Support NeoGAF

[Gruco]

Frontline has a great episode on the Willingham story. It's compelling for the forensic evidence reversal alone. Perry comes in towards the end, and is pretty horrific.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/death-by-fire/

 

[empty vessel]

Oh man, I'm falling down the rabbit hole on this execution case in the spare minutes I have today. Why did he refuse a poligraph? (Not that it means anything, but shit if I were facing a needle I'd probably take the damn test on a lark even if I were guilty as shit).

For whatever it's worth (and I usually charge quite a bit for it), take my advice: never, ever, ever, ever take a polygraph test. Besides being junk science, the police don't even use them for the purpose of helping them investigate. They are used for interrogation purposes, i.e., to apply psychological pressure to somebody they already believe (not necessarily based on any reliable evidence) to be guilty to get them to confess. When you're at a police station and you're asked to take a polygraph, you've already failed it.

This stuff has been studied, although hardly anybody is familiar with the research.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0674035313/?tag=neogaf0e-20

Every American should read that book.

 

[polyh3dron]

Yeah a polygraph is basically a Scientology E-Meter with a paper record of the electric resistance.

 

[Jackson50]

Frontline has a great episode on the Willingham story. It's compelling for the forensic evidence reversal alone. Perry comes in towards the end, and is pretty horrific.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/death-by-fire/

Of the innumerable ridiculous aspects of this story, what bemuses me most is the conclusion that the Iron Maiden and Led Zeplin posters were evidence of satanism. I understand it is the Bible Belt. But, please.

 

[elrechazado]

Poll: More say 'blame the GOP' if debt ceiling deal isn't reached

SHUT 'ER DOWN!

Teabag loonies like Bachmann definitely helped push GOP's numbers on this issue. She flat out said to Wolf Blitzer that she has a "No" vote for raising the debt ceiling, at least, for now.

1% of the country even knows what the debt ceiling is. I don't think this is some kind of amazing political issue for either side.

 

[TacticalFox88]

1% of the country even knows what the debt ceiling is. I don't think this is some kind of amazing political issue for either side.

Can't argue with that. People don't put a priority on things they have absolutely no fucking clue about.

 

[state-of-the-art]

The U.S. Supreme Court has thrown out the largest sex discrimination lawsuit in American history — a nationwide class action lawsuit brought against Wal-Mart on behalf of 1.5 million female employees.

The 5-to-4 decision arguably leaves room for smaller lawsuits against Wal-Mart, based on alleged discrimination in a single store, region, or state. But for all practical purposes, Monday's ruling makes any nationwide class action lawsuit impossible.

http://www.npr.org/2011/06/20/137296721/supreme-court-limits-wal-mart-discrimination-case

Disappointing.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

For whatever it's worth (and I usually charge quite a bit for it), take my advice: never, ever, ever, ever take a polygraph test. Besides being junk science, the police don't even use them for the purpose of helping them investigate. They are used for interrogation purposes, i.e., to apply psychological pressure to somebody they already believe (not necessarily based on any reliable evidence) to be guilty to get them to confess. When you're at a police station and you're asked to take a polygraph, you've already failed it.

This stuff has been studied, although hardly anybody is familiar with the research.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0674035313/?tag=neogaf0e-20

Every American should read that book.

To put it more simply never ever talk to the cops at all without a lawyer if you are in anyway thought to be a suspect (you know as opposed to witnessing a car accident or something).

 

[Baraka in the White House]

Another 5-4 ruling. Shocking.

 

[Celsior]

http://www.npr.org/2011/06/20/137296721/supreme-court-limits-wal-mart-discrimination-case

Disappointing.

That was a pretty weak class action suit, saying all female wal-mart employees were discriminated against is impossible.

 

[Gaborn]

http://www.npr.org/2011/06/20/137296721/supreme-court-limits-wal-mart-discrimination-case

Disappointing.

Horrible... journalism. The decision to throw out the case was unanimous. While some aspects of the decision were 5-4 that's complete sensationalism.

 

[mre]

Another 5-4 ruling. Shocking.

Calling this a 5-4 decision is misleading.

