Sarah Palin: the gift to the Obama campaign that keeps on giving.
MADD “outs” restaurants that give to the American Beverage Institute, asks customers to boycott them because ABI opposes MADD (or, just as accurately, just “mad”) public policy goals. Sounds to me like a good reason to go out of your way to patronize those restaurants.
So remember the kid in Ozark, Missouri whom police tazed 19 times as he lay in a ditch with a broken back and broken foot after falling off an overpass? An internal investigation has cleared the tazer-happy officer of any wrongdoing.
Detroit suburbs increasingly (and unfortunately) embracing breed-specific dog bans.
I think I’ve blogged this before. But it’s still pretty terrific that Target sells it. If only they still needed one!
Nice coverage in the Washington Post of the Institute for Justice’s fight to keep veterinary groups and some overly self-important state chiropractic board from performing massages . . . on horses.
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, September 30th, 2008 at 9:34 am by Radley Balko
and is filed under Alcohol, General Criminal Justice, Nanny State, Police Militarization, Police Professionalism, There Oughtta Be a Law.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
TheAgitator.com
[...] Radley, we learn that MADD has outed restaurants that give money to the American Beverage Institute. These [...]
Re: Palin:
Wait a second, why HASN’T CBS released the the clip of her being unable to name another Supreme Court decision? Don’t the voters have a right to know this? Why would they be sitting on this? Anyone?
Heh…it’d be worth the tax dollars to fit every cop with a camera…maybe then they’d take a moment to consider the ramifications (if any) of their actions…well…one can hope anyway
Radley, I just want to let you know you’ve determined my plans tonight - after work I’m going to Olive Garden and then stopping at Target.
“No Taser has been fired by an Ozark police officer since the cameras were installed, Hodges said.”
Kinda takes the fun out of it, don’t it?
Couric: What did you learn from that experience?
Palin: That this is all about “gotcha” journalism. A lot of it is. But that’s okay, too.
Well, Governor it might be that you are a little to easy to “get”. When my daughter was 2 years old she played hide-n-seek by standing in the middle of the room and covering her eyes but I expect more from a V.P. candidate. Jesus, even Bush could name Dred Scott. BTW, “What is your position on the economic bailout?” was probably a question you should have seen coming. Also, considering that you were Gov. of Alaska when the Exxon Valdez case and Alaska vs. United States regarding maritime rights were decided you might have known something about them.
Nick T: CBS is showing interviews every night during the evening news. I don’t believe they are holding back the clip to keep it from the public, I believe they are slowly releasing the clips day by day to keep people tuning into CBS.
I am borderline anarchocapitalist, but the Pit Bull is one breed of dog that I would not mind going extinct — even if by government decree! ( Wow! Saying that felt so good. Now I know why there are not more libertarians! )
I’d never put that doormat on my porch. It probably gives the police “probable cause” to invade my home.
[...] links to the story of police exonerating themselves after two of their finest tasered a guy (with a [...]
Wow, so the cops find using a tazer 19 times on a guy who just fell off an overpass and has a broken back justified? Is there ANYTHING they can’t justify? Obviously not. I even saw a cop recently in the news saying it was his “job” to have sex with hookers as part of an operation. LOL.
I have to agree with #7 on the doormat. In this police state it probably would be considered probable cause.
They do still need a warrant (rarely) and it’s just a rubber stamp away.
Bully breed legislation. A few years ago, I would say around August of 2002 I was in charge of investigating a dog attack that occurred on a 12 year old girl. I remember this case vividly and here was the list of injuries.
40+ puncture wounds covering the body.
Three large lacerations across the top of the head.
Laceration along one upper arm.
On the other arm, the tricep was partially torn off.
Luckily and fortunately the girl was able to climb onto a swingset/jungle gym structure to escape the dog.
The dog breed: Rottweiler
The girl was visiting her grandparents and the neighbor’s dog in the next yard over ignored it’s invisible fence, charged across the property and attacked her.
Most of the pit bull attacks that I investigated were mainly animal upon animal. Due to the inherent power of the pit, the results were not very appetizing.
This also takes into account the types of dogs within a given area. Rarely had pit bites on humans, but several animal on animal attacks and pits, chows and rottweilers and a mix of all three were pretty prevalent to the area. Chows were the #1 dog in quarantine followed closely by Rottweilers, Husky’s and Labs.
