Making Conundrums Where There Are None

Rick Moran is still hot and bothered for the mythical ticking time bomb scenario so we can have an excuse to rip up the Constitution and torture Shahzad:

Might there be other terrorists in other major American cities waiting to strike as I write this?

Probably! That’s what terrorists do!

And would that be a good enough excuse for the government to arbitrarily waive Mr. Shahzad’s Constitutional rights, designate him an “enemy combatant,” and interrogate him using all legal means at our disposal (I take it as a given that President Obama has rejected “enhanced interrogation” as an option)?

No! Because we have this thing called THE BILL OF RIGHTS!

For some on both sides of the argument, this is an easy question to answer in the affirmative or negative.

Indeed there IS! We call it “the law!”

However, knee jerk ideological reactions from civil liberties absolutists or bloodthirsty right wingers are just not good enough in this situation.

Those who believe in the law, and those who get off torturing people- the same thing! They just have different opinions! But both are extremists compared to our sensible Rick!

It goes on like that for what seems like pages, so I’ll just send you all to this definition of a false dichotomy and save us all some time.

*** Update ***

Rick says I made a hash of his writing:

As is his wont – and the wont of other excessively ideological dimwits on both sides – John Cole exaggerates, takes out of context, and generally makes a hash of my writing.

As far as torture, Cole knows full well I oppose it as strenuously as he does. As for the “ticking bomb scenario,” I have written extensively about how the professionals do not believe it could ever happen.

I’m well aware Rick is against torture, but I have no idea how I made a hash of his writing. I quoted him.






132 replies
  1. 1
    El Cid says:

    If Thomas Jefferson had known people would plot to hurt our country and murder our people, he totally would have torn up the Bill of Rights and pushed for a Bill of Kick-Ass instead.

  2. 2
    MikeJ says:

    Interesting phrasing there. He wants to be able to “waive” somebody else’s rights.

  3. 3
    FormerSwingVoter says:

    Every time I think that my opinion of the human species simply can’t go any lower, someone writes, says, or does something.

  4. 4
    Bill H says:

    Remember the picture of the guy standing on the side of the road in some kind of protest with a sign
    reading, “Get a life morans.” Another one had a sign, “We are all morons.”

  5. 5
    trollhattan says:

    I’m not sure my brain’s going to recover from trying to follow this. Ouchie.

    For some on both sides of the argument, this is an easy question to answer in the affirmative or negative.

  6. 6
    Cacti says:

    Ummm…

    The Government can’t “Arbitraily waive” anyone’s rights. The rights belong to the individual, not the Government, and as such, could never be waived by them.

    Sounds like Mr. Moran needs to repeat his high school Civics course.

  7. 7

    False equivalence. I am so fucking tired of it. I’m with FSV. I am afraid we haven’t reached the bottom of the gene pool yet.

  8. 8
    Brachiator says:

    @El Cid:

    If Thomas Jefferson had known people would plot to hurt our country and murder our people, he totally would have torn up the Bill of Rights and pushed for a Bill of Kick-Ass instead.

    And I shudder to think what James Madison, author of the Bill of Rights, might have done.

  9. 9
    JR says:

    It’s telling that the fact that torture doesn’t work never comes up. Why do you think that is? It’s almost as if punishing this guy and making an example of him is more important than getting info. But you can’t get as far in life as Moran and not know that torture doesn’t work, which means this is about something else.

  10. 10
    El Cid says:

    @Brachiator: You got me. I totally withdraw my comment.

  11. 11
  12. 12
    catclub says:

    The guy actually went to Pakistan(?) to train in bombmaking!
    Wow

    I am reminded yet again that the real high water point for AQ
    was the day before 9/11.

    Bush and Cheney inflated them for years.

  13. 13
    Cacti says:

    I waive Moran’s right to free speech.

  14. 14
    slippy says:

    I’m curious. If it could be proven that most terrorists were going to NRA-sponsored gun shows and purchasing their weapons without any kind of check on their identity, would conservatives suddenly be willing to chew up and shit all over the Second Amendment (their imagery) by implementing a teeny-weeny ID check at the POS for any gun?

    I bet the blistered loving fuck not. Maybe conservatives need to be reminded that the Bill of Rights is all one structure, and if you bring SOME of it to the conversation you by necessity bring ALL of it.

