anti_dan
19d ago
Since when has the FBI, or any intelligence agency, been able to contain anti-Trump leaks? They are so bad at infosec WRT Trump that they leak fake stories about him, invent their own fake stories about him, etc.
anti_dan
20d ago
This seems pretty damning.
It seems damning if you accept the paragraph you laid out as true, which it is not. There is fairly on point historical precedent in the case of Schlesinger v. Holtzman. In that case, no less than a Supreme Court justice ordered the executive branch to stop bombing Cambodia. They proceeded to continue to bomb Cambodia through all of the court proceedings until his absurd order was vacated, as this order will eventually be if it continues to be pressed, because like the Holtzman order, it is comically illegal for the judge to attempt to do what he did.
Once again a familiar pattern is emerging in this Trump administration, just as in the first: Many norms are being broken, but almost never by Trump, it is almost always the response to what Trump is doing that is unprecedented. Attempting to exert control over international relations at 8 PM on a Saturday from a DC court is, again, another norm-breaking act by Trump's opposition.
anti_dan
20d ago
Because all of that is expensive. Expensive in your own time because you have to go to the store every day instead of once a week; expensive because the shops can't be megastores on relatively cheap land, and instead have to be studio apartments that sell bread or parsnips; expensive because the stores have to get their food delivered somehow, and if there is no road, that has to be done with some alternative, slower, more expensive implement than a truck.
anti_dan
22d ago
The opinion, when read in full, makes it clear that the SCOTUS composition at the time was not believing this tale.
There was also lots of evidence that there was intentional racial discrimination baked into the results.
There was no reason SCOTUS had to make a ruling about disparate impact when one objectively evaluates the case. They wanted to make that ruling. Which makes sense, because that court was one of the the most overreaching courts in US history, and they also happened to be extremely left wing.
anti_dan
22d ago
They said that the company said they weren't . They clearly did not believe them. Said court was that eras equivalent of Sonia Sotomayor, but 6 of them.
anti_dan
22d ago
Griggs is a case where the defendant company was just using the tests to cover up intentional discrimination, which is one of many reasons that it is bad law. The trope of bad cases = bad law is common, and that is one. The more important part is that it substantively was written into the CRA in the early 90s as well, which makes overturning a sub-holding from a really dumb case only one obstacle.
I do agree that its not common in private practice, and wouldn't quickly become so to administer tests to applicants. That is too expensive. Instead, industries and unions would step in and have industry wide tests and/or union entrance exams. This diffuses the costs significantly so you aren't administering 100 tests to fill 3 positions. Instead, an aspiring machinist takes the Wunderlich, or something similar and then every possible employer in the country can see his machinist potential.
anti_dan
22d ago
Here is why I think Nate is wrong:
The difference this time, I’d argue, is that a shutdown would have put Trump and Musk in a highly awkward position. They’ve been arguing that all these governmental services are wasteful and unnecessary. Then there’s a shutdown, and notable voter-facing operations like National Parks and air travel are affected. People get really mad.
Actually, that is what happens when Republicans try to shut down the government when a Democrat is President and his cronies are running all of the departments. This, combined with the mainstream corporate media being overwhelmingly Democrat-aligned means this generates a very effective public pressure campaign that gets all but the most rock ribbed Republicans to soil themselves and cave.
Given that Musk has already been going around chopping off bits of the government without affecting anyone not employed directly by those programs, we have a proof of concept that a Republican-run shutdown could easily be ignored for months by the general public. THAT is a disaster for Democrats. If Trump were a Rand Paul level deficit hawk (which Silver correctly notes he is not) he would have intentionally played this chicken game HARD, and probably won decisively. As it is, he got a minor win without taking much risk.
anti_dan
25d ago
You are telling on yourself. Twitter isn't maga, Twitter is the lack of left wing censorship
anti_dan
25d ago
If you are certifying Ibrim Kendi there is no bar to clear. He's literally just a random guy who wrote a bunch of unsupported nonsense that supports left wing politics.
anti_dan
25d ago
I find this post to be generating a sentiment I generally agree with, and I also would point to there being a very important sub-portion of government that the split between liberals and conservatives seem to be fracturing around: Education.
If you are a conservative and went to public schools, you generally think a minority of your teachers were good and fair. If you are a progressive, the opposite is generally true. From 1st -12th grade I had 2 teachers total I would put in the category of good and fair. The vast majority were either unfair or bad, and a solid 70%+ were both.
This is all while I am a solid A student for all these years. I did not think these teachers were bad or unfair because they gave me bad grades, they were bad and unfair based on my other judgements. Usually how they treated other students, or how they expected ridiculous things from me like constantly pairing me in group projects with dumb/violent kids. Progressive kids I think generally like teachers. I think a lot of that is that they got good grades. Whence we are seeing the large M/F gap in both college attendance and partisanship. Girls keep getting good grades that are unearned in K-12, boys consistently over-perform on standardized tests now. Girls are getting more progressive, boys less so. Boys are seeing this unfairness more and more. On both ends. The 4.0 boy and the 2.0 boy are both being massively discriminated against in the most public facing institution in our government, the schools. And that is being reflected in poll results.
anti_dan
25d ago
This is insulting to What is a Woman. The depiction of trans advocates in that movie is entirely honest and without hyperbole.
anti_dan
25d ago
If you are only seeing white identity politics, then that is what you are looking for.
