Jump to content

softlynow

Certifiably Surly
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1245

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by softlynow

  1. softlynow
    The Courts can restrain, you say? Them and what army?
  2. softlynow
    He's talking about SCOTUS deligitimizing the federal government to the point that only pure power matters. Biden can do what he wants, within the practical limits of his power. He is immune from criminal prosecution for official acts. To the extent that he can direct people to act, he is unrestrained.
  3. softlynow
    Yep. Our little experiment only carries on as long as the people buy in. One half of the electorate was already ready to be done with the republic. 6 justices are trying their best to persuade the other half. Long live King Biden I! He should act like it lest he be responsible for Dotard I.
  4. softlynow
    Some of my clients saw arrest as temporary and desirable a solution to that problem, though those "commitments" were essentially voluntary.
  5. softlynow
    I'm given their name and access to the state's file on day 1. Those with moderated to severe illness are almost always still in jail when I am assigned. I have seen a few of them a couple or many years later. I mostly don't disagree with anything you've said. But I would add that the folks with less severe issues than you describe are also a problem we've decided to mostly ignore, outside of the criminal justice system. One point I take issue with: we DO involuntarily commit. A lot. We just call it "arrest." Then we don't treat them, for the most part. I've had many, many discussions with ADAs and judges about whether any of our very limited mental health resources are available for a client. I'd say less than 5% of the time, it's even a possibility. A tiny portion of that get to treatment. I would guess that 75% of our homeless population has a criminal record, even if we disregard tresspassing convictions, which is really just a Scarlet H.
  6. softlynow
    Swift / Kelce '24 No Travis. Jason.
  7. softlynow
    I'll allow it.
  8. softlynow
    @Dbeasy, now that I'm caught up on the deck chairs arranging that is this homelessness argument, I just gotta say you have been a terrible advocate for this ruling. I think it was correctly decided, but seeing your posts before the ruling, I was initially inclined the other way. JMO, but you could do with some nuance in your argumentation. And you should focus on the actual opinion, not our general policies w/r/t the homeless. The first couple pages of the opinion do a good job of walking one through what should and should not be considered "cruel and unusual." That would've been a better place for you to ground your position. Just a little constructive criticism.
  9. softlynow
    I've represented several dozen formally diagnose as schizoaffective. Several dozen more with other mental illnesses that contributed to anti-social behavior. I was appointed to represent them because they had no money or significant property. And? I think the question is whether they are homeless involuntarily. I'm not aware of people voluntarily becoming schizoaffective. Just want to know where you're going with this.
  10. softlynow
    Law school is, first and foremost, a means to an income. Every other consideration is secondary. Right now law students and recent grads are seeing that corruption can be quite lucrative and their opportunities in that field are increasing. Why would they want a refund?
  11. softlynow
    It's not a great movie, but Elysium seems like one of the most plausible dystopian futures, given current trends.
  12. softlynow
    I’m sorry. Were y’all really expecting the Court to not hand Trump an assist by delaying the immunity decision as long as necessary? On the 1/6 cases, how many of the defendants are solely charged with the obstruction statute SCOTUS dealt with? In this case, I believe it was only 1 of 7 charges. The others they did not discuss. Hardly a resounding win for that defendant.
  13. softlynow
    Tap the brakes. Jackson concurred with the majority. I skimmed the majority and the concurrence, and, while I didn't see enough to analyze the opinion itself, that quick read does tell me this will have a very limited impact on 1/6 prosecutions.
  14. softlynow
    Trump immunity ruling from SCOTUS stops that cycle.
  15. softlynow
    If the election was in July, very.
  16. softlynow
    Let me clarify. Undecideds. Like you say, there are lots of indys that are already decided. They aren't likely changing their vote after tonight.
  17. softlynow
    Well, it looks like the cooler heads are now prevailing in this thread. Fun while it lasted.
  18. softlynow
    To that point, they're usually independent because they don't pay attention until the end.
  19. softlynow
    Let's see where things are in a few months, but the bolded seems like a gut shot reaction. I have a couple aggy friends who texted me after learning the Schloss news, and you'd have thought I personally shot their dog, cut off their testicles fed them to their mother and burned down their church. By this evening, they remembered that they barely cared about college baseball, and our conversations normalized. I didn't watch the debate, and haven't bothered with low or highlights yet. I can imagine that those of y'all who did are feeling like aggy upon learning that we played Lucy with the football to their Charlie Brown, yet again. That feeling will fade. If this had been an October debate, different story. It's fucking June.
  20. softlynow
    Which leads me to ask again, why the fuck did we have a June debate? I saw somewhere this was at the Dems urging. If true, was it because they wanted a possible first run bomb to be buried 4.5 months before the election, with the nomination serving as a scripted bounce back?
  21. softlynow
    Ex-Republicans really are the best allies these days.
  22. softlynow
    Nah. That's old news. Stories are new stuff. Hawk tuah, not Scottie Scheffler's arrest. Everyone who may actually watch CNN knows Trump is a liar. That's ancient history by their standards. New drives clicks, sells ads. Run old shit, and you just lost someone to the Stanley Cup or to their TikTok feed. If the Biden campaign is savvy, they'll break the news cycle with something new. Who knows, maybe they needed this to allow some ignored jr. staffer to run with some risky, but high upside stunt?
  23. softlynow
    Why, the fuck, did they even stage one in June?
  24. softlynow
    80. I'd nominate him for governor of Nebraska, though.
  25. softlynow
    Mack Brown, 72, is tanned, rested and ready.

Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...