↓
 

The New Neo

A blog about political change, among other things

  • Home
  • Bio
  • Email
Home » Page 762 << 1 2 … 760 761 762 763 764 … 1,890 1,891 >>

Post navigation

← Previous Post
Next Post→

The dying of the dinosaurs

The New Neo Posted on April 3, 2019 by neoApril 5, 2019

In the comments to yesterday’s post about climate change, a lot of people mentioned this article that appeared in The New Yorker and caused a big sensation.

I had already read the article and found it to be absorbing. It helps that the author of the piece is a novelist, because not only did the article zip right along, but it read almost like a short story, a very dramatic one. The picture it created of the aftereffects of the asteroid hit that is presumed to have ended the dominance of the dinosaurs as a group and paved the way for mammals to rise was both fascinating and terrifying:

Within two minutes of slamming into Earth, the asteroid, which was at least six miles wide, had gouged a crater about eighteen miles deep and lofted twenty-five trillion metric tons of debris into the atmosphere. Picture the splash of a pebble falling into pond water, but on a planetary scale. When Earth’s crust rebounded, a peak higher than Mt. Everest briefly rose up. The energy released was more than that of a billion Hiroshima bombs, but the blast looked nothing like a nuclear explosion, with its signature mushroom cloud. Instead, the initial blowout formed a “rooster tail,” a gigantic jet of molten material, which exited the atmosphere, some of it fanning out over North America. Much of the material was several times hotter than the surface of the sun, and it set fire to everything within a thousand miles. In addition, an inverted cone of liquefied, superheated rock rose, spread outward as countless red-hot blobs of glass, called tektites, and blanketed the Western Hemisphere.

Some of the ejecta escaped Earth’s gravitational pull and went into irregular orbits around the sun. Over millions of years, bits of it found their way to other planets and moons in the solar system…

There’s much much more, but you get the idea.

The description of the discoverer of the fossil find that supposedly documents this event is fascinating as well. He appears to be monomaniacal about bones and how they fit together; obsessed with them from around the age of four, helped along by a great-uncle who was a renowned orthopedist.

“We have the whole KT event preserved in these sediments,” DePalma said. “With this deposit, we can chart what happened the day the Cretaceous died.” No paleontological site remotely like it had ever been found, and, if DePalma’s hypothesis proves correct, the scientific value of the site will be immense. When Walter Alvarez visited the dig last summer, he was astounded. “It is truly a magnificent site,” he wrote to me, adding that it’s “surely one of the best sites ever found for telling just what happened on the day of the impact.”

As I read the article, though, one thing that struck me was this question: hasn’t earth a lot of impact craters from fairly large asteroids? Did they cause similar extinctions? Was this the largest asteroid ever? The extent of the cataclysm described in the article is based on computer modelings, but how accurate are those modelings?

The following was in the article as well:

Scientists still debate many of the details, which are derived from the computer models, and from field studies of the debris layer, knowledge of extinction rates, fossils and microfossils, and many other clues. But the over-all view is consistently grim. The dust and soot from the impact and the conflagrations prevented all sunlight from reaching the planet’s surface for months. Photosynthesis all but stopped, killing most of the plant life, extinguishing the phytoplankton in the oceans, and causing the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere to plummet. After the fires died down, Earth plunged into a period of cold, perhaps even a deep freeze. Earth’s two essential food chains, in the sea and on land, collapsed. About seventy-five per cent of all species went extinct. More than 99.9999 per cent of all living organisms on Earth died, and the carbon cycle came to a halt.

Earth itself became toxic. When the asteroid struck, it vaporized layers of limestone, releasing into the atmosphere a trillion tons of carbon dioxide, ten billion tons of methane, and a billion tons of carbon monoxide; all three are powerful greenhouse gases. The impact also vaporized anhydrite rock, which blasted ten trillion tons of sulfur compounds aloft. The sulfur combined with water to form sulfuric acid, which then fell as an acid rain that may have been potent enough to strip the leaves from any surviving plants and to leach the nutrients from the soil.

So how did the mammals survive? What did they eat, for example? I’d like to know a lot more about that.

