The Spectacle Blog

Re: Golden Globes

By on 1.16.06 | 11:20PM

I watched part of the first season of 24 and a couple of episodes last season. But you can't miss an episode if you want to catch every plot twist, and I guess I've never been convinced that it's worth the commitment. (Another factor: My bride-to-be is uninterested. There aren't many shows that I watch alone anymore.)

I generally find the Globes less frustrating than the Oscars, so I usually catch them. Steve Carrell's hilarious acceptance speech alone was worth my time. As far as Davis is concerned, I didn't really have a dog (figuratively speaking!) in the Best TV Actress fight, so I wasn't too upset. (I can't really comment on the Best Drama award -- I'm not a good enough person to have seen Brokeback Mountain yet.)

Send to Kindle

Mark Judge Live on Laura Ingraham

By on 1.16.06 | 10:42PM

Mark Gauvreau Judge, whose recent column "Right-Wingtips" sparked quite a counter-revolution (e.g. here), will be a guest on Laura Ingraham's show Tuesday in the 10 a.m. ET slot. Don't miss him. And please be nice.

Send to Kindle

Re: Golden Globes

By on 1.16.06 | 10:39PM

John: Obviously you are not a 24 fan as you chose the Golden Globes for your post-season Monday Night Football night TV-filler. What a shame. An awards show that honors Geena Davis and her heavy-makeupped performance in Commander in Chief instead of a show that keeps up the fight between good and evil free of the Left Coast's melodramic. Give it a try next Monday night. The only good thing that came out of the Golden Globes tonight was that Kiefer Sutherland's real-life father, Donald, didn't win for his uber-aggressive imitation of a "Republican" in Chief.

The real question, though, is when the Nielson ratings come out tomorrow who will the real winner be? 24 or the Globes?

Send to Kindle

Golden Globes

By on 1.16.06 | 9:04PM

Paradise Now won for best foreign film. Its country of origin? Palestine. This brings to mind Cathy Seipp's account of a conversation with Oliver Stone:

[H]e went on to say that he'd just returned from Palestine, where he'd been interviewing Arafat. I asked if that was a package tour that included stopovers in Utopia and Xanadu. The conversation kind of went downhill from there, and luckily the valet soon pulled up with Stone's car.
Send to Kindle

Re: Sixty days

By on 1.16.06 | 8:43PM

Jed: If it were true that pedophiles have a nearly 100% recidivism rate, then it wouldn't really matter if Hulett were released in 60 days or 20 years, since he'd be all but guaranteed to prey on another kid. Indeed, getting him on easy-to-break parole, making it possible to impose a life sentence without him actually hurting another child, would be ideal. Fortunately, that's not true at all.

Here's some data on the subject. The most pessimistic study cited shows a 53% recidivism rate for child molesters. And while the data isn't quite conclusive, there is indeed some evidence that treatment makes a significant difference.

Send to Kindle

Re: Sixty Days

By on 1.16.06 | 6:08PM

John: It is absolutely not any more complicated in any respect. It's absurd to say, as the judge did, that he is more concerned with rehabilitation than punishment. This judge and his apologists are setting up the idea that this man is susceptible of rehabilitation, which is contrary to ALL the available data. The incidence of recidivism in pedophiles is nearly 100%, regardless of treatment, counseling, clay modeling or singing Kumbaya in group therapy. What purpose does our criminal justice system serve if not to protect the innocent -- especially the defenseless -- from those who will do them harm?

The judge had an obligation to take this animal off the streets. He didn't do so. That judge is allowing a convicted child rapist out on the streets again to victimize more children in less time than a shoplifter might serve in jail. The sentence should be -- and, I expect will be -- and the judge removed from the bench forthwith. If I had small children and this animal were roaming around, I couldn't let those kids out of my sight. Should that be my burden?

Send to Kindle

Re: Sixty days

By on 1.16.06 | 5:44PM

Careful there, Jed. The story's a bit more complicated than that.

Because Hulett was a first-time offender, Corrections Department officials told the judge that he wouldn't receive sex-offender treatment while in prison. The judge worried that without treatment, Hulett would go on to abuse more children as soon as he was let out of jail. He set the sentence at a 60-day minimum so that Hulett could be released under stringent conditions, including a treatment requirement. The judge made some mush-headed comments about "punishment" not being important, but his basic contention that sex-offenders need therapy isn't wrong.

Now that the state is offering Hulbett treatment in jail, one expects that the judge will reconsider the sentence.

Send to Kindle

Sixty days

By on 1.16.06 | 4:35PM

That's how long a Vermont judge gave convicted child rapist Mark Hulett for repeatedly raping a little girl. To say this is a disgrace to the legal system is to understate its importance and the injustice of it by several orders of magnitude. the judge should be removed from the bench forthwith. He is unfit for the job.

The best comment on this legal horror was made by a writer to John Gibson's show on FNC. The gent, having survived the Alito hearings, wrote last week that it seemed the sentence was shorter than a Joe Biden question. 'Tis sad, 'tis true. 'Tis true, 'tis sad.

Send to Kindle

Indy Radio

By on 1.16.06 | 4:09PM

I'm subbing for Greg Garrison tomorrow on his WIBC show broadcast in the Indianapolis area, 9-12 EST. And not only because TAS has Indiana roots but because his story in today's NY Sun is a real grabber, RET will be one of our guests. See ya on the radio tomorrow am.

Send to Kindle

Monologues at Catholic Colleges

By on 1.16.06 | 3:35PM

There's been much to-do at the University of Notre Dame for its allowing the presentation of the Vagina Monologues, and a Queer Film Festival. President Fr. John Jenkins will be delve into the controversy next Tuesday, January 24 in an address titled, "Academic Freedom and Catholic Character." Unless he's announcing that Notre Dame is cancelling such events in the future, this may be an empty teaching moment.

Send to Kindle