One man. Two boys. Twelve kids.

Related Post Roulette

30 Responses

  1. Avatar Stillwater says:

    From the linky:

    Civil-rights attorney Michael Sussman warned of a possible legal challenge, and questioned how conservative Republicans could support a law that “increases the power of the state with no due process being given.”

    Yeah, that is weird. I wonder how that circle can be squared.

    “It’s hard to find anybody except the ones who are going to benefit from it who support it,” said Matt Turnbull of Hamptonburgh, who called the proposal “policing for profit”

    Ahhh. No squaring required. Just a big ole circle.Report

    • Avatar Kazzy in reply to Stillwater says:

      Sussman’s position is what I saw echoed in those Republican regular folks’ letters. Basically, “Guys! This ain’t conservative!”Report

      • Avatar Kazzy in reply to Kazzy says:

        And I should add that the people-on-the-ground’s responses may well be indicative of the trend that Tod and JVH discussed. It just seems some politicians have not yet caught up.Report

    • Avatar Tod Kelly in reply to Stillwater says:

      @stillwater Yes, exactly. But I suspect that there is also something more primal going on here that is tangentially related but slightly different than what you point out.

      For a long time back in the 90s I couldn’t understand why conservatives had such a bee in their bonnet about pot, while they simultaneously called any kind of restrictions for cigarettes, cigars, or alcohol consumption an example of nanny-state over reach. Plus, most conservatives I knew had smoked pot in their youth at least once or twice and didn’t seem to think is was much of a big deal, which made the no-strikes policies they wanted imposed seem incongruent. It took me a while to begin to grok that when they talked about this level of police power, they were talking about it existing in very specific places.

      With CAFs, as well as criminalizing pot, I think there’s an assumption being made about who the people that we need to crack down on are. Anti-drug campaigns in the 90s always tied their message to “urban” drug use, and CAF seems to be similar — plus it often evokes the Mexican drug cartels.

      In other words, I think there is an unspoken assumption that these kinds of laws will be used with a heavy hand against certain segments of society, and with great temperance and latitude against us personally. (And I think it’s likely that this assumption is actually correct.) It’s the “good guys vs. the perps” attitude, IOW.Report

      • Avatar Saul Degraw in reply to Tod Kelly says:


        There is a reason that LGM calls it “The War on Some People who Use Some Drugs” My guess is that the asset laws are going to be targeted at passer-bys going through the county. The gamble is that these people will not find it worthwhile to come back and fight for their property.

        This is also the stuff that makes me think Corey Robin has a point with the reactionary mind. “We are fine smoking pot in our suburban homes. You better not have a dime bag in your car while traveling through our county”Report

      • Avatar zic in reply to Tod Kelly says:

        I’m curious about how conservative media is portraying the Texas Biker Gangs vs. the Baltimore riots. Are the biker gangs (mostly white) being played on repetitive loop? Anyone have a sense of the difference in air time?Report

        • Avatar Kazzy in reply to zic says:


          With all due respect, I don’t think this question is particularly germane to the topic here. If you would like to write a post — even one as simple as asking about people’s impressions of the media response — I’m happy to get it up as a guest post. However, while there are questions about this particular set of Republican officials, I don’t want this to become all about the ills of the right.Report

          • Avatar zic in reply to Kazzy says:


            I think it does pertain to the topic. How the media (particularly conservative media) portrays events — those it covers vs. those it doesn’t, or those it covers heavily vs. those it barely covers — feeds into the phenomena that @tod-kelly described, and that’s why I asked the question in response to Tod’s comment; and I was not trying to get into the ills of conservatism, but asking if anyone had an observation of coverage differences.

            ETA: I’d watch myself, and come to my own opinions, but I can’t get those channels since I no longer have a cable TV connection.Report

            • Avatar Kazzy in reply to zic says:


              Fair enough. I didn’t see that connecting thread but far be it from me to stifle a tangent!Report

            • Avatar Damon in reply to zic says:

              @zic @kazzy

              While I don’t watch much conservative media, the only thing I’ve seen related to the biker shootout that wasn’t about the event, was anti gun groups posting press releases that were wrong on the facts-for example that all the bikers were concealed carry licensed, etc.Report

          • Avatar j r in reply to Kazzy says:

            I’ve no problem getting into the ills of the right. And I don’t spend much, if any time, on conservative media outlets, but my guess is that Fox News is reporting it as a generic crime story and other outlets are doing the same or nothing.

            In other words, there is a whole lot of hypocrisy on how certain outlets treat crime stories depending on who the perpetrators are and who the victims are.

            So what? Conservatives are kind of tone-deaf, and sometimes much worse, when it comes to racism. Is this something that we did not already know?Report

          • Avatar Notme in reply to Kazzy says:


            Dont most threads end up being about the ills of the right? Why should this one be different?Report

        • Avatar Glyph in reply to zic says:

          the biker gangs (mostly white)

          Hey, the “Bandidos” admit Hispanics! (Boy, they’d sure look silly if they didn’t).

          It’s the “Cossacks” who are confused, since some of them seem to sport ‘SS’ tats and patches…Report

          • Avatar Will Truman in reply to Glyph says:

            For what it’s worth, the observations on the right side of my twitter feed:

            1) The whiteness of the Bandidos has been exaggerated unless we go full-on “Hispanics are white when it’s convenient.”

            2) There has been a great enthusiasm about calling the perpetrators thugs, in part to demonstrate a willingness to call white people thugs.

            3) Exasperation at the implication that they allegedly think that biker gang violence is “a-okay” and bemusement at the accusation that by calling them “biker gangs” they implicitly endorsing them or something.

            4) More attention devoted to this than devoted to Baltimore except when the protests/riots in Baltimore are live. Ferguson got more attention than both, though.