    I’d like to bring it as a large, heavy wooden structure shaped like a bat and smack the living fuck out of Rick Moran’s aptly-named self.

  15. 15
    Mark S. says:

    Bill of Rights 2: This Time It’s Personal!

  16. 16
    The Bearded Blogger says:

    You know, extremists on both sides of the debate thoughtlessly fall on one of two extremes, driving on the left lane or driving on the right lane. I, a levelheaded pundit, always drive in between lanes, a much more sensible course of action

  17. 17
    Kyle says:

    The Government can’t “Arbitraily waive” anyone’s rights. The rights belong to the individual, not the Government, and as such, could never be waived by them.

    As the local Tealiban like to bloviate on community access TV, rights “come from God” (one of the Founding Fathers said so, so obviously they all believed in the specific concept of a diety that Mr. Tealiban believes in!). Since this IslaMaoistNaziCommie obviously doesn’t believe in their god, he has no rights. QED.

  18. 18
    slackjawedgawker says:

    @MikeJ:
    Nice catch. At least he’s acknowledging that Shahzad has Constitutional rights to begin with. Baby steps…..

  19. 19

    What should we call people who want to blow up the Constitution?

  20. 20
    AngusJackBootedThugOfMeat says:

    Sorry, I have more important things to do than read the mindturds of fucking Rick Moran.

    What do these people suppose we want from Shahzad? Revelations that all the stupid people with wannabee sociopathic fantasies are talking to each other and exchanging their clever and diabolical ideas?

    Which, come to think of it, was the whole point of Moran’s blog, no?

    Just saying.

  21. 21
    SpotWeld says:

    It is pretty well understood that we could give ourselves total stafey if we were willing to pretty much destroy everything we hold precious as Americans.

    Threat of War? Kill the enemy, including civilians and cildren. Use nuclear weapons, chemical, and biological. Salt the earth, leave nothing but ash.

    Threat of Terrorists? Lock everyone in small rooms, strip them of all privacy and demand total obediance (anything less is punishable).

    Illegal illigrants? “Papers Please”, end all free passage within our boarders.

    Of course it would pretty much stop being America at this point.

  22. 22
    Pasquinade says:

    Adam Baldwin is a certifiable homophobe.

    http://twitter.com/adamsbaldwin/status/13202243568

    and he retweets Jane Hamsher

  23. 23
    SpotWeld says:

    I can’t believe I used to think Right Wing Nuthouse was a saner alternative to Red State.

  24. 24
    FormerSwingVoter says:

    @General Egali Tarian Stuck:

    What should we call people who want to blow up the Constitution?

    Republicans?

  25. 25
    The Bearded Blogger says:

    @asiangrrlMN: Some say false equivalences are a way for journalists to avoid two onerous tasks: research and independent thought.

  26. 26
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @General Egali Tarian Stuck: Assholes, teabaggers, Republicans, Dick Cheney… I could go on.

  27. 27
    MattF says:

    Once you start considering conundrums, you just can’t stop… So, if a little torture doesn’t work, what do you do? A conundrum.

    It’s possible, you know, that a little more torture would work. It might save lives, it might… well, you know. And if that doesn’t work, and the individual whose rights you’ve waived is injured in some unfortunate way, what do you do? A conundrum.

    You don’t start out wanting to hurt anyone, it just happens. All by itself.

  28. 28
    Cacti says:

    @slippy:

    I’m curious. If it could be proven that most terrorists were going to NRA-sponsored gun shows and purchasing their weapons without any kind of check on their identity, would conservatives suddenly be willing to chew up and shit all over the Second Amendment (their imagery) by implementing a teeny-weeny ID check at the POS for any gun?

    Such a scenario already exists.

    Mexican Narco Cartels get almost all of their guns in Texas, California, Arizona, and New Mexico.

  29. 29
    slippy says:

    @The Bearded Blogger: I would define that as getting in EVERYONE’S way.

    Sadly, centrists seem to end up mostly doing what the Right wants them to do because they are afraid of bucking conventional wisdom. My personal theory is there is no such thing as a centrist, and centrists by definition are right-wing conformist tools who are just too chickenshit to admit it.

  30. 30
    jeffreyw says:

    Did an informal poll from the porch this morning on whether we should do something different for accused terrorists or just follow the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights seemed to be OK with everyone.

