The last 30 comments posted will appear below. The comments are excerpted after 200 words, for the full comment thread; click the post title. To see new comments, refresh this page.
Last 30 Comments
- On Penn Goes Off, Argive said:
How many guilty findings of all the lawsuit brought against Sheriff Joe Arpaio et al ? In civil lawsuits, the vast majority of the time, the parties will reach a settlement. Maricopa County settles and has settled with most of the people who bring suits against Arpaio. If all of these lawsuits were frivolous, you'd see a lot more cases being thrown out. Now, if by "guilty" you mean cases in which the judge ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, here's an article detailing how a judge awarded $94,000 to one group of plaintiffs and how the county board of supervisors approved a $650,000 payout to another group. The article I cited in my previous post also mentions a $9 million jury verdict against MCSO. Arpaio's office has been sued 6,300 times since 1993; compare that with a county of the same size and population in Texas (Harris County), where the sheriff's office has been sued 283 times. What is the rate of repeat offenders in Maricopa County? A 1998 study showed no change in recidivism rates between Arpaio and his predecessor (page 42). Check out Right on Crime. I particularly like this bit, under the section "Reduce Costs:" Taxpayers know that public safety is...Posted May 25, 2012 - On Penn Goes Off, JimK said:
That could be a side effect of how browsers handle cookies. Wordpress sets em but they expire eventually, or they don't stick, and then you log back in but some of whatever didn't go away is still there...honestly cookies and browsers seems more like magic than actual computer code. But. If you find your browser's cookie storage area, search for "right-thinking" and delete every single cookie you find related to this site, THEN log back in, it will...hopefully...keep you logged in until the next time it goes haywire. I know. Not very technical or reassuring, but James Lileks recently said something that is a new universal truth: "'Keep me logged in' is the new "the check is in the mail."Posted May 25, 2012 - On Fuzzy Math, Xetrov said:
I wonder if he could include some of these Obama costs in his chart. Amazingly, Obama has declared that all the projects received funding “based solely on their merits.” But as Hoover Institution scholar Peter Schweizer reported in his book, “Throw Them All Out,” fully 71 percent of the Obama Energy Department’s grants and loans went to “individuals who were bundlers, members of Obama’s National Finance Committee, or large donors to the Democratic Party.” Collectively, these Obama cronies raised $457,834 for his campaign, and they were in turn approved for grants or loans of nearly $11.35 billion. Obama said this week it’s not the president’s job “to make a lot of money for investors.” Well, he sure seems to have made a lot of (taxpayer) money for investors in his political machine.Posted May 25, 2012 - On Fuzzy Math, Xetrov said:
That's a bullshit chart if ever I've seen one. All Military spending (including non-descretionary) is lumped under Bush, but Obama is given a complete pass for his 3.5 years in office nevermind the $680+ billion spent on the standard Defense budget in 2010 alone. Doesn't even mention Obamacare costs. Ignores the HERA 2009 alterations signed by Obama. And probably a hundred other things the chart is missing. Nevermind the fact that the reason the numbers are hard to define under Obama is that the Democrats have failed to pass a budget in three years.Posted May 25, 2012 - On Penn Goes Off, sahrab said:
BTW to the powers that be: In the past 6 days I’ve found myself “logged off” when I’ve tried to post a comment I've had this happen a few times as i was forming a response (usually to one of CM's or Rich's idiotic posts). I've written it off as a word press error, but its really annoying to have gone through drafted a retort, with links and quotes, only to have it lost to a "you must ne logged into respond" messagePosted May 25, 2012 - On Fuzzy Math, CM said:
Klein's visual here does include 2 years of extended tax cuts in Obama's share.Posted May 25, 2012 - On Penn Goes Off, Mississippi Yankee said:
Argive Your retort to my comment seems to be comparing 'apples to oranges' Do we stop punishing criminals whenever there is criticism? Criticism I might add from a not so impartial source. How many guilty findings of all the lawsuit brought against Sheriff Joe Arpaio et al ? What is the rate of repeat offenders in Maricopa County? Vindictive lawsuits have been a staple of the left, like forever. One needs only look at the millions of dollars in fake cases the State of Alaska was forced to fight in the past 4 years. Yet NOT ONE guilty finding. It's almost like the whole thing was a ruse. The question all comes down to: Would YOU run away from a fight just because a vocal bully tried to intimidate you? BTW to the powers that be: In the past 6 days I've found myself "logged off" when I've tried to post a comment. And as you have reassured me that this is not an admin peccadillo someone might look at the sites clock-works. juss-sayinPosted May 25, 2012 - On Penn Goes Off, Hal_10000 said:
Incidentally, you guys should watch that Russell Brand video. Donna pinged it to me and it's really good.Posted May 25, 2012 - On Fuzzy Math, Hal_10000 said:
Romney has said “”Since President Obama assumed office three years ago, federal spending has accelerated at a pace without precedent in recent history.” If it was so bad, and if he is such a huge spender, surely the second graph would have seen a steepening of the trend. I agree with this point. Spending has leveled off the last couple of years, thanks largely to the end of the wars. It bears pointed out that Obama's budget proposal *did* have significantly higher spending and it was the GOP that forced his hand. One other point I'm getting tired of is deficit projection that label much of the budget shortfall as being the fault of the Bush tax cuts. The analysis is accurate but the nomenclature is wrong. Obama had two years to end the tax cuts. He didn't even have to do anything. But he extended them in 2010 and is likely to again in 2012. At the very least, you have to call these Bush/Obama cuts.Posted May 25, 2012 - On Penn Goes Off, Argive said:
My only practical solution is to agree with Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. His take on non-violent offenders seems to be working. How so? Since 1993, Maricopa County has spent $50 million in legal fees to deal with lawsuits brought against Arpaio's office. That, at least, does not sound like he's getting practical results to me.Posted May 25, 2012 - On Penn Goes Off, Mississippi Yankee said:
Miguelito In theory I believe in everything you said. Sadly in the real world there will never be a "1 time deal". A moral society can not function that way. Good, honest, caring people find it most difficult to turn their back on a fellow human being. And frankly some never can. My only practical solution is to agree with Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. His take on non-violent offenders seems to be working.Posted May 24, 2012 - On Fuzzy Math, CM said:
Let’s pretend, for a moment, that the above quote isn’t a disingenuous retort. You've lost me. I try way harder than anyone else to stick to facts, to play the ball and not the man. I do get sucked in occasionally though. I'm only human. I don't often go looking for it though, unlike others. My comment about arguing against her FACTS was just a continuation of our original scrimmage. Kapish? It doesn't really work though. As you rightly point out, I highlighted your sources because you had a go at mine. If what you claimed about my sources was true (which it isn't - as I explained, I don't link to opinion pieces and claim opinion as fact), you could be shown to be no different. I don't care where any argument or facts come from. I'm happy to judge them on their merits. Not sure why you've got it in your head that the opposite is true. I’m still at a lost as to what set off your little dog. Presumably he sees how lame the misrepresentation and personal attacks are. Oh I see, sorry, you're attacking his 'persona' as a joke to make your point. Well played. Sullivan's latest on this is here. http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/05/if-you-want-another-debt-and-spending-binge-vote-gop-ctd.html He quotes Kilgore: I hardly...Posted May 24, 2012 - On Fuzzy Math, Mississippi Yankee said:
When the fuck have I ever argued against her, or anyone’s, ‘persona’? Let's pretend, for a moment, that the above quote isn't a disingenuous retort. Let us further remember that within the past week I accused you of linking to left-wing opinion site and the next day you attempted to call in to question two sites I had used as being right-wing sites. My comment about arguing against her FACTS was just a continuation of our original scrimmage. Kapish? I'm still at a lost as to what set off your little dog.Posted May 24, 2012 - On Argentina and Japan, Seattle Outcast said:
I fail to see how anyone can take Krugman seriously - the man's a complete idiot. My dog has a better understanding of economics.Posted May 24, 2012 - On Argentina and Japan, bolly said:
