Bloggingheads Community

Bloggingheads Community (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/index.php)
-   Diavlog comments (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury) (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?t=2973)

AemJeff 05-04-2009 03:27 PM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Personally, I won't be satisfied until I see Dick Cheney on a stage in full fetish getup saying, in a tiny Betty Boop voice, "I was a BAAAAD little girl, and I deserve to be punished, daddy" over and over again.

Or not. It's deeply disappointing to see the desire to impose public accountability over an issue of this gravity painted as partisan posturing.

AemJeff 05-04-2009 03:30 PM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by piscivorous (Post 112495)
Can you give me a reference to the specific statue you are using to define the specific enhanced interrogation techniques as torture. Just because you feel or think the techniques are torture does not make them by law that. If waterboarding were prohibited by law what was the purpose of President Obama's executive order prohibiting it's further use. If President Obama believes that it is prohibited, by law, there would have been no need for the executive order.

Pisc, the prohibition of torture is not in dispute. The definition of waterboarding as torture is not new. Your assertions have no force of logic. The burden is on the people who decided to adopt a novel definition to show that theirs is the correct view.

Wonderment 05-04-2009 04:02 PM

Re: In praise of Salt
 
Quote:

I'm not so sure. I don't like race-based affirmative action programs in education, but if they were altered to be income-based, then they'd be more acceptable to me. It really depends on what the social network program is. I prefer programs that give people job skills as opposed to money, etc. and I'm really not a fan of public housing.
Good, I'm not as much a fan of race-based AA programs as you might think. I don't oppose AA for the descendants of segregation and slavery, but I'm not a very enthusiastic defender and I'm receptive to the arguments of the other side.

On public housing, I always like to remind people that I also live in subsidized government housing, since I have a mortgage tax deduction. The government also provides me with subsidized credit card spending (on gambling at Las Vegas, for example) with a home equity second loan (also deductible).

Quote:

But earlier you conceded that some will 'fall through the cracks.' So it absolutely will endanger innocent people.
If 1000 people are saved from violent crime because we rehabilitated offenders and made them productive members of society, good parents, etc., and 10 people are victimized by offenders who re-offend, it's a net gain of 990 fewer victims.

uncle ebeneezer 05-04-2009 04:05 PM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Personally, I won't be satisfied until I see Dick Cheney on a stage in full fetish getup saying, in a tiny Betty Boop voice, "I was a BAAAAD little girl, and I deserve to be punished, daddy" over and over again.
Am I the only one who thinks Cheney probably enjoys that sort of thing?

Quote:

It's deeply disappointing to see the desire to impose public accountability over an issue of this gravity painted as partisan posturing.
Thank you. That's essentially what I've been trying to get at through these many posts. Well said.

JonIrenicus 05-04-2009 04:24 PM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AemJeff (Post 112496)

Or not. It's deeply disappointing to see the desire to impose public accountability over an issue of this gravity painted as partisan posturing.

This implies that the source of my indifference and general apathy for going after officials/legal consultants for this is partisan. This is wrong.

I just tend to reserve my self righteous indignation for bad arguments as I see them and acts I consider malevolent. Water boarding Khalid is not one of them. Neither was Ken Stars witch hunt over Clinton, or the fact that he lied to a grand jury, I did not care.

AemJeff 05-04-2009 04:30 PM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by JonIrenicus (Post 112506)
This implies that the source of my indifference and general apathy for going after officials/legal consultants for this is partisan. This is wrong.

No it doesn't. My assertion really has nothing to say about your motives. But, yeah, you definitely read like a partisan, regardless of that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonIrenicus (Post 112506)
I just tend to reserve my self righteous indignation for bad arguments as I see them and acts I consider malevolent. Water boarding Khalid is not one of them. Neither was Ken Stars witch hunt over Clinton, or the fact that he lied to a grand jury, I did not care.

I don't really understand what you're trying to get across here.

JonIrenicus 05-04-2009 04:31 PM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by popcorn_karate (Post 112493)
what made it their worst outing ever was not the fact that I don't agree with them. I have disagreed with both of them on numerous occasions and, in fact, I almost never agree with glen. However, usually Glen makes some sort of sense while not agreeing with me.

What made it ridiculous is that they didn't address any of the real concerns people have and were simply dismissive and insulting - they basically sounded almost as reactionary and stupid as you, jon, and that is really uncalled for.

Lie to yourself, not to others, you found it ridiculous because they did not see the concerns you had as legitimate. And you got all fussy over it, how could any reasonable person POSSIBLY not see this as important to follow through on as "I" do.

