TheAgitator.com
Open Thread
Wednesday, March 18th, 2009I’m out the rest of the day.
So please feel free to talk amongst yourselves.
86 Responses to “Open Thread”
Leave a Reply
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial NoDerivs 2.5 License.
Radley’s kinda slacking today…
hehehe
Hey everybody! How’s it going? Nice weather today, innit?
I poop too much.
I have a five minute persuasive speech due this weekend. It can be on anything (pretty much). I hate this class it’s a complete waste of my time and money but required for graduation.
I’m thinking of borrowing heavily from Mr. Balko’s work (citing it properly of course).
Hmm….maybe hayne/west? Police misconduct? Drug war?
#2, not sure how it is where you’re at, but the weather’s kinda dreary in NE Iowa today.
A friend of mine had to do a persuasive speech a couple of years ago and did it on the dietary benefit to eating bugs. His speech came complete with chocolate chip and cricket cookies. The speech was a hit, and the cookies weren’t bad either!
ktc2,
It’d be tough to make a speech on Hayne in 5 minutes. It’s more of a technical field and his is quite a drawn-out story. Plus, for it to be effective at all, you’d need to show a pattern of abuses, and you just don’t have time for that.
I’d pick a single story that’s very cut-and-dried (the death of Sal Culosi comes to mind – he was shot when an officer tripped over a root and discharged his weapon while raiding Culosi’s property for betting on football games) and make the case that these tactics are what got him killed. Again, this is tough for five minutes because it’d be helpful to show a pattern of abuses.
Just some thoughts.
#5 Manchester, NH. It’s mid 50s, breezy and slighty overcast so it’s not too bright but still sunny. It’s very nice.
I’m going walleye fishing.
On the ice.
Or what remains of it.
Cappy out.
A 5 minute persuasive speech seems like an oxymoron to me, unless we’re persuading people of trivial stuff of little importance. To challenge anybody’s belief in anything of substance seems to me like it would take more than 5 minutes, and talking at them (a speech) isn’t a very good method, even with more time.
Presenting a specific case of a cop killing a person and getting away with it seems like a good way to convince them of the trivial, specific claim (that cop ****ed up), but hardly likely to affect the vastly more important general beliefs (virtually all cops are Good Guys, swat teams protect us, drug dealers/users are Evil People, ect).
KTC
One idea for a persuasive speech would be to say the War on Drugs is lost, leave and then come back in 5 minutes later with some drugs and say “see?”
ktc2,
I go with something about how the consequences of enforcing laws against “consentual crimes” are far worse than the consequences of committing said crimes, and haven’t done much to deter those whom the law was intended to stop (destructive drug addicts, habitual gamblers, etc.) from engaging in these behaviors. You can find at least a dozen examples of this here each week.
Also Manchester NH…getting a bike ride in at 2p.
GD, I wish I could vote that up twice.
Nice Harley riding weather here in NC.
To be honest (except for me being sick this year) it is fairly nice year round for the bike here.
Iowa is dreary on a cloudless day.
;)
There was a story on the wire yesterday with some insider claiming American Idol is a total fix, and that the final four have already been chosen by the producers.
Maybe that’s why Radley’s out of the office. He’s busy taking names and kicking asses down in Hollywood as we speak.
Great weather in central mn today. Sunshine and 50 degrees or so.
Sunny and 72 degrees here in Dallas. Seems like it only rains when I don’t have to work. Then when I have to work, we get the best fishing days and I have to put up with text messages from my asshole neighbor who took the day off to go fishing.
I like open thread, I think Radley should have one every day.
Maybe a daily “Reader Submitted Links” thread once a day would be nice. Get a little more “open source” agitatorism going.
Thanks for the ideas folks!
I agree five minutes is insufficient time to address anything worth caring about. Ridiculous academic assignments.
Last week I had to do an “informational” 5 minutes. I chose Buddhist philosophy and my visual aid was a diagram of the universe according to Buddhism (ie a blank page). No grade yet. LOL.
Ugh, ” a daily ,, once a day, brought to you by the dept of redundancy dept.
My cat’s breath smells like cat food.
