Not sure if you’re following the comments in John’s post on some principled, Burkean winger law prof’s cri de coeur about the liberal bias of the American Bar Association. I’ll summarize: the guy whines that the ABA says more Obama nominees should be confirmed but it never said more Bush nominees should be confirmed
Since both sides do it, nominate unqualified people or obstruct qualified people, or whatever bad thing “it” is in this case, voilà, the ABA’s statement is proof of teh librul bias.
Some other principled Burkean winger law prof showed up to make this argument:
I’m surprised at the sloppiness in a post accusing someone else of being sloppy. President Obama has made judicial nominations at a far slower rate than his predecessors. Nonetheless, the rate of confirmation of his nominees is comparable (slightly slower for district courts, slightly quicker for appellate nominees).
I’m not sure what “nonetheless” is supposed to mean here. It sounds like it means the noble Republican Senate has confirmed the same percentage of nominees even though there were fewer nominees but that clearly makes no sense (though I think it is what he means, nonetheless) since, given that there is genuine work to be done in each confirmation, one would expect a larger number of nominees to cause a larger backlog — and thus, a lower percentage of confirmations.
Also too, if Obama had nominated a lot of judges, those two would undoubtedly argue “well, you can’t expect them to confirm too quickly, because he flooded the system blah blah blah overreach blah blah blah fiat nominations.”
I realize there’s a temptation to see Volokh Conspiracy as decent and honest because they oppose torture and executing innocent people (I’m guessing here as to why people like it, I don’t read the blog though I used to troll it quite successfully) and the front-pagers are the Daniel Plainview Chairs of Legal Ethics at their respective universities. But don’t give in. For one thing, you may think that legal scholarship is an intellectually above-board enterprise but in fact the law reviews are edited by students (I’ll let that sink in for you researchers in the sciences). For another, heh indeedy.
burnspbesq
There is more than one plausible explanation for the Senate’s apparent slowness in acting on judicial nominees. If you choose to believe in Republican partisan obstructionism, I probably won’t try to convince you otherwise.
DougJ
@burnspbesq:
You’ve never convinced me of anything, outside of music, where you’ve made a lot of good points.
burnspbesq
More importantly, Mets 5, DIE YANKEE SCUM 0.
Baud
I don’t read the blog though I used to troll it quite successfully
I’m glad you ended up here.
DougJ
@burnspbesq:
Don’t get me started on inter-league play. It is the work of the devil.
DougJ
@burnspbesq:
You must hate inter-league play too right?
Steeplejack
Is the interleague play going on way longer than in previous years, or am I just being driven mad by the heat? (Are they doing it all at once instead of a couple of different times during the season?) Interleague play serves only to get me (re)agitated about the designated hitter. I think it is an abomination, but if one league is going to have it then probably they both should.
Also, minor typo, cri de coeur, and kudos for correctly accenting your voilà.
burnspbesq
There shouldn’t be. Any blog that provides a forum for Randy Barnett should be nuked from orbit. The guy is willing to watch millions of Americans suffer and die needlessly in order to advance some awfully bizarre notions about the nature of the state and society.
General Stuck
@DougJ:
I only hate interleague play when the home team is in the American League. Because there is nothing “American” about the DH. It is blasphemy in the Church of Baseball, and highly Un American. also too.
DougJ
@burnspbesq:
Thank you.
MattR
@Steeplejack: I think it is more interspersed this year to get the fans ready for the new reality of at least one interleague game every day next year when the Astros move to the American League – putting 15 teams in each league.
Three-nineteen
@burnspbesq: So we don’t even get to hear the perfectly reasonable explanation(s)? Is Obama nominating Stalin himself? Are all the nominees born in Kenya? Did he nominate Bork again and double jeopardy applies?
Sorry, even though I am not a lawyer (eemom RIP) (not really) I would like to hear these reasons.
Three-nineteen + 4
gwangung
@General Stuck: I like the DH.
Aw, man…that means I’m persona non grata around here, now, aren’t I?
burnspbesq
@DougJ:
I could do without interleague play, but it’s here to stay, and as long as it’s here to stay I’m going to honor the memory of my grandfather the Giants fan by hating on the abomination that is the Yankees.