Would a similar-sized impact always and inevitably have a similarly horrific result? Haven’t many asteroids hit earth, and were some of them almost as big? I found this article that goes into the question a bit, enough for me to conclude that we aren’t entirely sure how big the Chicxulub crater (the impact described in the New Yorker article) actually is, although it’s certainly very very big. But I noticed that about five million years prior to Chicxulub, there had been another large impact (called the Kara crater) that doesn’t seem associated with any mass extinction (at least, I couldn’t find any discussion of it in a brief perusal). If not, then why?

I certainly don’t know. But I found an article from 2017 that raises some interesting points:

Of all the places in the world an asteroid could have walloped ancient Earth, the Yucatán Peninsula was possibly the worst…

According to the paper, this mass extinction happened because the space rock slammed into an oily tinderbox, blasting enough soot into the atmosphere to cause extreme global cooling…

The impact chilled the planet by a global average of 14 to 18 degrees Fahrenheit, with a drop of 18 to 29 degrees over land, the study finds.

Only 13 percent of Earth’s surface is made up of rocks that could have burned off that much soot, the team argues this week in Scientific Reports. That means if the asteroid had landed almost anywhere else, the nonavian dinosaurs may not have died out after all.

“This is a fascinating paper that … argues that even given the large size of the impactor, the mass extinction itself was of low probability,” says Paul Chodas, manager of the Center for Near Earth Object Studies at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory.

The possibility of a catastrophic asteroid impact is the meat-and-potatoes of many science fiction stories and films. Often they feature humankind attempting to head the asteroid off at the pass, and in real life we do have some rudimentary efforts to move in that direction:

In 2016 a NASA scientist warned that the Earth is unprepared for such an event. In April 2018, the B612 Foundation reported “It’s 100 per cent certain we’ll be hit [by a devastating asteroid], but we’re not 100 per cent sure when.” Also in 2018, physicist Stephen Hawking, in his final book Brief Answers to the Big Questions, considered an asteroid collision to be the biggest threat to the planet.[4][5][6] In March 2019, scientists reported that asteroids may be much more difficult to destroy than thought earlier. In addition, an asteroid may reassemble itself due to gravity after being disrupted.

If you’re interested in some of the contemplated approaches, see this. Suffice to say that our skills in this direction are in their infancy.

[NOTE: Here’s a database of known impact events.]

Posted in Disaster, Science | Tagged Paleontology | 51 Replies

A reminder of how much the climate has changed in the past

The New Neo Posted on April 2, 2019 by neoApril 2, 2019

It’s really odd that this article was published in The New Yorker, because although it’s not about the current AGW climate change controversy it certainly dwells on the wild swings that have occurred to earth’s climate in the past.

Worth reading.

Posted in History, Science | Tagged climate change | 46 Replies

Turkey’s Erdogan and the democracy train

The New Neo Posted on April 2, 2019 by neoApril 2, 2019

I guess Turkey’s Erdogan and his party didn’t do enough to fix the elections in Turkey this time, and must have underestimated the strength of his opponents, because the election didn’t go as he’d hoped. The NY Times calls it a “political quake”:

Step by step over the years, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey sought to ensure nobody could challenge him. He marginalized adversaries. He purged the army, the police and the courts. He cowed the press. He strengthened his powers in the Constitution. And he promised Turks a bright economic future.

So it was a huge surprise when the outcome of weekend municipal voting showed on Monday that Mr. Erdogan’s party had not only lost control of Ankara, the political center, but maybe Istanbul, the country’s commercial center, his home city and longstanding core of support.

Even if the results were not final, they amounted to the most momentous political earthquake to shake Mr. Erdogan in nearly two decades of basically uncontested control at the helm of Turkey, a NATO ally and critical linchpin of stability in the region.

What was different this time was the rapidly tanking economy and a highly disciplined opposition.

It deployed monitors to not only scrutinize the vote tallies but also sleep on sacks of sealed counted ballots to guard against possible tampering by members of Mr. Erdogan’s ruling Justice and Development Party, the AKP.

“We think they were not able to rig the election,” said Ilayda Kocoglu, 28, vice president of the Istanbul branch of the opposition Republican People’s Party, or CHP, who slept on some sacks herself. “They were not expecting us to be that organized, or that resolved.”

