We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
It's indecent on the face of it, for heaven's sake. Even Bill Clinton left the charming high school girls alone. Adults just aren't supposed to do that, Humbert Humbert: it's not "sick" - it's plain old bad. The guy has a pattern of bad, of all sorts.
Darn uptight Christian Conservatives don't think guys should be hitting on high school girls. It's somebody's daughter. Sheesh. I guess it is not unseemly, in the view of like really hip dudes like Matthews. Is "unseemly" obsolete?
How do they do? Really - other states want to know how CT Unions did it?
If they have to ask, then they are either incredibly stupid, incompetent or both. Seriously? Need to know how? Let me help them out.
First, elect a Democrat Governor who can't read or write or do math. Then elect a Vice-Governor who actually can read, write and to math, but won't because the party line says she can't. Then you elect a legislature that is 93% liberal Democrat and presto - instant Union contracts.
re prison math: "In a 2007 paper for Economic Inquiry, for instance, the U.C.–Santa Barbara economist Jeff Grogger found there are large deterrent effects from increased certainty of punishment..."
heh. And just how do they propose to do that?
re retirement: I have long known that I will have to work as long as I could stand up. Had no idea so many others were in the same boat. But it works for me. My work is as much lifestyle as it is a job.
re: Weinergate links
I never thought this would sink him. It's a little during the Clinton mess. Before the facts were known, it was "he didn't do what that right-wing cabal says he did, because he would never do something so reprehensible". After the facts were known, "it's no big deal (unless you're a Republican)". He will probably be re-elected by a comfortable margin.
Perhaps we shouldn't put criminals in jail. Does that mean we should let them continue to commit crimes against innocent people? And to say non-violent criminals shouldn't go to jail does that mean Madoff should be free? Many violent crimes are simply single acts against one individual who was believed harmed them. Many people who commit those kinds of violent acts aren't criminals and would not harm someone else. So why shouldn't they go free as well? If we have the laws and they are broken should we then do nothing? It would make more sense to eliminate all those inconvenient laws. Perhaps sentences are just too long, but for carear criminals who will commit crimes again aren't we protecting the public by incarcerating them? Violent crime is down across the country. Is it coincidental that crime is down and incarceration is up??? Which would you prefer? More crime and less jails?
Ahh ... I see that my disgusting namesake Chris Matthews says that Weiner is in trouble because his behavior "offends culturally backward Christian conservatives." Well, sure it does. If I felt stronger today I would point out that his behavior offends even culturally forward Christian conservatives, and anyone else who has a sense of decency about sexual attacks on children or even on adults. The man is a putz, you see, and like many of his ilk has no moral courage at all. He's not going to resign his job, because that would mean he has a sense of shame about his behavior, and obviously he doesn't.
The only thing we can do is to hope the good Lord passes a miracle and gives him one.
"Non-violent crimes" need some definition before we decide "non-violent criminals" should be handled differently -- which may well be true.
Burglary of an empty building is non-violent on its face. Still, theft is harmful and burglary often involves damage to the building like broken windows and forced doors. And if a burglary of an empty building suddenly becomes burglary of an occupied building, it's been known to turn violent very suddenly.
It is a fair point that theft or burglary has a definite victim and I agree that drug sales, drug purchases, prostitution and similar actions often don't. I can see decriminalizing these activities, even if we find them repulsive, for a lot of reasons.
It is also true that some of the people in secure facilities would be better managed in long-term community corrections. These "residents" have their movements monitored but they remain part of theri community with jobs, family interaction, and other generally positive elements. Community corrections is usually less expensive than secure confinement.
Any system except secure confinement has risks in terms of identifying the right candidates. There are risks in placing the wrong people into secure confinement too, though.
Didn't come up with an answer, did i?