            5) The response has not been that different between white and non-white conservatives, with some of each pouncing on the double-standard and others of each saying that this is actually a poor example for this reason or that.

            To be fair, I filter out a lot of the more ridiculous voices on the right (and the left), so this is not necessarily indicative of much. I do follow people ranging from the center-right to “won’t vote Republican because they are too moderate” right and lots of space in between, but explicit racism is a good way to get filtered out of my list.Report

        • Avatar Iron Tum in reply to zic says:

          Are the biker gangs (mostly white) being played on repetitive loop?

          Is there nice dramatic footage of the shootout?

          The police have arrested approximately 170 more gang members in Waco than they have of the Baltimore and Ferguson rioters combined, so there’s that. And charged them with capital crimes, which means something in Texas.

          Can we call them biker gang members? Or is “gang member” racist now too? It’s hard to keep up with the euphemism treadmill.Report

        • Avatar zic in reply to zic says:

          Here’s a really good analysis of what I was getting at — the perceptions of the Waco biker gangs as a gang of criminals, not gangs of white criminals who reflect on all white people:


          Read this.Report

          • Avatar Iron Tum in reply to zic says:

            I found the NPR coverage of the event interesting. They made certain to repeat the name of the venue where the shootout occurred (Twin Peaks.) Just in case their listeners were unaware that the shootout had occurred at Twin Peaks. In fact, they mentioned Twin Peaks more often then they mentioned the names of the gangs involved. In one of the three different stories mentioning Twin Peaks that I heard on the way home, they mentioned in passing that this particular Twin Peaks was not owned by Twin Peaks parent company but by a Dallas-based operating company who had purchased the right to franchise Twin Peaks from Twin Peaks. For some reason, they forgot to mention the name of this company, but instead reminded the listeners again that the shootout happened at a Twin Peaks.

            Comparing this incident and the Garland one with the famous NYC police-involved shootings (like the Empire State Building incident, Amadou Diallo, etc.) it seems clear that NYC cops are terrible, terrible shots. Why are they entrusted with guns?

            I’ll see your Salon article, and give you this:
            http://www.agingrebel.com/12873 . I notice that this article disagrees with NPR in that it does not mention The Boozehounds MC being part of the incident. It could be a point of comparison to judge the relevant trustworthiness of the sources if the presence or absence of the gang in question could be confirmed.

            This is of course not the first time that Waco has been the site of LEOs killing off a bunch of socially undesirables. Waco is an odd place — many strange religions out there, but as a plus side, the fascination with the eschaton and self-sufficiency that some of them have leads to them offering classes in fiber crafts, carpentry, farming, beekeeping and the like. There was a six week class that started with them giving you a log (you had to bring your own hand tools) and at the end of the course, you took home a chair. I don’t know if they had you boil your own bugs for varnish or not.Report

      • Avatar aaron david in reply to Tod Kelly says:

        I would suggest that the use of “urban” is the same as on the left, to denote inner city. Such as Urban Poverty. It is something that the right worries about because, I would guess, the aren’t blind to the issues of these areas and would like to do something that is within the belief system they subscribe to. This would be one area that they feel is worthy of the heavy hand of the law (and also the not so heavy hand of the various churches.)

        I disagree, but I am going to at least listen to them (conservatives I personally know.)Report

  2. Avatar Saul Degraw says:

    What I find interesting about this rule is that it is being done on the county instead of the state wide level. New York is increasingly becoming Democratic and liberal even if many liberals dislike Andrew Cuomo. This seems like a way for Orange County to get revenue without raising local taxes especially property taxes.

    Orange County is also on the way to NYC and near a lot of colleges or on the way to a lot of colleges and universities. I wonder if police in Orange County think that they can just take assets from college students who just happen to be passing by.Report

    • Avatar DensityDuck in reply to Saul Degraw says:

      “What I find interesting about this rule is that it is being done on the county instead of the state wide level. ”

      Although when you consider the age-old story of That Town Where The Speed Limit Suddenly Drops To 25, maybe it’s not so surprising after all.Report

    • Avatar Kazzy in reply to Saul Degraw says:


      Orange County is constantly hurting for funds. We are, I believe, the poorest county in the nation. Or have the highest percentage of folks living in poverty. This is largely the result of the unique community of Kiryas Joel (which I have written about), which I believe is, statistically speaking, the single most impoverished community in America. So it wouldn’t shock me to learn that county administrators were trying to line the coffers, something the article mentions (this law doesn’t necessarily change the law as much as it allows the county to keep the funds, which certainly shifts the incentives; at least, that is how I understood it). So, yes, there is something unique about this happening in Orange County, NY.Report

      • Avatar Mark Thompson in reply to Kazzy says:

        I’m not sure where you’re getting that statistic, but that seems off to me. From everything I had ever read, even within the state of New York, the poorest counties were the Bronx, followed by Kings (Brooklyn), and various counties upstate. This seems to confirm that recollection – http://alloveralbany.com/archive/2013/12/16/household-income-and-poverty-rates-in-new-york-sta

        That obviously doesn’t address the curious case of Kiryas Joel (pun intended), but Orange County as a whole seems to be pretty middle of the pack compared to the rest of the state.Report

        • Avatar Kazzy in reply to Mark Thompson says:


          I may have been conflating KJ with OC as a whole. It does present some unique difficulties in having this almost completely isolated and super impoverished* area and the money that goes into it right in the middle of the county. It also is experiencing rapid growth.

          * Some people bristle as referring to their poverty issues there as the people don’t seem poor. And there is much speculation (and some evidence) of fraud and the like. I don’t really want to wade into all that for a host of reasons.Report

  3. Avatar Stillwater says:

    Tod Kelly,

    Nice Tod. Interesting …

    I think you’re probably right. There’s certainly no reason to think you’re wrong.Report