Friday, May 07, 2010

Scratch-n-Win!


Charles Krauthammer, ladies and gents. You have to admire the guy's tenacity in the face of countervailing reality. He reminds me of my crazy great-aunt Mary, who was famous for buying twenty lotto tickets at a time to increase her chances of winning . . . all with the same numbers!

Posted by IOZ at 10:05 AM | email »
Labels: , ,

14 comments:

Jack Crow said...

I wonder of Chuck ever thinks his logic out to its conclusions.

I think so, which means he despises his loyal readers more even than the gliberals and Democrats upon whom he turns his piss hose.

Because if he really, really wants the state to stop Mirandizing under the cover of public safety, he's a half hop from begging all the Tea Partiers, abortion protesters and anti-immigrationists to line up for a long walk to the other side of the incarceration fence.

10:23 AM
Montag said...

we caught him, Walter?

10:38 AM
Charles F. Oxtrot said...

Chuckles is the bitterest man given access to opinion journalism. Everything he writes is fueled by envy and spite driving a sense of Krauthammer Superiority.

"That diving accident ruined my life, and it's all YOUR FAULT! I'm talking to ALL OF YOU WHO DON'T AGREE WITH ME!"

He doesn't need to be factually correct. He just needs to be throwing molar hydrochloric acid in the faces of those who disagree. That's all.

10:50 AM
Montag said...

if only there were some way that police and prosecutors could make a deal with a defendant in exchange for information about his bosses or organization, this conversation would be unnecessary.

10:55 AM
Anonymous said...

A person should really re-think their position when they are citing Andrew McCarthy for support.

11:23 AM
Professor Coldheart said...

The speed with which the arrested suspect goes from a substantial threat to "a pigeon", and from which the threat of his NOT talking is weighed against the reality of what he "is [...] telling us now," is breathtaking. The entire op-ed wavers so erratically between reality and unreality that I'm tempted to leave a bowl of cat food out for it, in case the unstable element hasn't decayed yet.

11:49 AM
la Rana said...

I think I've figured it out. After 9/11 the US went into prepare-for-police-state mode, then...no more attacks. But we had all this "someone's gotta pay!" built up and so we took our gigantic American cock to the Iraqi antique shop and thrashed about. Still, there remained the expectation that upon a second attack comparable to 9/11, we would resume full-on police-state mode. This second attack never occured, but Krauthhammer and McCarthy are still caught up in the expectation. Everyone else has decided to call it a night, good fun, but its late and we've gotta work tomorrow, and they're all like "what the fuck?! Are we gonna have a police state or not!?"

12:12 PM
Enron said...

Just pretend a Chinabot wrote the column.

1:46 PM
Anonymous said...

so miranda didn't stop him from talking, but if it had we would totally have to repeal that shit.

1:49 PM
Justin said...

One of the more deeply confused columns I've read in some time.

Given that Charles appears to know that the Miranda warning makes the suspect aware of rights he already has, as opposed to summoning them into existence upon invocation, and he thinks that we can't afford to give terrorists the Miranda warning because they are crazy, arch-criminals with all manner of nefarious sophistication and networks, has it not occurred to him that as part of their supervillian terrorist training, they could learn about the right to remain silent and invoke it upon capture even if they are not make aware of it by police?

1:56 PM
Inkberrow said...

Justin---

Obviously for all practical purposes, including those envisioned by Krauthammer, "making him aware" of his rights is indistinguishable from "summoning them into existence".

That said, it's hard to imagine that naturalized citizen Shahzad for instance would be unaware of his rights going in. Episodes of "Law & Order" are part of the Waziristan regimen in any event.

2:04 PM
la Rana said...

This:

"it's hard to imagine that naturalized citizen Shahzad for instance would be unaware of his rights"

Negates this:

"for all practical purposes . . . "making him aware" of his rights is indistinguishable from "summoning them into existence"."

2:16 PM
Inkberrow said...

La Rana---

In the my first sentence I meant terrorists generally, per Justin's post, as opposed to Shahzad particularly in my second sentence. I could have been clearer. Krauthammer's position holds more water (utility) with recent arrivals.

3:03 PM
Anonymous said...

I could have been clearer.

That's gotta be the title of Inky's autobio.

9:52 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)