  31. 31
    slackjawedgawker says:

    @JR:
    Of course it works. Did you not see the clip of the Phillies fan getting tased in front of thousands of cheering fans? Are you not entertained?

  32. 32
    freelancer says:

    @Pasquinade:

    The Hero of Canton, the man they call Jayne…is a fucking asshole.

  33. 33
    cleek says:

    “conservatives” are fucking cowards.

  34. 34
    The Bearded Blogger says:

    @SpotWeld: I seem to remember some guy, perhaps in one of those funny judge-wigs, saying something about liberty and security, deserving neither, or something….

  35. 35

    @FormerSwingVoter: Republicans, traitors. That about covers it. This was easier than I thought.

  36. 36
    Nellcote says:

    @Mark S.:

    Bill of Rights 2: This Time It’s Personal!

    Awesome!

  37. 37
    slippy says:

    @Cacti: Fascinating. And yet there is no hue and cry in the conservaworld for stopping this because GOD GUNS GUTS. Of course. Yet if they were getting AIRTIME on a station in the USA or in danger of being READ THEIR MIRANDA RIGHTS, of course we have to dispose of those immediately because SHUT UP NATIONAL SECURITY.

  38. 38
    slackjawedgawker says:

    @General Egali Tarian Stuck:

    The Bush Cabinet, duh.

  39. 39
    bemused says:

    There’s something rightwingers haven’t considered. Why would righties be willing for the government to arbitrarily waive an american’s constitutional rights while at the same time so many of them are convinced that Obama/the government is practically a dictatorship/monarchy now? Shouldn’t they be afraid that Obama/government could arbitrarily waive their constitutional rights if he/government decided they were terrorists & didn’t deserve those rights?

  40. 40
    Calouste says:

    Terrorist waiting to strike?

    Look, this (IRA) is what terrorists ready to strike looks like. Or this (ETA). One failed attack once a year? Don’t make me laugh.

  41. 41
    freelancer says:

    What should we call people who want to blow up the Constitution?

    Republicans?

    That Guy Fawkes GOP thing died pretty quickly, huh?

    What a bunch of Guy Fawkers.

  42. 42
    kay says:

    @JR:

    It’s almost as if punishing this guy and making an example of him is more important than getting info

    Bingo. There’s absolutely an element of punishment in this. They lie about it constantly but it’s always there.

    Notice how he needs an “excuse” to act illegally? He uses “excuse”. He wants to anyway.

    I personally think it’s pathetic. A vulnerability was revealed (although I don’t know why the FACT that they’re vulnerable is always a new and disturbing revelation to these people every single time) and he wants someone, anyone at all, punished. Now.

    They’re at “lashing out irrationally” stage.

  43. 43
    Gregory says:

    @MikeJ:

    Interesting phrasing there. He wants to be able to “waive” somebody else’s rights.

    Word. But, of course, conservatives are supposedly the ones who are all huffed up on “liberty.”

    Right.

  44. 44

    […] is his wont – and the wont of other excessively ideological dimwits on both sides – John Cole exaggerates, takes out of context, and generally makes a hash of my […]

  45. 45
    ThatPirateGuy says:

    I just like to know why people think that torture and the complete lack of civil rights will keep them safe when the *FREAKING NAZIS* couldn’t stop the french resistance.

  46. 46
    AngusJackBootedThugOfMeat says:

    So, I have a question. Who has the greater chance of success?

    Shahzad, heading out to Times Square to set off his Make A Bomb With the Stuff In Your Trunk experiment, or ….

    Ben Roethlisberger heading out to pick up chicks at a bar?

  47. 47
    Bill Section 147 says:

    Really making a conundrum where there is one.

    What is the difference between the Right and right?

    One side writes lies on the laws

    On the law’s side lies rights won

  48. 48
    ellaesther says:

    @General Egali Tarian Stuck: Ooh, I like that. I really, really like that.

    Expect a royalty check sometime soon.

  49. 49
    FormerSwingVoter says:

    @kay:

    Notice how he needs an “excuse” to act illegally? He uses “excuse”. He wants to anyway.

    THIS. This this this. A million times this.

    The question they pose is never, ever whether violence is justified – it’s whether violence is justifiable.

  50. 50
    Bottom Of The Gene Pool says:

    @asiangrrlMN:

    True, but I can see you coming around the bend. Not long now.

