Patterico's Pontifications


But Clarence Thomas Prefers Milwaukee’s Best

Filed under: Humor,Judiciary — Patterico @ 7:38 pm

What do Chief Justice Roberts, Nino Scalia, and Sam Alito have in common — other than being right-wing reactionary Supreme Court Justices, that is?

They all like Schiltz.

The Power of the Jump™: Women “Routinely” Serve More Time Than Men in L.A. County Jail — Except, That Is, When They Don’t

Filed under: Crime,Dog Trainer — Patterico @ 11:23 am

(Note: “The Power of the Jump”™ is a semi-regular feature of this site, documenting examples of the Los Angeles Times’s use of its back pages to hide information that its editors don’t want you to see.)

The L.A. Times says in a front-page article:

Under its policy of selectively releasing criminals to ease jail overcrowding, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department has routinely forced women, prostitutes arrested in Compton and certain gang members to serve more time than others convicted of identical crimes.

So women have “routinely” been forced to serve more time than men, eh? That certainly is a dramatic revelation. But guess what? When you turn to the back pages, you learn that men have also “routinely” been forced to serve more time than women. And, you find, men and women now “routinely” serve the same percentage of their sentences. It all depends on available space, and what period of time you look at. Let’s look at the details, which are set forth on Page A14:

Over the years, the Sheriff’s Department has maintained different release policies for men and women, even for those convicted of the same crimes.

Male and female inmates are housed in separate jail sections, and sheriff’s officials said their release policies are based on the amount of space available and fluctuations in arrests.

Two years ago, women convicted of all but the most serious crimes were released immediately, serving none of their sentences. But in the last year, the department required women convicted of assault to serve 25% of their sentences while men served just 10%.

Klugman said he changed the policy earlier this month. Men and women now are eligible for release after serving 10% of their time.

So: two years ago, women served less (actually, no) time. One year ago, they served more, based on available space. And now, they serve the same. And this situation is portrayed on the front page as women “routinely” being forced to serve more time than men.

I guess that sounds more dramatic than:

Under its policy of selectively releasing criminals to ease jail overcrowding, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department has at times routinely forced women to serve more time than men, and at other times routinely forced men to serve more time than women. And currently, men and women serve the same amount of time. Routinely.

In an unrelated front-page story, the paper reports that roulette wheels routinely come up black. On Page A14, the caveat is added: except when they come up red.

Republicans Caving on Judicial Nominees, Thanks to Gang of 14 Deal

Filed under: Judiciary — Patterico @ 9:53 am

Don’t let the confirmation of Kavanaugh fool you into thinking that all is hunky-dory on the judicial confirmation front. A recent Bloomberg story suggests that Republicans plan to cave on all the other controversial nominees:

The U.S. Senate, on the brink of gridlock over judicial nominations a year ago, is finessing a showdown over President George W. Bush’s most divisive choices for the federal bench.

Senators of both parties, preoccupied with other issues, are displaying little appetite for an all-out battle. Democrats, who are reluctant to oppose nominees for purely ideological reasons, won’t try to block White House aide Brett Kavanaugh, 41, who is scheduled to be confirmed to an appeals court judgeship today. Republicans, in turn, probably will put aside two other controversial nominees, Terrence Boyle and William Haynes II.

Link via Jonathan Adler, who says: “If true, this is bad news for Boyle (not to mention Haynes, Wallace, and Myers).” He’s right. From the article:

“We will take the others one by one,” Frist told reporters this week. He said he had no plans to bring up Boyle and didn’t respond when asked whether he would seek a vote on Haynes.

. . . .

Potential casualties [also] include William G. Myers III, 40, a mining and ranching lobbyist named to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, and Michael B. Wallace, 55, a Jackson, Mississippi, lawyer nominated to the 5th Circuit in New Orleans.

. . . .

Myers was left in limbo when the agreement by the Gang of 14 permitted votes on three of 10 nominees who had been blocked.

It’s hard to imagine why Republicans would be so skittish about a fight on these judges. Don’t they still control the Senate?

