Patterico's Pontifications



Filed under: Terrorism — Patterico @ 8:32 pm

Jeff Jarvis has the latest on who is behind the Madrid bombings.

It’s looking like Islamists, and possibly Al Qaeda.

3/14 UPDATE: The title of the post probably should have contained a question mark, as it was based on preliminary reports. However, the conclusion is looking more and more accurate.

Congratulations to Armed Liberal and Spoons

Filed under: Blogging Matters — Patterico @ 6:39 pm

Congratulations to bloggers Armed Liberal and Spoons on their weddings today.

Bear Flagger Brunch

Filed under: Bear Flag League — Patterico @ 5:20 pm

I had a great time at brunch today. I met Xrlq, Baldilocks, Michael Williams, Little Miss Attila, Breaker, Ith, Nin, Maddy, and Justin Levine (co-blogger on Calblog) — not to mention seeing BoiFromTroy and Justene once again.

I was the only one wearing a Bear Flag League T-Shirt.

It was only a 10-minute bike ride from our place.

I ate too much.

Baldilocks said she expected me to be older. How old did you think I would be (and how old do you think I am)?

I took pictures, but many of them are probably classified for reasons of anonymity pseudonymity. I’ll e-mail them, guys.

It turned out to be a great group of people. We stayed for over three hours. I’d love to do it again. . .

L.A. Times: Giving “Equal Treatment” to Justice Ginsburg?

Filed under: Dog Trainer,Judiciary — Patterico @ 9:33 am

I noted yesterday that Justice Ginsburg has publicly addressed the recusal controversy. Today, the L.A. Times runs a story concerning Ginsburg’s comments, here. The Times gives itself a pat on the back at the end:

Noting that the first articles were about Scalia, her conservative colleague, Ginsburg described those stories as “on one side of the political spectrum.”

The story about her relationship with the NOW legal defense fund came later, she said, because “the L.A. Times wanted to give equal treatment” to a liberal justice like herself.

Although (as I have said) I respect the Times‘s decision to run one Ginsburg article, it is still debatable whether the Times has given Ginsburg “equal treatment.” As I pointed out the other day, there is another potential controversy out there, in which Justice Ginsburg had a front-row seat for a speech by a defendant in a case, regarding the subject matter of the case — while that case was pending before the Supreme Court. The Times has been notified about this, and so far has shown no interest.

Would the folks at the Times be interested if, say, Justice Scalia had attended a speech by lead counsel for Texas in Lawrence v. Texas, extolling the virtues of Texas’s anti-sodomy laws, while the Lawrence case was pending? It’s almost impossible to imagine that the Times would fail to report Scalia’s attendance at such a speech, if that had happened. Yet this most recent allegation regarding Justice Ginsburg appears to be falling on deaf ears at the Times.

Perhaps some other media outlet will be interested . . .


Filed under: Blogging Matters — Patterico @ 6:52 am

Compare the quality of comments posted by Patterico readers such as Beldar (see this comment and the one below it) to the quality of comments posted by fans of Ted Rall (see this comment and the one below it).

It all comes down to what you prefer: commentary on the issues of the day, or cartoons making fun of murdered people’s families.


Filed under: Watcher's Council — Patterico @ 6:50 am

The Watcher’s Council is a group of blogs that holds a weekly contest for blog entry of the week. Further details are available here. The winning posts are always worth checking out.

This week’s winners have been announced. Congratulations to Xrlq (again) for the winning Council entry, a highly amusing piece titled Bob Dornan Gets a Bad Rap. Congratulations also to Jay Reding for the winning non-Council entry, Why John Kerry Must Never Be President.

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1932 secs.