Thinking about this, I like the guy’s honesty. Instead of saying that this is not who he is, he acknowledges that sometimes he can be a jerk. He appears to have no delusions about his imperfections. We all like to have high opinions of ourselves and maybe we really try to be nice people, but we are very quick to excuse our own misbehavior, lest the cognitive dissonance force its way into our psyche. While this guy sounds like he is making excuses for himself, he is simply saying things that more people should have the courage and honesty to say: sometimes, I treat people unfairly and for no good reason.
The first step is to admit that you have a problem.
I agree that being self-aware has its benefits and appears to be lacking in many public or wannabe public officials. So is this public statement in furtherance of self-improvement to just be a better person or is it laying the ground work to be a candidate again? I am fine either way as it is a step in the right direction.
But regardless of stripe, I don’t think we want any public official who has a problem treating people fairly.
But, isn’t this the “Popeye Syndrome”? I saw his interview with Tucker Carlson last evening, and while it was refreshing to see a public figure own his actions without some statement that he/she was taken out of context or misunderstood, he basically said, “well, yeah, I blew it but it[‘s who I am.”: That doesn’t excuse him using his position of authority to try to scam his way out of a ticket. It is an abuse of power. If he is doing this at a traffic stop, then what is he doing behind the scenes? Tiger? Stripes?
His main rationale is that the trial court erred in not permitting the defense to introduce evidence of his brother’s previous (and unrelated to the bombing) alleged homicides, this proving that the older brother was the corrupting agent and that the younger murderer wasn’t “as bad” as his Big Bro. Ridiculous.
Breyer also tipped his hand in 2008 – he’s an abolitionist. A coworker at the time was mad at SCOTUS, saying they had a chance to do away with the death penalty and didn’t take it.
I agree, but most abolitionists don’t have anything new to add to what’s already out there. I guess I do applaud some of my abolitionist friends, who stick by their principles. The one thing that not applying the death penalty has going for it is that the families of the victims won’t hear about this case any more once the guy gets locked up for life. If the death penalty is applied, the appeals continue for almost nine years like they did here, and the families have to keep hearing about it.
But that can’t be right. We’ve been told over and over that ballot harvesting, unsecured mail-in ballots, signature fraud, etc. are not problems…probably not even real things..
This article claims that their FOIA request revealed that HHS spent millions, possibly up to a billion, on pro Wuhan virus vaccine advertisement, and possibly getting pro Wuhan virus vaccine doctors interviews on news programs and talk shows.
Is this an ethical and proper role of federal government?
Ethics Alarms 
Here was something I sent Jack:
https://www.heraldtribune.com/story/opinion/columns/guest/2022/02/25/former-candidate-martin-hyde-apologizes-after-video-confrontation-threat-sarasota-officer/6936662001/
Thinking about this, I like the guy’s honesty. Instead of saying that this is not who he is, he acknowledges that sometimes he can be a jerk. He appears to have no delusions about his imperfections. We all like to have high opinions of ourselves and maybe we really try to be nice people, but we are very quick to excuse our own misbehavior, lest the cognitive dissonance force its way into our psyche. While this guy sounds like he is making excuses for himself, he is simply saying things that more people should have the courage and honesty to say: sometimes, I treat people unfairly and for no good reason.
The first step is to admit that you have a problem.
-Jut
I agree that being self-aware has its benefits and appears to be lacking in many public or wannabe public officials. So is this public statement in furtherance of self-improvement to just be a better person or is it laying the ground work to be a candidate again? I am fine either way as it is a step in the right direction.
But regardless of stripe, I don’t think we want any public official who has a problem treating people fairly.
But, isn’t this the “Popeye Syndrome”? I saw his interview with Tucker Carlson last evening, and while it was refreshing to see a public figure own his actions without some statement that he/she was taken out of context or misunderstood, he basically said, “well, yeah, I blew it but it[‘s who I am.”: That doesn’t excuse him using his position of authority to try to scam his way out of a ticket. It is an abuse of power. If he is doing this at a traffic stop, then what is he doing behind the scenes? Tiger? Stripes?
jvb
My father earned the enduring skepticism of Mrs. OB by using his favorite line, “It’s my nature,” too many times.
I just heard that SCOTUS upheld the death sentence against the Boston marathon bomber.
Thanks, and GOOD. I’ll post on that soon.
You think Biden will commute his sentence?
Who knows? He’s an idiot, and his popularity can’t get much lower.
The guy isn’t black, so he can’t score points with the blacks. Maybe to score points with the Muslims?
Oh God, Breyer’s dissent is TERRIBLE.
What was his rationale?
His main rationale is that the trial court erred in not permitting the defense to introduce evidence of his brother’s previous (and unrelated to the bombing) alleged homicides, this proving that the older brother was the corrupting agent and that the younger murderer wasn’t “as bad” as his Big Bro. Ridiculous.
Breyer also tipped his hand in 2008 – he’s an abolitionist. A coworker at the time was mad at SCOTUS, saying they had a chance to do away with the death penalty and didn’t take it.
Then he should have the integrity to find a legitimate argument, or just talk about “cruel and unusual,” which is tough with this crime.
I agree, but most abolitionists don’t have anything new to add to what’s already out there. I guess I do applaud some of my abolitionist friends, who stick by their principles. The one thing that not applying the death penalty has going for it is that the families of the victims won’t hear about this case any more once the guy gets locked up for life. If the death penalty is applied, the appeals continue for almost nine years like they did here, and the families have to keep hearing about it.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/i-have-been-struggling-with-what-i-see-as-my-parents-unequal-distribution-of-their-wealth-they-supported-my-brother-for-12-years-should-they-give-the-same-to-me-11646410323?siteid=yhoof2
See what all this crazy equity nonsense has wrought? Guy thinks his parents owe him an equal distribution of their wealth.
Elie Mystal called the Constitution trash.
Saw it. Elie lost his mind years ago. He’s just an angry, bitter man. Sad.
It is indeed tragic.
Per the Washington Times:
“Wisconsin probe finds 2020 election riddled with nursing home voting fraud”
But that can’t be right. We’ve been told over and over that ballot harvesting, unsecured mail-in ballots, signature fraud, etc. are not problems…probably not even real things..
Another case of censorship.
https://theintercept.com/2022/03/04/youtube-censorship-big-tech-rising-the-hill/
https://reason.com/2022/03/03/youtube-rising-the-hill-election-misinformation-suspension/
Two links will probably send this to moderation.
As well they did!
https://web.archive.org/web/20220307025102/https://www.theblaze.com/news/review-the-federal-government-paid-media-companies-to-advertise-for-the-vaccines#toggle-gdpr
This article claims that their FOIA request revealed that HHS spent millions, possibly up to a billion, on pro Wuhan virus vaccine advertisement, and possibly getting pro Wuhan virus vaccine doctors interviews on news programs and talk shows.
Is this an ethical and proper role of federal government?