Republicans, take note.

This doesn’t mean the Erdogan is finished; he remains in office. And his party has some tricks up its sleeve. They are contending all of the results, for example. I haven’t yet found a description of what that process entails in Turkey, but since Erdogan controls so much of the country and has no hesitation to clamp down to guarantee the continuation of his power, my guess is that they’ll figure out a way to reverse the results. After all, it was Erdogan who said early in his career, “Democracy is like a train; you get off once you have reached your destination.” Erdogan believes he’s the destination, and democracy was just the vehicle that got him there.

[NOTE: For more details of my opinion of Erdogan, please see this.]

Posted in Middle East, People of interest | Tagged Erdogan, Turkey | 11 Replies

No, Biden’s not like Franken

The New Neo Posted on April 2, 2019 by neoApril 3, 2019

So now it’s been decreed by someone or other on the left that it’s time for the person who’s already been known for years on the right as “Creepy Uncle Joe” Biden to be accused of inappropriate touching:

Amy Lappos, 43, who was a congressional aide to Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., at the time of the alleged incident, told the Washington Examiner that Biden, 76, should not run for president in 2020 and should support a female candidate instead.

She described how he put his hand around her neck and pulled her toward him to rub noses. She said she thought he was going to kiss her on the mouth. “This is the Al Franken thing all over again,” she said.

Well, no. No it’s not. Franken was 100% expendable at the time; everyone knew he’d be replaced by a Democrat and thus the Party wouldn’t suffer. There were only pluses for Democrats in throwing him under that crowded bus. They’d get #MeToo points to use against the Republicans, and they’d lose nothing by it. Al who? Never heard of him.

Biden is different. He’s not in office but he’s running for the highest office in the land. Not only that, but he’s one of the frontrunners. His touchy-feely stuff occurred while he was in office, much of it in full view of the world, and yet only the right was mentioning it during the eight years he was VP. Fancy that.

Biden was protected then as Obama’s veep. Now he’s fair game, at least for the moment, at least a little bit. Why? Because someone among the Democrats must want him out of the race. I suspect some other candidate or candidates. Note in that quote I gave, Lappos says that Biden “should support a female candidate instead.” I don’t know which one is behind this (or ones are behind this), but it is not some sort of coincidence that much is being made of this now.

Nothing has changed about Biden. Nothing. The Democratic establishment—Nancy Pelosi and the like in Congress—is more or less defending him (albeit a bit weakly), so we can guess that they see him as a very viable candidate for their side and don’t want to lose him:

…Democrats took a similarly neutral position on Biden, a beloved figure in the Democratic Party who also served in the Senate for 35 years. They view his behavior as questionable but not something that rises to the level of sexual harassment.

“I think he’s got to just really be thoughtful about the change in culture,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash. “This is clearly not a sexual harassment allegation but it is a question of just making sure people understand the boundaries of how you interact with people.”…

On Monday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the accusations don’t disqualify him as a candidate for president, but on Tuesday in a Politico interview she suggested he hasn’t responded appropriately.

“To say ‘I’m sorry that you were offended’ is not an apology. ‘I’m sorry I invaded your space,’ but not ‘I’m sorry you were offended’ because what is that? That’s not accepting the fact that people think differently about communication,” Pelosi told Politico during a live event.

Biden, in a statement Sunday, said he never meant to offend the women.

But it’s not as though this “change in culture” is something that just happened yesterday. And it’s really not a change, actually. I’m pretty old, and it was never especially acceptable for some strange guy—even someone in political office—to do what Biden has done. It was always creepy, even when I was a girl. Among all Biden’s other failings (for example this and this), he is at the very least completely tone deaf to the usual standards of behavior between men and women. If it hadn’t become one of my least favorite words on earth, I’d even call his attitude “privileged.”

And yet the 76-year-old Biden (he is slated to turn 78 just a couple of weeks after the 2020 election) is one of the Democratic frontrunners. Go figure.

And someone’s not very happy about it.