  51. 51
    Ben Richards says:

    John – shame on you as you are clearly not keeping up with this season of 24. Just last week, President Taylor designated a US citizen as an enemy combatant and sent her off for enhanced interrogation… The ends justify the means in this case. My TV keeps telling me so.

  52. 52
    The Bearded Blogger says:

    @Cacti: So cool, I hope this gets national attention: what happens when a wingers unbending love of all things guns is opposed to his unbending hatred of all things mexican? Exploding head fireworks, and cartoon cuckoos coming out of his ears man, that’s what.

    @slippy: Centrists are either lazy unprincipled opportunists or rightwingers who like to pretend they are sane. Check this out:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A.....moderation

    @bemused: Wingers are all in favor of big goverment and completely against it, that’s why they can say anything they want and be completely consistent:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P....._explosion

  53. 53
    Tonal Crow says:

    @General Egali Tarian Stuck:

    What should we call people who want to blow up the Constitution?

    Republicans.

  54. 54
    Erik Vanderhoff says:

    @Cacti: FTMTFW!

  55. 55
    cursorial says:

    Fortunately, Lieberman has the solution. Revoke their citizenship, then ignore their rights.

    With an exemption, of course, if the foreign power whose military you enlist in is Israel. Nice.

    And this guy was the Democratic VP candidate not too long ago?

  56. 56
    Tonal Crow says:

    @SpotWeld:

    It is pretty well understood that we could give ourselves total stafey if we were willing to pretty much destroy everything we hold precious as Americans.

    No, we can’t buy “total safety” even at that price. There’s rampant brutality in prisons, whose occupants have fewer rights than even most teatards would hold to be the acceptable minimum.

  57. 57
    Tsulagi says:

    Rick Moran is still hot and bothered for the mythical ticking time bomb scenario

    It’s their freaking unicorn and they try to fuck it every chance they get. Unicorn isn’t there, but that doesn’t keep them from pumping away. Peter Pan Patriots.

  58. 58
    The Bearded Blogger says:

    @Cacti: So, I put on my winger hat and read through the article… how do you reconcile 2nd amendment super-rights with mexican cartels? In fact, how do you reconcile “rule of law” with unlimited super-duper-bauer powers of interrogation? How do you fit all this in a coherent mindset?

    The answer is this: the car-bomb guy is arabic (racially), the gun salesman is egyptian, the gun buyers were mexican… ergo… ALL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS SHOULD BE FOR WHITE PEOPLE ONLY!

  59. 59
    Comrade Dread says:

    And would that be a good enough excuse for the government to arbitrarily waive Mr. Shahzad’s Constitutional rights

    Governments do not grant you rights nor do they take them away.

    The Bill of Rights was an enumeration of rights you have as both human beings (and when specified, as citizens). It was included specifically because people worried that the government would violate those natural rights if it decided it was convenient and some of the Founders wanted a clear set of rules in place telling such a government to go pound sand.

    I mean, hell, why stop with terrorism? I’m sure I can find several ticking clock scenarios that would justify giving the government the power to torture folks for other crimes.

  60. 60
    MikeJ says:

    @The Bearded Blogger:

    the car-bomb guy is arabic (racially)

    I thought he was Pakistani.

  61. 61
    Citizen_X says:

    @The Bearded Blogger:

    ALL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS SHOULD BE FOR WHITE PEOPLE ONLY!

    Annnd we have a winner! You have found the dividing line.

    IOKIYW.

  62. 62
    Zam says:

    In other news the mastermind behind the Katrina response is accusing Obama of incompetence in order to achieve political gain on Hardball.

  63. 63
    scav says:

    @Tonal Crow: well, I guess the only option then is carpet bombing ourselves back to the stone ages. oh goody.

  64. 64
    Undermined Narrative says:

    Is the moran aware that the person in question is a US Citizen?

    Good god, these people are horrible. Every one of them, horrible.

    For fucks sake, even Glenn Beck isn’t willing to get on board with them. Glenn Beck. Maybe that should alert you that your thinking is not what it should be.

  65. 65
    The Bearded Blogger says:

    @MikeJ: I had my winger hat on while I was writing that… in winger world there are only five races: white, black, asian, arabic and mexican…

  66. 66
    MikeJ says:

    @The Bearded Blogger: Also joos, the french, and eskimos. They’re far more broad minded than you credit them for.