DougJ
@Steeplejack:
Thanks for the edit.
General Stuck
@gwangung:
LOL, consider it a mulligan. Most of us are fake persona – non grata :)
burnspbesq
@Three-nineteen:
You can slice those data a lot of different ways. Adler’s spin on the data, as set forth in his responses to Cole, is not something I find laughable. And in fairness, the ABA (of which I have been a member for at least the last 25 years) has occasionally been guilty of taking sides.
But I find partisanship to be supported by more, and more reliable, evidence than any competing hypothesis.
General Stuck
@efgoldman:
I just like seeing pitchers strike out. It’s the way gawd meant it to be.
Lee Hartmann
the law reviews are edited by students (I’ll let that sink in for you researchers in the sciences.
sort of like the Astrophysical Journal, only a little better.
Linnaeus
@efgoldman:
Yeah, I have a hard time understanding the reverence for 8-man lineups.
burnspbesq
ETA: Goodwin Liu is the clinching data point for me. There is no fucking way on God’s green Earth that you can argue with a straight face that that guy is not qualified to sit on the Ninth Circuit.
Baud
@General Stuck: I like seeing pitchers get RBIs. It’s even more fun.
Jewish Steel
@gwangung:
Not to this White Sox fan you’re not. I like the the DH just fine. It’s one of the things that makes our league fun.
Roger Moore
@burnspbesq:
Given the number of secret holds and the Republicans more or less admitting that they’re engaging in partisan obstructionism on many of the judges, I’d like to hear a plausible alternative explanation.
ETA: Reading more, it looks as if we’re actually in agreement, so I apologize if this sounds like I’m disagreeing with your opinion.
DougJ
@burnspbesq:
Thanks for weighing in on this. I often don’t agree with you on these matters, but you always bring a lot of information. I appreciate that.
Three-nineteen
@burnspbesq: Interesting. So you think Kerr’s post is plausible but not true?
Let me clarify: my understanding of the previous administration’s difficulty with judicial nominees is this: Dems were blocking a lot of them on ideological grounds, then the “Gang of Whatever” happened, then nominations went through at a slow but defendable pace. Obama’s nominees are still stuck at “ideological reasons”. Am I close to being right in your opinion?
Three-nineteen + 4 1/12
bk
I’m an attorney. And most of the blogs written by attorneys make me embarrassed to admit it. The asshole from Cornell; Glenn Reynolds; Bainbridge; on and on and on and on.
El Cid
If there are some number of nominees named but no votes for or against confirmation, certainly a President could continue to introduce new nominations.
This, however, would seem to be a political and not a practical act. Having a longer list of nominees not being voted upon in practical terms only increases the backlog of nominations not acted upon, unless one wished to argue that doing so caused a political environment which would speed up Senatorial action. (I don’t think it would. Republicans don’t give a flying fuck.)
In addition, being nominated for some high position (i.e., judge) involves costs upon the person nominated, and not everyone can afford to or will choose to hang about for whatever indeterminate amount of time it might take for a Republican Senate bloc whose leadership and allies avowedly declare their opposition to Obama’s nominations as a thing in itself to decide to plow through the several or several dozen individuals further up the line etc.
Especially when that time will likely be never, as in, wait to see if Democrats ever get 80 Senators or whatever.
lamh35
Sandusky verdict reached. Waiting for results to be read now.
Roger Moore
@gwangung:
I’m not fond of the DH, but I can accept that it’s a valid part of baseball. Of course, I’m the kind of fan who likes to try outthinking the manager, so I enjoy the question about when to pinch hit, when to try to force the other manager to pull his pitcher for a pinch hitter, etc. I can understand why people don’t like seeing one position be a nearly automatic out, and why they might like the alternative strategic choices a DH presents.
David Koch
any bets on the Sandusky verdict?
MattR
@David Koch:
I bet there will be outrage by some people afterwards.
(EDIT: I also bet that he will be found guilty on at least one charge and not guilty on at least one charge, though I am less confident about this prediction)
SiubhanDuinne
@DougJ: This this this.