The conceit astounds.

piscivorous 05-04-2009 05:49 PM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
I guess that if the issue is pursued to it's logical conclusion the courts will have to decide that. Until that time it a matter of opinionating.

cognitive madisonian 05-04-2009 05:57 PM

Re: In praise of Salt
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wonderment (Post 112502)
On public housing, I always like to remind people that I also live in subsidized government housing, since I have a mortgage tax deduction. The government also provides me with subsidized credit card spending (on gambling at Las Vegas, for example) with a home equity second loan (also deductible).

But those are means of stimulating the economy. Public housing does the exact opposite. To me, the entire program has been an utter failure. Public housing hasn't elevated anyone; instead, it's kept people stationary and devalued the surrounding real estate of every area it enters.

Quote:

If 1000 people are saved from violent crime because we rehabilitated offenders and made them productive members of society, good parents, etc., and 10 people are victimized by offenders who re-offend, it's a net gain of 990 fewer victims.
If we simply keep them in prison then there's no net loss of non-criminals.

JonIrenicus 05-04-2009 06:27 PM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by piscivorous (Post 112520)
I guess that if the issue is pursued to it's logical conclusion the courts will have to decide that. Until that time it a matter of opinionating.


That was great, talking down that snot nosed kid who "knows" he has all the right perspective.

As to legality of what was done, I do not know. But for those stating it was not legal, that is not very convincing.


Better that you lay out the legal arguments in both directions, showing that you fully understand the argument that says it was legal, and give the argument a fair hearing, and then state why you think that legal reasoning is wrong.

It's wrong because X person says it is, while Y person says it's not leave the lay person (most of us) with nothing but air to hold onto. It is the antithesis of a compelling argument... this deserves its own post, what arguments hold the most persuasive power...

Wonderment 05-04-2009 08:42 PM

Re: In praise of Salt
 
Quote:

If we simply keep them in prison then there's no net loss of non-criminals.
Not necessarily. The rehabilitated and released inmate has a positive, crime-preventing effect on society: Dad comes home 10 years earlier from the joint, supports single mom, she gets off drugs, the two boys who would have been violent gangbangers go to college instead, get married, raise children who won't be gangbangers and drug addicts either, and so on..... one good deed multiplying throughout the society.

Lyle 05-05-2009 02:35 AM

Re: In praise of Salt
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wonderment (Post 112532)
Not necessarily. The rehabilitated and released inmate has a positive, crime-preventing effect on society: Dad comes home 10 years earlier from the joint, supports single mom, she gets off drugs, the two boys who would have been violent gangbangers go to college instead, get married, raise children who won't be gangbangers and drug addicts either, and so on..... one good deed multiplying throughout the society.

Wishful thinking Wonderment. Mom has been screwing some other guy/s while her husband is in the joint. Mom doesn't know is she wants Dad anymore. Dad has to deal with a wife who has fornicated with other men interregnum. Gnarly situation.

Life ain't a movie Wonderment. Public policy can't make it such.

Jelperman 05-06-2009 01:19 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Both are living proof of what George Patton said many years ago. Men are cynical about the very things they lack. A man who sneers at courage is usually a coward, while a man who scoffs at honesty is usually a liar. These two losers (McWhorter and Loury) sneer at justice and the rule of law and the moral courage to do the right thing. They are sniveling moral cowards who have no use for justice.

Funny thing is, if torture and murder are given the state's seal of approval by refusing to investigate (let alone prosecute), then justice and the rule of law will have no use for them.

pampl 05-06-2009 02:48 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Jon Chait at The New Republic just wrote an article about torture and the prosecution thereof. I found it to be pretty incisive. I was a little skeptical towards prosecution before but I've become convinced that, in principle, it'd be the right thing to do.

uncle ebeneezer 05-06-2009 03:08 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Thanks Pampl. Great Chait piece.

piscivorous 05-06-2009 04:03 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
If you would like a detailed analysis of enhanced interrogation techniques from the end of WWII through Iraq there is an interesting one that has been accepted for publication in the Yale Law Journal, Forthcoming by William Ranney Levi. The 50 page pdf is available at SSRN though. Its not as bad as it sounds though as it is 50 percent text 50 percent foot notes. Section one is a recap of the memos with some background of how the evolved. Its sections two and three that I found provide much of the perspective.

bjkeefe 05-06-2009 04:34 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by piscivorous (Post 112687)
If you would like a detailed analysis of enhanced interrogation techniques from the end of WWII through Iraq there is an interesting one that has been accepted for publication in the Yale Law Journal, Forthcoming by William Ranney Levi. The 50 page pdf is available at SSRN though. Its not as bad as it sounds though as it is 50 percent text 50 percent foot notes. Section one is a recap of the memos with some background of how the evolved. Its sections two and three that I found provide much of the perspective.