  67. 67
    Ben Richards says:

    Watching PTI on espn right now and they are interviewing Steve Nash and they asked him about the AZ immigration law. While answering they showed the Suns team wearing jerseys for a recent playoff game that said “Los Suns” as a protest of the law. Awesome.

  68. 68
    Bobby Thomson says:

    @cursorial: I’ve never forgiven Al Gore for that, either.

  69. 69
    Bnut says:

    @The Bearded Blogger:

    You forgot the gay.

  70. 70
    Tonal Crow says:

    @scav: Yes indeedy. We must destroy the village in order to save it. Too.

  71. 71
    The Bearded Blogger says:

    @Citizen_X: Waivers for IOKIYW include being head of the RNC or a far right wing cuban… but those waivers are hard to get…

  72. 72
    Brachiator says:

    @El Cid:

    You got me

    Your comment obviously was fine. It’s kinda fun, though, imagining Little Jemmy Madison going all “to hell with a bill of rights.” Ironically, Madison originally did not believe that a Bill of Rights was necessary, although he later passionately defended the addition.

    He personally did not believe a Bill of Rights was necessary. He agreed with Alexander Hamilton that the Constitution did not take any rights from the people in the first place. He also thought the State governments were more likely to pass unjust laws than the federal government, and he supported a provision that would have given the federal government veto power over all state laws.

    In a way, he has been proven right, in the wretched crap coming out of Arizona, Oklahoma and other states.

  73. 73

    I’m well aware Rick is against torture,

    If you don’t plan to use coercive techniques beyond what is generally morally and legally acceptable for detainee or arrestee treatment, then why not Mirandize. Before Miranda, no one knew what happened, because only the cops and the suspect were present. And not having a lawyer present would make most folks unsure they wouldn’t be beaten or even killed even if they did talk, so why cooperate.

    There is no more powerful interrogation technique than out in the open good old fashion plea bargaining. Most, but the most hardened characters will quickly go into self protection mode when they know they are caught and going to prison.

    And on the most hardened ones, sometimes even cookies and or a smoke can melt even these hard asses. Of course the cookies will need to be sugar free

  74. 74
    ruemara says:

    Well if you’re gonna go smear him with his own writing, you should be prepared for the blowback. I mean, using the man’s own words, like he should be prepared to stand by them, like he means them. That is beyond the pale. or is it pail?

  75. 75
    The Bearded Blogger says:

    @Bnut:
    @MikeJ:

    LOL! Not sure about eskimos… I’m guessing, like Homer Simpson, wingers think they are fictional characters, like elves… Also, maybe there are still some wingers who talk of macs, dagos and greaseballs, but with so much brown around the standards for whiteness has been lowered

  76. 76
    Catsy says:

    @freelancer: Yeah, that and reading what else was on his feed pretty much eliminated any respect I had for him beyond his acting. The guy’s a douchebag, and based on his own writing, a stupid one at that. And if the actual substance of his views wasn’t bad enough, he expresses them in a consistent “Ur”/”U’re” style that is so excruciating to read, it makes me yearn for a device that allows me to stab people in the face over the internet.

  77. 77
    Chyron HR says:

    I’m well aware Rick is against torture, but I have no idea how I made a hash of his writing. I quoted him.

    Isn’t the standard procedure in these situations to give the dissenting columnist space on the Balloon Juice front page to berate and insult all your readers?

  78. 78
    Cat Lady says:

    John Cole quoting Moran = partisan hack

    James Joyner quoting Moran = thoughtful critic

    Get a brain! Moran

  79. 79
    tesslibrarian says:

    Quoting him was clearly unfair.

    It’s a fact that he wrote those things, and everyone knows that facts have a well-known liberal bias.

  80. 80
    Cacti says:

    How dare you use a man’s own written words against him!!1!1

  81. 81
    freelancer says:

    @Undermined Narrative:

    well, that was fast.

  82. 82
    electricgrendel says:

    Shorter Rick Moran: Upon having my words quoted back to me SHUT UP AND SHUT UP YOU SHUT UP!!!!!

  83. 83
    Jrod says:

    C’mon, you know better than to pull a dirty trick like “quoting directly.” You don’t go by the meaning of the words actually written! You feel out what the person really meant, using something that’s like empathy but not as gay. Man-gut-sense, we could call it.