Link to decision.

All of the justices agreed with the outcome in this particular case:

The class in this case, I agree with the Court, should not
have been certified under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2).

The other three dissenting justices all joined with Ginsburg. They dissented on the basis that they thought the holding in the case was too broadly restricting on future class action suits.

 

[Gaborn]

Calling this a 5-4 decision is misleading.

Link to decision.

All of the justices agreed with the outcome in this particular case:

The other three dissenting justices all joined with Ginsburg. They dissented on the basis that they thought the holding in the case was too broadly restricting on future class action suits.

Indeed. NPR should issue a correction because they didn't mention that the decision was unanimous at ALL.

 

[state-of-the-art]

Horrible... journalism. The decision to throw out the case was unanimous. While some aspects of the decision were 5-4 that's complete sensationalism.

I think that it is disingenuous to call it sensationalism. The decision to throw out the case based on procedure was unanimous. The 5-4 split was on the issue of whether or not the women were categorically discriminated against, which was the substantive issue of the case.

 

[eznark]

For whatever it's worth (and I usually charge quite a bit for it), take my advice: never, ever, ever, ever take a polygraph test. Besides being junk science, the police don't even use them for the purpose of helping them investigate. They are used for interrogation purposes, i.e., to apply psychological pressure to somebody they already believe (not necessarily based on any reliable evidence) to be guilty to get them to confess. When you're at a police station and you're asked to take a polygraph, you've already failed it.

This stuff has been studied, although hardly anybody is familiar with the research.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0674035313/?tag=neogaf0e-20

Every American should read that book.

No shit, but if I am to get put down in a few days anyway, I would bring in the machine for the hell of it.

 

[Gaborn]

I think that it is disingenuous to call it sensationalism. The decision to throw out the case based on procedure was unanimous. The 5-4 split was on the issue of whether or not the women were categorically discriminated against, which was the substantive issue of the case.

It's sensational journalism because the justices agreed on the outcome - it will go down as a 9-0 decision. And that wasn't mentioned. They made a casual reference to that fact here:

Writing for the five-member court majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that in order to sue as a single class, the women would have to point to a discriminatory policy that affected all of them, and they could not do that. Indeed, Scalia noted that the company has a specific corporate policy against discrimination.

The four dissenting justices — including the court's three female justices — agreed that the lower courts had used the wrong standard in certifying the nationwide class, but they would have sent the case back to the lower courts for a second look at whether the class could be certified using a stricter standard than had been used before.

But from the wording the average reader is going to think it was 5-4 decision and it wasn't. The majority opinion was unanimous in this case. The relief available to the group hoping for class certification was not but that's a separate issue and unrelated to the direct outcome of the case. This sort of lazy, misleading journalism buries the lead on the story which should read "Supreme Court unanimously dismisses class action lawsuit against Walmart"

 

[DasRaven]

Poll: More say 'blame the GOP' if debt ceiling deal isn't reached

SHUT 'ER DOWN!

Matters not. The debt ceiling will be raised. There is no doubt. And not because the people would blame one party or another.
It will be raised because super rich would take most of the damage if it isn't raised and neither of the parties in power would allow that.

That the rest of us are spared is incidental at best.

 

[state-of-the-art]

It's sensational journalism because the justices agreed on the outcome - it will go down as a 9-0 decision. And that wasn't mentioned. They made a casual reference to that fact here:



But from the wording the average reader is going to think it was 5-4 decision and it wasn't. The majority opinion was unanimous in this case. The relief available to the group hoping for class certification was not but that's a separate issue and unrelated to the direct outcome of the case.

You're correct. I read the article again, and it lacks clarification.

 

[mre]

I think that it is disingenuous to call it sensationalism. The decision to throw out the case based on procedure was unanimous. The 5-4 split was on the issue of whether or not the women were categorically discriminated against, which was the substantive issue of the case.

The 5-4 split was based solely on the fact that the dissent felt the majority's ruling would make it more difficult for future class actions to gain certification, because it imparted some of the more stringent requirements of certifying a class under Rule 23(b)(3) onto the prerequisite provision 23(a). The dissent worries that this decision will mean that the requirements of 23(b)(3) must be met in order to certify any class action under 23(b)(1) or (2).