[UPDATE] This comment no longer applies. See my next comment.

================================================== =====

Thanks for the heads-up. Unfortunately, that link doesn't work for me -- I only get a 26 KB file (which my PDF reader says is not a PDF file when I try to open it).

I found what looks like the abstract page, but the download link there produces the same result.

bjkeefe 05-06-2009 06:48 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 112688)
Thanks for the heads-up. Unfortunately, that link doesn't work for me -- I only get a 26 KB file (which my PDF reader says is not a PDF file when I try to open it).

I found what looks like the abstract page, but the download link there produces the same result.

While waiting to see if that document becomes available* through some other route, here's another thing to keep an eye out for (emph. added last sentence):

Quote:

Justice Department's Internal Memo Inquiry Reaches Pivotal Stage

A draft version of the Justice Department's internal investigation of Bush Administration lawyers who wrote memos authorizing torture has concluded that at least two of them are guilty of significant misconduct, two sources with direct knowledge of the draft said.

The Associated Press reported tonight that the draft version of the report does not recommend criminal charges against lawyers John Yoo and Jay Bybee. But the sources said that the report lays out, in exquisite detail, a significant number of exchanges between the lawyers and the White House as several of the memos were being crafted. The report includes excerpts from internal memoranda and e-mail messages.

Ostensibly, Yoo, an attorney for the Office of Legal Counsel and Bybee, that section's chief, were tasked by Attorney General John Ashcroft with determining whether so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques" violated U.S. law and treaty obligations. But a draft report, prepared by the Justice Department's Office of Professional Review, suggests that, at the direction of the White House, the OLC worked to justify a policy that had already been determined and did not begin their inquiry from a neutral position.

The rest.

==========
* [ADDED] Just tried the link on the abstract page again, and this time it worked. Go figure.

[ADDED 2] Probably won't read it all right now, but I can't help but pass along this observation, from among the people thanked by the author:

Quote:

Harold H. Koh consulted and advised throughout; I am immensely grateful for his encouragement.
[ADDED 3] On a related note, here's the beginning of an article in today's (6 May 2009) WaPo:

Quote:

Bush Officials Try to Alter Ethics Report

Former Bush administration officials have launched a behind-the-scenes campaign to urge Justice Department leaders to soften an ethics report criticizing lawyers who blessed harsh detainee interrogation tactics, according to two sources familiar with the efforts.

Representatives for John C. Yoo and Jay S. Bybee, subjects of the ethics probe, have encouraged former Justice Department and White House officials to contact new officials at the department to point out the troubling precedent of imposing sanctions on legal advisers, said the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the process is not complete.

The effort began in recent weeks, the sources said, and it could not be determined how many former officials had reached out to their new counterparts.
With apologies to Mr. Byrne: Do I smell? I smell whitewashing/It's only the river, it's only the river/

bjkeefe 05-06-2009 07:16 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pampl (Post 112671)
Jon Chait at The New Republic just wrote an article about torture and the prosecution thereof. I found it to be pretty incisive. I was a little skeptical towards prosecution before but I've become convinced that, in principle, it'd be the right thing to do.

I'll second uncle eb: Thanks for the link. Not anything I haven't already come to conclusions on, but Chait makes the case nice and succinctly.

bjkeefe 05-06-2009 07:21 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 112692)
With apologies to Mr. Byrne: Do I smell? I smell whitewashing/It's only the river, it's only the river/

And I gotta say, Mr. Riley is not helping to ease my creeping cynicism.

bjkeefe 05-06-2009 07:23 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AemJeff (Post 112496)
Personally, I won't be satisfied until I see Dick Cheney on a stage in full fetish getup saying, in a tiny Betty Boop voice, "I was a BAAAAD little girl, and I deserve to be punished, daddy" over and over again.

Or not. It's deeply disappointing to see the desire to impose public accountability over an issue of this gravity painted as partisan posturing.

