Tuesday Open Thread [3.12.13]
More facts for the Fact Averse.
Peter Beinart is now convinced that “Jeb Bush will never seriously challenge for the presidency—because to seriously challenge for the presidency, a Republican will have to pointedly distance himself from Jeb’s older brother”:
No Republican will enjoy credibility as a deficit hawk unless he or she acknowledges that George W. Bush squandered the budget surplus he inherited. No Republican will be able to promise foreign-policy competence unless he or she acknowledges the Bush administration’s disastrous mismanagement in Afghanistan and Iraq. It won’t be enough for a candidate merely to keep his or her distance from W. John McCain and Mitt Romney tried that, and they failed because the Obama campaign hung Bush around their neck every chance it got. To seriously compete, the next Republican candidate for president will have to preempt that Democratic line of attack by repudiating key aspects of Bush’s legacy. Jeb Bush would find that excruciatingly hard even if he wanted to. And as his interviews Sunday make clear, he doesn’t event want to try.
Former Senator Joseph “He’s with us on everything but the war” Lieberman joined the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute yesterday. President Eisenhower once said that nominating Earl Warren as Chief Justice was the “biggest damn fool mistake” he ever made as President. Choosing Joe Lieberman as his running mate was President Al Gore’s second worst decision. His first? Shunning Bill Clinton during the 2000 campaign. It is sometimes funny how history plays out. If Gore had actually got to serve as President, and was reelected in 2004 as was likely, then guess who would might have been our likely nominee in 2008: Vice President Joe Lieberman. Or does Hillary beat him in the primary?
This is kinda cool, but how is it that a former President is walking the city without at least one Secret Service agent? I know they can refuse it, but still.
I assume the objective of your deficit comparison is to paint the current deficit (along with the current administration) in a brighter light.
You posted a budget deficit comparison beginning with the first full year (2009) of the latest financial panic. Prior to that, the budget deficit was routinely near or less than half what it is now.
Now, don’t get me wrong, government deficits are bad, period- I’m no defender of the economic policies of 2002-2009 or the Bush administration- however trying to make the current deficit look better by comparing it to an outlier year is foolish at best and manipulative at worst.
What’s not on the comparison you posted (nominal dollars/inflation adjusted dollars):
2002 $157.8 Billion Deficit $201.02 Billion Deficit
2003 $377.6 Billion Deficit $470.82 Billion Deficit
2004 $413 Billion Deficit $501.21 Billion Deficit
2005 $318 Billion Deficit $373.24 Billion Deficit
2006 $248 Billion Deficit $282.14 Billion Deficit
2007 $161 Billion Deficit $178.1 Billion Deficit
2008 $459 Billion Deficit $488.82 Billion Deficit
Good day.
“don’t get me wrong, government deficits are bad, period”
Is that a “fact”? Clearly not.
The point, sir, is that the deficit is not exploding as Republicans and conservatives repeatedly and falsely claim. Instead, it has in fact been cut in half over the last four years. Yes, it is still high, but there is no need to eliminate all social programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid like Paul Ryan suggested today in his budget. Instead, we should continue to cut spending and waste and raise revenue in a balanced way to close that gap.
And as Geezer says, deficits are not bad. Sometimes they are necessary, like when fighting a war, or dealing with the worst financial crisis and recession since the Great Depression. Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush certainly enjoyed deficits (I refer to him since you have disclaimed George W. Bush and Dick Cheney).
JTFM, anybody who learned the principles of economics from Rush or Fox should keep their ignorance to themselves.
Last night Sussex County elected their new Executive Committee.
SA: So who won?
Defense attorney’s in Ohio are claiming that if you’re too drunk to say “no” it means “yes”:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2291926/She-didnt-affirmatively-say-Silence-means-consent-according-defense-Ohio-high-school-rape-trial-passed-drunken-teenage-girl-sexually-assaulted-multiple-football-players.html
someone tell me what’s wrong castrating these little pukes on national television…. without anesthesia
I’d like to say I’m shocked by this, but I’m not. I wrote a post on this a while back and it seemed obvious that this town has a big problem. It took a village to create this.
Beinart makes a good argument with regard to Jeb.
Stubenville Ohio… where you deserve whatever your tiny little prick wants if you can run fast and hit hard.