 

[empty vessel]

The other three dissenting justices all joined with Ginsburg. They dissented on the basis that they thought the holding in the case was too broadly restricting on future class action suits.

Judicial activisty.

 

[eznark]

I love the way Politico is phrasing their preliminary hit pieces lately. First they use Daniels' indecision to bring up the embarrassing cuckold story and now they rekindle the rumor of Perry being gay by claiming other people are going to start re-spreading the rumor!

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57381.html

This is brilliant stuff. Reminds me of the "I'm not sayin Sean Hannity killed a stripper" meme.

 

[ElectricThunder]

For whatever it's worth (and I usually charge quite a bit for it), take my advice: never, ever, ever, ever take a polygraph test. Besides being junk science, the police don't even use them for the purpose of helping them investigate. They are used for interrogation purposes, i.e., to apply psychological pressure to somebody they already believe (not necessarily based on any reliable evidence) to be guilty to get them to confess. When you're at a police station and you're asked to take a polygraph, you've already failed it.

This stuff has been studied, although hardly anybody is familiar with the research.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0674035313/?tag=neogaf0e-20

Every American should read that book.

Yep, there was also a solidly entertaining/somber episode of Penn and Teller's Bullshit on this topic---the tests need to be phased out big time to the shit heap with stuff like Phrenology.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Hannity killed a stripper? Holy shiit

 

[Incognito]

I love the way Politico is phrasing their preliminary hit pieces lately. First they use Daniels' indecision to bring up the embarrassing cuckold story and now they rekindle the rumor of Perry being gay by claiming other people are going to start re-spreading the rumor!

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57381.html

This is brilliant stuff. Reminds me of the "I'm not sayin Sean Hannity killed a stripper" meme.

Karl Rove would be proud! I wonder if he knows anything about this particular rumor? Someone should dial up Anne Richards or some Alabama politicians...

 

[Dude Abides]

I love the way Politico is phrasing their preliminary hit pieces lately. First they use Daniels' indecision to bring up the embarrassing cuckold story and now they rekindle the rumor of Perry being gay by claiming other people are going to start re-spreading the rumor!

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57381.html

This is brilliant stuff. Reminds me of the "I'm not sayin Sean Hannity killed a stripper" meme.

The current HuffPo headline is "Rick Perry aids prepped for rumor rehash." Is there a rumor that he has AIDS?

 

[eznark]

The current HuffPo headline is "Rick Perry aids prepped for rumor rehash." Is there a rumor that he has AIDS?

homophobe

 

[Incognito]

If Perry runs, then I think the GE is his to lose. Unemployment will still be high and Perry, like many conservatives, will point to the Texas economy as the shining beacon for Trickle Down economic success. Plus, Texas is already a virtual ATM for Repub candidates.


EDIT: d'oh!

Perry would be utterly destroyed. However, as a long suffering Texan under Rick Perry's 11 year reign, I wish him the best of luck in the GOP primary!

 

[Cyan]

It's sensational journalism because the justices agreed on the outcome - it will go down as a 9-0 decision. And that wasn't mentioned. They made a casual reference to that fact here:



But from the wording the average reader is going to think it was 5-4 decision and it wasn't. The majority opinion was unanimous in this case. The relief available to the group hoping for class certification was not but that's a separate issue and unrelated to the direct outcome of the case. This sort of lazy, misleading journalism buries the lead on the story which should read "Supreme Court unanimously dismisses class action lawsuit against Walmart"

Agreed. I expect better of NPR.

 

[Macam]

Perry would be utterly destroyed. However, as a long suffering Texan under Rick Perry's 11 year reign, I wish him the best of luck in the GOP primary!

There's certainly a party of me that wishes he would just so I could engage in some cathartic Schadenfreude.