And a list of dogs that I trust the list.
1. Dalmations (If these councils only knew what these dogs were bred for)
2. Chows
3. Rottweilers
4. Cocker Spaniels
5. Great Danes/St. Bernards
6. Any dogs with moon eyes.
Thanks, Gary. So then the whole leaking” it thing is not really an issue because it will come out. Just seems weird that they would do that to keep viewers coming back. Also wouldn’t they want to release the details or the transcripts SO THAT viewers tuned in to the juicy stuff they knew was coming. I think most people wouldn’t read the transcript but they would know that tonight was the night she’s screws up ‘X’ or ‘Y.’
In regards to the MADD press release:
First of all, I actually laughed at the rhetoric in that piece.
“ABI has a long, sad history of fighting to keep drunk drivers on the
road” Yes… I’m quite sure that the ABI has been saying “Hey. You know what we need? We need MORE drunks on the road.”
As for the 9,100 signatures saying they’ll boycott? As of 2002 (the most recent year that showed up in a 2-minute Google search), the annual profits for Darden Restaurants (owners of Red Lobster and Olive Garden) were $4.4 billion. Those are just 2 of the restaurants on the list. 9,000 boycotters aren’t even going to be noticed–except, of course, by the other patrons who won’t have to deal with the condescending looks when they decide to have a beer with dinner.
Some day we will be grateful if all we get is tased.
http://www.kare11.com/news/whatsup/whatsup_article.aspx?storyid=525835&catid=333
If only the list of restaurants that MADD is boycotting were a little, you know, better. Then I’d eat at those establishments regularly. Instead, I think once for defiance reasons will be more than enough.
(If these councils only knew what these dogs were bred for)
And why is that?
Palin has become a punch line and when this is all over McCain will be a spokesman for Depends.
You are ignorant and probably have never been around a pit bull (American Pit Bull Terrier). A well breed, sound dog is one of the dogs least likely to attack a human. Why? Generations of selective breeding to breed out human aggression. Why? Because in dog fights two handlers (not the owners) and a referee (not one of the owners) is in the pit with the two dogs. If the dogs were at all inclined to attack humans those humans (I’m using that term loosely here in that dog fighting is despicable) would be in serious danger. While the American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT) is not human aggressive they are one of the strongest dogs in the world for their size. There is no reason to ban any dog of any breed, but there are plenty of reasons to strongly encourage responsible dog ownership and I’d even be willing to consider government action along those lines. Things like,
1. Mandantory spaying and neutering of all dogs save those owned by reputable dog breeders (i.e. people who do things like get their dogs health checked–e.g. hips, heart, etc.–who don’t breed litters without having potential buyers already lined up, make sure potential buyers have insurance, have a secure place for the dog, and breeders who sell dogs via contract with a “buy back” clause so that if the person no longer wants the dog the breeder has the right of first refusal).
2. Stricter enforcement of leash laws.
3. Stricter dangerous dog laws and stricter enforcement. Any dog can become dangerous. A 4 to 5 pound pomeranian killed an infant while the owner went to warm up a bottle of milk.
4. Strongly encourage people to be better owners, using the aboave example NEVER EVER leave a small child alone with a dog.
The APBT is not a dog for everyone. They can be dog aggressive and they are, as I already noted, extremely strong. However they are also very submissive to humans. So you need to be firm and fair with the dog, never take them to a dog park, never take them off leash anywhere, and make sure that wherever you keep them is completely escape proof. This requires work. If you want a dog that is lower maintenance then look for another breed.
I own one of these too, and yeah not a dog that should be left with simply an invisible fence. They are large, strong and have very solid independent and willful streaks to them. These dogs require a very firm and fair hand as well. The owner needs to do two things immediately:
1. Establish that humans are always higher in the hierarchy than dogs.
2. Socialize the dog with as many differnet people as possible.
The last one reinforces the first one and also shows the dog that people are not to be feared (fear in a dog can lead to aggression). A dog like this should be let out of doors off leash/unsecured. A dog like this should be well trained to respond to verbal commands. These are a fine dog, but again not for everyone and people who decide to own them should do lots and lots of research and/or consult with other owners to learn what to expect. Also your veternarian can be a good source of information.
