GOP2020: What Becomes Of The Collaborators Post-Trump?
Posted By: scrotisloknowsthe "lefty sites" are not going to shine too much light on this because it makes their perspectives on crime look false.One data point or one anecdote doesn't say much of anything on which policies work, and which do not. Unless you're the type of shallow black-and-white thinker who oversimplifies things and cherry-picks facts to fit a preconceived ideology.
You know, like a right-winger.
Dec 1, 2009 at 4:16am Edited
A lot had been made recently, before this awful episode, about sentencing young offenders to "forever." I can't imagine how you predict which will backfire and which won't. Huck saw a kid, I guess. Somewhere in America, a wayward teen seeks clemency that he'll never get because of this lunatic.
Coincidentally, today's Science Times features an interview on the subject of adolescent criminal justice.
I can't credit Huck with empathy for a "kid".
He specifically responded, repeatedly, to prisoners who claimed to have found Jesus. His choice was not really random so much as it was based on his very narrow criteria, which ignored the advice of everyone else, including the police, the parole board, prosecutors, wardens, etc. etc. He took advice from pastors, but no one elase.
As far as I know, this does not resemble positions put forth by anyone who could be described as a "lefty". This is Huckabee's own magic formula, and other people are paying the price for it, including (as GL2 notes above) teens who are deserving of another chance. There is always a risk involved; however, the opinions of criminal justice professionals, however flawed, ought to count for something. For Huckabee, they did not.
Nevertheless, it's hard for me to fathom why a repeat offender and parole violater accused of a brutal rape of a 12 year old was out on bail.
He specifically responded, repeatedly, to prisoners who claimed to have found Jesus. His choice was not really random so much as it was based on his very narrow criteria, which ignored the advice of everyone else, including the police, the parole board, prosecutors, wardens, etc. etc. He took advice from pastors, but no one elase.
As far as I know, this does not resemble positions put forth by anyone who could be described as a "lefty". This is Huckabee's own magic formula, and other people are paying the price for it, including (as GL2 notes above) teens who are deserving of another chance. There is always a risk involved; however, the opinions of criminal justice professionals, however flawed, ought to count for something. For Huckabee, they did not.
Nevertheless, it's hard for me to fathom why a repeat offender and parole violater accused of a brutal rape of a 12 year old was out on bail.
Posted By: ktcPosted By: scrotisloknowsso of course the "lefty sites" are not going to shine too much light on this because it makes their perspectives on crime look false.
Why would the "lefty sites" bother interrupting the feeding frenzy happening in the Republican Party right now? Huckabee failed the Limbaugh test so he too is tossed aside. Purging the minority party of members is an interesting strategy to win back power. The backwards-looking strategy fits with the party's outlook on global warming, same-sex marriage, health care, etc. so it's not surprising.
dude, you swung so late on that one, the stadium is empty, everyone went home.
Posted By: tomPosted By: scrotisloknowsthe "lefty sites" are not going to shine too much light on this because it makes their perspectives on crime look false.One data point or one anecdote doesn't say much of anything on which policies work, and which do not. Unless you're the type of shallow black-and-white thinker who oversimplifies things and cherry-picks facts to fit a preconceived ideology.
You know, like a right-winger.
Posted By: tomPosted By: scrotisloknowsthe "lefty sites" are not going to shine too much light on this because it makes their perspectives on crime look false.One data point or one anecdote doesn't say much of anything on which policies work, and which do not. Unless you're the type of shallow black-and-white thinker who oversimplifies things and cherry-picks facts to fit a preconceived ideology.
You know, like a right-winger.
or certain English Climatologists. :wink:
-SLK
mjh, given what you know (read?) about whom he ignored in making this choice, and what his choice was based on, I think you're right. I was just "seeing a kid," not Huck.
I'm not sure where the line is between fronting general remorse and fronting having found Jesus. Would Huck have commuted the sentence if there was ostensible remorse w/o Jesus?
I also don't know how often the other people (police, the parole board, prosecutors, wardens) disagree in their recommendations; i.e., do they always disagree with commuting a sentence?
One thing's for sure: we just got a lot tougher (for better or worse) on every young offender.
I'm not sure where the line is between fronting general remorse and fronting having found Jesus. Would Huck have commuted the sentence if there was ostensible remorse w/o Jesus?