I just don't think he's actually going to run since, say what you will, but the words 'Texas governor' alone would easily politically taint him in a way that I suspect would prove hard to shake -- not to mention that with John Huntsman all but confirmed to jump in the race, along with Mitt Romney, there are other governors touting their own records with more appeal to the more moderate and pragmatic side of the Republican primary. Naturally, Ron Paul and Michelle Bachmann will sap the tea party and loonier fringes of the party, so it doesn't really leave Perry much of a platform to really rally around.

 

[elrechazado]

There's certainly a party of me that wishes he would just so I could engage in some cathartic Schadenfreude.

I just don't think he's actually going to run since, say what you will, but the words 'Texas governor' alone would easily politically taint him in a way that I suspect would prove hard to shake -- not to mention that with John Huntsman all but confirmed to jump in the race, along with Mitt Romney, there are other governors touting their own records with more appeal to the more moderate and pragmatic side of the Republican primary. Naturally, Ron Paul and Michelle Bachmann will sap the tea party and loonier fringes of the party, so it doesn't really leave Perry much of a platform to really rally around.

eh, who says republican primary voters want moderates?

 

[eznark]

There's certainly a party of me that wishes he would just so I could engage in some cathartic Schadenfreude.

I just don't think he's actually going to run since, say what you will, but the words 'Texas governor' alone would easily politically taint him in a way that I suspect would prove hard to shake -- not to mention that with John Huntsman all but confirmed to jump in the race, along with Mitt Romney, there are other governors touting their own records with more appeal to the more moderate and pragmatic side of the Republican primary. Naturally, Ron Paul and Michelle Bachmann will sap the tea party and loonier fringes of the party, so it doesn't really leave Perry much of a platform to really rally around.

Rick Perry ends the chances of John Huntsman point blank. Texas governor is far, far better to a GOP voter than Obama ambassador.

 

[Plinko]

But that would mean she is one step closer to getting the nuke launch codes. 47 million people voted for McCain-Palin over Obama-Biden. Never forget.

But McCain was also a respected war veteran who did a decent job at appearing moderate to the general public. Bachmann is none of those.

 

[RustyNails]

But McCain was also a respected war veteran who did a decent job at appearing moderate to the general public. Bachmann is none of those.

Well even if they had George Washington on the ticket, Palin's name should immediately disqualify it. The point is, you should never play chicken with stupid.

 

[TacticalFox88]

But McCain was also a respected war veteran who did a decent job at appearing moderate to the general public. Bachmann is none of those.

Screw that. He would've STILL continued Bush's fucktarded policies and would've inarguably made the economy worse. Then if he kicked the bucket because of the stress we'd be stuck with President Palin.

 

[elrechazado]

Well even if they had George Washington on the ticket, Palin's name should immediately disqualify it. The point is, you should never play chicken with stupid.

It's the VP - nobody of either party should care as much as they do about who the VP is.

 

[RustyNails]

It's the VP - nobody of either party should care as much as they do about who the VP is.

Nobody should care who's on the ticket besides the presidential nominee?

 

[elrechazado]

Nobody should care who's on the ticket besides the presidential nominee?

That's what I just wrote, yes.

 

[Jackson50]

President Obama will announce today his decision regarding the withdrawal in Afghanistan. This will obviously indicate whether the withdrawal will be accelerated as some (many) hope.

There's certainly a party of me that wishes he would just so I could engage in some cathartic Schadenfreude.

I just don't think he's actually going to run since, say what you will, but the words 'Texas governor' alone would easily politically taint him in a way that I suspect would prove hard to shake -- not to mention that with John Huntsman all but confirmed to jump in the race, along with Mitt Romney, there are other governors touting their own records with more appeal to the more moderate and pragmatic side of the Republican primary. Naturally, Ron Paul and Michelle Bachmann will sap the tea party and loonier fringes of the party, so it doesn't really leave Perry much of a platform to really rally around.

The GOP is more diverse than you portray it. There is a swath of genuine conservatives that are neither loons nor TPers. They seek an authentic conservative that represents their values yet does not offend moderates. Thus, they ignore nonviable candidates such as Paul and Bachmann. Additionally, they are not wholly satisfied with Romney. Pawlenty should appeal to this group. And his performance may improve as his name recognition increases. Nevertheless, this swath is presently undecided. I think Perry would appeal to this group. Of course, as they are familiarized, they may decide he is too offensive to moderates. Otherwise, presently, there is certainly an audience to which he appeals.