There is an abundance of evidence that the girl was drunk, but little or no evidence that she was raped. I think everyone agrees there is no physical evidence, so it all hinges on whether there were eyewitnesses, whether they were really in a position to see anything or not, what are willing to testify to, and whether the judge buys it or not.
Mitch Crane is the new Sussex Dem chairman.
puck according to the NYT, there were plenty of witnesses:
Some people at the party taunted her, chanted and cheered as a Steubenville High baseball player dared bystanders to urinate on her, one witness testified.
About two hours later, the girl left the party with several Big Red football players, including Mays and Richmond, witnesses said. They stayed only briefly at a second party before leaving for their third party of the night. Two witnesses testified that the girl needed help walking. One testified that she was carried out of the house by Mays and Richmond while she was “sleeping.”
She woke up long enough to vomit in the street, a witness said, and she remained there alone for several minutes with her top off. Another witness said Mays and Richmond were holding her hair back.
Afterward, they headed to the home of one football player who has now become a witness for the prosecution. That player told the police that he was in the back seat of his Volkswagen Jetta with Mays and the girl when Mays proceeded to flash the girl’s breasts and penetrate her with his fingers, while the player videotaped it on his phone. The player, who shared the video with at least one person, testified that he videotaped Mays and the girl “because he was being stupid, not making the right choices.” He said he later deleted the recording.
The girl “was just sitting there, not really doing anything,” the player testified. “She was kind of talking, but I couldn’t make out the words that she was saying.”
At that third party, the girl could not walk on her own and vomited several times before toppling onto her side, several witnesses testified. Mays then tried to coerce the girl into giving him oral sex, but the girl was unresponsive, according to the player who videotaped Mays and the girl.
The player said he did not try to stop it because “at the time, no one really saw it as being forceful.”
At one point, the girl was on the ground, naked, unmoving and silent, according to two witnesses who testified. Mays, they said, had exposed himself while he was right next to her.
Richmond was behind her, with his hands between her legs, penetrating her with his fingers, a witness said.
“I tried to tell Trent to stop it,” another athlete, who was Mays’s best friend, testified. “You know, I told him, ‘Just wait — wait till she wakes up if you’re going to do any of this stuff. Don’t do anything you’re going to regret.’ ”
He said Mays answered: “It’s all right. Don’t worry.”
That boy took a photograph of what Mays and Richmond were doing to the girl. He explained in court how he wanted her to know what had happened to her, but he deleted it from his phone, he testified, after showing it to several people.
Caution: Reports of unconsciousness or mistreatment are NOT evidence of rape, no matter how vulgar, detailed, or numerous they may be. This is the same report I read. There are reports of two eyewitnesses to an act of rape. Let’s see what they testify to and if it holds up.
Caution: The defense is saying the sex was consensual because she didn’t “affirmatively say no.”
“As reported by the Cleveland Trader Madison said: ‘There’s an abundance of evidence here that she was making decisions, cognitive choices.’ ‘She didn’t affirmatively say no,’ he stated.”
and…
“Richmond’s attorney Madison said of the girl: ‘The person who is the accuser here is silent just as she was that night, and that’s because there was consent.'”
That’s their defense.
The issue of consent is a loser for the defense. But is the defense now conceding there was the kind of contact that would constitute rape? That would seem the weakest part of the case.
The “Cleveland Trader” is actually the Plain Dealer newspaper. http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/03/steubenville_rape_trial_will_c.html
puck: Sexual contact of any sort without consent is rape or sexual assault. Consent is what it hinges upon.
Yes, as long as it is established there was sexual contact. If there’s no qualifying contact, it doesn’t matter how drunk or how consenting/unconsenting she was, there’s no rape. I think it’s pretty well understood there was no consent.
So you don’t know either if sexual contact has been proved. If not, then it’s all up to the eyewitness testimomy.
puck, I think the main outrage (for me anyway) here, until they are found guilty, is the town’s reaction of “well, why was she dressed like that and drinking?” when their darling football players were accused of rape. It seems like even the defense is saying there was sexual contact however. Not sure what’s left to prove.
The suspects and their supporters are all guilty of being assholes. However, there is a technical definition for rape, and standards of proof must be met. It is an unusual case because there is no physical evidence, and the victim is not traumatized. Fortunately, it’s not up to the online lynch mob.