Raven
@SiubhanDuinne: Braves up 2-0 in the 5th after a rain delay at Fenway.
lamh35
@MattR: it’s 48 counts. there is gonna be at least one guilty verdict…even money says.
David Koch
catherine crier is pretty milfy.
MattR
@lamh35: That’s why it is probably a safe bet he will be convicted of at least one and will manage to get off on at least one. Completely off the top of my head and having not followed details of the trial, I will say 42 guilty, 6 not.
(EDIT: OTOH, it is a near certainty that someone will complain about the verdict for one reason or another)
TR
And in fairness, the ABA (of which I have been a member for at least the last 25 years) has occasionally been guilty of taking sides.
Occasionally? Well, seeing how the two sides have clearly been exactly the same, always and forever, in the quality of judges nominated then any evidence of taking sides must be librul bias.
Because Harold Carswell, Clarence Thomas, and Harriet Myers were totally as qualified as Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan, right?
Or maybe you’re just the ghost of Roman Hruska?
burnspbesq
@Three-nineteen:
Close enough
JPL
@Raven: This game is a win/win for me, although I do lean one way more than the other.
May Sandusky rot in jail.. btw
SiubhanDuinne
@Raven:
Yeah, that’s good and I’m happy, but Braves had a 4-0 lead over Blue Jays a couple of weeks ago in Atlanta, ended up losing 12-4. Never be complacent when you’re ahead; never give up when you’re behind.
There’s not much nice to say about FTFY, but they did give us Yogi Berra and his timeless observation “It ain’t over ’til it’s over.”
Raven
@SiubhanDuinne: Um, something gave you the impression that I thought the game was over?
Roger Moore
@El Cid:
That seems like it would only be an issue if the nominations have to be voted on in the order they’re made, which AFAIK is not the case. Otherwise, non-controversial nominations could be pushed through while the controversial ones are obstructed.
That’s important because nominations for District judges are traditionally made with very strong input from the Senators from that District. Judges in states with two senators from the opposite party from the President are likely to be relatively non-controversial. In that case, the President might withhold nominations in those states until his other nominees were voted on as a tit-for-tat, so they will have some pain of their own in return for their refusal to play ball.
MattR
And now to bitch about my white people problem – F’in Comcast added channels over 999 so now I have to remember to hit zero before the three digit channels or hit enter afterwards. Such a minor thing, but so damn annoying.
Raven
@MattR: So make them favorites.
Violet
How long before the Sandusky verdict is announced?
burnspbesq
@TR:
Comprehension. Fail. You assumed that my comment about the ABA taking sides referred only to judicial nominations. It didn’t .
Raven
@Violet: MSNBC is there live.
MattR
@Violet: I thought I heard someone say 20 minutes but that was a few minutes ago.
Southern Beale
My neighbor Emmylou Harris has her Obama-Biden campaign signs up in her yard. Prompted me to put mine up, too.
So, that happened.
Raven
@Southern Beale: The Sweetheart of the Rodeo. . .
Violet
@Raven:
I’ve got it on, but didn’t get any sense of how long it will be–20 minutes or two hours or whatever.
Violet
@MattR:
Thanks. I thought I saw that but wasn’t sure. It’s been half an hour since the news broke, I think.
Raven
@Violet: Yea, I don’t think you ever can tell. I’ve been on a number of juries and there is so much bullshit that it boggles the mind.
Maude
@Violet:
We don’t know.
MattR
@efgoldman: I bet there is a setting I can change. But then I have to remember to hit exit everytime I start to change the channel and then change my mind or mistype :) The thing is the 800’s are currently the HD channels, the 900s are pretty much unused and they just added about a dozen new HD channels spread from 1200-1650. I am sure I’ll get used to it in about a week, but for now I’ll bitch.
Raven
Something happenin
But we don’t know what it is
Raven
45 guilty
MattR
Verdicts have been announced in the courtroom. Reporters flowing out now. At least I saw Jeremy Schapp.
ETA – 45 guilty charges
lamh35
45 out of 48 counts guilty.
Violet
GUILTY 45 of 48 counts.