“with some insider claiming American Idol is a total fix, and that the final four have already been chosen by the producers.”
We have one of those on the AI message board i post at occasionally. He always claims its totally fake and that he personally has an insider who tells him who is getting voted off every week b4 that results show airs. Problem is he is always wrong. When hes wrong, he just says that the producers must have decided to keep someone else for audience appeal. Hes only been completely wrong every week for the last 3 seasons. Its kind of cute.
Pittsburgh is having San Diego weather today. And I’m sitting in a fucking cubicle that faces a wall.
Sadly, I am not shocked by this kind of thing anymore – it is just another data point on a pretty clear trend:
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_11936283
Although the habit of assuming a police officer testifying is always right must have been quite a conundrum for the jury, as officers testified against him. Not that it mattered…
Not to worry Fritz. If you’re a cubicle worker you’re already dead on the inside anyway.
Fritz, your cubicle has walls?! I’m in an open concept office. Or at least that’s what they call it.
And they wonder why I work from home a lot.
“There was a story on the wire yesterday with some insider claiming American Idol is a total fix, and that the final four have already been chosen by the producers.”
I can’t believe I’m still watching that shit. Mostly because my wife and kids watch it and I’m in the room at the same time. Man, that show has jumped the shark. It’s embarrassing how the judges are raving about almost all the contestants this year. Most of them are so average. It smacks of desperation, of trying to make it true by repeating it over and over again.
Can we find a way to combine the American Idol thread with police brutality thread….come to think of it, that sounds like a good idea.
There… Done for the day. Taking the rest of the day off. Gonna pick up my 8 year old son from daycare (spring break this week) and take him fishing. This weather is just too nice.
Have a nice day everybody!
#4 | ktc2
I would like to see more people speak out on the erosions of the 4th amendment from the standpoint that jr high and hs kids aren’t afforded any rights (they receive random drug tests, dogs sniffing around, lockers searched without probable cause, etc). So, when they become cops, lawyers, judges, teachers, etc, they have no respect for others’ rights.
5 minutes? nevermind.
Persuade them to go to Subway instead of McDonald’s…
ktc2,
Just talk about marijuana being legalized.
A. It’s harmless,
- Strong anecdotal evidence it has medicinal value
- Never killed anyone ever
- Not habit forming (medically)
- most thorough/recent studies show it is not even harmful on your lungs and may fight cancer
- Countless successful people have used it
B. Social costs
- Broken families
- Veterans find it effective for treating PTSD and then can be punished as criminals
- No tax revenue
C. Legal costs
- Filled prisons
- Busy courts
- Wasted police resources
- Civil liberties: (Frederick, Calvo)
D. Liberty
- Harmful? Addictive? Even if true, so what? Doesn’t liberty mean free to make bad choices?
Wiz bang! Done and done! Open with a dramatic telling of the story of Calvo, Maye or Frederick to pull your audience in. A+ mofo!
Beautiful weather here in central Florida! Unfortunately, I am also stuck indoors (working on my PhD in biomedical science at the University of Central Florida). Hopefully my wife and I will be going on a motorcycle cruise this evening…perfect weather for it.
I have to say, how you people are handling this unmoderated free-for-all gives me hope that a state-less society is possible.
I just jinxed it, right?
The risk in talking about legalizing drugs is that the prof might assume you are 1) a dealer or 2) a whacko. Both will get you a visit from the po-po after the prof calls them, most likely in the middle of the night with a no-knock “warrant”, flash-bangs, and assault weapons.
Nah, that NEVER happens.
ktc2,
If I was you I would be doing a speech about relaxing the gun laws on college campuses (Radley posted a link about a student who tried this). It would be fairly straightforward to mention that licensed gun owners rarely shoot when it isn’t called for, how they are usually better trained in firearm use than police officers, etc. I know those studies have been done, I just don’t have any links for you. It’s a topic that is current and I’m sure you’ll get some good discussion going (if you have a Q&A after you’re speech).