The last line of the post I linked to elsewhere brought your comment to mind. Can't imagine why.

bjkeefe 05-06-2009 07:47 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by piscivorous (Post 112687)
If you would like a detailed analysis of enhanced interrogation techniques from the end of WWII through Iraq there is an interesting one that has been accepted for publication in the Yale Law Journal, Forthcoming by William Ranney Levi. The 50 page pdf is available at SSRN though. Its not as bad as it sounds though as it is 50 percent text 50 percent foot notes. Section one is a recap of the memos with some background of how the evolved. Its sections two and three that I found provide much of the perspective.

All right, I've read enough of it now to guess the rest: Levi appears to have retraced the path of the Bush White House OLC; i.e., there is/was enough vagueness in the existing laws and treaties regarding torture, and enough of an all-asses-covered paper trail laid down, that I'm more convinced than ever that it is going to be awfully tough to make a legal case against anybody. This realization has doubtless long been on the mind of many in the Obama Administration.

So this, plus the rumors about the soon-to-be-released Justice Department memo, the nonstop howling from the right-wing noise machine, the complicity of too many Congressional Dems, and my sense of the general political air have left me feeling even more than I did before that no one is going to be punished for all the torture that was authorized and carried out.

I now place my hope in a truth commission, so at least everyone will have a chance to learn what is about to be swept under the rug. Because make no mistake about it: legalistic hand-waving notwithstanding, the United States government -- specifically, the Bush Administration -- did approve a program of torture and did carry it out. That some of these same actions may have happened before, in other times and under other administrations, does not change that. Nor does it excuse it.

cognitive madisonian 05-06-2009 10:14 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 112696)
All right, I've read enough of it now to guess the rest: Levi appears to have retraced the path of the Bush White House OLC; i.e., there is/was enough vagueness in the existing laws and treaties regarding torture, and enough of an all-asses-covered paper trail laid down, that I'm more convinced than ever that it is going to be awfully tough to make a legal case against anybody. This realization has doubtless long been on the mind of many in the Obama Administration.

So this, plus the rumors about the soon-to-be-released Justice Department memo, the nonstop howling from the right-wing noise machine, the complicity of too many Congressional Dems, and my sense of the general political air have left me feeling even more than I did before that no one is going to be punished for all the torture that was authorized and carried out.

I now place my hope in a truth commission, so at least everyone will have a chance to learn what is about to be swept under the rug. Because make no mistake about it: legalistic hand-waving notwithstanding, the United States government -- specifically, the Bush Administration -- did approve a program of torture and did carry it out. That some of these same actions may have happened before, in other times and under other administrations, does not change that. Nor does it excuse it.

The Bush administration approved a program that Nancy Pelosi had full knowledge of, that the American people supported, and that had its roots in the Extraordinary Rendition started under Bill Clinton. Shall we start the witch hunt?

Prosecuting the prior administration is what banana republics do. It's a shame that certain elements of the modern left have rejected democracy for thuggery.

bjkeefe 05-06-2009 10:39 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by cognitive madisonian (Post 112703)
The Bush administration approved a program that Nancy Pelosi had full knowledge of, that the American people supported, and that had its roots in the Extraordinary Rendition started under Bill Clinton. Shall we start the witch hunt?

Hard to believe you quoted my entire post and still missed where I said "... the complicity of too many Congressional Dems ..." and "... some of these same actions may have happened before, in other times and under other administrations ..." And if you didn't miss them, then I don't know who you're arguing with.

Quote:

Prosecuting the prior administration is what banana republics do. It's a shame that certain elements of the modern left have rejected democracy for thuggery.
Wow. There's an original thought. Good to see you're on the fax list for Wingnut Central's Special Orwell Division ("Redefining Terms Our Specialty!").

I guess we can toss "Republicans are for the Rule of Law" onto the shitheap of obsolete GOP slogans, though, huh? The Party of No. Short and simple. with the added advantage of being true.

piscivorous 05-06-2009 10:45 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Sorry for the mix up, click on the SSRN Button, at the top, for the download.

cognitive madisonian 05-06-2009 10:48 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 112705)
Hard to believe you quoted my entire post and still missed where I said "... the complicity of too many Congressional Dems ..." and "... some of these same actions may have happened before, in other times and under other administrations ..." And if you didn't miss them, then I don't know who you're arguing with.

Oh I saw that but I wanted to remind you that your speaker of the house was also in the camp of the terrible evil torturers with hidden mustaches and evil laughs. I suppose we'll also be prosecuting her?