I also don't know how often the other people (police, the parole board, prosecutors, wardens) disagree in their recommendations; i.e., do they always disagree with commuting a sentence?
One thing's for sure: we just got a lot tougher (for better or worse) on every young offender.
On a lighter note, my new favorite metaphor for expressing a view of late comments:
:thumbup:
Posted By: scrotisloknowsdude, you swung so late on that one, the stadium is empty, everyone went home.
:thumbup:
An afterthought: what's your view of right, wrong, and personal safety if you're hiding or protecting this guy? Seriously; not just rhetorically.
Posted By: bobkHuckabee had a tendency when he was Governor of Arkansas to pardon/commute the sentences of people who accepted Jesus into their lives while in prison. It didn't always work out.
On the flip side he had a tendency to spend money on social programs as a good Christian should.
You take the good and the bad. In any event the fact he isn't a true fiscal conservative will kill any chance he has in getting the nomination for 2012. He isn't acceptable to the Club for Growth and the Wall Street Journal Republicans because of his tendency to spend money.
Heck this guy thought he WAS Jesus! Maybe Huck knew something no one else knew?
Posted By: sbenoisI do hope that you folks appreciate just how clever this thread title is.
"GOP 2010: Huckleberry Hounded by Right Wing; Hoo Hears a Horton?"
One of the best ever on MOL. Superb job GL2.
Agreed. Superb.
Posted By: GL2On a lighter note, my new favorite metaphor for expressing a view of late comments:
Posted By: scrotisloknowsdude, you swung so late on that one, the stadium is empty, everyone went home.
The metaphor doesn't work when you consider that the poster in this scenario is both the pitcher AND the ump.
The retort was a cop-out, a cheat.
Posted By: ktcThe metaphor doesn't work when you consider that the poster in this scenario is both the pitcher AND the ump.
The retort was a cop-out, a cheat.
Just likin' the metaphor, ma'm; just the metaphor. First scrote comment I've ever liked. They're usually just nasty.
Posted By: GL2First scrote comment I've ever liked. They're usually just nasty.
Is this actually the real guy everyone is always making fun of, or is he another spoof poster? I can't tell.
Posted By: ktcPosted By: GL2First scrote comment I've ever liked. They're usually just nasty.
Is this actually the real guy everyone is always making fun of, or is he another spoof poster? I can't tell.
I'm guessing it's the real scrote if he's using that name. I don't know the particulars of how MOL works, but I assume you can't hijack a name. But, if you followed the drama on "fun/w Repubs" thread, you know I share the frustration with the Colbert wannabes that dupe posters and cause general confusion.
Posted By: GL2the Colbert wannabes
Colbert's act is smart. So he's doing either a poor Colbert act, or...no...he can't be for real, right? What a terrifying thought...
Posted By: GL2Posted By: ktcPosted By: GL2First scrote comment I've ever liked. They're usually just nasty.
Is this actually the real guy everyone is always making fun of, or is he another spoof poster? I can't tell.
I'm guessing it's the real scrote if he's using that name. I don't know the particulars of how MOL works, but I assume you can't hijack a name. But, if you followed the drama on "fun/w Repubs" thread, you know I share the frustration with the Colbert wannabes that dupe posters and cause general confusion.
ktc, how many times do I have to tell you, it is me, the one true original, master of the universe, SLK, back with a vengenance (or until at least one of the Ross brother's finds another weak excuse to ban me...) :wink:
GL2, yes sometimes I do get nasty, but it usually responding to stupid, know it all, self righteous hyper-partisan, pompous comments posted by others...
Just saying...
-SLK
mjh, holy poop! I'm watching and reading more about both Huck and this Clemmons guy.
Given the thread theme, what do we make of the role of political Christianity, given this horror story? Is Huck a conservative Christian?
If not, what is he and what would a conservative Christian have done in this case?
Is his Christianity called into question? Is his Christianity seen as a weakness now?
Really begs the question, WWJD?
Given the thread theme, what do we make of the role of political Christianity, given this horror story? Is Huck a conservative Christian?
If not, what is he and what would a conservative Christian have done in this case?
Is his Christianity called into question? Is his Christianity seen as a weakness now?
Really begs the question, WWJD?