I think the original related to Japan http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18161895Posted May 24, 2012 - On Penn Goes Off, Miguelito said:
I'm with Dave from above... I'm all for the individual freedom to choose to use drugs and ruin your life if you so desire (if you abuse the drugs)... but ONLY if people also suffer the consequences and we don't step in and essentially socialize the costs. Otherwise it's eating your cake and having it too. I might even be for a gov't rehab system that was VERY strict that essentially was a 1 time deal. You get one chance to clean up, break any rules or re-use... you're done, have fun living out your last days in the gutter. I'm sure that makes plenty of people cry the usual bits about being uncaring or heartless.. but it's not. If you cause it to happen to you, it's your own fault.Posted May 24, 2012 - On Fuzzy Math, CM said:
WTF, they've removed the second graph (the one called 'Federal spending flattens under Obama'). However it comes up as the second result if you do a Google image search for "Obama spending binge never happened". Weird.Posted May 24, 2012 - On Fuzzy Math, Miguelito said:
I think the bigger problem with this fuzzy math is that the budgets originated in the democratically controlled congress since the FY2007 year basically (Or at least 2008+). Sure Bush didn't veto them, but the spending increases that even the year by year graphs look at show there was a pretty large jump in 2008 and then 2009. Both of which Obama is at least partly responsible for since he voted for them as a member of congress himself (AFAIK at least).Posted May 24, 2012 - On I wish this was a joke.., CM said:
Wow, look how much the original Daily Mail story has changed since it was first put up. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2135434/Egypts-plans-farewell-intercourse-law-husbands-sex-DEAD-wives-branded-complete-nonsense.html The headline is now: Egypt's 'plans for farewell intercourse law so husbands can have sex with DEAD wives' branded a 'complete nonsense' Of course, none of the people who simply accepted the original claims as true would have seen the complete re-writing of this. They wouldn't care anyway, it's already firmly entrenched in their mountain of evidence.Posted May 24, 2012 - On Penn Goes Off, CM said:
I think it’s actually good to have what seem to be opposing views. You'd think so wouldn't you (otherwise, what's the point?). Apparently not though. But of course it's not even just a case of having opposing views, often it's just enquiring about the basis of the one view being expressed. Apparently that's crossing some sort of line into moronic ridiculousness. Anyway, as time is infinite (according to Russell) onwards we march.Posted May 24, 2012 - On Penn Goes Off, TxAg94 said:
Sorry to incite what I was kind of making fun of. It's actually fun, sometimes, to watch you two bash it out. I think it's actually good to have what seem to be opposing views. Though at times it seems you're arguing passionately to agree. I had a boss like that one time. We would be saying the same thing, really, but in different ways. But it always was contentious because unless I parroted his exact phrases he wasn't satisfied. Often he wasn't even hearing what I was saying so he assumed I was disagreeing. THAT was frustrating. I had simply read quite a few posts to catch up on what's going on. I had come across several instances of Seattle Outcast leading with the "Here comes CM" cues. I couldn't resist mocking it, to be honest. No personal insult intended either way.Posted May 24, 2012 - On Penn Goes Off, CM said:
I was waiting to see if he’d realized how fucking predictable he’d become – he only has a couple of things to say, so all topics get twisted so he can start up on his stuck record. Hopefully, at some point he’ll give those two tunes a rest and actually start up on something else. Certainly no less predictable than you. There's so much blatant and ridiculous misrepresentation going on here about what I post that I don't believe anyone but probably Kimpost has any idea what I think on most subjects. It's beyond parody how you bend yourself so out of shape to warp what I say to make yourself feel better. And I've only commented on things that have already been raised in each thread. Perhaps if you engaged properly with what I post and don't just respond with personal abuse and leg-humping and pretending I've said something entirely different, we could have moved on. All I did was ask specific questions about your ideology. Apparently your ideology is so magnificent that articulating it in any reasonable way is beneath you. Anyway, I'm torn on the drugs issue too. I certainly agree that the hypocrisy is ridiculous. As usual (not...Posted May 24, 2012 - On Fuzzy Math, CM said:
The main point, to me, isn't arguing in the margins about how much of the 2009 spend should be attributed to Obama. That just looks like a distraction from the fact that Nutter's second graph bears no relationship whatsoever to the right-wing rhetoric that Obama's stimulus was astronomical and that he's also spending-like-there-is-no-tomorrow. Romney has said ""Since President Obama assumed office three years ago, federal spending has accelerated at a pace without precedent in recent history." If it was so bad, and if he is such a huge spender, surely the second graph would have seen a steepening of the trend. But if you look at the trend from 2002 to 2008 and keep that trend line going, it's way above the 2012 and 2013 total). So the trend has reduced EVEN WITH Keynesian stimulus spending. Also, I keep being told that the Keynesian stimulus etc is just business as usual for people like Obama. I've lost count of the times I pointed out in an argument with Alex that the stimulus and the Keynesian approach was about trying to stem the worst of the bleeding while attempting to get out of a huge hole. However that was always completely ignored....Posted May 24, 2012 - On Fuzzy Math, CM said:
CM, before you even fuckin start, argue against her FACTS not her persona OK? When the fuck have I ever argued against her, or anyone's, 'persona'? For some reason you seem to have me confused with many others here. Seattle Outcast appears to be a permanent troll now. I'm far more interested in the details/substance. But most of the time it's a complete waste of time because posters will instead start humping my leg and frothing at the mouth like rapid dogs. Some of you are on permanent troll /hint: your not as entertaining when you become predictable, justsayin/ Pffffft. As if you guys are unpredictable in any way shape or form. What, we're all expected to be hypocrites just to be less predictable?Posted May 24, 2012 - On Penn Goes Off, Poosh said:
I was under the vague impression that Bush put the "war on drugs" on the backburner and toned it down?Posted May 24, 2012 - On Penn Goes Off, Seattle Outcast said:
I was waiting to see if he'd realized how fucking predictable he'd become - he only has a couple of things to say, so all topics get twisted so he can start up on his stuck record. Hopefully, at some point he'll give those two tunes a rest and actually start up on something else.Posted May 24, 2012 - On Penn Goes Off, Dave D said:
Drugs is an issue that I am torn on. Freedom to ruin your own life and/or invest your time in the demon of choice is obviously something I would support. I am a religious person and don't believe in tossing substances in my body and risk addiction, etc. OTHO, I am a fat slob and fight the food/overweight demon every day. I have witnessed my only brother wreck his life over drugs/alcohol and literally lose his ability to function in society, so this also biases my opinion. I do no, however, believe that the government has any jurisdiction in this area. The ONE THING that I wrestle with when I see things like Penns' rant above (which I support), is that our society, being an ever-increasing nanny state that wants to take care of all our problems, be everything to us, and make the "rich" pay for it all, simply cannot affort the predictable increase in addiction and the resulting wreckage of personal lives brought on by widely available legal drugs. Rehab is expensive. Personal choices should NOT cost others. A difficult dichotomy...... I believe that the cost of increase...Posted May 24, 2012 - On Penn Goes Off, TxAg94 said:
Seattle Outcast will now comment that CM will now drop by to say that...Posted May 24, 2012 - On Ravi Resolved, Seattle Outcast said:
Yeah right. That’s why the equivalent of ‘skanky old fags’ is ‘girls’. Once again we see you have a complete inability to use logic. What was the roommate bringing over? A "shifty" older gay man, who looked like a thief" Totally unacceptable. Opposite end of the spectrum: Young girls looking for sex Still unacceptable See - they weren't meant to be "equivalent", but a moron like you can't figure out where things are going without being led there by the nose.Posted May 24, 2012 - On Ravi Resolved, salinger said:
The punishment is way out of line The judge sentenced him for tampering with evidence after saying he did not feel the case met a hate crime standard. Tampering with evidence is a fourth degree felony in New Jersey which can carry up to an 18 month sentence and up to a $10,000.00 fine.Posted May 24, 2012