Bottom line: Breed specific legislation is a form of bigotry that relies on ignorance.
That should read as,
Sorry for the confusion.
Link to the pomeranian story lest anyone think I’m making shit up.
Pomeranians clock in at around 3 to 7 pounds, on average 5.
My son with our pit bull:
My son our rottweiler:
Damn The pictures didn’t work,
Try here and here.
Hope that works.
Too bad the “Family friendly” restaurants MADD wants us to boycott are all crap.
Their history/lineage is somewhat in dispute, but they were coach/chariot dogs. Possibly used war and as guard dogs. They still have a high guarding instinct and can be aloof with strangers and dogs they don’t know. They have a high prey drive and it isn’t unknown for them to hunt smaller animals such as rats, rabbits and possible cats. They’ve also been used in hunting as well upto and including boar (the APBT is another breed that excels at boar hunting).
All of the above means, once again, not a dog for everyone. A dog that is aloof with strangers, has a high prey drive, and stong guarding instinct is a recipe for disaster with a half-assed owner–i.e. some dipshit who say 101 Dalmations and thought it would be a great family dog without checking this all out. It is imparative that such a dog be socialized with children in the household and that they learn that humans are higher in the heirarchy. They require an owner who is firm and fair and can stay calm when things go sideways. They should never be alone with children (they weigh 45 to 60 pounds so they are medium dog and a possible issue with children even in their early teens). The children need to be trained also on the correct way to play with such dogs and to always behave in a way that lets the dog know that the children are also dominant over the dog. And for God’s sake don’t just toss the poor dog in the back yard and ignore it 23/7. These dogs need to be around people, you will have to let the dog into your house.
I was wondering about that Ozark kid the other day.
Today’s News-Leader has another, slightly more informative article reiterating the cops’ earlier claims that they fired on Hutchinson to keep him from bounding out into traffic. With his punctured lung and his broken back. (They forgot to mention his badly broken heel.)
The Missouri Highway Patrol is also investigating this thing separately. Just to make double sure that there really truly is nothing to see here, I suspect.
“but the Pit Bull is one breed of dog that I would not mind going extinct ”
But what exactly is a Pit Bull?
http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html
And what percentage of pit bull does the dog have to be before it is destroyed? The whole concept of a breed related law seems silly. The problem is aggressive/uncontrolled dogs, not what they look like. I wouldn’t want to authority of determining my dog’s lineage to fall to some untrained animal control/police officer.
I’d be more likely to support all dog owner’s whose animal has a bite strength greater than X, be required to take a safety course. This at least would be easy to measure objectively. Determining a dog’s lineage is not. Even better might be a required class for all dog owners in general and leave any testing aside.
From Radley’s link about dog breed bans:
Translation:
The pit bulls either charged or attacked her dog so she picked the dog up to protect it. The pit bulls continued to attack and mistakenly bit the woman on the hand (probably the one holding her dog). All-in-all a dumb move. In a dog fight, never try to break it up by picking up one of the dogs. Get help and seperate all dogs. Yeah, I know that that isn’t always an option, but anything else is risky in terms of placing yourself in between to fighting animals…not a good idea.
And that being said these dogs need to be removed from their owner, the owner needs to be fined, pay for medical bills, and possibly restricted from owning other bully breeds. The owner was negligent in not making sure the dogs were secured. Keep in mind this owner almost surely violated at least one law. Prosecute on that law, enacting another one that will be hapharadly enforced isn’t the answer.
My APBT is dog aggressive. I know that. However, in most cases it is the other dogs that display far higher levels of dog aggression than my dog. I’ve taken my dog to UCLA’s Festival of Books and every time she is charged, barked at, and challenged by much smaller lap dogs that “wouldn’t hurt a flea”. I, knowing my dog, have trained her to ignore these dogs as best she can and to keep moving. People who have small dogs, IMO, tend to be the poorer types of owners. Figuring that since their dog is small they don’t have to correct for such anti-social behavior. In fact, these owners often behave in ways that reinforce such behavior.
Exactly right. What makes pit bull so dangerous is the media’s fascination with such dogs. Also, many articles are written by the ignorant and/or stupid. They automatically assume “fighting dog” = “man biter” when in actuallity that is simply not the case.