Quote:


Wow. There's an original thought. Good to see you're on the fax list for Wingnut Central's Special Orwell Division ("Redefining Terms Our Specialty!").
Actually it's the truth. The foundations of democracy are being corrupted by people such as you, and if we drift toward your end of the spectrum, American democracy will cease to exist within 50 years.

bjkeefe 05-06-2009 11:16 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by piscivorous (Post 112707)
Sorry for the mix up, click on the SSRN Button, at the top, for the download.

No prob. That's what I did do, once I found the abstract page. (I should have noted this explicitly myself, I guess.)

Thanks for checking back, though.

bjkeefe 05-06-2009 11:24 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by cognitive madisonian (Post 112708)
Oh I saw that but I wanted to remind you that your speaker of the house was also in the camp of the terrible evil torturers with hidden mustaches and evil laughs. I suppose we'll also be prosecuting her?

Given that the entire theme of my post was a lament that we'd probably not be prosecuting anybody, again I ask, who exactly are you arguing with?

Quote:

Actually it's the truth. The foundations of democracy are being corrupted by people such as you, and if we drift toward your end of the spectrum, American democracy will cease to exist within 50 years.
Well, cog.mad., if you think the US will turn into a "banana republic" because people like me would like a proper investigation into the actions of our elected officials, and that my belief that they shouldn't be above the law is going to kill democracy, I don't know what to tell you. Never mind values; you and I don't even share the same vocabulary.

cognitive madisonian 05-06-2009 11:26 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 112713)
Given that the entire theme of my post was a lament that we'd probably not be prosecuting anybody, again I ask, who exactly are you arguing with?

So this isn't even about "justice" for you. This is just a way of trying to stick it to Bush. This is the embodiment of Bush derangement syndrome. And there's nothing "proper" about your idea. It's a partisan attack technique. George Bush didn't investigate the selling of pardons and other such questionable moves by the Clinton administration. of course, who cares? It's George Bush. Gar! Gnash teeth!

bjkeefe 05-06-2009 11:28 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by cognitive madisonian (Post 112715)
So this isn't even about "justice" for you. This is just a way of trying to stick it to Bush. This is the embodiment of Bush derangement syndrome. And there's nothing "proper" about your idea. It's a partisan attack technique. George Bush didn't investigate the selling of pardons and other such questionable moves by the Clinton administration. of course, who cares? It's George Bush. Gar! Gnash teeth!

Whatever you say, child.

cognitive madisonian 05-06-2009 11:30 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 112716)
Whatever you say, child.

*puts away troll feed*

cognitive madisonian 05-06-2009 11:38 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
By the way, bjkeefe, an honest question for you: do you have any friends who are on the other side of the political spectrum? I'm not talking about obsequious quasi-conservatives such as David Brooks, I'm talking about people who actually are conservative. Because you seem to represent exactly what Bill Bishop was getting at with The Big Sort.

bjkeefe 05-07-2009 07:00 AM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 112693)
I'll second uncle eb: Thanks for the link. Not anything I haven't already come to conclusions on, but Chait makes the case nice and succinctly.

I should add that I just went back to that Chait piece that pampl recommended, to watch the short video of Chait and Foer. Also worthwhile.

claymisher 05-08-2009 08:36 PM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by cognitive madisonian (Post 112718)
By the way, bjkeefe, an honest question for you: do you have any friends who are on the other side of the political spectrum? I'm not talking about obsequious quasi-conservatives such as David Brooks, I'm talking about people who actually are conservative. Because you seem to represent exactly what Bill Bishop was getting at with The Big Sort.

This sounds like I'm kidding, but it's true: I used to have right-wing friends and relatives, but none of them are right-wing anymore. (It's also generational. They're just aren't that many right-wingers my age.) A lot of them are still pro-life and generally cranky about government, but after eight years of Bush and the Palin thing they've all had it with the Republican party. Most would now call themselves independent, and some became Paulites, but on the whole they've just checked out.

I couldn't name even an acquaintance that denies evolution though. I guess I don't know any full-on wingnuts.

x9#z6 05-09-2009 01:45 PM

Re: Non-Bloodthirsty Edition (John McWhorter & Glenn Loury)
 
Because it's just and a society should function according to a rule of law! It would appear that McWhorter and Loury feel justice should be selectively applied to crimes for which they have no vicarious moral culpability. Guys, don't hide your selfishness behind language that is carefully chosen (for McWhorter at least) to mis-characterize the various players (i.e. "vengeance", "bloodthirsty", "nah nah" etc.). Truly pathetic.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:43 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.