Posted By: ktcPosted By: GL2the Colbert wannabes
Colbert's act is smart. So he's doing either a poor Colbert act, or...no...he can't be for real, right? What a terrifying thought...
I've been here since '07 and he's been consistent. Of course, I just hypocritically blurted out an anti-BHO sentence on his thread about Peanuts being pre-empted by BHO, assuming the thread itself was a ha ha. Too many jokers here I guess.
IF the Republicans continue on the road they seem to be on, I wonder how the US will do as a one party state.
Posted By: TaureanIF the Republicans continue on the road they seem to be on, I wonder how the US will do as a one party state.
It won't be. The Republicans are on their way to becoming obsolete, but their void will be filled with moderate Democrats and smart Republicans (ie, people who are conservative but aren't loony enough to join the Rush-Palin-Beck ranks).
Posted By: ktcPosted By: TaureanIF the Republicans continue on the road they seem to be on, I wonder how the US will do as a one party state.
It won't be. The Republicans are on their way to becoming obsolete, but their void will be filled with moderate Democrats and smart Republicans (ie, people who are conservative but aren't loony enough to join the Rush-Palin-Beck ranks).
Amateurish my dear Watson....
-SLK
Posted By: GL2This wingnut stuff is downright scary.
Tis.
It is kind of fascinating watching a major American political party fold away and die though. I honestly never thought I'd see it, but we're witnessing history. It's certainly not unprecedented, and it's understandable when a party and its members steadfastly refuse to adapt their rigid, outdated beliefs to changing times.
I'm sensing my own intolerance here. I simply don't want to hear about creationism in science classes, anti-choice arguments, anti-public option arguments, or anti-gay marriage arguments. I feel nothing but irritation. And I realize that's wrong.
Posted By: GL2Hope ktc is right. This wingnut stuff is downright scary.
yes and the left wing loony stuff is downright sane....seriously....
-SLK
Posted By: GL2I'm sensing my own intolerance here. I simply don't want to hear about creationism in science classes, anti-choice arguments, anti-public option arguments, or anti-gay marriage arguments. I feel nothing but irritation. And I realize that's wrong.
It's not wrong.
There are plenty of issues that need to be debated and compromise achieved, and I'm optimistic that in the next seven years of the Obama administration we're going to see real progress. Like I said in the Global Warming thread, some people have literally dumbed themselves out of the conversation. Some people are still denying Global Warming, while the conversation has become what to do about it. Same with health care and gay marriage. (Abortion is a whole 'nother can of worms, but I don't think we're going to lose abortion rights in this country...the right uses this issue as nothing but lip service to lure votes from people who otherwise couldn't afford to vote Republican; they never had any intention of doing anything about it).
So the conversation is down to Progressive Democrats and Moderate Republicans/Conservative Democrats. The Palin-Limbaugh-Beck wing is loud, obnoxious and irritating, but they don't have the numbers to back up any of the bluster.
GL2,
Huckabee is such a mixed bag that it hard to figure him out. Plus, he is reportedly very, very charming, which can be disarming in a way that sugar coats the most toxic beliefs.
On the one hand, he has a refreshing interpretation of "pro-life" as meaning something more than "anti-abortion". As a consequence, he supports some social-justice programs most Republicans hate (health insurance for poor children, reforming our criminal justice system to be less focused on revenge and more attentive to rehabilitation).
But, he's anti-science and opposed to teaching evolution. He believes the Earth is 6000 years old and that we would solve the immigration "crisis" if we just allowed all pregnancies to come to term, which would give us the large workforce that we need. He's thrilled with the idea that Christians will "win" at Armageddon. He believes God is giving him explicit directions. He believes that Jesus supports the death penalty (evidence being that he submitted to death penalty himself). His reputation is one of utter moral certainty and conviction----I think this is what leads him to make decisions about commuting sentences that are based pretty much exclusively on claims of religous conversion, regardless of evidence to the contrary. (I agree that one cannot necessarily base such decisions on advice from prosecutors and parole boards, but still........)
You might be interested in the book "The Family: Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power" by Jeff Sharlet. I just heard part of this interview the other day, and had to order the book: http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=120746516.
Huckabee is such a mixed bag that it hard to figure him out. Plus, he is reportedly very, very charming, which can be disarming in a way that sugar coats the most toxic beliefs.
