Patterico

Friday, July 31st, 2009

Jesus, this guy is obsessive.

1) I read and re-read Patterico’s initial post several times when composing my response to it. He says I wrongly wrote that he left out a portion of his excerpt of Dunphy’s post. Apparently, I skipped over that portion several times. I’ll take his word for it. Consider this a correction. The rest of the post stands.

2) He’s declaring victory in his critique of my articles on the Jimmie Duncan case. Incorrect. I didn’t respond to his nonsense because his critiques are misleading, quote from opinions to cases that had nothing to do with Duncan’s criminal trial, and otherwise leave out information that undermines his case. This is partly because he got much of his information from summaries of the evidence in judicial opinions (including dissenting opinions) and not from the actual trial transcript (odd, because he has (wrongly) criticized me for doing the same thing in the past). His critique of the second article basically amounted to dismissing my reporting of police-coerced testimony, prosecutorial misconduct, and the withholding of exculpatory evidence as “pro-defense spin.”

It would take a many-thousand word blog post to explain what’s wrong with his critiques, after which I’m sure he’d respond with another many-thousand word post. I don’t have the time or the interest in getting into that. If he wants to consider my reluctance to engage in an exchange of pedantics to be a grand victory for him, let him.

3) I blocked Patterico from reading my Twitter feed because he has a strange obsession with me. My Twitter feed is where, in addition to linking to my other work or the occasional news story, I write about my dogs, or complain about the WiFi at whatever airport I’m at, or write about a delicious dinner I just ate at some restaurant. When he tried to subscribe to it, I didn’t see a reason why a guy who clearly hates me would or should have any interest in what I’m eating for dinner. Nor did I really feel like reading a blog post in which he meticulously explains why what I ate couldn’t possibly have been as delicious as I described it on Twitter, calls me a liar, and demands a retraction. I’m exaggerating, but only a little. In the past, Patterico has referenced a blog post I once put up about an event in my personal life to try to delve into my psychology to explain why I have the opinions I do.

So I really didn’t feel like having the guy use old Twitter posts in some future attack on me. I figured if Patterico wants to see what I’m writing about politics or news events, or what I’m reporting, he can read my blog. So I blocked him. This was many months ago. That he has saved up my blocking of him all this time to now throw up with a giant graphic and expose! at the top of his latest blog post is weird. That he found a way to get around the block and is reading my feed anyway is, again, obsessive and creepy.

4) I haven’t responded to point (1) because in the last 36 hours, I’ve been working on a breaking story, had a lunch appointment, had a drink with a friend, and for the last 12 hours have had a massive migraine. Henceforth, I’ll try to be more comprehensive out my daily routine in my Twitter feed so Patterico can keep track.

5) You’d think I’d have learned by now that responding to this guy in any way invites hours of wasted time delving into tedious parsing, rehashing months- or years-old debates, and responding to personal attacks. And, apparently now, discussion of my Twitter feed. Lesson (finally) learned. This idiot doesn’t merit a response. If one of his inevitable future attacks on me includes allegations meritorious enough that a blogger or commentator I respect picks up and reposts, I’ll respond. Otherwise, it’s just not worth it. I’m sure Patterico will respond to this post, and will then take my failure to respond to that response as a concession of defeat. And I will let him.

6) Because of aforementioned migraine, I won’t be blogging any more today. Consider this an open thread.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

180 Responses to “Patterico”

  1. #1 |  Tokin42 | 

    Maybe you guys could go have a beer and get it all figured out.

    While you both admittedly have your biases, he’s stuck always trying to defend, what I would consider, sometimes indefensible prosecutorial positions. I don’t think I’ve ever seen him come out and say “some prosecutors are more interested in using their jobs as political springboards than worrying about justice”.

    Nor did I really feel like reading a blog post in which he meticulously explains why what I ate couldn’t possibly have been as delicious as I described it on Twitter, calls me a liar, and demands a retraction.

    I laughed.

  2. #2 |  Woog | 

    Well… everyone has to have a hobby… and he sounds like such a nice person.

  3. #3 |  dsmallwood | 

    a lot of people would be flattered to have someone take that kind of interest in them.

    i’m just saying

  4. #4 |  LivingInHippieTown | 

    Why respond at all. Every time you reference him or link to his page you build his traffic. Let the dill-weed expend his time and effort preaching to his lunatic fringe.

  5. #5 |  Dave W. | 

    Sorry to hear it. Does sound creepy. At least you haven’t had a Dave W. problem in a long time — or at least I hope not.

  6. #6 |  Danny | 

    Totally unreasonable, Radley. If it takes any time at all to respond, you have shown yourself as a coward. That’s the only reasonable interpretation of such actions. Of course, your interpretation of Dunphy’s original post is completely unreasonable in comparison. Oh, and you should really stop with all of your parenthetical asides that make such terrible accusations as failing to include portions of sentences. They may seem like little nothings, but they are vicious, barbaric, and overly harsh — especially when untrue — as evidenced by entire blog posts dedicated to such endeavors.

  7. #7 |  Taktix® | 

    Lesson learned indeed: Twitter doesn’t mix with politics or religion :)

  8. #8 |  Zargon | 

    The most important skill nobody ever teaches you in school is when to quit.

    Patterico’s entire world-view is predicated upon the notion that obeying the government is a moral obligation. That’s how he can play his part in locking up a bunch of people who’s only offense was not hurting a fellow human being, but rather disobeying the government (the largest group of these disobedient subjects are drug users), and still sleep at night.

    Getting him to even think about the possibility that the government isn’t on the right side of things merely by virtue of being the government simply isn’t going to happen. Ever. Getting people reading his blog to think about that possibility might be possible, but highly unlikely – after all, they’re reading his blog in the first place, and Patterico is only ever going to present his side of things on his blog. Getting people reading this blog to think about that possibility isn’t necessary. Well, mostly.

  9. #9 |  justaguy | 

    Its amazing that people just say its ‘unreasonable’

    saying its ‘unreasonable’ isnt even an argument. You have to specify why. Then they go on to say things like ‘barbaric, vicisious, harsh’ without actually specifying anything. Very clever, but not very productive.

    This whole debate is foolish, and reeks of people who simply wont entertain the libertarian position, at all.

  10. #10 |  Cynical in CA | 

    I wonder if Patterico has stopped beating his wife yet.

  11. #11 |  BamBam | 

    Don’t bother responding ever again to the douche. By doing so, you fuel his/her “ego”, give him/her a chubby, and most importantly divert your limited time from doing your excellent work to fueling said “ego” and creating a chubby. One could even say this is intentional on his/her part, as it’s a fairly common tactic of people that feel you’re a threat to their cause to lure you into their mire.

  12. #12 |  Danny | 

    /sarcasm

    I guess nobody can tell that I was kidding. Am I really that good at mimicking members of Patterico’s blog? Or was it just Alex and Brad coming into the thread to attempt to wreak havoc?

  13. #13 |  JAB | 

    Patterico was certainly pissed, but I’ve experienced trying to correct someone’s false statement and feeling ignored before, and it’s pretty infuriating. Maybe you just missed the comments informing you of the error on accident, and that’s fine, but I’d be mad were I him, too.

    As far as the substance of his response about Dunphy’s post, it doesn’t seem like you respond to anything, you just write it off as “man, this idiot is obsessed with me.”

    I love most of your work (and agree with more of your politics than Patterico’s probably), but I feel like you dropped the ball on this Dunphy post issue. You’re smart enough to know the difference between asserting your constitutional rights and disobeying a reasonable order from a police officer.

  14. #14 |  JS | 

    Maybe I misunderstood isn’t this Paterico guy a prosecutor? And he wants to know more about your personal life..duh! Of course you should keep him from your twitter stuff. He’d love to find something to use against you to persecute, uh, I mean, prosecute you.

    Guys like that are dangerous Radley. Guys like that built and kept running the Gulag system and the concentration camps.

  15. #15 |  JS | 

    Danny, forgive me but I thought you were serious. Glad to hear you were not!

  16. #16 |  TomMil | 

    Danny, I would say “barbaric” was a tip off.

  17. #17 |  Rhayader | 

    I’m sure most of us here have run up against a Patterico or two in our time. Sounds like Radley is taking up the only rational approach, which is just to forget about the stupid bastard.

    Hope the migraine feels better Radley.

  18. #18 |  B | 

    This guy sounds like a real asshat. Glad I haven’t wasted any time reading him, and glad to hear that you will now do the same.

    Sorry about the migraine. I know (from experience) how much those can suck. Feel better, and for God’s sake don’t look at any flickering screens for a while…

  19. #19 |  Les | 

    That was good, Danny. You got me all hot and bothered, you troublemaker, you.

  20. #20 |  Ira | 

    Balko – 1
    Pat – 0

    Game over.

    It was fun to watch the pimp-slapping though.

  21. #21 |  ktc2 | 

    Since this is an open thread, anybody watch Bullshit! last night on organic farming?

    I enjoyed it, good laugh and good facts. Was surprised to see Ron Bailey (or Reason) on the show.

  22. #22 |  ktc2 | 

    Ugh . . . was supposted to be “of Reason”. :(

  23. #23 |  pc | 

    From Patterico’s latest update:

    P.P.P.S. Blocking me doesn’t work, Balko. I can still see your Twitter feed on Google Reader.

    Ah, Patterico. Always a class act tool.

  24. #24 |  Rhayader | 

    Yeah how creepy is that?

    It’s like the skeevy ex-boyfriend bragging that he found a way around his restraining order. Good going buddy.

  25. #25 |  nobahdi | 

    The screenshot of Radley blocking him was when Radley had 550 followers; now, he has over 1,400.

    So yeah, it must have been months ago and that guy really must be holding a grudge to save that pic and to post it.

  26. #26 |  pickle | 

    [quote]Nor did I really feel like reading a blog post in which he meticulously explains why what I ate couldn’t possibly have been as delicious as I described it on Twitter, calls me a liar, and demands a retraction.[/quote]
    “WRONG! You all had Special K with ba-na-na.”

  27. #27 |  pickle | 

    Argh, too much posting on vbforums…

  28. #28 |  SusanK | 

    Is this a bad time to admit that I have a “strange obsession” with Radley, too?
    Granted, I don’t have a blog, or prosecutorial powers, or any motivation to do anything creepy, but I certainly make sure to check The Agitator every day.

  29. #29 |  ktc2 | 

    If checking the agitator everyday qualifies as a strange obsession i’m sure he has lots of folks with it, myself included.