Keep in mind that the victim hasn’t said anything. She doesn’t remember.
This case is being tried on witness testimony. Photos, tweets, FB postings, texts, YouTubes, instagrams, etc. being sent around by those standing on the sidelines watching. In fact, if they hadn’t taunted the victim’s parents by sending them photos of their daughter this might have never been discovered.
And Ben is correct. What a disturbing town. Talk about a glimpse into the dysfunction that is Steubenville. Here’s my post on it Remember their assistant coach:
And the head coach:
And the Police Chief:
And the lawyer:
Nice town you have there.
I’m sorry, but how do you know the victim is not traumatized?
That seems like a huge leap from someone cautioning others not to leap.
how do you know the victim is not traumatized?
As one follower of the case put it, “the victim hasn’t said anything. She doesn’t remember. ” I’m sure by now she’s quite traumatized by the media circus.
Photos, tweets, FB postings, texts, YouTubes, instagrams, etc.
I’m sure a lot of casual readers assume this mountain of evidence depicts a rape. None of it does.
You know, the football aspect of this case could have been taken totally off the table if the identity of sex crime suspects were protected in the same way victim identity is protected. Which is something I strongly advocate. Prosecutors LOVE to publish suspect name and photo along with the gory details of the crime, because it taints the jury pool in their favor. But I guess once in a while they get blowback from this technique when the gut turns out to have community support.
I meant “when the guy (suspect) turns out to have community support.”
You’re right puck, but you cant unring the bell.
Now we have another example of football Uber Alles. This is at every level. Steubenville, State College, Pittsburgh… The entire country has a sickness (or at least PA and Ohio). I don’t know HOW football ties into it exactly, (maybe in other countries it is soccer) but we have to reexamine our priorities… make a few harsh examples (public shaming, defunding, criminal charges) of coaches, schools, and communities that allow this to happen. Children are doing this because adults are letting it happen.
Besides, you know our society..even if they had not been outed (anonymously, not by any official) I still think it would have come out that “football players” were implicated.
I’m sure a lot of casual readers assume this mountain of evidence depicts a rape. None of it does.
I’d love to see a link to prove your assertion that digital penetration without consent (which is pretty much documented in the evidence) does not qualify as rape or sexual assault. Until that point what it seems like you’re doing is arguing for a definition of rape so narrow that only penile penetration could count, while I would argue that the introduction of ANY item into a woman’s vagina without her explicit consent meets the standard (as would a number of lesser acts), and that someone who is so drunk as to be non-responsive (also documented in the evidence) is incapable of giving consent.
Just sayin’.
In this case everyone knows identity of everyone due to the bystanders use of social media. This isn’t the prosecutor’s doing.
I’m also having trouble understanding why – when no one here has rendered a verdict on rape – your first reaction (every single time one of these cases comes to light) is to cast doubt on the woman, usually by citing the Duke lacrosse incident. And yes, that is casting doubt. You do know that false rape allegations are extremely rare, and that a portion of retracted charges doesn’t mean that a rape didn’t occur?
And in this case, it isn’t even the alleged victim that brought all of this to light. She isn’t testifying because she doesn’t remember what happened.
Ben says: “Besides, you know our society..even if they had not been outed (anonymously, not by any official) I still think it would have come out that “football players” were implicated.”
I agree, mainly because being a football player in Steubenville gave the accused celebrity status. It’s still a key part of their defense. Good football playing boys vs girl who “posted provocative comments and photographs on her Twitter page over time” and whose online posts “demonstrated that she was sexually active and showed that she was “clearly engaged in at-risk behavior.” Haven’t heard much outcry against that.
Celebrities from all venues use their celebrity in cases such as these, as well. There’s power in national and small town celebrity – power that can be, and is, used for an advantage in the court of public opinion. It is used, quite effectively, to place the accused above the alleged victim – to justify behavior because the alleged victim would obviously be honored by the celebrity agreeing to have sex with them. This dynamic leads to “it can’t be rape” because a girl like that would be lucky to have sex with that guy.
I really would like to stop the myth of false rape accusations. It simply isn’t true.