Just my suggestion (but hey, there have been some really outstanding suggestions made already…you have plenty of inspiration!)
ktc2:
Legalizing marijuana should be advocated as much as possible, in any possible arena. 5 minutes probably isn’t enough time to make a persuasive argument, though (you have to show that it is harmless, and not just state it). I think 5 minutes is long enough to make the case that the feds shouldn’t be raiding medical marijuana dispensaries, though, and that the people they have already locked up should be freed without trial. Basically the case that John Stossel/Reason made in the 20/20 special last week.
Yeah go with the marijuana issue. 5 minutes is enough time to recap the major points.
Also, I think we should start a few pernicious Radley Balko rumors while he is out, and then spread them on teh interwerbz. Any ideas? Something involving bestiality or necromancy might be intriguing.
Thanks again all! Great ideas! Yeah the time limit does suck.
Also, I think we should start a few pernicious Radley Balko rumors while he is out, and then spread them on teh interwerbz. Any ideas? Something involving bestiality or necromancy might be intriguing.
–
Radley performs incantations on his dogs in order to seduce them?
Nah.
Dr. Stephen Hayne performs incantations on his dogs in order to seduce them. While Dr. Michael West watches.
Better. Much better.
ktc2,
Make a 5-minute persuasive speech on how 5-minute persuasive speeches are relatively useless at persuading anyone of anything.
…or do what I did for my persuasive speech years ago, why we should convert to the metric system. Cite ease of conversion as a reason and give examples. Reciting all of the ridiculous fractions that happen in the “standard” system conversions is guaranteed to take up at least couple minutes.
We need an edit function.
Here is an anger generator.
There are simple creatures called phages that can fight certain infections with greater success and less side effects than antibiotics.
These can help a lot of folks and maybe even save lives.
Yet the FDA will not approve them for use in the US even though they have been safely used in Eastern Europe since the 1920s.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13136196/PopSci200904 scroll down to page 60 on the I-paper reader
Give a 5 minute speech on why it’s a bad idea to have SWAT teams on college campuses.
So Missouri not only thinks we’re all terrorists due to our Libertarian leanings, but if any of you owns a Nintendo DS and plays “Animal Crossing” you’re also a pedophile:
http://www.joystiq.com/2009/03/18/missouri-police-say-adults-shouldnt-play-animal-crossing/
Now I have a new dirty name to call my wife when she gets froggy with me.
NYC. 50some degrees. Belly full of kebabs. A hole in my left sock.
Not haiku.
@ Scott #44:
Has anybody asked “Detective Andy Anderson” why an adult would believe anything said by a Congressman or Legislator?
“Something involving bestiality or necromancy might be intriguing.”
I really dont think spreading rumors about radley sleeping with ann coulter is appropriate.
Which one would it be: Beastiality or Necrophilia?
@Aresen
Shut up, terrorist! What are you? Anti-patriotic or something?
:D
Come back, Shane! Radley!
Ah, can’t strike out characters here. Where’s that test pad he posted here a week or two ago?
Although the habit of assuming a police officer testifying is always right must have been quite a conundrum for the jury, as officers testified against him. Not that it mattered…
Looking at some other stories on this one, I think the jury may have gotten it right.
Reading between the lines, it sounds like the defendent cop *didn’t* participate in the stomping committed by the “ratting” cops and so they decided to frame him.
Think about it. Would they *really* rat out a fellow cop?
Hey!..
I would sleep with Ann Coulter. But then .. if you saw some of the women I’ve slept with lately, you would understand.
Oh, by the way, can’t catch minnows with minnow seine or cast net , so no bait, so no point in fishing. Have to try in the early morning next time.
No matter where you go, there you are.
“Beastiality or Necrophilia?”
Well, on my crabby days id like to think one would lead to the other.
O:-)
Radley otta go away more often- 56 comments today!
#8 Chris- sunny in Manchester- I live in Hanover- rain
Does anyone know what it takes to work for AIG? I could use a retention bonus.
“#55 | claude | March 18th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
“Beastiality or Necrophilia?”
Well, on my crabby days id like to think one would lead to the other.
O:-)”
Only in the Minneapolis Airport Men’s room my friend.
Scott -
Had seen this on Kotaku yesterday. They were referring to the Wii version and not the Nintendo DS version I think though.