The right wing personalities worth following are rarely universal, because most people aren't infinite polyglots. And most issues aren't appropriate for all styles of people. Matt Walsh is basically a comedian. He is best followed when discussing DEI and Transgender issues, because the appropriate level of seriousness the left wing positions on those topics deserve is mockery and scorn. Matt Walsh barely talks about climate change (except to mock someone like Greta Thunburg) because its not an appropriate issue for his style, and he luckily knows it.
Someone like Bjorn Lundberg is more appropriate for talking about climate change because, while the left wing talking points around the issue are also absurd, it is a serious issue where much more nuance is actually appropriate. If you are looking for a one size fits all solution to understanding the right, you probably will not find one that satisfies you. But if you think there is one on the left I would like to know who you think that is. I would expect I would find several positions that quickly fall apart. I mean, just look at the pathetic performance of Sam Seder on that "stacked" show (I think that is the name) that is now going viral.
anti_dan
25d ago
There are few, but they exist. But there are also few on the left (none really that I can recall). You have Douglas Murray, Charles Murray (coincidence?), Victor Davis Hanson, and Niall Ferguson who all talk about modern issues from mostly right of center perspectives.
Then there are also some of the more pragmatic (some will be controversial and/or considered evil by many here I think) ones like John Yoo who is a very good SCOTUS prognosticator and pontificates on legal issues from a right of center perspective, in that vein we also have Steven Miller on immigration, Molly Hemingway on media corruption, Bjorn Lomborg on climate change, and some others.
Who on the left could get invited plausibly to a DNC event that talks about any major issue of the day honestly and frankly? It is hard to say. Which, again, is why it is hard for me to take Hanania and others talking about this sort of topic seriously. If "intellectual" is just code for "politely repeats left wing propaganda" then it has no real persuasive power to me.
anti_dan
25d ago
When you add stuff to your platform that didn't used to be there, some of the people who liked the old platform will decide they don't like the new platform and depart.
Not being a Hanania follower, I don't really know what you are referring to here.
All the criticisms I've seen of him recently is of him staking out what I consider to be incoherent positions and/or fearmongering about right wing developments that would take 20 years of progression to get us to sanity, minimum, then another 20 years of continuing to get us to the "other end of the pendulum" wherein the right was as powerful and crazy as the left was in 2022 on whatever point he is droning on about. In other words, when I see him being talked about now, he generally just seems wrong and/or stupid.
anti_dan
25d ago
Reversed stupidity is still not intelligence.
True, but entirely over-applied by centrists nowadays when talking about the right's or right-aligned responses. In fact, I most often see it deployed as a statement when a centrist is commenting on one of the issues the left is not able to articulate a right wing argument on, and because most centrists live in left wing media environments, they too cannot articulate the RW theory of the issue.
anti_dan
26d ago
Its not just about making the outgroup angry, it is why they are angry. That reason is that they are losing money that they were deploying both as sinecures for party loyalists, and also money for straight up political activity. Every program will have its charismatic sob stories, but between USAID the Department of Education, and others, a lot of left wing money has the potential to simply dry up. I've commented a few times now, with little engagement on this point, but aren't a lot of honest left-of-center people REALLY embarrassed about how huge portions of the movement are being revealed as government funded astroturf? With that plus the ACTBlue fraud, is there any actual grassroots to the movement at all? What is the response to this? "Yes the left should be funded by the government?" That would be honest for the people angry about various cuts to say, but can they bring themselves to be honest on this point?
anti_dan
29d ago
You act like criminals are Seal team 6 going after Bin Laden. In reality they are low intelligence cowards looking for easy opportunities to make a quick score. They dont have the time or patience to think about a 23.5 degree vertical. If one of them steps on a bear trap going up to your front door they don't redouble their efforts and look all around for bear traps, they run away like scared dogs. Even better, if your bear trap wakes you up, now you are the sniper.
A security system against these sorts of people doesnt need "identify, delay, fix, eliminate" it needs "scare, delay, notify". If a drop trap breaks one guy's leg, activates a bedside alarm that wakes you up, and gives you a minute to actually wake up, it has more than done the job.
anti_dan
29d ago
Turkey took over half a country, Cyprus, and is currently occupying vast swathes of Syria. Its not orders of magnitude smaller. The only thing smaller is the media coverage.
anti_dan
29d ago
Your plan just looks like the Biden plan, but the Biden plan is what got Ukraine invaded to start with.
I suppose if I look extra hard its like the Trump plan but super slow and tediously done with no real offramps for the US.
In either case its a silly plan. "Support European-funded response" might as well read "Spread Unicorn horn dust". Also, "support the economic war..." its not possible. The Euros sabotaged that capability by going green.