Posted in Men and women; marriage and divorce and sex, People of interest, Politics | Tagged inappropriate touching, Joe Biden | 39 Replies

Rahm Emanuel blames Trump for the Smollett case, which prompts Al Sharpton to blame Trump for the Tawana Brawley case

The New Neo Posted on April 1, 2019 by neoApril 1, 2019

When the Smollett case was settled with hardly a wrist-slap, Rahm Emanuel was spitting mad. But after a couple of days he thought better of his tirade and reverted to what Democrats so love to do and blamed Trump, the all-purpose excuse for everything wrong in the world.

Emanuel criticized Trump with one of the left’s favorite lies about him:

The mayor pointed to President Trump’s comments about a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Va., where a counter protester was killed. The president said there were “very fine people on both sides” of the protests.

Actually, Trump was referring not to those protestors but to the people involved in the statue-pulling-down dispute, and he was quite explicit about that—but hey, why abandon a good accusation just because it’s false?

Emanuel followed with this:

“The only reason Jussie Smollett thought he could take advantage of a hoax about a hate crime is from the environment, the toxic environment that Donald Trump created. This is a president who drew a moral equivalency between people who are trying to perpetuate bigotry and those who are trying to fight bigotry,” Emanuel said. “President Trump should literally take his politics, move it aside. He’s created a toxic environment, now he’s created a toxic, vicious cycle.”

That’s pretty twisted, even for those who people who accept that Trump has created some sort of toxic environment. Wouldn’t that result in tons of real hate crimes being perpetrated, and no need whatsoever to fake a hate crime?

Enter Al Sharpton. Sharpton’s been a little bit hard on Jussie up till now. Sharpton actually had the gall to say—ironic in light of Sharpton’s own participation in the Tawana Brawley hate crime hoax back in 1987, an act for which Sharpton was successfully sued, although supporters such as Percy E. Sutton, Johnnie L. Cochran Jr., and Earl Graves Jr., paid Sharpton’s fines and he never really suffered from the judgment because of that.

Now Sharpton has issued a new statement on the Smollett case:

I was listening to Rahm Emanuel the other day and I realized that he’s right. If Smollett did this, it’s because of the toxic environment about race that President Trump has created. And it got me to thinking. Who was very prominent in New York and elsewhere in 1987, during the time of the Tawana Brawley case? When Donald Trump, that’s who.

What was Trump doing in 1987? He’d just published The Art of the Deal. But what I think is far more significant is that he had talked about running for president. I looked it up. And you know what he said that year? He gave an interview where he said “I’m not running for president, but if I did… I’d win.”

Clearly, he was paving the way for his run. Clearly he was thinking long and hard about it. So he was already making the air toxic back in 1987. You don’t believe me? You can read about it in Politico. Everything he’s saying now he was saying then.

I’m convinced that Trump is the reason the Tawana Brawley case happened. But of course that hate crime was real, not fake like Smollett’s might be. I know; I was there.

[BUMPED UP.]

Posted in Law, People of interest, Race and racism | Tagged Al Sharpton | 36 Replies

Report: millionaires are fleeing NY

The New Neo Posted on April 1, 2019 by neoApril 1, 2019

The NY Post headline reads: “Even New York’s millionaires are fleeing to less expensive cities.”

“Millionaire” sounds like a rich person—at least, it used to. But it occurs to me that in New York City these days a million doesn’t go very far. So why not take the money and run? In particular, if you own any real estate in New York, you can cash out and live like a king elsewhere.

Posted in Finance and economics | 17 Replies

Another interesting article by Matt Taibbi…

The New Neo Posted on April 1, 2019 by neoApril 1, 2019

…on Russiagate, and what the MSM doesn’t get about the Trump phenomenon even now.

Posted in Press, Trump | Tagged Russiagate | 9 Replies

“Unplanned” finds a larger audience than expected

The New Neo Posted on April 1, 2019 by neoApril 1, 2019

The movie “Unplanned” is about many things, but one thing it’s about is a person changing her mind on an important issue. In this case, the issue is abortion, and the change was from being head of a Planned Parenthood clinic to being an anti-abortion activist.

The movie wasn’t heavily promoted or predicted to do all that well, but in addition to that, many efforts at publicizing it were blocked, ostensibly because the subject matter was controversial. That hasn’t seemed to stop a lot of other promotional campaigns, so it’s hard to conclude anything other than that it was the movie’s un-PC pro-life stance that was the problem.

