Patterico's Pontifications


You Must Not Refrain from Drinking or Harassing Others . . .

Filed under: Humor — Patterico @ 10:24 pm

Tales of British justice:

It was when the 15-year-old miscreant was hauled into court that the problem was first noticed.

Angered by his unruly, boozed-up behaviour, police had hoped magistrates would punish the youth for breaching his Asbo [anti-social behavior order]. He hadn’t.

Closer examination revealed that he had mistakenly been ordered not to be in public “without” alcohol and that he was also duty bound to act in a threatening manner likely to cause harassment, alarm and distress to others.

(Via Oxblog, via Pejman.)

Extra! Justice Ginsburg Lived in Neighborhood that Once Used Restrictive Covenants! (Oh — So Did John Roberts)

Filed under: General,Judiciary,Media Bias,Morons — Patterico @ 7:20 pm

The AP reports some blockbuster news:

Like many towns across America, the exclusive lakefront community where Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. grew up during the racially turbulent 1960s and ’70s once banned the sale of homes to nonwhites and Jews.

Pretty shocking stuff. Of course, as the article acknowledges, the Roberts’s house “did not include a racially restrictive covenant,” and such covenants “had begun fading away” by 1966, the year they moved in. This little fact has led some wingnuts to ask: “what the hell is the point of bringing it up?” These right-wing nutcases don’t get it. The neighborhood once had them! . . . so, you know, it’s RELEVANT, dammit!

Well, I hate to be picking on Ruth Bader Ginsburg all the time, but I have some shocking news to report.

It appears that, like many towns across America, the community where Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg grew up also used covenants to keep the neighborhood homogenous.

You heard it here first. Ginsburg grew up in the Flatbush section of Brooklyn. According to this site, her Brooklyn neighborhood “consisted mostly of poor, working class Jewish, Italian, and Irish immigrants.” No blacks there!

Here’s the shocker: Flatbush had also had restrictive covenants at one point. A New York Sun article advises that “Victorian Flatbush, of which South Midwood is a part . . . was settled in the late 19th century by affluent Protestant families who used covenants to keep the area homogenous.” (“Victorian Flatbush” is a part of Flatbush.) The Sun explains further: “During the 1930s, increasing numbers of Irish and Jewish professional families moved in.” Irish and Jewish families — but no blacks!

I hereby call for the impeachment of Justice Ginsburg. Who’s with me?

P.S. By the way, the covenants probably just had to do with how the houses looked, not the race of the people who lived in the neighborhood. [But see the UPDATE below.] That doesn’t make my news any less relevant than the story about Roberts. Either story is about as relevant as saying they once lived in neighborhoods with rapists and murderers.

UPDATE: In a comment below, Xrlq notes evidence in the story that the covenants were indeed racially restrictive covenants on sales after all.

Malkin and Maloney: Inside Air America

Filed under: Current Events — Patterico @ 6:37 pm

If you’re interested in the Air America scandal, you’ll want to follow the coverage by Michelle Malkin and Brian Maloney. It’s blog journalism, and Part One is here.

My Advice: Jerk It Harder!

Filed under: Judiciary — Patterico @ 1:12 pm

After the Washington Post said yesterday that Democrats weren’t that interested in fighting John Roberts, the interest groups blew a gasket. Guess what? Pat Leahy has now issued a deceptive statement decrying Roberts.

I like the way the Center for Individual Freedom puts it in a press release:

Liberal Groups Jerk the Leash, Senate Democrats Respond with Attacks

Woof, Pat. Woof.

Stephen Gillers’s Credibility Takes Another Hit

Filed under: Dog Trainer,Judiciary — Patterico @ 1:06 pm

Ed Whelan at Bench Memos does a devastating job of explaining why Gillers’s notion of recusal is absurd — or, in Whelan’s understated language, “dubious.”

Remember, Gillers is one of the main guys the L.A. Times kept going to on the issue of Scalia’s alleged ethical issues last year. Now you’re starting to see why: he’ll say anything to promote the leftist viewpoint, no matter how absurd the logical consequences.

Trouble Accessing the Site?

Filed under: Blogging Matters,General — Patterico @ 6:48 am

Has anyone had trouble accessing the site lately? I have had some trouble myself, both in accessing the site, and in getting posts that I have published to appear on the site. Also, the SiteMeter has shown long down periods during times of the day when I am usually getting 2-3 visitors a minute. The Hosting Matters people say that these down periods in the Site Meter don’t necessarily indicate anything about the server side, which seems strange to me.

If you have had any trouble getting on recently, please let me know in the comments.

UPDATE: I’m getting a lot of responses regarding today — what about yesterday?

“Insult to Injury” Defined

Filed under: Court Decisions,Law,Morons,Scum — Patterico @ 12:02 am

Not content with simply taking its citizens’ homes, the city of New London is charging them back rent for the time they stayed in their homes and fought the case in court.

I kid you not.

It’s the eminent domain analogue to the Chinese government’s practice of executing political prisoners and billing the family for the cost of the bullet.

(Via Ed Brayton.)

UPDATE: For those of you who don’t trust a story unless you see it in a big paper, the same facts are reported here in USA Today. (Via Jeff G.)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0843 secs.