Firstly, it’s just patently ridiculous that playing Animal Crossing as an adult is = being a pedophile. No adult would play the game? Really?
Though I will admit to always being a little suspicious of Tom Nook on that game. He’s kinda creepy.
I wonder – is Radley ever going to engage in a little self-critical examination of his fervent support for the Libertarian Party’s 2008 Presidential Election strategy of nominating non-libertarians? Radley went on the record saying that Bob Barr was the first “serious candidate” the LP has run in a long time.
Yet after the Bar/Root ticket’s, well, miserable electoral failure – suddenly all mention of the forthcoming Great Libertarian Electoral Revolution disappeared from the site. As a percentage of popular votes cast, the Bar ticket failed worse than Harry Browne in 1996, Ed Clark in 1980, and Ron Paul in 1988.
What’s the benefit of selling out your principles if you can’t even trade them in for a little power? At least if “nutjob” Mary Ruwart had run, the LP would still have had its principles.
“Only in the Minneapolis Airport Men’s room my friend.”
LOL. That particular mens room is a tourist attraction at the minneapolis airport. Lots of passengers ask where it is and go visit it. Human beings are sometimes easily entertained.
The Midwest used to have Mount Rushmore but, along with the rest of us, they are looking for more appropriate symbols of modern democracy.
I don’t recall giving Radley the rest of the day off. Who the hell does he think he is?
I just got home and discovered that the mystery has been solved regarding AIG and Dodd. Unfortunately, I’ve already had two glasses of a lovely Australian shiraz. In 200 words or less, somebody tell me why I should care. Wait, first tell me what I care about, and then why. WTF does this mean? Yes, on a sober day I am mostly libertarian. Thanx.
Radley, you got some ‘splaining to do… LOL!
Here…debate this statement I overheard today…
“No one can expect a right to privacy when out in public.”
Well, we can begin by assuming you are not quoting a LEO…
“Well, we can begin by assuming you are not quoting a LEO…”
Cuz that’s illegal.
Harm Reduction and Libertarianism
Hello everyone! (The Agitator is clearly the best blog on the net).
I work as a social worker in Chicago.
would appreciate any feedback concerning the idea that there is a philosophical conflict (which has been expressed by some individuals I have conversed with on various forums) between the concept of “harm reduction” and “libertarianism.” (Please clarify if I am mistaken – Also, please excuse me for including some of my previously written remarks).
Advocates of harm reduction (as I understand it) hold that members of society will continue to use substances no matter what (and have every right to) and asks how they can do so in the safest way possible (in an often extremely hostile pro-drug war society). Moreover, every human culture has consumed “drugs” and every single attempt at drug prohibition has failed.
As I understand harm reduction, it is all about what goals the individual wants to pursue. The individual is ultimately the true “expert” on his or her life – while the “clinician” can be a positive support along the way. Any “decent” therapist – I would hope – would embrace this philosophical approach. Harm reduction philosophy holds that we have a right to do with our bodies (our most cherished possession) as we choose.
It has everything to do with respecting the right of the individual to make decisions to improve one’s life (And that might have nothing to do with a person’s actual substance use).
I work for a program that embraces the harm reduction philosophy. Many of our clients ask for help with finding employment or better housing. Most of our clients actively use illicit substances. We assist them with what THEY determine to be the main obstacles to a more fulfilling existence.
I think that some clinicians emphasize way too much the supposed destructive influence of substance use. In my opinion, the typical clinical labels regarding substance use that I keep hearing from trained professionals (many of whom believe in the legalization of all substances) are: 1. Addiction. 3. Clean/Sober. 4. Disease.
I feel that we need to discard all of the labels thus mentioned (and many others). They are destructive – and only serve to back the claims of prohibitionists that all illicit substances are “bad.” I think that when speaking to others on this subject it is absolutely crucial to note that most use of substances (regardless of their “legal” status in our society) results in no harm whatsoever.
I’m not implying that libertarianism = harm reduction. I am just pointing out that harm reduction philosophy definitely shares the same ideals of libertarianism. The difference (from one clinician to the next) is in the details on how social services should be funded. As a libertarian, I strongly believe in the idea of private charities (funded by private donations) – as opposed to government run social services (which are cruel and coercive).