On the one hand, he has a refreshing interpretation of "pro-life" as meaning something more than "anti-abortion". As a consequence, he supports some social-justice programs most Republicans hate (health insurance for poor children, reforming our criminal justice system to be less focused on revenge and more attentive to rehabilitation).
But, he's anti-science and opposed to teaching evolution. He believes the Earth is 6000 years old and that we would solve the immigration "crisis" if we just allowed all pregnancies to come to term, which would give us the large workforce that we need. He's thrilled with the idea that Christians will "win" at Armageddon. He believes God is giving him explicit directions. He believes that Jesus supports the death penalty (evidence being that he submitted to death penalty himself). His reputation is one of utter moral certainty and conviction----I think this is what leads him to make decisions about commuting sentences that are based pretty much exclusively on claims of religous conversion, regardless of evidence to the contrary. (I agree that one cannot necessarily base such decisions on advice from prosecutors and parole boards, but still........)
You might be interested in the book "The Family: Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power" by Jeff Sharlet. I just heard part of this interview the other day, and had to order the book: http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=120746516.
You know, I have studied the radical right in American politics from the late 1930's through today. I mean literally studied, as in academic dissertation kind of crap. And I have to tell you that the GOP is not going to fold in on itself and implode. Nor will the radical right wither away. They represent a long and well established trend in American politics.
As I have said many times in other threads, I think northeast liberals make a mistake when they think that the looney toons stuff on the right is so nuts as to be unstable and eventually ineffective. It has a lot more traction in America than you seem to give it credit for, and you don't have to go to Texarkana to find this--there is plenty of support for this in southern New Jersey, upstate and midstate New York, northeastern Connecticut, Maine and New Hampshire.
Even if the majority will never vote for a Palin or Huckleberry for president, or listen to Limbaugh with any frequency, the constant right wing damage to liberal ideas and candidates has resonance for enough people that the Democrats may even lose Obama and Biden's former Senate seats. And don't forget that Bob Grant plays very well in New York City.
As I have said many times in other threads, I think northeast liberals make a mistake when they think that the looney toons stuff on the right is so nuts as to be unstable and eventually ineffective. It has a lot more traction in America than you seem to give it credit for, and you don't have to go to Texarkana to find this--there is plenty of support for this in southern New Jersey, upstate and midstate New York, northeastern Connecticut, Maine and New Hampshire.
Even if the majority will never vote for a Palin or Huckleberry for president, or listen to Limbaugh with any frequency, the constant right wing damage to liberal ideas and candidates has resonance for enough people that the Democrats may even lose Obama and Biden's former Senate seats. And don't forget that Bob Grant plays very well in New York City.
Posted By: ktcPosted By: GL2I'm sensing my own intolerance here. I simply don't want to hear about creationism in science classes, anti-choice arguments, anti-public option arguments, or anti-gay marriage arguments. I feel nothing but irritation. And I realize that's wrong.
It's not wrong.
There are plenty of issues that need to be debated and compromise achieved, and I'm optimistic that in the next seven years of the Obama administration we're going to see real progress. Like I said in the Global Warming thread, some people have literally dumbed themselves out of the conversation. Some people are still denying Global Warming, while the conversation has become what to do about it. Same with health care and gay marriage. (Abortion is a whole 'nother can of worms, but I don't think we're going to lose abortion rights in this country...the right uses this issue as nothing but lip service to lure votes from people who otherwise couldn't afford to vote Republican; they never had any intention of doing anything about it).
So the conversation is down to Progressive Democrats and Moderate Republicans/Conservative Democrats. The Palin-Limbaugh-Beck wing is loud, obnoxious and irritating, but they don't have the numbers to back up any of the bluster.
he no batter he no batter swing!! :rolling::rolling::rolling:
In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.
Rentals
For Sale
Garage Sales
-
HUGE Rummage sale to benefit the Bloomfield High School Robotics Team Sale Date: Apr 27, 2024
More info
Why would the "lefty sites" bother interrupting the feeding frenzy happening in the Republican Party right now? Huckabee failed the Limbaugh test so he too is tossed aside. Purging the minority party of members is an interesting strategy to win back power. The backwards-looking strategy fits with the party's outlook on global warming, same-sex marriage, health care, etc. so it's not surprising.