  30. #30 |  justaguy | 

    arg danny really got me. i feel dopey.

    also, what do we call people who read theagitator.com every day? (like myself?)

    agitatorteers?
    balkoites?

  31. #31 |  Frank | 

    I’d stay out of California for a while. It wouldn’t surprise me if this twit has an “Unofficial BOLO” out on you with the police just so they can swoop down on you for mopery.

  32. #32 |  Mister DNA | 

    Radley, he wants to follow your Twitter feed so that he may build his case against you.

    Like so many prosecutors, “the evidence shows the defendant had the means, motive and opportunity to commit the crime. Plus, the sick bastard jizzed all over the murder weapon, so we have his DNA, to boot” isn’t quite good enough. Your Twitter feed shall be your downfall in Patterico v. Balko. I can see it now:
    “Ladies and gentlemen, this man has a puppy that eats its own poop! He puts ketchup on his T-bone steaks! He has questionable taste in music! How can he NOT be guilty?”

  33. #33 |  Kristen | 

    I’m sorry, but EEEWWWWW. Patterico can’t get on Radley’s Twitter, so he’s going through Google? I’m sorry, but I thought this person was a prosecutor? Aren’t they supposed to be busy prosecuting or whatever the hell it is they do?

    I’m just skeeved out, here.

  34. #34 |  Mister DNA | 

    also, what do we call people who read theagitator.com every day?

    masochists.*

    *in case this needs to be explained, it’s not a jab at Radley; I think I’m a masochist for coming here daily to read about puppies getting shot, deaf people getting tased and collateral damage in the drug war.

  35. #35 |  SJE | 

    Patterico’s Radley obsession seems to approach that of the loopy lady in Virginia currently locked up for “harrassing” the police.

    More’s the point: when and how is he doing all this blogging etc. Isn’t he supposed to investigating and prosecuting baddies? He is so frequent, and voluminous, it must be on California or LA taxpayer time. Using government property and time for his personal blog.

    Not necessarily a firing offense but, if I were his boss, I would be asking him to focus a more on the job. California is bankrupt, and it certainly doesnt look good to have highly paid government employees spending so much time on very public, personal interests.

  36. #36 |  happyfeet | 

    I read Mr. Patterico and I think saying he has a strange obsession with you is inaccurate and for real I know for sure he doesn’t hate you.

    Me though sometimes I google up that bloggingheads thing you did once cause you have the coolest head ever. It’s perfectly symmetrical and you have a very expressive face where no one feature dominates.

    My friend in Chicago thinks you have a cool head too. He just said so on messenger.

  37. #37 |  ktc2 | 

    Corsendonk Abbey Pale Ale is GREAT beer.

    If you can find it, try it.

    I spent 7 years in Europe and most of the beers you can buy here (even the imports from Europe) just don’t measure up.

    (Hey, it’s an open thread!)

  38. #38 |  Zubon | 

    I think the phrase you want is the Chewbacca Defense. Here, as in the canonical example, it is used on offense.

  39. #39 |  ClubMedSux | 

    I guess nobody can tell that I was kidding.

    TEENAGER #1 AT HULLABALOOZA: Oh, here comes that cannonball guy. He’s cool.

    TEENAGER #2: Are you being sarcastic, dude?

    TEENAGER #1: I don’t even know any more.

  40. #40 |  Mike T | 

    You’re smart enough to know the difference between asserting your constitutional rights and disobeying a reasonable order from a police officer.

    Dunphy was obviously not saying that you have to subject yourself to a violation of your rights. He was, no doubt, assuming the stereotyped lower class minority or white hoity toity who immediately jumps in the cop’s face about “their rights.” Everyone here knows what sort of people I’m talking about, and they’re not the sort of people who say calmly, “no sir, you may not search my car without a warrant…”

  41. #41 |  joe b | 

    agitatorteers?…

    …agitatortots

  42. #42 |  Mike T | 

    More’s the point: when and how is he doing all this blogging etc. Isn’t he supposed to investigating and prosecuting baddies? He is so frequent, and voluminous, it must be on California or LA taxpayer time. Using government property and time for his personal blog.

    How do you know he isn’t actually just some PR goon out of the state prosecutor’s office whose real job description includes blogging 20 hours a week?…

    On the Internet, no one knows you’re a dog… I’m just sayin…

  43. #43 |  Frank | 

    #34 Don’t forget the cops who frame a woman for an accident that’s the fault of one of the cops down in Hollywood, Florida.

    I wonder what the Pat-boy would be doing if he were the DA in that town? Probably finding a way to justify their actions and refusing to prosecute. Blame it on the bitch, she was drunk anyway. I put this up on his own blog but it would be deleted in a second.

  44. #44 |  Bee | 

    I like Balkons.

    Patterico sounds like a creep. Ignore him, if possible.

  45. #45 |  Danny | 

    I never thought I’d take such pleasure in trolling, but I swear I thought it was too ridiculous to believe. All of your “bad karma” (thumbs down) give me a big smile. Maybe I should look into it as a profession? Alas, I don’t think I have the inspiration normally, but I’ve spent quite a bit of time over the past couple of day’s at Patterico’s blog, completely incredulous to how completely flaming they try to be. They aren’t the least bit generous in their arguments, tactics, or interpretations, not even Patterico himself.

  46. #46 |  SJE | 

    @42

    It was my understanding that he was a prosecutor.

    Nevertheless, blogging as “Patterico” is not blogging as a representative of whatever government he represents and is, therefore, a personal activity. If done on government time or property, there is a strong argument that it is misuse. I find it very hard to imagine that there is a government fund set up for “Patterico’s pontifications”

  47. #47 |  ktc2 | 

    Agitori?

  48. #48 |  Cynical in CA | 

    what do we call people who read theagitator.com every day?

    The Agitated

    … but I had to wipe the spit off my monitor after reading “agitatortots” and “Balkons.”

  49. #49 |  wunder | 

    agitatortots gets my vote.

    Hey, where’s Cynical in CA? I’ve been waiting for an open thread to ask him about how a anarchy deals with crimes such as murder, assault, rape, etc – or even property crimes where this is no contract between individuals or groups.

    It’s a serious question, because I’ve learned a lot from his responses to other questions that I thought were beyond anarchy’s capabilities to deal with. But this one still throws me.

    Anyone else wanna offer their two cents on this one?

  50. #50 |  Marty | 

    Patterico’s a dick. having said that, he’s smart enough that I’d avoid him like the plague if he was a prosecutor around here… truth isn’t his thing- winning is.

    like my ex-wife!

  51. #51 |  Chance | 

    I hope you feel better soon.

  52. #52 |  Marty | 

    while we’re discussing anarchy, just thought I’d mention that Jim Bell is supposed to get out in September… maybe that’s why Patterico wound so tight!

  53. #53 |  Dave Krueger | 

    Be careful. There’s only a fine line between a groupie and stalker.

  54. #54 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    Time wasting morons will waste your time. Patterico shows massive holes in his intellect that he fills with ego. That’s a good recipe for avoiding the truth to convince yourself of that which you want to believe.

    Penn and Teller’s Bullshit on Organic was great! Especially when “Taste” started to dance at the end.

  55. #55 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    OPEN THREAD POLL:

    Who wins in a Cage Death Match:
    1. Three Wolves Shirt
    or
    2. Gay Marriage

    We know there’s very little that Gay Marriage cannot destroy, but 3WS is believed to be the most powerful thing on the planet. Has me real stumped.

  56. #56 |  Marty | 

    3 Wolves Shirt is bigger than gay marriage and the drug war combined!

  57. #57 |  ktc2 | 

    Let’s hope Jim Bell gets safely away from the US when he gets out. I’d expect a relentless crusade to put him back in jail otherwise by any means they can.

  58. #58 |  JAB | 

    _Dunphy was obviously not saying that you have to subject yourself to a violation of your rights. He was, no doubt, assuming the stereotyped lower class minority or white hoity toity who immediately jumps in the cop’s face about “their rights.” Everyone here knows what sort of people I’m talking about, and they’re not the sort of people who say calmly, “no sir, you may not search my car without a warrant…”_

    Mike T, what’s the point of this ludicrous strawman? It’s completely unrelated to the dichotomy you quote me on.

  59. #59 |  aw2pp | 

    After all is said and done, I am still unclear as to whether or not I can sass a cop without fear of being shot.

  60. #60 |  MichaelK42 | 

    Yeah, you can have as many Twitter accounts to follow with as you want, really. Unless you make your feed private and verify every single person you follow to allow them to see it, there’s no way you can keep an obsessed stalker-type like Patterico from seeing it.

    But if you ever link to him, be sure to put a rel=”nofollow” attribute in the link to keep it from giving him Googlejuice.

    In fact, go back and update those links sometime…

  61. #61 |  Mister DNA | 

    There is only one thing that a 3Wolf shirt cannot protect against. Gay marriages in which both parties wear a 3Wolf shirt.

    If teh gheys get wind of this, civilization is doomed.

    I wear a 3 Keyboard Cat shirt underneath my 3Wolf shirt, just to be safe.

  62. #62 |  Two--Four | 

    [...] is predicated upon the notion that obeying the government is a moral obligation.”That comes from a commentor at Balko’s place, and he’s entirely correct. Frey is a prosecutor, under this government. He’s not [...]

  63. #63 |  Mister DNA | 

    As funny as “agitatortots” is, I think Cynical in CA’s “The Agitated” is the obvious choice.

  64. #64 |  Cynical in CA | 

    Wunder, present and accounted for, but heading out for lunch with the Mrs. right now. I will address the capability for dealing with heinous crimes under anarchism on a full belly in an hour or so.

    It is debatable whether Jim Bell is an anarchist. Non-violence is a hallmark of anarchy (the true kind, not the kind most people falsely associate with the word), and Jim Bell most definitely espoused violence as a means of dealing with unrepentant state tyrants. I do like discussing the Jim Bell hypothesis as a means of discovering truth, but I have not decided as to whether his means constitute self-defense.

    As for 3 Wolves Shirt vs. Gay Marriage, I sense a false dilemma, but leaning toward 3 Wolves Shirt as the early favorite.

  65. #65 |  Zargon | 

    #49
    I’ve been waiting for an open thread to ask him about how a anarchy deals with crimes such as murder, assault, rape, etc – or even property crimes where this is no contract between individuals or groups.

    My answer may prove to be unsatisfactory.