Yeah, in theory. But there’s this little thing called the “filibuster” that we had the chance to knock out, but didn’t.

But didn’t that Gang of 14 capitulation deal bring us Alito and Roberts?

No. As I have said before, they would have been confirmed anyway. And if we had deployed the nuclear option, we would have gotten all the judges we already got — plus Estrada, Kuhl, Saad, and the judges who look like they are getting thrown under the bus now.

Remember: fight John McCain, wherever you find him.

P.S. Meanwhile, Adler notes, the Administration isn’t bothering to nominate anyone new. Not that any new controversial nominee has a prayer of ever being confirmed, thanks to the Gang of 14 Weasels.

P.P.S. Confirm Them has a suggestion for a good candidate for the President to nominate: Solicitor General Paul Clement. He could be replaced by Miguel Estrada — that is, if Estrada would take the position, after the unnecessary hell he was subjected to by Retaliacrats.

Power Line Is Four

Filed under: Blogging Matters,General — Patterico @ 9:52 am

Happy fourth blogiversary to Power Line.

Thomas Friedman Will Know in Six Months

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 9:51 am

Heh. I think we’ll know in six months whether Thomas Friedman thinks that we’ll know in six months whether the situation in Iraq will ever turn around. (Via Cori Dauber.)

Documents Show That Our Allies Pay Terrorists Millions in Ransom

Filed under: General,Terrorism — Patterico @ 9:34 am

So where do the terrorists get the money to keep fighting us?

How’s this for an answer?

(Via Cori Dauber.)

Beslan Terrorist Gets Life — Three Cheers for Death Penalty Moratoria!

Filed under: Crime,General,Scum,Terrorism — Patterico @ 1:33 am

You think it’s bad Moussaoui got life? That’s nothing. The only surviving terrorist behind the Beslan massacre got life too — for 331 murders, including many children:

The only known militant to survive the Beslan school siege was convicted in the deaths of 331 people — many of them children — and sentenced to life in prison Friday, touching off an emotional scene in which mothers of some victims tried to attack the defendant in court.

Prosecutors had demanded the death penalty for Nur-Pashi Kulayev, but Russia imposed a moratorium on capital punishment when it joined the Council of Europe a decade ago.

. . . .

“Kulayev deserves the death penalty, but is sentenced to life in prison because a moratorium is in place,” Judge Tamerlan Aguzarov said.

(H/t Clark Smith.)

Well, He *Was* Good At Cover-Ups . . .

Filed under: Dog Trainer,General,Morons — Patterico @ 12:47 am

The L.A. Times supports Bill Clinton for U.N. Secretary-General, arguing that he is popular throughout the world. In a quote I swear I am not making up, the editors say:

Clinton also could bridge the growing divide between Washington and much of the world. He has been all but beatified in Africa, where his foundation has negotiated big discounts on drugs for treating AIDS. European heads of state eat out of his hand, and even the most hostile elements in the Arab world respect him as a peacemaker. He is so well known in China that a condom has been named after him, and his support in the U.S. cuts a swath across the ideological and socioeconomic spectrum, from billionaires to evangelicals to inner-city minorities.

See, you don’t believe me. You think that the part in bold is something I inserted for humor purposes.

Fine, don’t believe me. Read the editorial yourself, if you can stand to. You’ll see.

What do you want to bet that the person who wrote this is the same nincompoop who repeatedly pushed for Bono to be the head of the World Bank?

UPDATE: Commenter Dana points out that U.S. citizens are barred from the job anyway:

The Security Council nominates a Secretary-General to the General Assembly which then votes to appoint the Council’s choice. The Security Council is barred from nominating an individual that is from one of Security Council’s five permanent members (China, France, Russia, UK, U.S.

So when the editorial says:

It would be unprecedented for a secretary-general to hail from a country that is among the Security Council’s five permanent members.

Well, there’s a reason for that.

Maybe there’s an exception for people who have Chinese condoms named after them.

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1994 secs.