This character is a parody of a conservative . . . please? (.pdf)
And here's Wis. Sen. Glenn Grothman telling the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel that education "can have harmful psychological effects."
Sen. Grothman himself has a law degree [!] so maybe he's correct, although Grothman's attendance at the University of Wisconsin law school apparently predated the tenure of top blogger/law perfesser Ann Althouse, thus mitigating the harmful psychological effects.
For years Grothman has served the good people of Washington County, where his many admirers compare him favorably to Louie Gohmert, and his detractors disfavorably to a block of softwood.
i think they made a movie of "grothman." it was a sequel to "the amazing shrinking man."
ReplyDeletethis is totally unrelated, but could you post your thoughts about the DOMA lawfirm controversy? I don't know if you do requests, but this seems "legal" so...
ReplyDeleteYou know what, I don't even know who's on whose side in that thing, so I'm not sure what Clement's beef is. I thought it was more of a conflict of interest deal rather than either sympathy with or antagonism toward the gay-marryers. Sorry but that's about all I got! (I have a lot of catching up to do on a lot of things.)
ReplyDeleteBenefits lost if the single mother marries a man earning $35,000 a year. In other words, if joint family income goes from poverty-level to somewhere in the middle class range, she no longer gets benefits aimed to support the working poor.
ReplyDeleteNow why didn't the marry her to a man who also earns $15,000 a year (or $21K, to account for the fact that women earn about 70 cents on the dollar, relative to similarly qualified men), and who brings two children of his own into the marriage? That's the only way to show that there a "penalty" for marriage.
Or they could have gone all the way and show what happens if she married a man who earns a million dollars a year. Then you could count her $15K as being taxed in the top marginal tax rate, or worse yet, have to pay the AMT.
I'm not sure what Clement's beef is
ReplyDeleteBasically, it's the "legal representation does not imply endorsement" thing. Dahlia Lithwick tackled it yesterday.