And this despite the fact that apparently the movie takes a “nuanced” view of things in terms of sympathy for women having to make the decision (Planned Parenthood, on the other hand, is the villain), although reviewers panning it disagree and think it’s simply a one-sided anti-abortion polemic.

I haven’t seen the movie, but many of the reviews that criticize the movie also state that the movie preaches to the choir, and that its intended audience is those who are already firmly in the anti-abortion camp.

I disagree. I haven’t seen the movie, but all the descriptions (including those of those who are giving it negative reviews) indicate to me that the movie actually would appeal—and intends to appeal—to those who aren’t sure about abortion or at least have some doubts where they stand.

I have read, for example, that in the younger generation, support for abortion has been declining somewhat rather than increasing. Polls over the last three decades indicate a periodic wobble but no clear trends, as far as I can see. I also think that there are two main issues involved: whether people think abortion should be legal or not and under what circumstances, and a second question as to whether this particular woman would ever have one. I believe (yet cannot prove) that there are a significant number of women who think abortion should be legal but who would not personally have an abortion if faced with an unwanted pregnancy.

It seems to me that the film probably is working on that last group more than on anyone else, trying to get an increase in the number of women who see abortion as something that is not a personal option for themselves.

Posted in Getting philosophical: life, love, the universe, Health, Movies | Tagged abortion | 47 Replies

Voices from the past: the elderly speak

The New Neo Posted on March 30, 2019 by neoMarch 30, 2019

These are filmed interviews with the elderly. Not the present-day elderly, but the elderly from almost a century ago.

Most of these clips were made around 1930, which means that a lot of the interviewees were born in the 1840s. Some earlier. I’ve located a number of these videos on YouTube, and rather than post them all at once (some are long) I’m planning to post excerpts now and then as a regular feature.

I find them astounding. Not only do these interviews drive home how long we’ve had the capacity to make movies and record people’s speech, but they make it apparent that, by interviewing the elderly, one can see back farther in time to make the even more distant past come alive in a way that’s startling.

I’ve also been struck over and over by how vigorous these elderly people are. But that makes perfect sense, because they had to be much hardier than people of the same age today. These old folks didn’t have the benefit of antibiotics and all sorts of modern medical interventions to help them along. They had to have remarkable resistance for all sorts of diseases, and they also ordinarily were very physically active by necessity. The number of old people was fewer as a percentage of the population, but the ones that survived were a very special group.

As you will see here.

Note also the old-fashioned accents (some of their lines seem scripted, though), Love this first guy in particular, who has an almost Frostian eloquence at times:

Posted in Getting philosophical: life, love, the universe, Painting, sculpture, photography | Tagged American life, passage of time | 62 Replies

The “soft coup”: killing a king

The New Neo Posted on March 30, 2019 by neoMarch 30, 2019

In the very olden days of the monarchy, kings often used to kill their opponents before they got killed by those opponents. It was a pretty brutal world.

Wretchard (Richard Fermandez) uses that as a metaphor to talk about the present:

Now that the shoe is on the other foot, one can make the equivalent argument that a probe against Obama officials would be just as much “a good faith attempt to investigate a credible charge” as the Mueller investigation. But one should not deceive oneself into not realizing that the ultimate targets of such a course would be Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Such a turnabout would not end the crisis which began in the waning days of the Obama administration, it would only change its direction. And then some other king would lie on the political floor and the whole point of a peaceful transition of power which “is to prevent a clash between kings” would still be in ruins. Perhaps this is why Karl Rove is urging Trump, having won the round, to move on; for by considering the affair closed, Trump could restore the tradition of comity, which has been damaged.

Or could he? In the current political culture, magnanimity is unlikely to be met with gratitude, unless the words are spat out with irony. Passions are high and neither side appears willing to give an inch. It may take time before an extended hand is not met by a punch. The fever must still run its course. One can only hope the fever breaks before the patient does.

Good points and interesting points as well. But the problem is that this situation is not really some sort of tit-for-tat, any more than the police trying to find a cop-killer is tit-for-tat.