    You’re thinking about the problem from a centrally planned state of mind. Anarchy provides no answers, no solutions. All solutions to all problems would be invented and implemented by individuals. Nobody has any way of knowing what solution might turn out to be the most effective solution to the problem of (real) crime, because right now we have only one solution, that solution is very obviously suboptimal, and we are forbidden from implementing alternative solutions.

  66. #66 |  Dylboz | 

    Isn’t this guy a prosecutor? They’re just terrible people, low-life bullies, not worth the time it takes to deal with their obsessive nit-picking and mind-warping word games that twist the truth beyond any meaning. And frankly, no one would, except that they have the state’s power to wield. It’s one of those indicators of a sociopathic personality that wont let a minor matter like this drop, and he’s gonna turn it into WW3 if that’s what it takes for him to declare victory, regardless of whether he actually “won.” See, that’s what makes him a “good” prosecutor, and a horrible person.

  67. #67 |  nwerner | 

    I think that Radley or one of his lawyer friends ought to file a FOIA request with the Los Angeles County prosecutor’s office, or wherever it is that Patterico allegedly works, for all of his emails and computer records over the past few years.

  68. #68 |  Angie | 

    I remember when you shut off comments cause you were frustrated with the negativity going around. Hopefully nonsense like this doesn’t have you shutting down twitter (tho I don’t use it myself) or anything else.

    About the migraines – topamax saved my life. Use to have those damn things 3-4 days a week. It does’t work for everyone tho.

  69. #69 |  The Angry Optimist | 

    I think anarchists have their hearts in the right places and believe what they believe out of radical individualism, but I think what they miss is what the Founding Fathers were basically saying in their outlining of what is good government.

    Government is, to me, inevitable. There have been and always will be people, people with weapons who desire money and power without having to operate in the market to achieve either. These people are fundamentally lazy, and their laziness means that they see it is as easier to take what they want via force rather than work for it.

    If you have a government that is properly hampered by redundant processes (i.e. checks and balances) and is limited in its scope, this gives those omnipresent individuals an outlet for their lazy desires without harming the 99% of us who are good too much.

    Anarchism cannot and will not work: it ignores the historical fact that there always have been groups who are in control by force.

    Once we accept that as an historical inevitability (while railing against the desire to control others all the while, in the hopes that we will evolve past it), we can talk about how best to control those who have the desire to control others (i.e. how do we limit government?).

  70. #70 |  justaguy | 

    I want to make you guys a big bowl of my agitatortot casserole. Mmm MMmm delicious.

    Also, yeah, The Agitated some seem like a good name… for a death metal band. =)

    YES! ROCK!

    (first concert to be held in the balkon islands)

  71. #71 |  PW | 

    About a year ago there was an election for the main prosecutor in Houston, Texas. It was between two women, both republicans. One was an assistant prosecutor from inside the office who took the hardline “law and order” approach. The other was a retired judge who ran as an outside reformer. Both candidates had their strengths and weaknesses, which I’m not going to get into now. But the reason I mention it is a strangely similar blog connection.

    The “law and order” lady from inside the office naturally had the backing of all the other prosecutors, including one that wrote a local political blog. During the campaign he used his blog to be her attack dog – again sometimes with a valid point, sometimes just political hackery. But he went overboard, especially as his candidate lost the election. For the 10 months or so between the primary where she lost and the general election where the other candidate won and took office, this prosecutor-blogger turned his little corner of the web into a daily sour grapes report about the candidate who had defeated his own.

    Well, she took office in January and he kept up the antics for a couple of days. So they gave him a warning to stop. He didn’t so they fired him. And he kept blogging all his “poor me” stories about the new chief prosecutor. It really makes me wonder if there’s something to the mindset at play here…

  72. #72 |  PW | 

    “I think that Radley or one of his lawyer friends ought to file a FOIA request with the Los Angeles County prosecutor’s office, or wherever it is that Patterico allegedly works, for all of his emails and computer records over the past few years.”

    Absolutely! The last time somebody did that it turned up some pretty juicy stuff.

    http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com/2008/01/every-nasty-thing-you-thought-about.html

  73. #73 |  Danny | 

    #69 | The Angry Optimist | July 31st, 2009 at 3:30 pm

    My recent revelation is that Anarchism is truly the logical end to the belief that Government is and always will be evil. Clearly, if the appropriate checks and balances are in place and work, your idea of government will work (and I’d hope for it, as well). Both believe the same thing, but your idea of libertarianism is optimistic that we can actually do something about the Government’s inherent evil.

  74. #74 |  The Angry Optimist | 

    well, I mean, to quote Federalist 51:

    If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.

  75. #75 |  joev | 

    attorneys are taught this and employ it just as the bene gesserit were taught “the voice” and how to employ that.

    it’s a creepy, but oddly close parallel tween the two.

    “It would take a many-thousand word blog post to explain what’s wrong with his critiques, after which I’m sure he’d respond with another many-thousand word post. I don’t have the time or the interest in getting into that. If he wants to consider my reluctance to engage in an exchange of pedantics to be a grand victory for him, let him.”

  76. #76 |  Dave Krueger | 

    What I really dislike about democracy worship (which is institutionalized in the American education system) is that it stifles investigation of and experimentation with other styles of government. Anarchy may turn out to be the best answer, but as long as democracy is held up as the ultimate evolution of civilization, we’ll never know.

    I lean toward the belief that some government is necessary, but I’ve seen enough of democracy to know that it’s largely just tyranny dressed up in different clothes. The history of civilization is the history of the few trying to control the many by whatever invention they can get those many to by into. As divine right and religion lost credibility, they wheeled in democracy as the end-all, be-all to freedom and liberty.

    No form of government works once the masses lose faith in it. When people no longer believe in democracy, what new concoction will they offer as its replacement?

  77. #77 |  Andrew S. | 

    Substance of the post: I have to say that Patterico’s seeming obsession with you lately is a bit creepy.

    Also, as an attorney, I’m actually embarassed that someone like Patterico is an attorney. Scares me that someone like that could be a prosecutor.

    Open threadedness:

    The Hollywood, FL Police Chief is promising to “investigate” the coverup:

    http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/broward/hollywood/sfl-hollywood-cops-fake-report-b072809,0,350771.story

    Wonder if he managed to stifle a giggle when he said “investigate”. Sure he busted out laughing afterwards.

  78. #78 |  witless chum | 

    “After all is said and done, I am still unclear as to whether or not I can sass a cop without fear of being shot.”

    Presumably, that’s the point.

  79. #79 |  JS | 

    Dave Krueger “As divine right and religion lost credibility, they wheeled in democracy as the end-all, be-all to freedom and liberty.”

    Yea I think you’re on to something there/ It seems to that as traditional religious belief declined and we became more secular in the 20th century people replaced the idea of God with big government that can take care of our every need. I think for a lot of big government advocates government is really a surrogate God. They want it to guarantee their health, their happiness, their safety at all costs. The only thing they don’t look to government for nowdays is for freedom, which doesn’t seem to be high on most people’s list of priorities because after all, we live in the “free-est country in the world.”

  80. #80 |  Dave Krueger | 

    #77 Andrew S.

    The Hollywood, FL Police Chief is promising to “investigate” the coverup:

    http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/broward/hollywood/sfl-hollywood-cops-fake-report-b072809,0,350771.story

    Geez! It’s stuff like this that should make cameras mandatory for almost all cop activities.

    It will be interesting to see where this goes.

  81. #81 |  ASPECTRATIO | 

    ‘Patterico’ is a government employee wasting time on ‘Twitter’ as the city and state who pays him goes bankrupt? Defending the muddled messages of ‘Dunphy,’ another government employee with time on his hands no less? California crazy. The only ‘assistant district attorney’ I’ve ever seen in action as a reference point was a character played by Rudy Vallee in an old Cary Grant movie called, “The Bachelor And The Bobby-Soxer.” Vallee’s character spent the whole film running around reminding everyone, “I’m the assistant district attorney!” Grant suavely out-smarted him. Balko’s no Cary Grant but his take on the ‘Dunphy’ piece has certainly put both these fellows in their place.

  82. #82 |  Mattocracy | 

    @ JS, I’ve been preaching that for a long time brother.

  83. #83 |  Dr X | 

    “That he has saved up my blocking of him all this time to now throw up with a giant graphic and expose! at the top of his latest blog post is weird.”

    It’s more than weird. There is no more right or entitlement to join one of your social networks, than there is an entitlement to attend a cocktail party in your home. The fact that he made such a big deal of blocking him confirms for me that blocking him was a very sound decision.

  84. #84 |  Kino | 

    never wrestle with a pig . you’ll get mud on your clothes and the pig will enjoy it !

  85. #85 |  Angie | 

    Maybe this applies here –

    As individuals, as families, as neighbors, as members of one community, people of all races and political views are usually decent, kind, compassionate. But in large corporations or governments, when great power accumulates in their hands, some become monsters even with good intentions.

    DEAN KOONTZ, Dark Rivers of the Heart

  86. #86 |  The Angry Optimist | 

    Angie – corporations only have “power” inasmuch as you patronize them.

  87. #87 |  wunder | 

    #86 – or until they’re too big to fail, at which point, the government steps in to provide it once it’s been lost.

  88. #88 |  Stephen | 

    Sorry to hear about you getting migraines Radley.

    I get them too and they are NOT! a normal headache. I basically go blind about an hour before one starts and then can see again about half an hour before the pain hits.

    Getting to sleep in a cool, quiet, dark place as soon as possible is usually my goal as soon as the blindness hits. (pills, beer, bong hits… whatever it takes to get to sleep and reboot your brain)

  89. #89 |  joev | 

    law n’ order republicans, fine fine fine examples of authoritarian morals and telling other people what to do with their lives regardless of the constitution.

    and they wonder why their numbers are shrinking?

  90. #90 |  The Dude | 

    I just read several posts and comments at Patterico for the first time. How do those authoritarians sit around claiming to be “conservative?” They complain about big government liberals, but think it crazy to question the never ending authority of the state.

  91. #91 |  JS | 

    Mattocracy-yea I’m glad to hear I’m not the only one!

  92. #92 |  Moe | 

    I just read the chains over at Patterico, and it is very similar to this

    http://www.timecube.com/

    Either way, my head hurts just the same trying to follow what the heck they are saying, and what exactly they want. Other than to just be right that is.

  93. #93 |  Cynical in CA | 

    OK, here’s my anarchist take on prosecuting heinous criminals.