  84. 84
    Robert Waldmann says:

    I’m going to quote the relevant parts of the bill of rights. I will uses ellipses. I will not make a hash of the constitution, but note that one can make a has while quoting by removing necessary context. I have no idea if John Cole made a has of Moran, because I can’t force myself to read the quotes let alone the context.

    OK here’s your constitution

    V “No person shall be … compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself ”
    and
    VI “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right … to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”

    They restrict what the US can do in criminal cases and in prosecutions. The US can compel testimony (with the threat of charging with contempt of court not with the threat of enhanced interrogation) and can question people without an attorney being present. However, such compelled testimony or questioning without counsel must have nothing to do with criminal cases or criminal prosecutions.

    The solution is to have two seperate teams of investigators — the crminal prosecution related team and the team completely isolated from the criminal prosecution.

    It would be perfectly constitutional if one group informed the Times Square dud firecracker lighter that he has the right to remain silent and that anything he said can and would be used etc. while the other team said “we’re the other team. Anything so say to us can’t be used in a court of law. You do not have a right to have an attorney present during questioning. We can’t tell the Miranda team or prosecutors or anyone anything which might help them build a case against you or that case building will be fruit of the poisoned tree.” This is done regularly. It is called “use immunity.” Team B and a judge (or a committe of the house, the senate or both) can compel the guy to talk (with the threat of holding him in contempt).

    Remember Ollie North was compelled to testify. He got off because the egomaniacs insisted on televising his testimony and so there was no way to prevent it from indirectly influencing his jury.

    Also note. 5th and 6th amendment rights are not restricted to citizens. It is not easy to make this clearer than by writing “no person”

  85. 85
    Corner Stone says:

    @Erik Vanderhoff:

    FTMTFW!

    Do you have an extra T in there by any chance?

  86. 86
    Cacti says:

    Perhaps Moran could enlighten us on how the Government is able to “waive” this man’s rights.

  87. 87
    Zifnab says:

    I’m well aware Rick is against torture, but I have no idea how I made a hash of his writing. I quoted him.

    You are either with the the correct interpretors or you are WITH THE TERRORISTS!

  88. 88
    anonymous says:

    Rick needs to spend more time with his hugbox.

  89. 89
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @FormerSwingVoter: @kay:

    Notice how he needs an “excuse” to act illegally? He uses “excuse”. He wants to anyway.

    What JR, Kay, and FSW said. I read Moran’s post. He’s very, very scared, and wants someone to give him a defensible (in his mind) reason to abandon his anti-torture stance, but he’s not there yet. Like my pal Dickie Cohen, he wants some therapeutic violence. I have to say, the fact that he’s at least clinging to his principles, however reluctantly, makes him a better person than the WaPo’s “liberal” columnist.

  90. 90
    slag says:

    I’m well aware Rick is against torture, but I have no idea how I made a hash of his writing. I quoted him.

    I’m pretty sure he made the hash. By quoting him, you made the hashish.

  91. 91
    robertdsc says:

    The whole thing is grotesque.

  92. 92
    Comrade Luke says:

    I can’t believe that we’re at the point where actually following the Bill of Rights makes you a leftist partisan hack.

  93. 93

    As is his wont – and the wont of other excessively ideological dimwits on both sides…

    Jeez, project much, Moran?

    that whole piece is intellectual masturbation at its highest form.

    ETA: Sorry, I just heard Brownie on Hardball saying the Obama administration was slow in responding to the oil spill. Dammit, where are my rusty farm implements!

  94. 94
    Bubblegum Tate says:

    I have no idea how I made a hash of his writing. I quoted him.

    These situatons always make me think of this exchange from The Simpsons:

    Chief Wiggum: Alright smart guy, where’s the fire?
    Homer Simpson: Over there. [Homer points to a fire at the police station]
    Chief Wiggum: Okay, you just bought yourself a 317: Pointing out police stupidity.

    As a good rule of thumb, bear in mind that when wingnuts start screeching about “taking my words out of context” or “misrepresenting my argument” or some such, most of the time, they’re really accusing you of committing a 317: Pointing out wingnut stupidity.