See. Sounds great. But what is completely lacking is any kind of perspective on how often this happens, how common such dogs are in the area etc. If you have 3 serious dog bite cases and 6 dogs living in the surround area….then yeah you might have a problem with such dogs, or possibly the owners. But if you have 3 cases and 300 dogs then it is a completely different picture. Passing a law that affects 300 dogs and their families because of the bad actions of 3 dogs and their owners is just the morons form of regulation (Butler T. Reynolds).
#18:
Dalmatians are coach dogs, meaning their job is to trot with the horse and protect it, both from animals and brigands. They are quick to rush out and attack anything that enters their “zone”.
On the Palin note, I am going to make a few points in passing:
1.) She’s probably been so crammed full of talking points and “what not to say”s, that the question caught her a bit of guard. She’s being interviewed on national TV. If she said, “Marbury v. Madison”, would that have been better? Would all of her detractors suddenly seized up and said, “Here’s a conservative we can support?” Give me a break.
2.) All the candidates have pretty said ridiculous things on the campaign trail. We have a laundry list of misstatements, uhs and malapropisms by Obama, McCain and Biden. Once and while you even get to see one by Biden (but never by Obamessiah). Is Biden the gift that keeps on giving because he thought the McCain ad was bs? Because he told a guy in a wheelchair to stand up? Give me a break. We might have seen on NBC if Biden was a Republican. Or “57 states” by Obama, too. Oops.
This campaign is between two flawed candidates - one of which clearly has the media supporting while the other one doesn’t. If you want to criticize the choice of McCain’s people to keep putting her in front of hostile interviewers, that’s fine. The Gibson interview editing was a joke. But the main reason Gov. Palin is seen as a “gift” to Sen. Obama is because she’s on the wrong ticket that media supports.
Back to Palin, I think the point should be rasied here too of just how terrible a job that campaign did to prepare her for the interview that they didn’t bother to give her things to share about her judicial philosophy or something like that.
If you can only name one case (and I’d bet my first-born child she can’t tell you the arguments or legal issues in RvW) then you have not thought anywhere near long-enough about the constitution and role of government to be qualified to be President. Hands down.
Bottom line: Breed specific legislation is a form of bigotry that relies on ignorance.
More importantly, breed-specific legislation has been empirically shown to be ineffective.
another way you can tell palin was a great VP pick is to note the reaction from her (and the GOP’s) enemies.
they just couldn’t BE more earnest. owlishly pointing out her faults; solemnly noting that she and those faults are going to hurt mccain; helpfully tossing out suggestions that, perhaps, if she were to drop out, perhaps mccain would have a better chance in the election.
because that’s what the media is all about, really: trying to make sure mccain has a good shot at getting elected. that’s why we get news of the obama/rezko connection every day. why we get bill ayers updates every day. why the obama/ACORN connection is being scrutinized so closely. heh.
OR, you could be all cynical and suspect that palin *terrifies* the left and they’re desperately trying ANYthing; saying ANYthing to make her go away. if threats won’t work, maybe helpful suggestions will.
xyz123,
It’s funny how you chose not to defend Palin on her own merits or her substance as a candidate. Are the criticisms of her lack of knowledge and experience unwarranted, unfounded, irrational? If so, please explain why? Also explain why she is a good candidate and qualified to be the President? Specifically, is only knowing one Supreme court case not a valid reason to seriously doubt one’s ability to be chief of the executive branch? Why not?
I’ll wait VERY patiently for your response.
Oh, and Republicans are the only ones I’ve seen reportedly suggesting she step down.
well, nick, as i’ve noted here before, i really don’t care too too much about palin. she’s a VP candidate. who gives a shit?