Of course, if in fact Trump had been an agent of Russia, that couldn’t be left to stand. The problem was that it was not only an absurd notion but there was no evidence for it that could pass the smell test, and so those wanting the investigation to go forward had to fake evidence, leak it, and lie about it to make the allegations seem at all credible.

So this really was an effort first to discredit Trump the candidate and then, when that didn’t work well enough, an attempted coup on Trump the president. If it was that—and I think it’s clear that it was—Trump can’t just let bygones be bygones. The precedent would be awful. The perpetrators of what amounts to a several years long attempt at a frameup have to be made to think they will be caught and cannot get away with it.

And yet, as Richard Fernandez says in his post that I quoted at the outset, an investigation of the investigators could help to destroy the peaceful transition process that America has seemingly enjoyed till 2016. But it was the previous administration that actually destroyed it, and we can’t pretend that didn’t happen.

I wrote all of the above before reading this article by Roger Kimball. An excerpt from it:

I think my friend Karl Rove is a very smart man. But I dissent categorically from his judgment a couple of days ago that the president ought not to “obsess” over the “origins” of the investigation because that was not an effective strategy to win over swing voters. Rove said Trump should let bygones be bygones and “move on.”

On the contrary, the president, to the unalloyed delighted of the crowd, made it clear last night that “moving on” was not part of his agenda. Or, to put it more accurately, move on he would, but not without making sure that those who weaponized the intelligence resources of the United States against him (and, more to the point, against them) were called to account. This is not a matter of vengeance. It is a matter of preserving the central core of our democratic republic, which turns on the integrity of our elections.

As I have said on many occasions, the whole Russia-collusion narrative represents the biggest political scandal in our history. Why? Because a cabal of officials in the Obama Administration, aided at every turn by a hysterical media, decided that the candidacy and then the election of Donald Trump was not to their taste. They used every expedient to challenge his campaign and then to attack his presidency. Senior officials in the CIA, the FBI, the Department of Justice, and Department of State decided that they had a “higher loyalty” than their loyalty to the Constitution. The people may have spoken on November 8, 2016. But they made the wrong choice. Therefore it was incumbent upon people like James Comey to correct the mistake. They would lie under oath and leak classified material to the press to damage President and people close to him. Perhaps most stunning, they would employ a legal instrument designed to be used against suspected foreign terrorists and repurpose it to open a conduit into Donald Trump’s campaign and then into his administration.

The whole Russia-collusion fantasy, of which the Mueller investigation was only the desperate centerpiece, has cost the taxpayers untold millions ($30-$40 million for the Mueller investigation alone), it has destroyed the lives and careers of several people whose only “crime” was to have been in the orbit of Donald Trump, and it has gravely damaged public faith in the impartiality of our intelligence and security institutions to say nothing of what public faith remained about the media. It is imperative that people like John Brennan, James Clapper, Andrew McCabe, and James Comey are made to understand—and that the public can see that they have been made to understand—that the heads of the FBI or the CIA or the Office of National Intelligence do not have a veto over who gets to be the president of the United States.

The Resistance tried to kill the king. They may not like the king—you may not like the king, either—but that’s not the point. The effort cannot be allowed to stand, and it must be driven home to the American people what actually happened and what the dangers are. And we certainly can’t count on the MSM to do that, since they were in on the conspiracy.

That’s not tinfoil hat territory. That’s just the way it was and the way it is.

[NOTE: I’m starting to experiment with using tags for post content as well as the usual categories.]

Posted in Law, Politics, Trump | Tagged coup, Russiagate | 106 Replies

The European car police

The New Neo Posted on March 30, 2019 by neoMarch 30, 2019

These car police will be inside your car:

…[P]oliticians…want to limit your car’s engine power to make sure you don’t break the speed limit while robots determine whether you’re fit to drive in the first place. At least that’s the proposed plan in Europe starting in May, 2022.