  95. 95
    slag says:

    FWIW, I know very little about Rick Moran (intentionally), but what I got from this post alone was that he wasn’t on the torture bandwagon but preferred to play footsie with it by putting it on the same level as people who think of the Bill of Rights as more than just a good idea.

    If that’s making a hash of his writing, then you are guilty. But I strongly suspect you are not guilty. In this particular instance, anyway.

  96. 96
    AhabTRuler says:

    By quoting him, you made the hashish.

    Then smoke or pass. You’re bogarting.

  97. 97
    patrick II says:

    Rick Moran, 5/4/10, at Rightwing Nuthouse:

    And yet, this is one instance where the “ticking bomb” scenario might very well be a reality.

    Rick Moran, 5/4/10, slightly later in response to John Cole:

    As for the “ticking bomb scenario,” I have written extensively about how the professionals do not believe it could ever happen.

    Me, 5/4/10, even later:

    Huh?

  98. 98
    Mike Kay says:

    This is one of those days when I want to punch evey firebagger and puma in the face for saying obama is worst than bush.

  99. 99

    To be excessively fair to Rick Moron he did seem to try to present “both sides” as though they were somehow equal in a rather disjointed and stupid manner.

    Excuse me while I laugh at you clowns who find their particular number of the BOR as disposable and scream about another being marginalized. R&L such behavior makes you an authoritarian clod seeking an impossible security through a document dedicated to the counter proposal.

  100. 100
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Mike Kay: That is like saying it is one of those days that ends in a “y”.

  101. 101
    slag says:

    @AhabTRuler: I’m not big into drugs, so I suspect that starting out with Moran-derived hashish would send me on a very bad trip. I’d need a starter drug. Like whatever Sullivan’s smoking.

  102. 102
    Svensker says:

    Am I alone here in being proud to hang out with a bunch of excessively ideological dimwits?

  103. 103
    AhabTRuler says:

    Like whatever Sullivan’s smoking.

    Oh, I am sure he gets the good bud. OTOH, the myopic lack of self-awareness is strictly natural phenotypical.

  104. 104
    Svensker says:

    @Chuck Butcher:

    Chuck, I usually enjoy your posts, but I have to say you lost me somewhere there. Or, in short: huh?

  105. 105
    AhabTRuler says:

    @Svensker: Heh, as one of my few intelligent Poli-Sci profs said: I have a political philosophy, you have an ideology.

  106. 106

    @arguingwithsignposts:

    He said earlier on another program that Obama was late responding and actually wanted the oil spill so he could stop off shore drilling completely. Because everyone knows BO is working undercover for ELF. When he’s not a pro drill baby drill corporatist Palin wannabe. In this war, things get confused out there, in the field.

  107. 107
    YellowJournalism says:

    I’m well aware Rick is against torture, but I have no idea how I made a hash of his writing. I quoted him.

    Maybe it was his evil twin brother who said all those other things. Did the writer happen to have an eye patch and/or a nasty scar on his cheek?

  108. 108

    @Svensker:

    huh?

    I find a lack of understanding that the BOR and associated amendments are not only statements about rights that precede government but also a deliberate hamstringing of government in recognition that risk exists in a free society unfathomable.

    Every one of the 10 BOR directly strikes at areas governments prefer to keep control of and to use for control of the population – ie creating a risky proposition. It doesn’t matter whether it is guns, religion, assembly, legal protections or whatever – you screw with that at very real risk to what you take for granted. If you have the least doubt look at what has been done to the Fourth because of the wiggle word “reasonable.”

  109. 109
    The Bearded Blogger says:

    @patrick II: Ah, consistency… not a trait often seen in professional liars…

  110. 110
    Donald G says:

    @Chuck Butcher:

    Excuse me while I laugh at you clowns who find their particular number of the BOR as disposable and scream about another being marginalized. R&L such behavior makes you an authoritarian clod seeking an impossible security through a document dedicated to the counter proposal.

    I must’ve spent too much time doing yardwork out in the sun today because I have to second Svensker’s “Huh?”

  111. 111
    Donald G says:

    @Chuck Butcher:

    I find the lack of understanding that the BOR and associated amendments are not only statements about rights that precede government but also a deliberate hamstringing of government in recognition that risk exists in a free society. Every one of the 10 BOR directly strikes at areas governments prefer to keep control of and to use for control of the population – ie creating a risky proposition. It doesn’t matter whether it is guns, religion, assembly, legal protections or whatever – you screw with that at very real risk to what you take for granted. If you have the least doubtl look at what has been done to the Fourth because of the wiggle word “reasonable.”

