Search results

Thanks, mates! I'm just passing through (looking for mods since I re-installed Civ4).

But Texas courts have jurisdiction over wrongs committed against Texas residents while those residents were in Texas, right? I don't see how anyone could dispute this. Likewise, an English Court would have jurisdiction over an Englishman who had signed a contract with an American company (say...

Beck obviously ought not to be held legally responsible. The guy was an obvious nutjob, and there are nutjobs everywhere in the political spectrum. But Beck makes a living riling up nutjobs. He constantly talks in apocalyptic terms about how the Obama administration and the radical groups...

If you want to learn about Beck some more, historian Sean Wilentz has written a very good article placing him in American political context. Tl;dr: Beck's a Bircher. Cleo

Matthew Broderick, right, but what about the Civil War re-enactor? Cleo

I haven't "condemned" the guy, but I'm sure you can recognize the difference between an actor portraying a Nazi and having the hobby of dressing up like one. There's a difference between Civil War Re-enactors and Matthew Broderick, right? Or LARPers and Viggo Mortensen? Maybe that difference...

Yeah, I remember that, too. When Al Pacino bought that devil outfit with his own money and pretended to be the devil on his own time, and without getting paid money wrote about how he admired the devil's drive and determination. Cleo P.S. And that the devil, you know, existed.

Yes, I had a white professor who was a former NAACP litigator. What Stegyre said is true. But bear in mind there's lots of good public interest / government work that's not DoJ. And in a state -- let's say New Jersey -- a degree and a good transcript from Rutgers or Seton Hall will get you...

Good to see you, Fred! Would I be wrong in suggesting that you're not that familiar with Mr. Beck's body of work? ;) Don't worry about finding substance for Beck's claim -- for most of his claims, there isn't any. He's a right-wing fantasist who's attracted a fairly large following here. I...

I read something about the case that said the Court would uphold the Fourth Circuit's decision in favor of Rev. Phelps because the suits were based on state law invasion of privacy claims, and Phelps pretty much followed the municipal regulations regarding protests. Moreover, the protest was...

But they're not, are they? I linked to actual data a few posts up in this thread. Poorer people tend to vote Democratic; wealthier people tend to vote Republican. There certainly are some groups of poorer people who vote for Republicans -- as I said earlier, white males -- but by and large...

This isn't true. Or maybe I mean it is true. Whatever, my point is that poor people do vote for Democrats and rich people do vote for Republicans. For every millionaire actor out there, there are many more garden-variety millionaires laughing with George W. Bush when he refers to them as "his...

Because some people are just authoritarians. If they were born in the Soviet Union, they'd be saying, "What do you have to hide, comrade? The KGB only investigates threats." It's because you don't understand "liberty," el mac. It has nothing to do with due process or secret evidence or...

A lot of the discussion has moved away from the real topic (intentionally or unintentionally): the Obama administration claims that people cannot even ask why the government has decided they deserve death. It's not a matter of whether the process is "due," there is no process at all. We've...

Everything you say should be prefaced with, "the government asserts that . . ." If the government said that Theige was "a criminal mastermind trying to kill as many of his fellow citizens as possible," and did not even allow you to ask about how they came to that conclusion, would it be okay...

Not bad. :) But it still just assumes the "wartime powers extend all over the world indefinitely" paradigm. And it requires that we assume the government is factually correct and acting in good faith about its assertion of terrorist status. (We protect the rights of the guilty because the...

Not to nitpick (I agree with you), but I want to make clear how hard it is to overstate the position taken in this litigation. What you've written isn't entirely correct. We're actually talking about the government being able to kill whomever it wants, simply if it can make an entirely...

That's a good question. But it is my opinion that it's not analogous at all to the current situation because the "War on Terror" is essentially police action against a criminal enterprise, rather than a war between belligerent armies. (No matter how much al-Qa'eda wants to think of it as a...

I disagree. I think it's wussy authoritarianism. Instead of submitting your will to the all-powerful state, you just submit your will to whoever owns the property. E.g., Pullman, Illinois. I assert that every single libertarian -- 100% of them -- assume that they'd be the people at the top...

Is anyone even going to try to defend this? This is the President of the United States asserting the power to issue kill orders for U.S. citizens without any judicial process, and then preventing those citizens from even gaining entry to the courts to prevent the government from killing them...