    First, reading some of the entries about anarchism on this thread, I am encouraged with the general understanding. As Danny wrote, anarchism is the logical end of understanding that all government is evil, with evil defined as the means ill-suited to the purpose, the purpose being to secure the political freedom of every individual. Thomas Jefferson wrote that the best government is that which governs least, so of course, no government is the best government. And while it is true that anarchy is a form of government — its defining characteristic being absolute political equality among all individuals, as well as complete decentralization of power — its focus is on “negative liberty” or being as free as posssible to pursue individual desires as long as no infringement on another’s right to do so occurs.

    Angie rightly points out that the central issue regarding government in human society is the trend toward centralization of power. It is easy to see this in American history, as the central government in Washington, D.C., has grown beyond all control and, given current trends, will soon concentrate all political power at the national level. Donald Boudreaux, professor of economics at George Mason University, wrote an article on the subject: http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/coercivists-and-voluntarists/

    So, since concentration of political power is the root cause of loss of individual political freedom and equality, then it would be sensible to explore the alternative of decentralization, the logical end of which is anarchy, or political power vested in the human individual — in essence, each individual being a State unto him/herself.

    I agree with Angry Optimist’s quote of Federalist 51 — governments exist because Man is not perfect, and that as long as two or more people share a geographic area, there will be a government of some form as each individual has equal and often competing claims on scarce resources. A government thus can be loosely defined as the result of any human interaction where competing claims are settled. Two people who share an otherwise deserted island either cooperate or compete. If they cooperate, then they have established a government by consent (anarchy). If they compete, then their competing claims will be settled by force (statism).

    Humans, being imperfect, will often resort to violence, usually perceived as self-defense. It may seem paradoxical, but this is perfectly acceptable. Violence is part of the human condition, as history bears out in painful obviousness. The question is whether this violence is concentrated or dispersed. If concentrated, as in the mega-States of the 20th Century, the body counts can be mind-blowing — hundreds of millions in a century alone (RJ Rummel). However, as discovered here a while back, the most motivated human individual acting alone can only achieve a body count of no more than a thousand.

    cont’d

  94. #94 |  Cynical in CA | 

    With power decentralized to the individual, each person would be responsible for his/her own self-defense (per se or by contract). With each person empowered to kill in self-defense, the temptation to resort to murder would be severely diminished. Studies of geographic areas with more legal freedom to carry guns prove this by showing reduced crime statistics.

    Of course, there will still be murders. In anarchy, each individual would be free to decide how to deal with the murderer. A family member of the victim might hunt down and kill the murderer. This could prove extremely risky as the murderer’s buddies would continue the cycle of murder. So, perhaps the victim’s family member would organize a posse to apprehend the murderer (a citizen’s arrest) and have him brought before a court to which both the parties explicitly agreed to have disputes heard (dispute resolution organization, or DRO). Or perhaps the community would band together against the murderer and his associates and ostracize them, refuse to associate with them in any way and consider them fair game for killing if they show their faces in the community (self-defense). That’s the thing, there’s no set way of doing anything in anarchy. Order comes from the infinite interactions among politically equal individuals, just as price discovery in the true free market comes from infinite interactions. What would evolve would be Common Law, which predominated before the 19th Century and the rise of the mega-State. What form it would take would depend on the true nature of the humans concerned.

    In anarchy (free-market government!), the truth about humanity would be discovered. Finally we would all know the answer to the question of whether we are killers by nature or if the State so distorts reality that it appears that we are killers by nature. Just as the State distorts and ultimately destroys the “free market,” so too the State destroys human relationships (which is to say the same thing). You see it all around you — on this website, everywhere in the discussions of politics and economics — favoritism, corporatism, bailouts, pork, class differences, immunity for State agents, unlevel playing fields in the markets, minimum-wage laws, licensure, positive restrictions on liberty such as the FDA and drug war and all the evil that entails, etc., etc., etc. All of these are State creations that destroy the ability of individuals to TRUST EACH OTHER. Trust is the basis of civilization, nof taxes!!! Every government intervention against free individuals is proof that the central State has failed and must use force to achieve its ends.

    Where the central State is, trust between individuals has been destroyed. When every individual is his/her own State, with all the power and protection that entails, then every individual will have virtually no choice but to cooperate with his/her fellow human. A choice to resort to murder would be suicidal or economically self-destructive. Anarchism is far from perfect in restraining violence, but it has the least potential to cause mass harm to large populations and it is the perfect means of discovering truth.about ourselves and ending the regime of lies and distrust under which we spend every day of our lives.

    I welcome your comments. Please understand I dashed this off in about an hour, so there may be some logical holes to fill in.

  95. #95 |  Cynical in CA | 

    #69 | The Angry Optimist

    “Anarchism cannot and will not work: it ignores the historical fact that there always have been groups who are in control by force. Once we accept that as an historical inevitability (while railing against the desire to control others all the while, in the hopes that we will evolve past it), we can talk about how best to control those who have the desire to control others (i.e. how do we limit government?).”

    Anarchism can work if every individual accepts responsibility for his/her own self-defense and is willing to die to defend that responsibility. That the human race has not evolved to that level of responsibility yet does not prove that anarchism will fail in every instance, just that it has not taken hold yet.

    I posit that “how best to control those who have the desire to control others (i.e. how do we limit government?)” is by every person assuming political equality and possessing means of self-defense from those who would attempt to control them.

    Certainly I could list for a lifetime the historical examples of the failure to limit State power. There’s your proof — the State is illimitable. This is the issue I have with minarchists — once the State (centralized organization of force) is formed, there is no way to limit it except with equal or greater force.

    Optimist, where’s your equal or greater force?

  96. #96 |  The Angry Optimist | 

    Look, you seem to know the drill about this, but you just said “humans have not gotten to that level of responsibility yet”. And you know what? They never will.

    Go back as far, far, far back as you want, and you will find tribalism, even hundreds of thousands of years ago. People band together and fight each and take each others’ stuff. These are facts. To me, anarchism in a country with a modicum of intelligence will last, oh, about 20 minutes, because someone is going to form a group and try to take by force what they are too lazy to earn in the market. And then another group is going to form as a defense. And whichever of those groups wins in a given geographical location, they are now the government, like it or not.

  97. #97 |  wunder | 

    OK, so I guess my “issue” (sorry, can’t think of a better word after a long day at work) is that everyone doesn’t want to assume control of their own lives, and that government is ultimately inevitible in at least some sense of the word.

    Even your DRO’s, CiCA, are a form of government. I get that only those who explicitly agree to join would take part. So, say a murderer had joined before, but now does not agree that his “dispute” should be resolved by this organization. Does he decide to be removed? At which point, I guess he is dealt with in the other manner you indicated – however the victim (or victim’s family) sees fit. Is that correct?

    It just seems to me that anarchy is unworkable in practice across a large population, similar on the other extreme to communism, because it stands against human nature – at least the nature of enough humans to make it unworkable. I think that our nature is to live somewhere in between complete self-control and complete offering of ourselves to the larger community, and it will be a constant pendulum swing between the two.

    I guess there could be small anarchist communities within larger statist communities, but only so long as the statists agreed to “allow” the anarchists their own system, which is then not really anarchy, since it ultimately only exists with permission of the larger statist community.

    It just seems to be a circle that my brain can’t escape. Even if anarchy could be supported briefly, there would be cycles of statist evolution and then (hopefully) revolution/destruction/return on an endless basis.

    This hasn’t really been a linear thought, but again, it’s late, I’m tired, and don’t often think in a linear way, anyway.

  98. #98 |  Dave Krueger | 

    #85 Angie

    Maybe this applies here –

    As individuals, as families, as neighbors, as members of one community, people of all races and political views are usually decent, kind, compassionate.

    The way I see it, individually, people are great. Two is a mob. Raise the number to three, and you have oppression.

    I know what you’re thinking and you’re right; I don’t get invited to many parties.

  99. #99 |  Danny | 

    Dave –

    I’m sure that’s not the funniest thing you’ve ever said, but after cruising Patterico’s blog all day, arguing with the crazies, your funny, self-depricating humor feels like the funniest thing I’ve ever read, and better than anything that’s probably ever been said over at Patterico… So thanks.

  100. #100 |  Dave Krueger | 

    Isn’t pure communism a form of anarchy? I don’t see communism as being sustainable because it defies human nature. I think the same would be true of any form of anarchy. It’s inherently unstable because people, not knowing any better, would tend to form groups with like-thinkers and the groups would select leaders and there would eventually be conflicts with other groups and next thing you know, you’re stockpiling nukes.

  101. #101 |  Cynical in CA | 

    Optimist, you make a great point, but I think you prove too much. Your description of what might occur in anarchy is simply a description of the status quo. I guess all roads lead to Rome after all.

    Look, I understand that humans are by and large a fearful, superstitious, emotion-driven bunch of weaklings, but surely humans are evolving to higher levels of behavior? Or was Devo right?

    Arthur Koestler wrote, “… mankind is an evolutionary mistake doomed to extinction. To have given a killer ape the capacity for intelligence was not nature’s smartest strategy.”

    Let’s frame this a different way. I argue for personal political freedom and equality. Please tell me why it is better for one man to be the slavemaster and another to be the slave. What does that accomplish for me, the slave?

  102. #102 |  Cynical in CA | 

    So Dave, what I glean from comment #100 is that humans are doomed to slavery for all eternity.

    Man, you are some merchant of happiness! I’m never inviting you to any of my anarchist parties.

    [sticks out tongue and makes rude noise]

  103. #103 |  Cynical in CA | 

    Danny, stick to the crazies here. We’re a lot more fun than those simpering bootlickers.

  104. #104 |  Danny | 

    No shit, Cynical, but at least there I get to feel like an intellectual giant. I’ll tell you right now, it doesn’t feel too rewarding overall, but I’m sure you’ve learned that lesson more than once ;). I’m sure your logic quite unwelcome all over the internet!

  105. #105 |  nicrivera | 

    Wow!

    I still don’t understand why Patterico is not willing to let this issue rest. I have read and reread Dunphy’s original quote, going both to Patterico’s blog and the National Review Online to make sure Radley didn’t misquote Dunphy or omit portions of his quote that would have provided context, and I STILL read Dunphy’s quote the same way Radley.

    It may very well be the case that Dunphy did not intend to convey the conclusion that Radley and the rest of us came to, but we have only his words to go by, and his words are there everyone to read, and I don’t see how they could be read any other way. And if a writer poorly states his argument, leading others to come to conclusions that he did not intend, then that is the fault of the writer, not the reader.

    I’ve followed these “debates” between Radley and Patterico every since they started a couple of years ago. As a fan of Radley’s, I’m obviously biased.