OTOH, the voluminous criticisms of her lack of whatever it is this week seem oddly one-sided when compared with the **utterly nonexistent** similar criticisms of the *democrat* VP candidate. biden has shown himself repeatedly to be A) incredibly stupid B) childish C) dishonest D) arrogant E) by any reasonable yardstick, a serious liability to obama.
yet we don’t read about that. we don’t have 30 ‘agitator’ posts detailing his lies; and moronic utterances; and his plagiarisms; and the fact his little sonny *lobbied for businesses his daddy regulated*. nope. not a peep. oh, sure, there are vague amorphous MSM notations that “gee, he’s not all he could be and maybe it’d be better if he was hillary”, but that’s about it.
as to specifics, is biden’s vast history of lies/embellishments/plagiarism not a valid reason to doubt his ability to be president? or does that not matter when the person in question is a democrat? it’s funny how you choose not to mention that.
let’s put biden on camera, and let a hardcore rightwinger play ‘gotcha’ with him. then let’s let that same hardcore rightwinger EDIT the interview to showcase him at his absolute worst. (you know, like couric the hardcore left-winger did to palin.) think biden would look too good? “senator biden, you’ve been sucking on the government tit for 35 years now, and as far as we can tell, your accomplishments add up to a big fat zero. why should anyone think you’re qualified to be anything but an empty suit? what exactly have you accomplished in all that time?”
as for your statement of “republicans are the only ones i’ve seen suggesting she should step down”, well…..you’re either blind or lying, nick. which is it?
*i’ll* wait very patiently for *your* response, nick. remember now! stick to defending biden, not taking gratuitous cheap shots at palin.
Asking about a candidate’s judicial philosophy, or their opinion of the current economic bailout is hardly a “gotcha” question, and neither is asking how being next to Russia gives you foreign policy experience. All are legitimate questions. Saying “well, she’s only the VP” ignores the fact that the VP does have important legislative duties, and is direct in line for presidential succession(and also, protecting the space-time continuum. READ THE CONSTITUTION.)
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
That being said, if your defense of Palin only knowing the name of one SCOTUS case is “But…but….Ayers!”, well….weak. Just weak.
http://www.sinfest.net/archive_page.php?comicID=2947
An article from someone who has debated Palin. He says it’s harder than it would seem.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/1001/p09s01-coop.html
Let’s just boycott MADD.
Erm, your last one re: IJ and horse massage… Your post says IJ is trying to stop veterinary groups from doing horse massage.
I’m sure you mean the _veterinarians_ are trying to stop “unlicensed” horse massage, and IJ is opposing them.
That’s because Biden… no matter how much I may disagree with his politics… is not as dumb as a bag of rocks. The last thing I want near the White House is another stupid Republican.
That Target doormat oddly reminds me of a promo I’ve been seeing for that new show on ABC, Life on Mars. I guess the idea is that a cop from the present gets transported back to the 70s and is a fish out of water. One of the scenes they keep showing is the lead guy - modern cop - asking about a warrant before they enter a home, and Harvey Keitel, 70s cop, scoffing and breaking down the door. I keep thinking to myself every time I see it: they’ve got it backwards! It is the present day cop that would likely be scoffing. Anyone remember the ultimate 70s renegade cop - Dirty Harry? That movie’s outrage that someone would go free because their confession was tortured out of them seems quaint.
Saw the Palin interview….and it’s even worse. She starts out by saying that she agrees that there is a constitutional individual right to privacy….which is kinda where Roe rests its hat. Then she goes on to say that she believes that states can limit that right.
That’s…..that’s…..I’m actually at a loss for words here. Your agreement or disagreement on Roe becomes a non-issue. Those who argue against Roe make a legitimate claim that the Constitution does not contain an explicit or inherent right of privacy and SCOTUS overstepped it’s bounds.
But that’s not what Palin argued. She ceded the point that there is an inherent constitutional right to privacy–essentially agreed with the legal holding, the underlying basis of Roe. And then proceeded to say that the states can violate it at will. Think about that for a second. A candidate for the vice-presidency has argued that the states can ignore a constitutional right if they choose. Because she started out by ceding that privacy is an inherent constitutional right.
Either she doesn’t have the slightest inkling of how constitutional law works and how legal holdings lead to pragmatic results….and therefore, I don’t see how she ever could have passed high school civics, or she doesn’t really believe in the Constitution. Either way scares the hell out of me.
Oh, and then she couldn’t name another case besides Roe. Which really starts seeming unimportant in comparison.
Oh wait. I forgot. But…but…Ayers! And Wright! And she’s only running for VP! There’s no way a VP could *ever* do damage to the Constitution! Does that about cover it?