Three-nineteen
@burnspbesq: Thanks for the reply. I like to think I have some experience in a law-adjacent field (interpreting FDA regs and inspection results), but that’s obviously not a direct substitute.
As for the MLB, the DL is fucking stupid but probably constitutional, you can do it but it compromises the original intent — everyone was assumed to play the entire game.
As for Sandusky – it can’t be good for him that the verdict comes so soon – and IMHO, he needs to be convicted.
Three-nineteen +5
El Cid
@Roger Moore:
Except that right now it’s beign argued that what had previously been seen as “non-controversial” nominations are subject to the same dynamic.
And no one has to be literally in some chronological position on a list, just that if some Senator or group of Senators are slow-walking it with one, they’ll do it with two, or three, or 10, or 24, or 50.
We’d be dealing with a much saner country right now if there was a Republican Party which was willing to divide the ‘non-controversial’ issues from the ‘controversial’ ones.
DougJ
@Southern Beale:
Is she really your neighbor? I love her music.
SiubhanDuinne
Guilty Sandusky.
JPL
@SiubhanDuinne: 45 of 48 counts.. wow..we won’t see him for 400 years..
David Koch
Man, this verdict is gonna kill Paterno.
Violet
Holy crap. There he is on TV in handcuffs. Wow. Didn’t think we’d see that.
Maude
@SiubhanDuinne:
The victims have justice.
Roger Moore
@Three-nineteen:
Ugh. I’ve had to add dealing with the FDA to my list of job skills, and I don’t envy anyone who has to do it full time. cGMP is a major PITA.
Martin
@lamh35:
ACTIVIST JUDGES!
Baud
I wonder what the 3 not guilty counts were.
Raven
While this is justice this is some sad shit.
scav
That’s a solid chunk.
j
O/T, but Sandusky was found guilty of 45 of the 48 charges. He is looking at a MINIMUM of 60 years in prison. He is currently 69 years old.
MattR
@Baud: I assume they were charges related to some of the victims who did not testify. One of the ESPN analysts made the point that it shows the jury took seriously the idea of reasonable doubt for each charge.
Violet
@Raven: Yeah, it’s just tragic all the way around.
Alison
Ed Schultz saying it’s a minimum of 60 years. Good.
I just hope this gives at least a tiny bit of justice or closure or something to his victims. At least they now know they were heard and listened to and believed. It’s small, but…it’s something, I hope.
Raven
@Violet: I mean what the fuck are people cheering and whoo-hooing about? Fucking morons.
JPL
@Baud: one not guilty on victim 2..the one mcqueary saw because of confusion in his testimony, one against 5 and one against 6. Each victim had multiple counts though. It sounds as though the jury was thorough. Personally, I would have walked in and said guilty on all counts.
burnspbesq
So Sandusky got all the due process he was entitled to, and a fair trial by a jury of his peers. Now we can bury him under the jail for a very long time. Happy now, Clime Acts?
P.S. to the lynch mob: this doesn’t change the fact that you were wrong last fall.
lamh35
Personally, if any of the Penn State officials knew this man was doing this for years and did nothing to stop it or told no one something should be done about that too.
Raven
@lamh35: Yea, this is only the beginning.
honus
@Roger Moore: I’m not fond of the DH, but I accept that it’s part of baseball. Just not a valid part of baseball. Of course, I think the whole American League is only marginally a valid part of baseball.
Any way, after he analyzes the ACA ruling Monday, I want Burns to explain to me why it’s OK to hate on the Yankees but not Duke. They both wear blue, same as Kentucky.
Mnemosyne
Now I almost regret that our little pedophile-defending friend got himself banned since he was confidently repeating a rumor before Sandusky’s trial began that the prosecutors were going to drop the charges for lack of evidence.
Note I say “almost,” and really only for the entertainment value of watching him try to walk his prediction back while simultaneously declaring that he was right and we were totally wrong.
j
@lamh35: The U will be sued out of existence. The football program is toast, and the Big 10 will probably kick them out.
Happy Valley will be just a small Agriculture school, if the was a God.