    Okay, now I grok you in fullness. Whew.

  112. 112

    @Donald G:
    I suppose that’s the problem with trying to say “in short” rather than being expansive.

  113. 113
    FormerSwingVoter says:

    As is his wont – and the wont of other excessively ideological dimwits on both sides – John Cole exaggerates, takes out of context, and generally makes a hash of my writing.

    JC is “excessively ideological”? I had no idea that being against stupidity was an ideology.

    On a completely different note, I will now precede every criticism of anyone that I make with “As is his wont”.

  114. 114
    Martian Buddy says:

    I think that Rick [the] Moran might be part of a sleeper cell–we ought to violate his fifth and sixth amendment rights, just to be on the safe side. I mean, gosh, what if we don’t and trillions of Americans die?

  115. 115
    Annie says:

    Republicans and teabaggers — We are for the Constitution until we are against it…We, the party of the people, get to chose…

    Lady Sarah — We are for the Constitution until the Constitution stands against “common sense” solutions. Then, we are against it…

  116. 116
    Martian Buddy says:

    Now that I think about it, did any wingnuts suggest that we should revoke “Jihad Jane’s” constitutional rights, or are the rules different for white women than they are for brown men?

  117. 117
    Mike Kay says:

    @Martian Buddy: go one better, they never suggested stripping the rights of McVeigh, the atlanta olympic bomber, or the terrorist who killed Dr Tiller.

  118. 118
    EthylEster says:

    It goes on like that for what seems like pages

    That’s how you know for sure it’s the work of Rick Moran.

  119. 119
    jibeaux says:

    I’m sure you misquoted him, John. CHECK THE KERNING!!!!

    I know it doesn’t really fit, but nor does it get old, now does it?

  120. 120
    mikefromtexas says:

    I still say he mispells his last name.

  121. 121
    Sly says:

    I clearly remember this same debate swirling around the public consciousness when many people insisted that members of the militia and white nationalist movements be denied their constitutional rights after Oklahoma City.

    Oh wait. That actually didn’t happen.

    I wonder why.

  122. 122
    chopper says:

    moran lives up to his name. keep it up, cole. moran, you’re a choad. an incredible choad. your backtracking is just passive aggressive attempts at being a dick.

    that is all.

  123. 123

    @Bottom Of The Gene Pool: OK, you made me laugh heartily, so thank you for that. Much appreciated.

  124. 124
    Kevin says:

    His response reminds me of something Amanda at Pandagon remarked about, recently: the I’m “Just Asking Questions” excuse. If you frame your idiocy as milquetoast academic-y sounding hogwash, then you can (1) include enough plausible deniability to stay teflon and (2) still defend an asstacular, fact-free position.

  125. 125
    Bill Murray says:

    @Mike Kay: Hey don’t forget William Krar and Nathan Bedford Forrest

  126. 126
    Brick Oven Bill says:

    This NEVER would have happened had they not cancelled 24!

  127. 127
    goatchowder says:

    @AhabTRuler: Is that all it takes to make hashish? Damn, I want some now.

  128. 128
    Batocchio says:

    Funny, he sure seems to advocate torture in his actual post, or at least consider it. Perhaps both his writing and his thinking could benefit from being clearer.

  129. 129
    Erik Vanderhoff says:

    @Corner Stone: I do. Woe is me.

  130. 130
    grumpy realist says:

    Maybe I could drop my casebook of Constitutional Law on his head…

    Would someone please finish inventing a time machine so we can send these idiots back to the time of the Star Chamber? If they want lack of Due Process and unsupported accusations, we’ll give it to them.

    Heck, the Inquisition had more due process than what this nitwit wants to have!

    Rick Moran== the modern Titus Oates.

  131. 131

    If the Los Suns were wearing their uniforms to celebrate Cinco De Mayo, I would be all for it. *

  132. 132

    If the Los Suns were wearing their uniforms to celebrate Cinco De Mayo, I would be all for it. `

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] is his wont – and the wont of other excessively ideological dimwits on both sides – John Cole exaggerates, takes out of context, and generally makes a hash of my […]

Comments are closed.