    But even if I were to take a step back and admit that Radley and Patterico, in their zeal to defend their respective positions, may have both misunderstood one another and even (on occasion) mischaracterized each other’s remarks, one thing has been consistent throughout every single debate that these two have ever had, going back a couple of years ago…

    Radley (the libertarian) has consistently defended the smaller government/deference to individual liberty position while Patterico (the conservative) has consistently defended the bigger government/deference to government authority position.

    Welcome to the Modern Day Conservative Movement, where being a conservative means defending the authority of the state in virtually all matters pertaining to to law enforcement or the military.

    I don’t believe Patterico “hate’s” Radley, as Radley claims. I believe that he honestly believes that he is right and that he honestly believes Radley has mischaracterized Dunphy’s position. But as a Law and Order conservative, he has an agenda (just as Radley does as a Libertarian) and isn’y going to back down…

    Ever.

    Patterico, his blog, and his followers all serve as a perfect example of how the Modern Day Conservative Movement has very little to offer Libertarians. With the Democrats in control of the Presidency and both houses of congress, running up record deficits, and threatening to nationalize the health insurance industry, you would think that conservatives and libertarians would be able to put aside their differences and wor together.

    But no, because conservatives are too busy politicizing a misunderstanding between a police officer and a civilian and defending unambiguously authoritarian remarks like Dunphy’s.

    Sad but predictable.

  106. #106 |  JS | 

    Danny “No shit, Cynical, but at least there I get to feel like an intellectual giant.”

    lol big fish in a small pond huh?

  107. #107 |  nicrivera | 

    The Angry Optimist,

    By the way, I followed your comments over at Patterico’s blog, and let me say, you are a more patient person than I shall ever be.

    I posted a couple of comments there back when Radley and Patterico were debating over the use of paramilitary tactics during marijuana, and between Patterico and his readers (his readers, mostly), I found his blog so frustrating that I finally left, wondering “What’s the point? These guys are true believers.”

  108. #108 |  nicrivera | 

    Whoops, I meant marijuana RAIDS.

  109. #109 |  Gonzo | 

    Yikes — somebody give me the Wikipedia version. I’ve got stuff in the oven.

  110. #110 |  ASPECTRATIO | 

    #105- “I don’t believe Patterico “hate’s” Radley, as Radley claims. I believe that he honestly believes that he is right and that he honestly believes Radley has mischaracterized Dunphy’s position.” The obsessive, myopic Captain Queeg thought he was ‘right,’ too. Tuck in your shirt tail.

  111. #111 |  Joe | 

    Jeff Goldstein from Protein Wisdom and Patterico were having a debate on lanaguage and how the left tries to twist “intent” and in a heated interchange between a Patterico reader and Goldstein, Patterico banned Jeff Golstein for an alleged death threat. No such threat was ever made. Then Patterico and his readers trashed Goldstein. Which makes Patterico crying foul because you blocked him from Twittering you amazing.

  112. #112 |  Cynical in CA | 

    The quote on the banner of that blog linked in #111 is from Arthur Koestler.

    I just quoted Arthur Koestler for the first time today in post #101.

    F’en weird….

  113. #113 |  wunder | 

    Thank you, Dave (#100), for saying much more eloquently what I was trying to – that because of human nature, anarchy seems unsustainable.

    Also, your statement that communism is a form of anarchy also illustrates the point often made about the political spectrum really being a circle where the extremes meet each other. I’d always thought of that in terms of fascism and communism, but hadn’t really put anarchy on there, too.

    And Cynical, I think your interpretation is correct about being doomed to slavery. Sadly enough.

    I would still love to have a full discussion about ways anarchy could work. I’d just like to watch/read those of you much smarter than me work through it. I want to believe.

  114. #114 |  Robert Stacy McCain | 

    Radley, I got a visit off this thread and don’t know why, but:

    1. As strongly as I disagree with your anti-cop stance, you have always been courteous in person.

    2. Given some recent blogospheric events (having nothing to do with you or Patterico), I’ve developed a theory on the nature of flame wars. Basically, virtual communication has an effect of social isolation. Minus the visual/voice cues of telephone calls or flesh-time acquaintance, people are prone to attribute malicious motives where none exist.

    3. When a flame-war turns into a blood feud, the best thing to do is just walk away, get offline a while, and chill. Next time you log on, resolve to avoid whatever feud it was that got out of hand.

    What leads to this kind of madness is the tendency in polemical debate to become obsessed with proving oneself 100% right and one’s adversary 100% wrong. Sooner or later, in order to maintain sanity, we must content ourselves with the reality that people who disagree with us will never cede the point at dispute.

    Given my utter ignorance of what has led to this blowup with Patterico, the right-or-wrong question is moot with me. I’m just trying to explain the organizational dynamics of the underlying systemic problem. Everybody go drink some beers, chill for the weekend, and resolve that this won’t chew up so much of your valuable time next week.

    Finally, when in doubt, blame me. Everybody else does.

  115. #115 |  Cynical in CA | 

    Well I must disagree that communism (theoretical, not how it was actually practiced in the Soviet Union, China and elsewhere) is a form of anarchy. I’m personally at a loss to explain how a collectivist philosophy could have anything to do with radical individualism. That being written, there are anarcho-communists, and as long as they voluntarily associate and are free to leave the commune at any time, I see nothing inconsistent with anarchy. Obviously that’s not how it worked out in the Soviet Union and China.

    Wunder, the human individual is not doomed to slavery. Some wise writers have explained that freedom is where you find it. Like Dave Krueger wrote, getting people together in groups larger than one risks tyranny. THAT is the human condition. Alas, the freedom-seeking individual is doomed not to slavery, but to a lonely existence. Because humans are weak, superstitious, fearful and emotional, freedom is sacrificed for the company of fellow beings.

    These discussions are so edifying because they expose truth. I argue for anarchy because I feel compelled to do so morally, but I do so knowing that it is utterly hopeless to change human nature enough to make it real in society. It is frustrating because, as others have pointed out (John Hasnas, et. al.), anarchy is all around us. Most of us go through our days peacefully interacting with all manner of family, friends and strangers, no force involved at all, all consensual relationships. But in the end, the State is always present, lurking, poisoning everything it touches with violence and slavery.

    So, this is reality. The search for freedom starts within. Albert Jay Nock wrote that the only thing a person can do is present the world with one improved unit. Read Nock. No one ever wrote more eloquently about freedom.

  116. #116 |  Joe | 

    Right on cue, Joe goes over to Balko’s and publishes a distorted account of my arguments with Goldstein, which of course the audience over there (which is already talking about how I’m doing my blog on County time and such) will lap up.

    Joe: what fluffy said.

    Comment by Patterico — 7/31/2009 @ 6:23 pm

  117. #117 |  Joe | 

    Actually Patterico, I put the link that Jeff Goldstein wrote on McCain’s site. If you consider Goldstein’s version “distorted”, well let’s just say it is the other side of the story.

    And JD, you are obviously a Patterico-man. You are too much of a pussy to publically take a side because you agree with Patterico but are afraid Jeff might get mad at you if you say what you you really think. Grow a set.

    This fight between you and Balko is similar in a way to your fight with Jeff. You never want to admit you are wrong.

    Balko is a libertarian and is by his nature skeptical of police power (that does not mean he is anti cop). You’re a prosecutor so you go the other way (that doesn’t mean you are some jack booted thug against justice). Okay, we get that.

    But you tell me, did Cory Maye deserve to be executed (or did the court screw up in staying that execution)? Does he deserve to be set free or should he stay in jail? Are you one of those prosecutors who is fine with no knock warrants when…opps…they get the wrong house? Is Balko wrong on that case?

    And with Duncan, the thought of a child molester going free does not make me happy in the least (although I assume if that the case would be re-tried again under these circumstances if any appeal is successful). But if there was incompetency and possibly fraud with the prosecution’s criminal expert, whose fault is that?

    Instead you are all bitchy because Balko blocked you from Twitter, when you had no problems blocking Jeff Goldstein not that long ago for what you knew was a completely bogus “death threat.”

    Comment by Joe — 7/31/2009 @ 6:48 pm

  118. #118 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    “…anarchy is all around us.”

    Most of what works well in this world is anarchy.

    Hard for some to realize “in spite of” and not “because of” for their favorite dogma.

  119. #119 |  Joe | 

    7/31/2009
    10,000,000 Visits
    Filed under: General — Patterico @ 5:19 pm
    Sometime last night, this blog passed 10,000,000 visits since SiteMeter started measuring the count back in December 2003…

    We’re going out to dinner tonight. My response to Radley Balko’s latest mendacious attack on me will have to wait until tomorrow. For now, suffice it to say that his commitment to accuracy is now more in doubt than ever.

  120. #120 |  Joe | 

    There was no answer by Patterico to my post at 6:48 p.m. other than this:

    Does keeping Joe around serve any purpose? Other than continually bringing up old fights, that is.

    If there are any moderators around, feel free to ban him. He can go fight the Goldstein wars somewhere else.

    [Done. Goodbye, Joe. -- DRJ]

    Comment by Patterico — 7/31/2009 @ 7:25 pm

  121. #121 |  Joe | 

    Haven’t you left for dinner yet Patterico? Or are you texting me from your cell phone as you are waiting for a table? I will ban myself. But as you tend to do, you are just doing with Balko what you did with Goldstein…

    Comment by Joe — 7/31/2009 @ 7:30 pm

  122. #122 |  Joe | 

    Patterico will of course respond back after dinner with geometric logic.

  123. #123 |  Dave Krueger | 

    #115 Cynical in CA

    Well I must disagree that communism (theoretical, not how it was actually practiced in the Soviet Union, China and elsewhere) is a form of anarchy.

    According to Marx and Engels, Socialism and Capitalism have a state. The USSR was Socialist, so the state still existed. However, at the end of Socialism, “the state withers away” and the resulting communist system is stateless. There is no need for a state in a classless society. People are no longer governed. Only things are governed and that occurs by consensus.

    I would like to see anarchy have a chance, but in order to do that, I think you would have to find an uninhabited chunk of land end entice people to move there who are absolutely dedicated to the concept and committed to making it work. Or you could just adopt the popular strategy of finding an inhabited chunk of land and just kicking the current occupants out.

    I think, however, I could make a case that the majority of the earth’s population would not be happy with that much freedom. I think many people want to be managed.