Violet
@Alison: He never looked to me like he understood why what he did was wrong. That Costas interview gave me the same impression. He just always looked to me like he was so confused as to why any of this would be wrong. Makes me wonder if he experienced abuse as a child and never understood that what was done to him was wrong, or something.
Not that that excuses anything he did. It just adds to the sadness and tragedy of the whole thing.
Maude
@Raven:
And will never be over for his victims.
gwangung
@honus: OK, if not for liking the DH, but saying I sorta kinda like Duke will certainly make me persona non grata.
As far as Sandusky goes: Good.
Alison
@Violet: Plenty of pedophiles really do not think what they’re doing is wrong. They don’t consider it abuse – they really believe they “love” their victims and that there is nothing wrong with the relationship. I can’t say if that was his way of thinking, but it’s definitely not uncommon among them. It’s pretty terrifying.
TR
@burnspbesq:
So I fail at comprehension for not reading your mind? Blow it out your ass, numb nuts.
Southern Beale
I don’t know who this Nick Gillespie person on Bill Maher is but he’s doing the same right wing talk show thing of NEVER SHUTTING THE FUCK UP SO SOMEONE ELSE COULD TALK.
I swear they must all be trained to do that, to be domineering and bullying on every panel discussion. What an ass.
Another Halocene Human
@MattR: Nooooo! Booooo! Hisssss! keep that filthy NL team out of my AL!
Nothing is sacred anymore, innit?
MattR
@Southern Beale: Rachel is doing a pretty good job countering him – both getting the time to speak and then making a good coutnerargument to his crap.
Violet
@Alison: Yeah, that’s the impression I have of him. I just don’t think he thought he was ever doing anything wrong. That kind of body language, plus what he said on his interview with Costas, is what left me with the impression that he very likely did abuse the kids and didn’t know what he did was wrong. Did you notice that slight shake of his head as he left the courthouse tonight? I just don’t think he understands why he was found guilty.
At some level he had to know it was wrong because he was hiding it, but on some other level I don’t think he knew it was wrong. I don’t know….just awful all the way around. I’m glad the victims have some justice. And if this wakes people up so they actually listen to kids, that will be a good thing.
burnspbesq
@honus:
The Yankees are evil. Duke is good. SATSQ.
freelancer
@Southern Beale:
Nick Gillespie is the Fonzi of Freedom. An editor of Reason.com who is the poster-boy for smug, idiotic glibertarianism.
Mnemosyne
@Violet:
I think he kinda-sorta gets that other people think it’s wrong, so he has to hide it from them, but he does not and will never understand that taking advantage of kids who trust him is intrinsically wrong.
As Alison said, it’s one of the marks of a true pedophile — they really think that the relationships they have with these kids are romantic “true love” and can’t see how the power differential poisons everything.
Steeplejack
@Southern Beale:
Nick Gillespie is none other than the “Fonzie of Freedom,” Cole’s leather-jacketed bête noire at Reason magazine.
JPL
@Baud: here’s the entire list
link
SiubhanDuinne
@Raven:
@Violet:
Yes. No matter how awful the offense nor how justly deserved the sentence, I am always conscious of the screaming psychic pain a Sandusky (or any criminal) must be in. It takes nothing away from the horrors his victims endured to note that he was being chewed up by his own demons. What a sad and awful situation for everyone.
honus
@gwangung: I used to kinda sorta like Duke, even had a couple of cousins go there, but the demise of Bones McKenna and the ascendance of Dick Vitale kind of ruined it for me.
SiubhanDuinne
@Raven:
@Violet:
Yes. No matter how awful the offense nor how justly deserved the sentence, I am always conscious of the screaming psychic pain a Sandusky (or any criminal) must be in to have done what he did. It takes nothing away from the horrors his victims endured to note that he was being chewed up by his own demons. What a sad and awful situation for everyone.
Baud
@JPL:
Interesting. Thanks.
honus
@gwangung: I used to kinda sorta like Duke, even had a couple of cousins go there, but the demise of Bones McKenna and the ascendance of Dick Vitale kind of ruined it for me.