No, this looks exactly to me like the kind of half-pregnant sort of plan that "serious people" opted into with Iraq and Afghanistan. At least if you came to me with a serious decapitation plan with SEAL teams and assassinations and sabotage of Russian nuclear facilities I could take you seriously. This, I cannot.
anti_dan
29d ago
Yes. You're just illustrating that myopic idealism is irrelevant to international relations, and what actually matters is cost/benefit analysis. If China were doing what it currently does with no nukes and the 1980 economy we'd already be in Hong Kong and Bejing.
anti_dan
29d ago
The main end-state aim was that every country in the world understand that there is no hope to change the world order by force. So a deterrent, but not only for Russia: also for China/Taiwan, etc.). This end-state is now unreachable, because the world order has changed, but that it hurts the aggressor is the most important part. Saving Ukrainians is a net benefit, though.
This is just stating that the original goal at the outset was delusional. Many countries have been altering borders by force for the last 3 decades without NATO intervention. At least one of them, Turkey, is a NATO member.
anti_dan
29d ago
Its not really better than booby traps for security. Its better than getting drug out of your house by the cops then raped for eternity in prison because your booby traps were successful.
In other words, such things are illegal.
anti_dan
1mo ago
Its also plausible that 4 more years of aimless Trump would have had the Democrats doubling down on all their worst ideas, just doing them while out of power. Dozens of impeachment attempts instead of 2, relatively focused federal prosecutions. Even more state prosecutions, now of a sitting President. All in trans crazy activism writ large, etc.
All in all, I don't think Trump 2024 is even that much for normie Dems to worry about. Perhaps they lose some percentage of USAID, PEPFAR, etc slush funds permanently and semi-permanently. That reduces their federal dollars advantage from what? 1000-1 to merely 100-1? They also still have all the universities, and ending DEI doesn't mean you are ending funding for higher ed, which is simply funding for leftist propaganda, as a rule. And they still have captured the k-12 teachers and unions, so unless the public ends all public funding for all public education, there is Trillions of taxpayer dollars flowing into Democrat coffers still. You'd need to redirect like 40% of all public funds spent nationwide to get Republican orgs to parity when it comes to slush funding.
Plus you have inherent "get out the vote ;)" advantages baked in.
So the normie Dem that isn't worried is the correct one. Protect a bit of the status quo that you can, keep running milquetoast candidates like Biden that can pretend to be moderate. Perhaps not one who has been senile for 4 years. The institutional advantages are still overwhelmingly in your favor. Carry on, and maybe stop transing the frogs (and the kids).
I want to talk about one of the first points in this article.
I know this makes sense and has data backing it with regards to deterrence. But I want to talk about a vastly under-discussed part of incarceration, which is incapacitation.
As a bit of background, I am an attorney who has worked as a prosecutor as well as many other parts of the law over a mid sized career so far.
The argument about punishment is wrong, because the goal isn't just punishment, the goal is no more crimes by that specific individual during that specific time period that he/she is incarcerated. You see this most importantly IMO with people who are serial thieves. They will have an MO. Its either retail theft where they keep going to Macys and stealing something like perfume or $90 shirts, or they go into a grocery store and steal booze. Others have the MO of following Amazon trucks and hoovering up delivery boxes. The point is, often these people will have 3+ pending cases at once, then they take a plea, get a short sentence, then are back out thieving a year later, get 3 more cases, take a plea. Repeat for 30 years.
Prison can solve this problem. First, we can have legislatures eliminate sentences running concurrently for multiple offenses. Commit 3 thefts, get 1 year on each, that is 3 years instead of 1 (under the current system). Thats still a deal for the defendant because they are now facing a max of 18 instead of 6 years (or whatever the math is for your specific state). Second, bring back strikes laws. You do some time, next time you do more, third time there is release even if it is just nonviolent theft. These crimes do significantly impede the law and order of communities.
side note, this sort of pattern, while common with theft, is not only relating to theft. I have seen rap sheets where people have committed 5+ burglaries, went in for a year, then committed 3 more plus a kicker charge for drugs/guns and still got out in time to be back in court a year after that second sentencing. In fact, it even happens with violent crime. I recall one case where a person's rap sheet had over 5 armed robbery convictions on it within 5 years of being back in court on another armed robbery. This sort of sentencing structure defies anything resembling sanity.
So, my conclusion is that we probably need more policing as everyone generally suggests. Boots on the ground both deterring and investigating crime. BUT we also need people to just not being allowed back into society. At this point, mere incarceration is not enough. We also need to expedite the death penalty not just for murder and sex crimes, but for all common law crimes wherein the defendant has a previous felony common law conviction. This is a cost saving measure. The whole anti-death penalty bar needs to be put in a corner. There shouldn't even be sentencing hearings at some point. Just ask 12 people did this person commit this crime. If yes, 100 days later the defendant gets to walk the plank. Literally. We should also bring back public hangings to assuage the deterrence-inclined folks.
More options
Context Copy link