Patterico's Pontifications


SCHEER STUPIDITY: Well, another idiotic

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:52 pm

SCHEER STUPIDITY: Well, another idiotic Robert Scheer column has appeared. However, I will not be debunking it, because Glenn Reynolds has done it so well that anything I said would be superfluous. The bottom line is that Sneer has fallen hook, line, and sinker for a BBC report on the Jessica Lynch rescue that has been shown inaccurate six ways from Sunday. Scheer accepts it blindly because it is critical of Bush.

My only problem with Reynolds’s analysis is his apparently unthinking agreement with an observation that allows that Sneer may be “fundamentally a good guy and a good journalist.” Reynolds is more on target when he calls Scheer an “idiot” and says that Scheer’s column is an “excuse to foam at the mouth in classically over-the-top Scheer fashion.” Amen to that, brother!


Filed under: General — Patterico @ 6:33 am

SUPREMES TAKE INTERESTING CASES: Decisions to watch for next term:

What if a cop takes your confession before reading you your rights, and then reads you your rights and takes your confession again — all in a deliberate effort to get you to waive your rights on the theory that “I already confessed”? The practice is denounced in this editorial in the New York Shams (formerly New York Times) as “a form of investigative trickery” which is “coercive and unconstitutional.” We’ll see next term whether the Supremes agree with the Shams.

Also, USA Today reports here: “The Supreme Court agreed Monday to decide whether states that offer scholarships or other aid to needy students may refuse to provide money for instruction at religious schools.”


Filed under: General — Patterico @ 6:26 am

MORE THAN JUST CUTE: As a prosecutor, maybe I take this stuff a little too seriously. But I don’t think so. I am really offended by what I read in this story: a town in Northern California making it a crime to obey the Patriot Act. “Starting this month, a new city ordinance would impose a fine of $57 on any city department head who voluntarily complies with investigations or arrests under the aegis of the Patriot Act, the anti-terrorism bill passed after Sept. 11.” The people who passed this seem to understand that the ordinance is “mostly symbolic, since federal law trumps any local ordinance.” But they seem mighty proud of having taking “civic disobedience” to a new level.

Before you liberals start reflexively cheering, stop and think. My objection has nothing to do with whether I like the Patriot Act. It is that it is deeply offensive to pass a criminal statute as a symbolic gesture — one which cannot be enforced. Want to pass a resolution denouncing the Patriot Act? Fine. You’re an idiot and I’ll vote you out of office. But I won’t get upset the same way I would with a phony criminal statute.

What if some yokels in Mississippi passed a law that made it illegal to perform an abortion, with the punishment being death? “Hee-yuk. Clearlah weah jus jokin,” said local official Cletus Q. Tuethliss. “Fed’ral law says it’s ok ta kill them babies, so this heah is mos’ly a like symbolic type thang.”

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1636 secs.