Backed by Members of the European Parliament, the European Transport and Safety Council says its new mandatory systems “will reduce collisions by 30 percent and save 25,000 lives within 15 years of being introduced.” And so just days after Volvo announced it will introduce driver-facing cameras and limit all its cars to 112 mph, the EU followed up with its own Intelligent Speed Assistance (ISA) system. Which includes:

—GPS and/or traffic sign recognition to determine the speed limit of the road, with your car adjusting its engine power accordingly. Granted, the ETSC says that initially, the system will switch off once you floor the gas, mostly “to aid public acceptance at introduction.”
—Data loggers. When, where, how fast. And the data available to whom?
—Advanced autonomous emergency braking and lane keep assist.
—Reversing cameras.
—Camera-based driver fatigue detection.
—Alcohol interlock installation facilitation. A breathalyzer?
—Emergency stop signal.

As EVO points out, pressing the pedal to floor won’t get rid of your new nannies. The ETSC says that “if the driver continues to drive above the speed limit for several seconds, the system should sound a warning for a few seconds and display a visual warning until the vehicle is operating at or below the speed limit again.” Beep-beep. Beep-beep-beep-beep!

Some of these features I have no problem with, such as camera-based driver fatigue detection (I believe that’s a beep that goes off if your car drifts unduly or if your head drops an unusual amount). Others seem more like the step-by-step injection of more and more control by an ever-escalating nanny state bent on curbing your freedom in order to protect you.

Now, I’ve never felt the need to drive at a speed beyond 112 mph or anywhere even remotely near that figure. But I am made very uneasy by a car that won’t let me because of legislation that degrees cars have systems such as the one described. And there is no reason to believe it will remain at the 112 level, or that more and more of these government-imposed won’t curbs be placed upon anything that smacks of liberty.

The bottom line for all of this is the question of how much risk we want to assume and who we want to be in control of that. I’ve learned over the years that people differ very much in the degree of their desire for liberty and the value they place on it. In general, Americans have long placed a higher value on liberty than Europeans do, but I fear that is changing.

Posted in Law | 23 Replies

A few more things about Smollett

The New Neo Posted on March 30, 2019 by neoMarch 30, 2019

There are many reasons prosecutors might drop a case (or decline to go to trial), but as the Illinois prosecutors’ statement made clear, the Smollett case does not partake of the usual reasons and it was not handled in the usual way.

The case was not weak. The perp was not even forced to accept or admit any kind of guilt whatsoever. There was no probation. The community service was a joke. None of the ordinary procedures for settling rather than prosecuting were followed.

We can speculate on the reasons for this, but the leading one is that due to pressure the fix (not the Foxx) was in. One thing that seems crystal clear is that there was nothing weak about the case. Even Kim Foxx admitted as much [emphasis added]:

Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx on Wednesday defended her office’s decision to drop all charges against “Empire” star Jussie Smollett but said prosecutors had enough evidence to convict the actor of faking a hate-crime attack on himself.

Foxx began a string of interviews with local media, as Smollett’s lawyers took to the airwaves to declare Smollett’s innocence following an unusual, hastily called hearing Tuesday at which prosecutors dropped 16 felony counts tied to the alleged hoax attack.

Foxx said that the deal, which essentially wipes Smollett’s record clear, was not a sign that the prosecution case was weak or that Smollett was innocent, and said similar low-level felony defendants are cut the same breaks.

“The notion that this somehow exonerates him or that the prosecutors somehow believed he was innocent is very frustrating to [my] idea of alternative prosecution,” a hoarse-voiced Foxx said late Wednesday in an interview with The Chicago Sun-Times. “But I understand that [Smollett’s lawyers] have a client, and they have a spin.”

Foxx, who recused herself from the case just over a week before Smollett was charged because of conversations she’d had with a relative of the actor, pointed to the $10,000 bond that Smollett turned over to the city of Chicago, a sum equivalent to the maximum fine for the disorderly conduct charges he faced. The prosecutor, who took office in 2016 after campaigning on a reform platform, said she believed the evidence against Smollett would have convinced a judge or jury to find him guilty.

“I believe based on the information that was presented before the grand jury, based on what I’ve seen, the office had a strong case … that would have convinced a trier of fact,” she said.

But the way it was handled allows the shameless self-promotor Jussie Smollett to proclaim his innocence and to make further accusations against the Chicago police.