    I can also make a case for government in another way. One of the key developments to occur during the industrial revolution was the division of labor. Division of labor greatly improved man’s efficiency as a generator of wealth and comfort. Government is like a division of labor in the sense that it handles certain aspects of our security, freeing up our time to be used for more productive purposes.

    I don’t see government as the problem nearly so much as I see government expansion as the problem. To date, through all of man’s history, we still haven’t solved that problem. I think you would contend that it can’t be solved. You may be right, but if anarchy were able to achieve a stable self-sustaining civilization, why hasn’t it ever developed spontaneously during those periods of history where governments have collapsed and chaos reigned?

  124. #124 |  CharlesWT | 

    “…, and for the last 12 hours have had a massive migraine.”

    Perhaps you need a forehead lift.

  125. #125 |  Cynical in CA | 

    #123 | Dave Krueger

    “I would like to see anarchy have a chance, but in order to do that, I think you would have to find an uninhabited chunk of land end entice people to move there who are absolutely dedicated to the concept and committed to making it work.”

    I came to the same conclusion earlier this evening, Dave. It is even more than that. For anarchism to succeed and perpetuate, you need to start with a blank slate. You need people who are not indoctrinated in the State system. You almost need an Adam and Eve dedicated to anarchism and then for them to raise their children as anarchists, and so on. It’s starting to sound cultish, but then just about every belief system could be labeled a cult, and to me, anarchy has some very positive aspects to it.

    “I think, however, I could make a case that the majority of the earth’s population would not be happy with that much freedom. I think many people want to be managed.”

    See above, and I agree completely. State indoctrination is an insurmountable advantage, even more powerful than all the weaponry at the disposal of the State.

    “Government is like a division of labor in the sense that it handles certain aspects of our security, freeing up our time to be used for more productive purposes.”

    I agree, to a point. The problem with delegating security to the government and abdicating self-responsibility for defense is that of Franklin’s admonition: “Those that trade liberty for security wind up with neither.” The State feeds off of that laziness of not wanting to defend oneself and turns it against the individual. It is a form of greed that individuals succumb to, the unwillingness to delay gratification and assume the responsibility of self-defense. Technological progress may be stunted if individuals must be ever-vigilant for themselves, but life would have much more meaning and depth if we were free men rather than pampered slaves.

    “I don’t see government as the problem nearly so much as I see government expansion as the problem. To date, through all of man’s history, we still haven’t solved that problem. I think you would contend that it can’t be solved.”

    Well, with government comes government expansion. It’s a package deal. Like in Federalist 51, how do you establish an unaccountable superagency and then hold it accountable? It’s impossible, except by superior force. Then the cycle repeats itself like a horror movie.

    “You may be right, but if anarchy were able to achieve a stable self-sustaining civilization, why hasn’t it ever developed spontaneously during those periods of history where governments have collapsed and chaos reigned?”

    It’s kind of pathetic to list the rare historical instances of anarchic societies that succeeded for any appreciable length of time, so I won’t bother. I think it’s fair to say that the common thread throughout all of this discussion is human weakness, specifically human mortality and the fear that goes with it. It’s a fairly easy thought experiment to conduct that if death were taken out of the equation, anarchy would follow rather easily. So, here is more truth — it has been written that war is the health of the State (Bourne), but the SOUL of the State is Death itself. There is your reason.

    Dave, it truly is a pleasure our meetings of the mind. Maybe someday us agitatortots will pound some beers together. Cheers!

  126. #126 |  Loader | 

    CiCA: Devo is ALWAYS right. Hell, they’re the Platonic form of “right”.

  127. #127 |  Lloyd Flack | 

    Radley,

    I don’t think Patterico hates you but he is obsessed with beating you. Most of the time he seems to go into arguments with the intention of winning rather than with the intention of finding out anything. It’s an adversay system lawyer’s mindset carried over into private life. He probably wanted access to your Twitter feed so that he could quote mine it for ammunition to use against you. The bit where he crowed over being able to get at your twitter feed he came across like a little kid smirking.

    The trouble is, does this mindset affect his work as a prosecutor? If he is blind to the nature of what he is doing then it is likely that he has gone ahed with some prosecutions that he should have placed in the circular file.

  128. #128 |  Lloyd Flack | 

    #Robert McCain,
    I can thnk of another thing that makes flame wars more likely that few people make allowance for. Your reading and writing efficency is less on a screen than it is on a printed page. I’ve seen people miss something that was in a post many times leading to the person they were communicating with becoming irate and this escalating into a flame war. I’ve also seen people rly too much on links to articles and to video clips to make their point. You need a summary as well as the link because for varios and often good reason people often do not click on the link that you provide. Especially when it is along clip or article. When commununicationg online we often think we have made our point much more clearly than we actually have.

  129. #129 |  billy-jay | 

    @80:

    But only police cameras. Private cameras are not allowed.

    Do any of you read Carlos Miller’s blog?

  130. #130 |  Dave Krueger | 

    #128 billy-jay

    @80:

    But only police cameras. Private cameras are not allowed.

    No, I’m saying that it should be mandatory that police have tamper proof cameras that record much of their official enforcement activities and any claim that a camera was mysteriously not working should itself be punishable.

    Police should have no jurisdiction over private cameras.

    Do any of you read Carlos Miller’s blog?

    I’m not a regular reader of his site, but being a photographer myself, I’ve visited there several times.

  131. #131 |  billy-jay | 

    The problem that’s brought up with anarchy is that most people don’t value freedom.

    That seems to be what happened to the USA, too.

  132. #132 |  billy-jay | 

    I know what you’re saying, Dave, but as long as police are policed by other police, it’s never going to happen. Shit, they don’t care about shooting people. Why would they care if someone tampered with a camera?

  133. #133 |  Dave Krueger | 

    #131 billy-jay

    I know what you’re saying, Dave, but as long as police are policed by other police, it’s never going to happen.

    Agreed.

  134. #134 |  Dave Krueger | 

    #125 Cynical in CA

    Dave, it truly is a pleasure our meetings of the mind. Maybe someday us agitatortots will pound some beers together. Cheers!

    Likewise. While we’re not exactly in perfect alignment with our perspectives, I’ve always considered your comments on here to be intelligent, thoughtful, and direct, without being antagonistic.

  135. #135 |  Joe | 

    Patterico is all about winning. I used to like the guy, but Patterico is dishonest. Jeff Goldstein absolutely nailed what Patterico is about with his post on Stacy McCain’s site:

    To recap, this “principled man” — and lord knows he’ll remind you of how principled he is at every fucking turn — 1) used a dishonest reading of a comment I’d made (and everyone has agreed on that point, with the exception of Patterico, for who denial is key to his being able to establish his pretext) to give himself leave to ban me from his site.

    2) He then encouraged others to defend his honor.

    3) He then stepped away and allowed his apparatchiks to take whatever potshots they wanted at me, including personal shots that redounded to my family — including vulgar suggestions that my wife was some sort of dupe who’d I’d managed to impregnate so I can keep up my unemployed life style.

    They did this knowing I was unable to respond, and they have continued to do so.

    Most cops are honest, face dangers on our behalf, and thus deserve respect. Most prosecutors are honest and act to do justice. Most people charged with crimes, the overwhelming majority, are guilty and wrongfully convicted people are rare…but it does occasionally happen. Prosecutors who only care about winning but not doing justice are dangerous. What bothers me is how the Cory Maye story gets ignored when it is highly probable he is innocent. Instead Patterico wants to tweet about twitter.

    Patterico got his 10 million post. Good for him. Andrew Sullivan got close to that last month, does Patterico want to end up like him? Well maybe he does?

  136. #136 |  JS | 

    Joe “Most cops are honest, face dangers on our behalf, and thus deserve respect. Most prosecutors are honest and act to do justice. Most people charged with crimes, the overwhelming majority, are guilty and wrongfully convicted people are rare…but it does occasionally happen.”

    I totally disagree. Plus there’s no way to prove such a broad general statement like that either so as long as people keep saying stuff like that everyone will think all these abuses reported by Radley and others are just “isolated incidents” when clearly they’re not.

  137. #137 |  Judi | 

    Radley, I can certainly sympathize with the migraine and here’s hoping it subsides soon!

    Apparently the Patterico dude is a very INSECURE person. Otherwise he would not be so hell-bent on disproving your opinions/posts. He would be satisfied that his opinion is strong enough to hold its own merit without lambasting someone else.

    Taktix, obviously Twitter doesn’t mix with what you ate for lunch either. I recommend a bland diet and a dose of Prevacid! Of course you have to lose THE STALKER!

    If this guy had a scintilla of decency and acted as any prudent adult should, then he would simply do as Radley has done…simply AGREE TO DISAGREE.

    Patterico is obviously a DRAMA QUEEN. Anyone who would go to the great lengths this guy has to criticize Radley and to hack into his Twitter feeds is obviously a psycho in dire need of some intense therapy.

    That said, just consider the source and ignore it!

    If all else fails, pour some WART-BE-GONE on him! Be gone evil man, you have no power here!

  138. #138 |  lew | 

    Patrick Frey does seem to be rather unstable. I think you’re probably correct to give him a wide berth, much as I would a potentially vicious animal encountered on the street.

  139. #139 |  Joe | 

    JS, you totally disagree? Why? What is your basis to say otherwise? We will have to agree to disagree. I do not believe the entire criminal justice system to be corrupt. But mistakes definitely happen, sometimes blatant corruption, and it needs to be addressed. Even a small number of “mistakes” translates to many many cases of injustice. What’s Patterico’s take on the Innocence Project for example? And the Dunphys and Pattericos or the world should welcome when journalists, bloggers, and others question cases where potential errors occurred, because it should all be about doing justice…correct?

    But Patterico has done this sort of blog war before. It is what he does.

    That Cory Maye has not yet gotten a new trial is wrong. I would have preferred Obama speaking out about a case like that, rather than a rather minor incident like the Skip Gates matter.

  140. #140 |  Joe | 

    JS, you don’t have to take my word for it:

    A few bad apples
    Most law enforcement officers and prosecutors are honest and trustworthy. But criminal justice is a human endeavor and the possibility for corruption exists. Even if one officer of every thousand is dishonest, wrongful convictions will continue to occur.

  141. #141 |  billy-jay | 

    Joe, are you new here?

  142. #142 |  Judi | 

    And for the “honest and trustworthy cops…”

    While I have never been a police officer, I was married to one (he was not a cop when we married) and have worked as a police dispatcher thus giving me first-hand knowledge.