Here’s a chunk of the Ohio rape stat I found online. I’ve deleted the non-applicable parts so it’s easier to read.
http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2907
2907.02 Rape.
(A)
(1) No person shall engage in sexual conduct with another who is not the spouse of the offender or who is the spouse of the offender but is living separate and apart from the offender, when any of the following applies:
(a) For the purpose of preventing resistance, the offender substantially impairs the other person’s judgment or control by administering any drug, intoxicant, or controlled substance to the other person surreptitiously or by force, threat of force, or deception.
c) The other person’s ability to resist or consent is substantially impaired because of a mental or physical condition or because of advanced age, and the offender knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the other person’s ability to resist or consent is substantially impaired because of a mental or physical condition or because of advanced age.
(2) No person shall engage in sexual conduct with another when the offender purposely compels the other person to submit by force or threat of force.
(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of rape, a felony of the first degree…
Ohio’s def:
(A) “Sexual conduct” means vaginal intercourse between a male and female; anal intercourse, fellatio, and cunnilingus between persons regardless of sex; and, without privilege to do so, the insertion, however slight, of any part of the body or any instrument, apparatus, or other object into the vaginal or anal opening of another. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete vaginal or anal intercourse.
I’d love to see a link to prove your assertion that digital penetration without consent (which is pretty much documented in the evidence) does not qualify as rape or sexual assault.
I’d love to see a link to where I said that. Is there nobody you won’t smear?
If that’s what happened, then it’s rape. Hopefully the court will clear up your “pretty much” part. That’s what courts are for, after all. And jumping to conclusions based on “pretty much” is what blogs are for.
Until that point what it seems like you’re doing is arguing for a definition of rape so narrow
I dare you to show where I said that. Don’t project other people’s arguments onto me. I just asked if contact qualifying as rape had been established under the state’s definition. Because that is probably the first and most important element of proving whether or not a rape occurred.
Something about this kind of outrage clouds people’s minds when it comes to clear thinking about our legal system. Because the legal outcome is actually our only way of knowing, to the extent possible, if a rape occurred or not. The case is sordid enough even without rape.
your first reaction (every single time one of these cases comes to light) is to cast doubt on the woman
*sigh* Here we go again.
Link please, to where I said that. No projection of other people’s arguments, please. I’m casting doubt on the prosecutors and (maybe) on the eyewitnesses, not the girl. Who could doubt her when she doesn’t remember and hasn’t said anything? What’s to doubt?
“I really would like to stop the myth of false rape accusations. It simply isn’t true.”
In this case it doesnt seem to be true. The Duke Lacrosse team would beg to differ whether it “never” happens. But here we have pictures of the child’s unconscious body being dragged around. There are apparent confessions by the rapists….sorry, “alleged” rapists. I think acknowledging that a false accusation CAN happen, and HAS happened (to a school sports team during a party) allows for a stronger argument that this is NOT one of those cases.
Here’s one link for you.
It CAN happen, but that doesn’t mean that it DOES ALL THE TIME. I think that’s what Pandora is saying. People make it a possibility when in reality there is a very very very very small number of women falsly accusing. Much more often it’s one of those “grey area” rapes where people apply their own values on a victim (ie. well they were on a date! they’ve had sex before! she just regrets it. she didn’t say no enough times! etc) or much much more common, the women never report their rape at all because they dont think people will believe them.
gee, I wonder why.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/07/the-saddest-graph-youll-see-today/
Your link does not prove what you think it proves. It is consistent with a refusal to jump to conclusions. And if you read my comment at the link, there is no doubt cast on the woman. Search again, and better luck next time.
Remember, the Duke case was more about false accusations from the prosecutor rather than from the woman, for which the prosecutor went to jail.
But you do like citing the Duke lacrosse team.
It is a cautionary tale.
You know what, you go ahead and doubt all you want. The trial has begun and it’s being covered. We’ll all know what evidence they have soon enough.
If there’s a conviction I’m sure you’ll lord it all over us because you waited for all the evidence to come to light. Good for you. It just seems weird you’re so hardcore about it for rape cases. If you do that for white collar and shooting crimes and I just haven’t noticed, my apologies.
I’m done indulging puck like he’s a special snowflake, he’s just trolling.