At any rate, sorry for the long post. Any feedback on this subject would be greatly appreciated.
peace
Start your own personal tax protest.
@ Ben (#62):
If a friend and I are having a quiet conversation at a corner table in an outdoor café, do we not have a reasonable expectation that there isn’t a bug in the centerpiece?
The whole concept of “expectation of privacy” is circular, anyway: all government has to do to abolish any given “expectation” of privacy is to make intrusion upon it commonplace.
Of course, the comment might have been about civil invasion of privacy — such as being photographed with someone you didn’t want your wife to know you were seeing. I’d still say a bug in the centerpiece is invasion of privacy; but so long as what was observed, recorded, photographed, etc. was (or perhaps even could have been) observed or heard by an individual not taking explicit measures to conceal him/herself or the devices by which the observation was accomplished, it’s no invasion of privacy that the observed party was not in fact made aware of the observer.
In my opinion, invasion of privacy should require either an element of deceit or violation of some other law (such as breaking and entering). Applied to the government, that would mean it would be a violation of the fourth amendment to deploy undercover agents without first obtaining a warrant based on probable cause optained without deception or coercion.
Coises:
Impressive. I should have framed it in reference to government involvement. The context of this discussion had to do with CCTV in a medium-sized town.
By your statement, since CCTV is not disguised, it is legit?
I will weigh in on this open thread!
Later.
@ Ben (#65):
If the cameras are not hidden… and you’re too stoned or stupid to step behind a tree before you do whatever it is you don’t want the authorities to see… tough luck, dumbass.
That’s an entirely different question from whether the communities in question want this sort of surveillance. You might call me an “Überfederalist” — I believe that most collective decisions are rightly made by the smallest units of decision-making possible, so cameras like this should (in my opinion) be approved neighborhood by neighborhood, block by block. But if people think it’s worth it, and are willing to fund the equipment and personnel to do it… I wouldn’t call it an invasion of privacy, just creepy.
The issue isn’t so much the telescreens as whether the authorities get to turn off the telescreens. This occurred to me even readin Orwell’s book 2 or 3 times in 9th grade.
@ Ben (#65):
Thanks. :-)
I should perhaps mention, though, that my schema leaves a gaping hole.
Suppose your balcony is not visible from any point on any land or structure close enough to make out details with the naked eye.
Suppose you are sunbathing nude on your balcony.
Suppose I have a high-powered terrestrial telescope.
Making no effort to conceal my telescope (which you cannot see with the naked eye), I train it on you.
Am I invading your privacy?
My answer would be that I am not, so long as what I see remains with me — if you’re that concerned that no one see you, you’ll need to put up a screen. But if I take photographs and post them on my blog… then, I guess, I’d reluctantly resurrect the “expectation” test and say that I have no right to do that. In general, where there’s a clear expectation of privacy which is circumvented by means both unknowable and unexpected by the observed, even without overt deception it is an invasion of privacy to publicize, though not simply to observe.
Suppose, in the same scenario, that you’re smoking marijuana, and I am a government agent. I’d say I’ve not invaded your privacy if I use that information in an investigation… but it shouldn’t be admissible as evidence in any court (including as probable cause for a warrant), because of your reasonable (though in the event, mistaken) expectation of privacy.
I would be very surprised if my thoughts correspond with actual law, but I still think them.
And in that vein…
White House Says Feds Should Have Unfettered Access To Mobile Phone Location Info
As I recall (but without confirming), your right to privacy isn’t based simply on whether or not you are in a public place but is more of a totality of the circumstances. So yes, a private conversaton in a resaurant can be private, but your outward appearance when you walk down a crowded street (or any type of street probably) is not private. Similarly, your cell phon location is probably not private in when you are at the mall, but it almost surely is private if it tells the government which room of your house you are in.
That seems to make sense to me in general.
Wolfy:
Harm reduction approaches are usually justified on utilitarian grounds. Advocates typically aren’t concerned with the question of whether government has the right to punish drug use; they see that question as irrelevant, because they observe that in practice, government cannot achieve (what they consider) worthwhile ends effectively through prohibition, and that harm reduction improves actual outcomes.