    From what I have observed most ‘rookie’ (not all) come into this new atmosphere with a positive and fresh outlook. They seem to want to break the stereo-typed ‘corrupt-good-ole-boy’ image of officers.

    Then as time progresses the few and the proud new guys become frustrated fighting to stay ‘above-board’.

    They become victim to the old adage, “If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em.”

    The ‘thin blue line’ becomes a thick ‘blue wall of silence’.

    They soon learn that if you don’t, then you don’t survive.

    The few that have stood their ground are no longer police officers.

  143. #143 |  Joe | 

    Billy Jay, yeah, in terms of posting.

  144. #144 |  ukuleledave | 

    Actually, Patterico was responding to your analysis of his posts, and his coblogger’s (friend’s) posts. Since he figures that you were misleading and apparently sloppy about the posts, he’ll be pretty tough with you.

    Since you’re twittering about his posts, he kinda found it funny you took the time to block him. I do too. He’s not obsessed, although he cares when people are wrong about him on the internet.

  145. #145 |  Joe | 

    Patterico pontificates:

    Granted, 62 is about 61 more posts than some bloggers who seek donations for their site, but it’s still not an overwhelming output to do, on average, a post before you go to work, and a post when you get home.

    I wonder who that is a reference to…hmmm. Who could that be? Why not be a man Pat and admit banning him was a mistake? Patterico gets into a grudge match and he just can’t quit it. And if you call him on it he bans you (why decrying others for banning him). Then he will go off on red herring chases on how you are being unfair to him. And he will misrepresent and lie about the facts. And you wonder why some other bloggers question Patterico’s honor and honesty?

    Patterico is not a stand up guy. Far from it.

  146. #146 |  Patterico’s Pontifications » Balko’s Defense: I Don’t Have Time for Accuracy | 

    [...] not surprised to see that his latest correction follows the old pattern. Let’s take these points one at a [...]

  147. #147 |  JS | 

    Joe ” I do not believe the entire criminal justice system to be corrupt.”

    I do. Or at least I tend to think it is corrupt more often than not. Until someone does an empirical study I guess we can’t prove one way or the other. I’m glad you’re here though and my guess is that you will begin to view the legal system (we have no justice system in this country) in a different way if you read Radley’s reporting long enough.

  148. #148 |  ASPECTRATIO | 

    It’s odd how ferociously ‘Patter-ego’ has gone to defend ‘Dunphy’ in the first place. Accuracy? You’d think an experienced, big city police officer was capable of explaining what he meant to say to the public “accurately” in the first place, on his own, given the safety of a nom de cyber, without the swagger of a cyber billy club to lean on in the form of a friend in city government. Perhaps ‘Dunphy’ dropped his flashlight one night, raised his helmet and whispered, “Patter-ego, I am your father.” Whatever their relationship, the rabid defense by ‘Patter-ego’ over ‘Dunphy’s’ muddled messages says much about both these fellows approach problems. If it wasn’t for ego, they’d have let it go by now. It’s old news.

  149. #149 |  reff | 

    Danny at #45….seems you lied at Patterico’s site….

    Do you lie here too???

    “Either show me where I was trolling, or I will call you a conspiracy theorist. I have a lot of evidence for my assertion. Do you want to see it?”
    “Comment by Danny — 7/31/2009 @ 10:38 pm”

    THEN YOU DENIED THAT YOU WERE TROLLING???

    “I never thought I’d take such pleasure in trolling, but I swear I thought it was too ridiculous to believe. All of your “bad karma” (thumbs down) give me a big smile. Maybe I should look into it as a profession? Alas, I don’t think I have the inspiration normally, but I’ve spent quite a bit of time over the past couple of day’s at Patterico’s blog, completely incredulous to how completely flaming they try to be. They aren’t the least bit generous in their arguments, tactics, or interpretations, not even Patterico himself.”

    Your words….you were trolling….but you weren’t???

    What a dork….

  150. #150 |  Joe | 

    Okay JS, I am willing to listen, why do you think the entire criminal justice system to be “more currupt than not?” Emperical study? What you said is a very broad allegation. Are you suggesting half the people convicted are wrongfully so? What is your perspective for saying this.

    I disagree. I think most cops and prosecutors try to do a good job. But I know that corruption exists, prosecutors and cops on occasion cut corners, and that often the criminal justice system is unfairly stacked in the favor of the state. I also know that there are a lot of very bad people out there who need to be locked up in order to protect the rest of us.

    And when you discover a case of likely misjustice, like Cory Maye, it is our duty to correct it.

  151. #151 |  wunder | 

    thanks, Dave and Cynical, for the discussion and insight.

  152. #152 |  Joe | 

    And as for Patter-ego, he is just channeling is inner Charles Johnson. He has fought exactly the same way in the past, dirty:

    Patterico lies. He dissembles. When called on errors, he works tirelessly to gradually backtrack and reshape his argument so that it comes more into line with what the winning argument is. He then claims he’s been there all along — and that “attacks” on his arguments are really motivated by some desire to destroy his reputation.

    Those dual motivations — money and a desire to destroy his reputation — would come as a shock to my archives, wherein it is clear I’ve been making these arguments about language since I began my site at the very end of 2001, long before I knew of Patterico, long before I had ads on my site, and long before I supposedly was out solely to “destroy” Patrick Frey’s “reputation.”

    The faux humility he shows in this thread (“I’m not important blah blah blah”) is belied by his constant efforts to turn debates on merit into battles over his honor, and to cast his interlocutors as lesser persons out to bring him down out of malice or some other base motive he ascribes to them.

    In this sorry affair, Patterico has argued precisely like a leftist.

    It is happening right now. And is toady followers are no different than the lizoids at LGF.

  153. #153 |  happyfeet | 

    It’s time to think about what to make for dinner.

  154. #154 |  serr8d | 

    Another Patterico feud, another ill wind blowing through the blogosphere? Who’s the ‘good man’ this time?

    I’m staying out of this. I don’t read or visit Patterico’s site anymore, I don’t think I’ve ever read this site before, but a couple quick points…

    1) You can never block someone completely from reading your Tweets that are on the Twitter (gawd personally I hate that phraseology!) because there is an RSS feed that’ll dump the stuff in a Reader irregardless of your ‘blocking’. Twitter is the most open form of ‘private, what I’m having for dinner!’ communication out there. Anyone can see anything, anytime they like.

    2) If you don’t like the police, who you gonna call?

  155. #155 |  Cynical in CA | 

    #154 | serr8d — “If you don’t like the police, who you gonna call?”

    Fucking nobody. I’ll handle it myself or die trying, thank you very much.

  156. #156 |  Patterico’s Pontifications » Radley Balko’s Failure to Address the Substance of My Arguments | 

    [...] clear that I wasn’t going to allow him to leave the error uncorrected without comment. His entire response to all the points I made on the substance: The rest of the post [...]

  157. #157 |  pc | 

    What a douchebag. I wonder if LA has a problem having a stalker as a prosecuting attorney? While I don’t often agree with Patterico, this type of obsession shows mental issues. Internet, serious business, etc., but talk about creepy…

  158. #158 |  Joe | 

    Radley, you have a new best friend.

    Now if only Patterico put as much effort into trying to free Cory Maye, who most rational people agree got railroaded. But hey, Patterico does not get riled up when an innocent man gets convicted, only when prosecutors and cops get accused of misconduct. Then watch out. Patterico is on the case!

    When you ask Patterico about Cory Maye he dodges that question. He never addresses it.

  159. #159 |  Joe | 

    And this remains a very good response to Patterico. Dunphy is saying you should always cooperate with the police.

    This is what Dunphy said:

    And you, if in asserting your constitutional right to be free from unlawful search and seizure fail to do as the officer asks, run the risk of having such holes placed in your own.

    If you mouth off to the cops, you risk the chance of getting shot. Now granted, mouthing off to a cop (especially if he is hostile and suspicious of you) generally does not work. Mark Steyn talked about this very thing. But should you always voluntarily let such a copy search your car or home too? How far does this deference go? If someone burst into your home in the middle of the night, should you always assume it is the cops who just got the address wrong. These are very legitimate civil liberty questions, yet Patterico never seems to want to address that.

    The Duncan case is very disturbing. Is Duncan innocent? I doubt it (from what I read)–but if there was misconduct in the investigation and testimony that does not mean he absolutely not entitled to a new trial. And if sloppy or dishonest prosecution results in a conviction being overturned, that is a big deal too. And granted that case is not so clear cut and there is substantial evidence to support Duncan did what he is accused of (assuming that evidence is real). When you have evidence of possible misconduct by police forensic investigators, is that okay? Should you just ignore that. Prosecutors like Patterico are required to do justice, not just be zealous advocates for the state. Wasn’t at least one of the Duncan forensic investigator the same forensic investigators who helped convict Cory Maye on some ballistic theory that is very questionable.

  160. #160 |  Joe | 

    I suspect Jack Dunphy was being glib in his comment about getting “holes in you “and I also get his hypothetical that cops investigating what they believe to be a dangerous alleged armed person might be jumpy. Nevertheless, Dunphy was clear in what he was saying–shut up and cooperate when the cops come calling. Patterico’s over the top defense of Dunphy (who frankly could have defended himself and explain his intent) is what is amazing.

    And if we are going to talk about Gates some more, Gates got arrested after it was verified he was the owner. I am definitely no fan of Gates, but Gates got arrested for disorderly conduct in his own home (and yes his porch is his home) after it was verified he was the owner. So Dunphy’s hypothetical no longer makes any sense and Patterico’s over the top defense of it is a red herring argument.

    But this is not the first time Patterico had done this. If Patterico could take off the gloves and flat out lie about a fellow conservative like Goldstein, what’s in store for you? You are just a “radical libertarian” and cannot be trusted on anything, Patterico said so. And Patterico won’t have any qualms making comments about your mental sanity, friends and going on twitter to find crap* he can use against you. It is what Patterico does.

    *litterally.

  161. #161 |  Joe | 

    When Patterico accused you of bias in the Cory Maye matter these were the first two comments:

    i’m biased in favor of cory maye too. an innocent man protecting his child shot someone who busted through his door. we learned from atlanta’s kathryn johnston case that when cops lie to get a warrant and kill the householder, it’s only manslaughter. the householder’s life is worth no less than the officer’s, and the loss of a small town mississippi cop who terrorized the occupants of the wrong house in his search for marijuana does not weigh heavily upon this liberty-loving oregonian. get the address right. double-check it, because if anybody in mississippi didn’t know before that busting through the wrong door can be fatal, well, they do now.