Then there’s the question—and it’s a more general one that isn’t just about the Smollett case—of using the testimony of one (or more) of the alleged perpetrators against another of the alleged perpetrators, and/or the use of jailhouse snitches. Those practices are commonplace and always somewhat suspect, but that’s what a trial is about. In general, my rule of thumb is that if the snitch’s statement are unsupported by any other evidence they are far more suspect than if they are. Criminal law would be paralyzed if such statements were not allowed, but a judge or jury looks at the entire picture, including the corroborating evidence.

In the Smollett case, there was plenty of it. There was also the absurdity of Smollet’s original fact situation as he described it, as well as his shifting story.

I haven’t seen any polls on what percentage of the public believes Smollett and what percentage thinks he’s guilty, but my sense is that very few people believe he’s innocent at this point.

Posted in Law | 23 Replies

Post navigation

← Previous Post
Next Post→

Your support is appreciated through a one-time or monthly Paypal donation

Please click the link recommended books and search bar for Amazon purchases through neo. I receive a commission from all such purchases.

Archives

Recent Comments

  • John Galt III on News roundup
  • Niketas Choniates on Karmelo Anthony is found guilty of murder
  • Niketas Choniates on News roundup
  • M J R on Karmelo Anthony is found guilty of murder
  • John Guilfoyle on Karmelo Anthony is found guilty of murder

Recent Posts

  • News roundup
  • Karmelo Anthony is found guilty of murder
  • You may have noticed …
  • Open thread 6/9/2026
  • Still having that intermittent “too many requests” error message

Categories

  • A mind is a difficult thing to change: my change story (17)
  • Academia (320)
  • Afghanistan (97)
  • Amazon orders (6)
  • Arts (8)
  • Baseball and sports (162)
  • Best of neo-neocon (91)
  • Biden (536)
  • Blogging and bloggers (584)
  • Dance (288)
  • Disaster (240)
  • Education (321)
  • Election 2012 (360)
  • Election 2016 (565)
  • Election 2018 (32)
  • Election 2020 (511)
  • Election 2022 (114)
  • Election 2024 (403)
  • Election 2026 (49)
  • Election 2028 (9)
  • Evil (129)
  • Fashion and beauty (323)
  • Finance and economics (1,024)
  • Food (316)
  • Friendship (47)
  • Gardening (18)
  • General information about neo (4)
  • Getting philosophical: life, love, the universe (730)
  • Health (1,141)
  • Health care reform (545)
  • Hillary Clinton (184)
  • Historical figures (333)
  • History (707)
  • Immigration (433)
  • Iran (446)
  • Iraq (225)
  • IRS scandal (71)
  • Israel/Palestine (807)
  • Jews (429)
  • Language and grammar (361)
  • Latin America (204)
  • Law (2,932)
  • Leaving the circle: political apostasy (124)
  • Liberals and conservatives; left and right (1,288)
  • Liberty (1,106)
  • Literary leftists (14)
  • Literature and writing (390)
  • Me, myself, and I (1,480)
  • Men and women; marriage and divorce and sex (916)
  • Middle East (382)
  • Military (322)
  • Movies (348)
  • Music (528)
  • Nature (257)
  • Neocons (32)
  • New England (178)
  • Obama (1,737)
  • Pacifism (16)
  • Painting, sculpture, photography (129)
  • Palin (93)
  • Paris and France2 trial (25)
  • People of interest (1,026)
  • Poetry (256)
  • Political changers (176)
  • Politics (2,780)
  • Pop culture (395)
  • Press (1,627)
  • Race and racism (867)
  • Religion (423)
  • Romney (164)
  • Ryan (16)
  • Science (629)
  • Terrorism and terrorists (967)
  • Theater and TV (265)
  • Therapy (69)
  • Trump (1,613)
  • Uncategorized (4,442)
  • Vietnam (109)
  • Violence (1,423)
  • War and Peace (1,003)

Blogroll

Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
DanielInVenezuela (liberty)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (shrink archives)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor’s Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
Maggie’sFarm (togetherness)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
MichelleObama’sMirror (reflect)
NoPasaran! (bluntFrench)
NormanGeras (archives)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob)
Pamela Geller (Atlas Shrugs)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (exodus)
Powerline (foursight)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RedState (conservative)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
©2026 - The New Neo - Weaver Xtreme Theme Email
Web Analytics
↑