Again: Your job does not free you from your primary obligation to determine right from wrong and to act accordingly.
Three recent items, all excellent examples of that fact:
See the binding principle?
Become a judge, have your soul excised, and send a man with an IQ of 47 to prison:
For more than six hours Tuesday, as a parade of witnesses testified about the severity of Aaron Hart’s mental retardation and his inability to understand his legal rights, the 18-year-old defendant with an IQ of 47 sat silent and shackled in a chair, alternately fidgeting and making faces.
But in the end, none of it was enough to persuade a judge in this small east Texas town to reconsider the 100-year prison sentence he gave Hart in February after Hart pleaded guilty to molesting a 6-year-old boy.
Here’s an indication of what an IQ of 47 really means:
Under 70 - Definite feeble-mindedness
99.5% of IQ scores fall between 60 and 140
Eric Clifford, you’re a fucking liar:
Clifford, who last week said he had agonized over the case, took only a few seconds to issue his ruling.
Hart’s parents say he has been raped repeatedly by other inmates since he was first arrested last September.
Drop dead, Clifford. You took the coward’s path: you used the “law” as a substitute for rational thought, at the expense of a small child in an adult body.
Spend a day in Aaron’s place. I dare you.
This, from here:
Most people ‘going Galt’ refuse to recognize the final moral meaning of it; it’s a form of nonviolent social protest, and something you do on account of principle, and you should expect to pay a significant penalty for doing it.
Note the ultimatum: “you should expect to pay a significant penalty for doing it.” That “it” is minding your own damn business, and that chiseler presumes that you should pay dearly to someone for doing so.
That girl has dibs on grinding Paul Schene’s balls into powder.
Savages like Schene are a menace to everyone, every day they live.
Kill yourself, Paul Schene.
I’m always grateful for the benevolence of the Monroe News, which hosts the forums Monroe Talks, where I’ve been trying my best to explain what’s at stake to jbs:
There is more at stake than confiscation of property.
Like I said to Smash, would you participate in your own execution?
Another vostista who’s swallowed the voting sham.
A former home-owner in Phoenix quits paying her mortgage and blames everyone else:
A little more than a year ago, I bought a four-bedroom tract home with a pool, in a very nice subdivision in Scottsdale, Arizona, for $570,000.
…
Suddenly, the house I bought for $570,000 is worth…$380,000?!?!
…
What this means is that I, as a responsible homeowner, am now paying a mortgage of $450,000, on a house worth $380,000…
…
I never thought I would be the type to end up in foreclosure, but last month I made the decision to stop paying my mortgage.
Alisa, you made a commitment. A promise. You signed a contract vowing you would pay what you promised.
You’re bailing out before you’ve honored your promise, and that makes you a liar and a thief, not to mention a colossal moron for imagining that a house is an investment. You allowed yourself to be consumed by tulip mania and you’re going to walk away from your obligation. Your actions prove you’re not a “responsible homeowner”. On the contrary, they prove that you can’t be trusted to keep your word.
This would have been a comment on Alisa’s blog, but she’s disabled comments on that entry.
Alisa’s bullshit via Billy.
Update: Alisa removed her original post, stating “Way too many crazy, ignorant people linking to this post from fascist sites. Not worth the gray hair”, revealing that she’s not only a liar and a thief, but a coward as well.
And, by the way, Alisa, “fascist” doesn’t mean what you imagine it means.
My comment, at Radley’s place, a few days ago:
?A vote is nothing more and always an attempt to push someone else around by electing a proxy to do the pushing.?
Yup. Voting voting is delegated coercion.
It?s also a despicably cowardly act. No one I?ve ever met has the audacity to personally do to their neighbors what a vote-fueled government does.
Would you approach your neighbor’s employer and demand a portion of his pay? Would you prevent someone from attempting to save his own life with an experimental drug? Would you have the balls to go to your neighbor’s house and use force to stop him from eating duck liver? Of course you wouldn’t. But voting lets you do those very things, without getting your hands dirty or risking your own hide.
SaltyPig recently points out that he wrote about this very thing five years ago:
When confronted directly with first-person moral decisions, most people are quick to answer in favor of liberty. So what happens somewhere between lemonade-stand-land and the modern state to make people such hooligans by proxy?
Voting is all about abdication of responsibility and delegation of coercion to impose mere preferences upon others.
Charles Hueter highlights a horrific example of feral subhumans.
It is impossible to reason with irrational, rabid animals, which is precisely what such creatures are.
So how can a person deal with them? When you catch them in the midst of brutalizing and murdering, kill them. If you encounter them after the fact, shun them to starvation.
Rabid fucking animals.
My comment, which I attempted to post, only to find that I’m still banned:
“For the warrior who has such a code, certain actions remain unthinkable, even in the most dire or extreme circumstances.”
Warriors aren’t just people who participate in wars and carry weapons.
Some warriors use mechanical weapons. Some use ideas. What makes a person a warrior is relentless pursuit of truth and integrity, despite opposition.
My comment (PDF), just now, at Q and O, which was immediately deleted:
“the demands of justice require it”
Where were the demands of justice when you hung Steven Rhett out to dry?
This is the second time since Monday that my comment has been deleted by someone at Q and O. My previous comment was also a reminder of Steven Rhett’s mistreatment at the hands of Dale Franks. McQ posted that blogging would be light due to everyone at Q and O enjoying spending Memorial Day with their families, and invited open discussion in the comments. I left a comment noting that Steven Rhett would have also liked to have spent Memorial Day with his family. I checked back a day or so later only to find the entire post deleted.
Franks cannot change what he did. Everyone makes mistakes, especially me, but to continue to attempt to conceal reminders of those mistakes is just plain cowardly.
Update: I attempted to leave a second comment:
This thread is about miscarriage of justice, isn’t it?
…after Franks advised me:
COMMENT BY MATT REMOVED
If you can?t stop the impulse to hijack the thread, then leave.
Or I?ll ban you. But thread hijacking ain?t gonna fly.
But I found that I’d already been banned:
You have attempted to enter a comment using a blacklisted term, or your IP Address has been banned. Your comment cannot be saved until the offending term has been eliminated, or the IP Address ban has been lifted by a blog administrator.
That’s a record for me, getting banned after only two comments to a blog. I must have struck a raw nerve.