    Comment by assistant devil’s advocate — 10/6/2007 @ 9:40 pm

    OK.

    But the post is about disclosure of bias and why it matters.

    Comment by Patterico — 10/6/2007 @ 9:43 pm

    Radley in the future you should especially careful if you are in LA County and definitely do not give advance notice to Patterico you are going.

  162. #162 |  The Angry Optimist | 

    Radley, it is apparent that your refusal to further engage Mr. Frey has sent him over the edge. Multiple, thousand-word posts and a ton of tweets about you are making his obsession apparent. Of course, when I point this out, it’s because I am “obsessed” with you; i guess projection isn’t just for movie theaters anymore.

  163. #163 |  happyfeet | 

    Mr. Balko has a headache you should leave him alone Mr. Angry person. When he feels better we’ll see.

    Me I think it’s neat for there to be a conversation between a libertarian and a for real district attorney person. If I were a libertarian person I think I would say hey this makes for an interesting venue to explore these libertarian thoughts what I think in my head.

    That this is not happening yet speaks mostly I think to a lack of imagination. Or a really bad headache. We’ll see.

  164. #164 |  happyfeet | 

    hey someone do me a favor and hit that little thumbs up button on my last comment so everyone will go hey that is a very sensible comment you can tell cause someone hit the thumbs up button

  165. #165 |  Joe | 

    The Patterico Flamewar

    Radley, Patterico. Just. Can’t. Quit. You.

  166. #166 |  happyfeet | 

    hmmph. Libertarians are reflexive contrarians I think.

  167. #167 |  Lloyd Flack | 

    Radley is claiming that there are widespread systematic problems in law enforcement. Patterico doesn’t want to believe this and is coming up with anything he can think of as way to deny it. I will be very surprised if his real main reason is not protecting his self image. It is probably bound up too much with the institutions that he is a part of. Patterico sees the Law as an object to be revered. Radley sees it as an unpleasant necessity. I think I am close to representing their positions correctly. Radley, correct me if I’m wrong. Patterico, what I just said is what I believe a reasonable person watching your behavior would spot.

    Patterico will reluctantly acknowledge individual excesses on the part of law enforcement officers and prosecutors but will see them as the failings of individuals. Radley sees most of them as the result of institutional flaws and places less importance on the shortcomings of individual officers. Radley sees institutional problems as encouraging individual lapses. Radley is also claiming that the problems are far more widespread than Patterico wants to believe. And he is claiming that the well intentioned are the main problem not the rogues.

    An unenviable aspect of working in law enforcement is that job satisfaction can lead to doing a bad job. The more satisfying serving justice is the more likely you are to commit an excess seeking job satisfaction. Patterico is aware of and on the lookout for excessive zeal in prosecuting heinous crimes. He does not seem to realize that this danger is present all the time and seems not to see it in routine actions of prosecutors and police.

    As well Patterico wants to win arguments much too much. When proven wrong on the main point he will focus on a secondary issue or a qualifier to claim that the other side is still wrong as a distraction from his error. I’ve seen him do it.

    A pity because he’s not wrong all the time and Radley needs a sharp critic to counter his occasional excesses of zeal and bits of carelessness. He doesn’t need a bad faith one.

  168. #168 |  ASPECTRATIO | 

    ‘Patter-ego’ is beginning to remind me of one of those pilots a few decades ago who fussed over and over about a faulty light bulb that told them they had a problem with their landing gear. In the obsession to prove the dim bulb wrong, they lost track of flying the plane, disengaged their autopilot, and crashed into the Everglades. Let it go, ‘Patter-ego.’

  169. #169 |  The Angry Optimist | 

    Frey’s followers are a group of ignorant rednecks. Like someone else said, it makes me embarrassed to think of myself as a conservative, and if this is the political acumen of the Right these days, well, I would say the President has nothing to worry about.

  170. #170 |  joev | 

    they really are a fine example of “law and order” authoritarian republicans. their weapons of choice– fear and insecurity–are finely honed; no surprise they’d be bitter about anyone questioning their authority.

  171. #171 |  Patter-holio | 

    Are you threatening me?

  172. #172 |  ASPECTRATIO | 

    “Patter-ego” is not only obsessive, he’s a but stupid as well. I visited his site and he is now mocking the Obama Cash for Clunkers program, backslapping unfortunate Americans who have had the misfortune of struggling in the private sector, unlike ‘Patter-ego.’

    His post, “Where’s the Money for Responsible People?” Whines with the following:

    “Looks like the cash-for-clunkers program may be near an end. I don’t qualify; I made the mistake of buying a fuel-efficient car in 2000.” Timing in life, is everything, Patter-ego. Like working for the government in the midst of the worst economic downturn in 70 years. Must be nice.

    “Didn’t get any money for my house either. I made the mistake of getting a mortgage I could afford.” A mortgage you can pay thanks to the government paycheck you get. Gee, wonder if your bank got a bailout.

    “I’d love to get my student loans paid off — but dammit, I paid them off myself.” Try getting those loans today.

    “I’m trying to think if there’s some area of life where I can be stupid and irresponsible now, so I can get paid by Obama in the future. Because so far I’ve really screwed myself by doing things right.”

    By Obama he must mean ‘government.’ Apparently the conservative ‘Patter-ego,’ forgets he works in a government job and doesn’t realize he’s already there. Seems at cross purposes for a true, free market conservative. But yes, there is another area of life you can be stupid and irresponsible. Get a job in the private sector where you face the risks and realities of layoffs at profit-centered law firms, or hang your own shingle, and hustle for work like the vast majority of Americans. If it’s legal, cities and municipalities across the land might do well to save some money, outsource, shed their staffed legal operations and contract with the lowest bidder from law firms in these cities for legal services.

  173. #173 |  Steve Verdon | 

    By Obama he must mean ‘government.’ Apparently the conservative ‘Patter-ego,’ forgets he works in a government job and doesn’t realize he’s already there.

    Oh it is much much better. California public employees have amazingly sweetheart deals when it comes to retirement. In some cases 100% of your salary with benefits. One of the highest paid state employees is the former Chief of Police Bernard Parks, he is paid something close to a quarter of a million each year just for his pension, then he is paid another $175,000 for being on the LA Board of Supervisors, nearly $500,000 and definitely over that when you count in benefits.

    Patterico is in the same boat. If he holds that job till he retires he’ll likely have a nice pension. Better than just about anything most people would get in the private sector. On top of Social Security and Medicare benefits he’d quailify for.

    If Patterico is all for responsibility, then how about his pension gets cut and all those people currently collecting. After all, CalPERs and the State Teachers Retirement System has lost quite a bit of money.

    http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-calpers22-2009jul22,0,5416427.story

    And according to the nice laws in place, the tax payer is on the hook. You don’t hear Patterico complaining about that in that post now do you. And the system is set up so that it has to earn pretty good returns to stay afloat. In other words, the California Pension System is very much like the problem we have with Medicare. Its irresponsible and reckless…and stupid.

  174. #174 |  ASPECTRATIO | 

    #173- ‘Patter-ego’ doesn’t see it that way. He conveniently avoids acknowledging the fact his government paycheck is cut from an organization that is not structured to be a profit center and can run deficits for years with minimal salary and staff cuts. Yet has th gall to whine about handouts. He’s just a public servant with a public servants attitude of entitlement, even if his employer is running massive deficits– or broke. Given the continuing deficits in California, with revenues dwindling, outsourcing rather than cutting services to the poor, the sick and elderly would be a better move. If ‘Patter-ego’ was employed in the private sector which his conservative position champions, his angst against President Obama might have more credibility. Conservatives who get government paychecks then rail against government are biting the hands that feed them. They are hypocrites.

  175. #175 |  Danny | 

    #149 | reff | August 1st, 2009 at 4:49 pm

    Danny at #45….seems you lied at Patterico’s site….

    Do you lie here too???

    “Either show me where I was trolling, or I will call you a conspiracy theorist. I have a lot of evidence for my assertion. Do you want to see it?”
    “Comment by Danny — 7/31/2009 @ 10:38 pm”

    THEN YOU DENIED THAT YOU WERE TROLLING???

    “I never thought I’d take such pleasure in trolling, but I swear I thought it was too ridiculous to believe. All of your “bad karma” (thumbs down) give me a big smile. Maybe I should look into it as a profession? Alas, I don’t think I have the inspiration normally, but I’ve spent quite a bit of time over the past couple of day’s at Patterico’s blog, completely incredulous to how completely flaming they try to be. They aren’t the least bit generous in their arguments, tactics, or interpretations, not even Patterico himself.”

    Your words….you were trolling….but you weren’t???

    What a dork….

    This was only 2 months ago? Seems like ages…

    Anyway, the operative word in admitting that I trolled was “IT” was too ridiculous to believe. I trolled in one post. Here at the Agitator. To see if anybody would buy it. They did (to my surprise). The accusation that I was trolling at Patterico was that I was producing several posts merely just to piss Patterico and his readers off, as well as to ding his credibility. This was not the case. I spoke openly and candidly and was scorned simply because I offered other points of view.

  176. #176 |  PROMINENT RESPONSE ALERT! | 

    [...] Too, I disagree that the joke was about Willow, or that it was a joke about rape, statutory or otherwise. The reasons for which I articulated in the original thread. I haven’t changed my position since I first posted on this, and nothing Frey writes in his post has anything much to do with intentionalism (other than that he insists that Letterman is really joking about someone he never mentions, and whose inclusion in the joke would have made it nonsensical), which he continues to misunderstand in the most egregious and frustrating of ways. As seems to be his wont. [...]

  177. #177 |  Now I hear I’m being accused of altering a Patrick Frey comment… [see update] | 

    [...] this kind of obsessive behavior is nothing new with Frey, as libertarian Radley Balko could [...]

  178. #178 |  Sigh (again) | 

    [...] while you’re at it, leave Radley Balko alone, as well. For symmetry. Posted by Jeff G. @ 10:52 am Comments (1) | Trackback [...]

  179. #179 |  Taking (at least part of) the day off | 

    [...] remember: when it comes to proof of secretive email rants and creepy stalking behavior, only I have ACTUALLY supplied [...]

  180. #180 |  Radley Balko: Another Recipient of Patrick Frey’s Attention | Patrick Frey WATCH! | 

    [...] in the court case, but wanted to get copies of the autopsy and other true-crime-related stuff. When this upset the people writing about the case, he decided to “investigate” them, too. This included Radley Balko, a Huffington Post crime blogger and former senior editor of Reason [...]

Leave a Reply