly identify with evil, which is why they consistently show more compassion to criminals than victims. The only exception is when the victim is a member of a flavor of the day special group.

That's always a good one. Hazel says liberals pushed conservatives to madness .. as conservatives say "liberals support the mass murder of pre-born babies so a 4 year old is just a very late term abortion."

Stupid party. Crazy party. Can't self-police for a dann. Anybody who tries is RINO.

Do you think any college would admit "Brock Turner" after he's served his time for laying next to a drunken woman who passed out?

Even the completely exonerated Duke Lacrosse Players didn't have top-tier schools falling over to admit them.

But if you're a woman who murders a disposable son, you have the red-carpet rolled out.

Brock Turner's pinkie finger is bigger than the 90% percentile penis length of this blog's audience.

"90% percentile"? = "0.9 percentile" ~= 1st percentile. So you're talking about 1 out of 100 audience members? And if you go away, it'll be zero.

Shitty at math and a small dick is no way to go through life son.


Re 3a: Did Thomas Jefferson have an architect's license?

It's outrageous to impose a jail sentence for a crime that had apparently no victims. According to the underlying article, the judge said. “Heaven forbid something like this caused injury because someone fell off a balcony because it wasn’t designed properly.” But nobody did, because according to all accounts, all his buildings were designed properly, while having a license is no guarantee for proper design either. What was really at stake here was the government's monopoly on licensing.

So, using some US citizen's identity to work in the US causes no harm so there should be no penalty for illegal workers who enter and then stay and work on a tourist visa??

Where in the article did you read that the man in question was illegally in this country? He wasn't, he was an American who worked in the area in which he grew up.

Where in my post did you read that I argued that the man should not be punished? He should, my point was that a jail sentence of several years is entirely out of proportion

Since when is forging an engineering certification a victimless crime?

It's all well and good to say that you can settle up damages in court after the building falls down. But that has large avoidable risks about things like buildings falling down, people getting killed or maimed, and staggeringly expensive and lengthy lawsuits.

Even in a libertarian paradise, it's hard to imagine that an insurance company wouldn't insist on having a certified architect sign off on a building's design before construction starts. Or that it wouldn't get bent out of shape if the guy who signed the design wasn't qualified to do so.

Most states today require a degree from an accredited school in order to obtain an architect license. Guess Frank Lloyd Wright wouldn't have made it. Must be the reason why his buildings are falling down...

2a. I advocate for equipoise.

2b. "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."-JFK

#4 Doga

No one has anything to say about Czukay? Not even the Radar Station guy? I thought that this was a site for old guys...

"The Marshall Project, a nonprofit news organization that focuses on criminal justice and produced this article for The New York Times ..."

I sort of recall Maureen Dowd twenty-odd years ago, proudly maintaining she was an old-school reporter, not a 'journalist.'

I guess the update would be, I'm a reporter! - not "an activist employed by a non-profit."

I think maybe I like the new system better.

Comments for this post are closed