Most libertarians would reverse this. While they note the “failure”¹ of the War on Drugs for purposes of argument, their real concern is with its encroachment on liberty; I think it’s fair to say that the vast majority of those who identify as libertarians find it in principle offensive and unjustifiable for the state to interfere with a person’s freedom of choice in any matter when that choice does not deny or endanger someone else’s freedom or safety. Whether such interference could actually accomplish a utilitarian benefit is irrelevant.
For example, I suspect most harm-reduction advocates approve of motorcycle helmet laws. Most libertarians are opposed to them.
Whether it’s possible to develop a “utilitarian libertarianism” — that is, a political philosophy that reaches essentially libertarian conclusions entirely on pragmatic grounds, without appeal to any moral axioms (such as “inalienable rights”) — is a problem that’s intrigued me for some time. I have not solved it.
¹ I put that word in scare quotes because it is a failure only if one really believes its purpose is to minimize the direct and collateral damage done to individuals by the outlawed substances, or to dramatically curtail their use. The purposes of the War on Drugs include to keep the idea that mind-altering drugs (other than alcohol) have worthwhile non-medical uses unthinkable in mainstream society; to make it impossible to discuss psychoactive drugs or altered states of consciousness in a sane way; to keep both users and non-users frightened and suspicious; to provide a pretext for erosion of liberty, increased police powers and asset forfeiture; and to put a lot of brown people in jail. It’s been very successful at those goals.
Radley – you linked to a case where a cop unreasonably rammed a driver on New Year’s after it took him some time to pull over (he was on a highway.) Well anyway, via Fark – http://wcco.com/local/trooper.rams.minivan.2.962629.html – the police department considered the case of the driver and decided to reprimand the officer and it appears that they will settle for damages to his car from this ramming. Its a good result that should happen more often.
Also, I wish you would have given details of where in Seton Hall you were speaking. I’m close by and would have went, but I wasn’t about to trudge through Newark randomly trying to find the right hall.
As for harm reduction, I haven’t seen the term used outside of the AIDS/clean needles concept. Obviously, in that scenario, there really is no reason to argue against it.
Has anyone heard any stats for sales of Kellogg’s products? Wondering whether there has been any noticeable effect on their sales since they dropped Micheal Phelps as a spokesmodel.
This is my opportunity to tell the world that last night I got my first puppy ever! Of course, she, an 8 week old Havanese, is the cutest, smartest and all around best dog in the world. (Please, forgive the new parent excitement.)
AIG bonuses should be paid as per contracts. This is what you get when you DON’T go thru bankruptcy and when you DO pass a bailout without reading it.
If Congress jimmies the system to get these bonuses killed (via tax or other slight of hand…again pandering to get votes), then we ALL should storm the Capital and demand Congress return all of THEIR pay. Without a doubt, Congress has fucked up more than AIG ever could.
Be careful what you wish for Congress…dangerous precedent to set with performance pay for government work, jerk-offs!
Those of us that were outraged when the bailouts were proposed are ROFLOAO at the most retarded Congress in the history of the USA (I’m guessing the 100th would now be #2). Friggin’ Keystone Congress.
Ottawa Co. Sheriffs did find the demon weed in Derek Copp’s apartment: “A few tablespoons of marijuana and nothing more,” according to Copp’s attorney.
The county prosecutor has turned the investigation over to the state attorney general after establishing that he has a conflict of interest in the case (as part of the WEMET operations board). The AG’s office could either review the case itself or turn it over to another county prosecutor.
And good news about the GVSU campus response from one of the self-described hippies who helped organize the protest:
And by “the investigation” above, I’m referring to the investigation into the shooting, not the initial drug investigation that prompted it.
Opinions on this:
http://blog.americanjusticecenter.com/2009/03/state-orders-dr-john-muney-to-stop.html
ok, ignoring all previous postings, but HOLY COW!
i was stunned by Pat Buchanon, and now you can add George Will to the list: legalize marijuana
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/03/arizona_in_the_cross_hairs.html