 

[RustyNails]

That's what I just wrote, yes.

Even if the presidential nominee is a 74 year old guy with skin disease condition?

 

[Mortrialus]

To put it more simply never ever talk to the cops at all without a lawyer if you are in anyway thought to be a suspect (you know as opposed to witnessing a car accident or something).

No. Even with a lawyer you do not speak to the police unless witnessing. It will never help you.

Don't Talk to Police.

It's sensational journalism because the justices agreed on the outcome - it will go down as a 9-0 decision. And that wasn't mentioned. They made a casual reference to that fact here:



But from the wording the average reader is going to think it was 5-4 decision and it wasn't. The majority opinion was unanimous in this case. The relief available to the group hoping for class certification was not but that's a separate issue and unrelated to the direct outcome of the case. This sort of lazy, misleading journalism buries the lead on the story which should read "Supreme Court unanimously dismisses class action lawsuit against Walmart"

Do you even know what sensationalism is? Lazy and wrong? Yes. Sensationalism. No.

 

[eznark]

Do you even know what sensationalism is? Lazy and wrong? Yes. Sensationalism. No.

Reading the article I think it's pretty clear the author wanted to push buttons with the 5-4 headline. Textbook sensationalism. The only way you so willing ignore the unanimous ruling is if you want to push an agenda.

 

[Bulbo Urethral Baggins]

Horrible... journalism. The decision to throw out the case was unanimous. While some aspects of the decision were 5-4 that's complete sensationalism.

It's NPR. What did you expect.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

No. Even with a lawyer you do not speak to the police unless witnessing. It will never help you.

That's what I meant.

 

[Clevinger]

President Obama will announce today his decision regarding the withdrawal in Afghanistan. This will obviously indicate whether the withdrawal will be accelerated as some (many) hope.

It says tomorrow (Wednesday), unless I'm reading it wrong.

 

[Mortrialus]

Reading the article I think it's pretty clear the author wanted to push buttons with the 5-4 headline. Textbook sensationalism. The only way you so willing ignore the unanimous ruling is if you want to push an agenda.

Pushing an agenda is not the definition of sensationalism.

Sensationalism is a manner of over-hyping events, being deliberately controversial, loud, self-centred or acting to obtain attention. It

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensationalism

Again. Being extremely wrong about something isn't called sensationalism. It's called being wrong.

 

[Manmademan]

It's the VP - nobody of either party should care as much as they do about who the VP is.

Really? Even when that ticket was Bush/Cheyney? It's widely assumed that the bush administration was actively pushing Cheyney's agenda in a LOT of areas- Halliburton, etc.

 

[elrechazado]

Really? Even when that ticket was Bush/Cheyney? It's widely assumed that the bush administration was actively pushing Cheyney's agenda in a LOT of areas- Halliburton, etc.

"halliburton etc" - well, that argument has convinced me. Yes, I am saying I don't care who the veep is. It's the most overrated political office ever.

 

[Journeywalker]

"halliburton etc" - well, that argument has convinced me. Yes, I am saying I don't care who the veep is. It's the most overrated political office ever.

For what it's worth, Cheney abused the office to avoid investigation and shield himself from resigning over the Valerie Plame leak. If the chief of staff/national security of a congressperson had willfully leaked a covert CIA operative's name to get back at her husband, the congressperson would (probably) be forced to resign.

 

[Bulbo Urethral Baggins]

Pushing an agenda is not the definition of sensationalism.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensationalism

Again. Being extremely wrong about something isn't called sensationalism. It's called being wrong.

Deliberately misleading is not called "being wrong". It's called "deception" or "dishonesty"

 

[Clevinger]

Yes, I am saying I don't care who the veep is. It's the most overrated political office ever.

Nah, it's rated about right; the person next in line for the presidency, should something happen. And if a candidate is old, of course people should care more about it.