SiubhanDuinne
@Raven:
@Violet:
Yes. No matter how awful the offense nor how justly deserved the sentence, I am always conscious of the screaming psychic pain a Sandusky (or any criminal) must be in to have done what he did. It takes nothing away from the horrors his victims endured to note that he was being chewed up by his own demons. What a sad and awful situation for everyone.
SiubhanDuinne
@Raven:
@Violet:
Yes. No matter how awful the offense nor how justly deserved the sentence, I am always conscious of the screaming psychic pain a Sandusky (or any criminal) must be in to have done what he did. It takes nothing away from the horrors his victims endured to note that he was being chewed up by his own demons. What a sad and awful situation for everyone.
SiubhanDuinne
@Raven:
@Violet:
Yes. No matter how awful the offense nor how justly deserved the sentence, I am always conscious of the screaming psychic pain a Sandusky (or any criminal) must be in to have done what he did. It takes nothing away from the horrors his victims endured to note that he was being chewed up by his own demons. What a sad and awful situation for everyone.
Violet
@Mnemosyne: Yeah, that’s the thing–they just don’t get that it’s wrong, even when they understand that other people think it’s wrong. I don’t know if they think it’s “true love” but I think they think they have “special relationships” with the kids. Ugh. Makes me sick.
freelancer
@Steeplejack:
You owe me a Coke.
Baud
@JPL:
Interesting. Thanks.
honus
@burnspbesq: And you’re the one who always accuses John of oversimplified, naive and patently wrong analyses.
SiubhanDuinne
@Raven:
@Violet:
Yes. No matter how awful the offense nor how justly deserved the sentence, I am always conscious of the screaming psychic pain a Sandusky (or any criminal) must be in to have done what he did. It takes nothing away from the horrors his victims endured to note that he was being chewed up by his own demons. What a sad and awful situation for everyone.
SiubhanDuinne
Holy shit. Dunno what happened. Sorry for all those duplicate posts. FYWP.
Cacti
-Eugene Volokh
hamletta
@Violet: Kinda makes me think Sandusky was abused himself, if he thinks it’s a normal thing—and he acts like he does, like he doesn’t quite understand why people are so upset. He wrote these boys love letters, and cried when they rejected him.
Kinda makes me feel sorry for him on some level. And before you jump down my throat, remember the outrage against Mike McQueary? He grew up with Sandusky’s sons. It’s not unthinkable that he was a victim himself.
Just horrible all around.
burnspbesq
@TR:
No, you fail at comprehension by seeing things in what I wrote that are Fig Newtons of your imagination. That’s on you, not me.
burnspbesq
@honus:
The trick is knowing what really is simple and what isn’t.
sneezy
@Southern Beale:
Good for her! Tying this into another topic, she loves baseball and hates the DH.
Horrendo Slapp (formerly Jimperson Zibb, Duncan Dönitz, Otto Graf von Pfmidtnöchtler-Pízsmőgy, Mumphrey, et al.)
I always feel a little bit bad for people like Sandusky. I’m glad he’s going to be in jail for the rest of his life, but people like him are nearly always (as far as I understand it) people who have been molested themselves earlier in life. In all truth, I feel less anger toward Sandusky, or all those Catholic child molestors, than I do toward the people at Penn State who looked away for 15 years or whatever it was while Sandusky was running wild, or the turds in the Catholic church who shuffled the molesters around rather than handing them over to the police. In some ways, I suspect Sandusky and the Catholic child molesters didn’t have an awful lot of control over what they did. I don’t mean to excuse them, but I think it’s worth acknowledging. The people who let these guys get away with what they did for so long did have control over what they were doing.
Steeplejack
@freelancer:
Why, I oughta . . . [shakes fist]
Rex Everything
That is pretty weak sauce, dude.
J.W. Hamner
Whoops wrong thread!
DougJ
@Rex Everything:
Best you can do?
Rex Everything
@DougJ:
“What’re you gonna do, bleed on me?”
Jamie
It should be kept in mind that Eugene Volokh endorsed state sponsored torture-execution in Iran. He walked it back after a lot of approbrium from peers. Google “site:Volokh.com Iran twice a day”