Here’s another one.
you cant think I was saying it happens “All the time”. I don’t think this is a false accusation. I know it happens far less than the defense in this case will try and assert. But taking an absolute statement that it never happens weakens your position. This case isn’t being decided by a room full of rational enlightened people. You have to assume at least one in 12 people think it’s a real possibility and THAT is who your argument should be aimed at.
Here’s all of them.
Prosecution methods make even guilty pleas unreliable.
I don’t think you were, but just the idea that’s it’s brought up as often as it is (moreso than when other victims report their crimes – nobody is like “was she really mugged?”) perpetuates the idea that it happens much more often that it actualy does.
If we continue to bring it up as a possibility when 99% of the time it isn’t THAT’S the reason that one guy (and yeah, sorry, probably a guy) on the jury thinks it is one. We should be as supportive and believing of rape victims as we are of other crime victims. We should should also take every opportunity like this to educate on the realities of false reports.
If there’s a conviction I’m sure you’ll lord it all over us because you waited for all the evidence to come to light. Good for you. It just seems weird you’re so hardcore about it for rape cases. If you do that for white collar and shooting crimes and I just haven’t noticed, my apologies.
I do it while on juries. You’re welcome.
I’m not blaming to prosecution for that poor guy Puck, I’m blaming his attorney.
ugh you’re insufferable. do you want a medal?
here’s my thoughts.
Clearly, whatever happened this woman was mistreated. And even worse it seems like the town (especially the adults) have really screwed up priorities. I don’t know what happened to her. If the news reports of what happened to her are correct, then it looks like she was raped and I’d like to see someone pay for that. None of us here are in the courtroom and havent’ seen the evidence, so it’s really anybody’s guess as to what they have to prove or disprove that. I just hope that it doesn’t turn into a victim blaming fiasco on the defense’s side. If those guys are innocent (gross but innocent) of rape, then they should have evidence to support that (or contradictions to the prosecution’s evidence) and we’ll find out what happened soon enough.
See how I managed to do that without sounding like a rape apologist? it’s possible.
V, we’re basically agreeing with each other… my point is… from the prosecution standpoint, you can either try to convince someone that false accusations are highly exaggerated OR allow them to be wrong and spend your one chance making them realize this is not one of those cases. Im speaking strictly from the position of getting a conviction. The defense WILL bring up Duke. They have to be ready to say “yeah, that happened… this is not the same thing” rather than “well, statistically………..” This is a society where a plurality of people don’t believe in evolution. In a scenario like a trial by jury where you only get one chance to put away a scumbag, sometimes you have to swallow a bitter pill to get a better overall result. Should we be making people aware of the reality of false rape accusations? of course! Should one try and make that argument at the possible expense of a rape conviction? I’d say no.
i just dont know why you feel we need to indulge the wrongness to get a conviction. Why do I have to be like “oh this isn’t one of those” instead of “that’s like the ONE TIME it’s ever happened” Why is perpetuating the lie more convincing? I’m not saying you go into statistics to prove your point, but there’s got to be a meaty, juicy, interesting way to get your point across without giving something like that credibility.
@puck
There is an abundance of evidence that the girl was drunk, but little or no evidence that she was raped.
Then
Reports of unconsciousness or mistreatment are NOT evidence of rape, no matter how vulgar, detailed, or numerous they may be.
Actually, according to what was quoted by the Ohio code any “sexual conduct” with her when she was drunk qualifies. You’re splitting hairs in order to defend an untenable position. If “evidence” only qualifies after a judge says it does, then nobody has evidence of rape–ever–until after a ruling at trial.
The common sense meaning of what you wrote is pretty plain–you read a news story that said men were fingering and fondling a woman too drunk or stoned to talk, must less give consent, and then opined that there was “no evidence” that rape had occurred. Now you’re simply trying to run from it.
Im not necessarily saying we NEED to, but if looks like the defense is making headway with that argument, your focus should be on the case at hand. Let them make their false argument to the 12 people who decide the case, then try and use it against them. What’s important here (and when i say “here”, i mean this particular case) is (if they are guilty) punishing the guilty. This is a very hypothetical argument. The defense could utter the words “Duke Lacrosse” and all 12 members of the Jury could cough *bullshit*. In that case absolutely talk about the falseness of that argument. Then explain why this case, like 99% of them, is not that. What’s important is justice in this case.