But then what does “if you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided” mean? As a non-lawyer, I can’t see any other way to interpret that part of Miranda…
That’s where the ‘slave’ part comes in.
Are you saying that Rand Paul does consider lawyers slaves? Or something else?
The law requires that you have a lawyer but not that the lawyer gets paid, see?
What McCain is non-stupidly responding to, is stupid. Was that not clear?
I’m not intentionally trying to be dense, but…no, I don’t see. A defendant is guaranteed a lawyer. Apparently, by your words, that lawyer may not be paid. By my reading of Rand Paul’s words, that’s slavery to him.
If I’m wrong, I don’t understand why…so, I’ll ask again: Are you saying that Rand Paul does consider lawyers slaves?
I’ll say that Rand Paul is an idiot, because no one is dragging lawyers out of their corner offices, stuffing them in cages and selling them to wealthy crack dealers to defend them in court for free.
Public defenders are paid quite well. They defend people who can’t afford lawyers willingly. That’s what their job is. Where Rand Paul gets, “that’s slavery” is between him and his psychiatrist.
I think you got whooshed by Biggirl, DS.
Oh, I’m sure he can find slavery inherent in the collection of taxpayer dollars to pay the PDs. Of course, that casts taxpayers in the role of slaves, rather than lawyers, but since his quoted words don’t actually mention lawyers, I’ll leave further speculation on the subject of his thoughts vis-a-vis Public Defenders and slavery to others.
It could be worse. It’s not like they’re removing standards on purifying water in cities for the free market, are they?
http://quorumcall.wispolitics.com/2011/05/assembly-passes-bill-ending-requirement.html
http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/121603108.html
Oh god.
:smack: Huh. Unintentionally dense, but in a different way than expected.
Of course they are slaves. Don’t you remember when we went to the African area known as Lawyerland and grabbed all the people living there and brought them here in chains? Then we took them to America where we forced them to attend law school. Then we continued the subjugation by making them take high paying jobs. The shame of America ,lawyer slavery.
They just want their… FREEDOM.
The right to legal counsel doesn’t come from Miranda. Miranda established that suspects had to be advised of their right to counsel.
The point is that the right to have the government pay for your counsel only attaches when the suspect cannot afford one himself (whereas Paul is presumably talking about universal healthcare, which is the logical result of “a right to healthcare”).
Obviously, Paul’s comments are moronic, but the rebuttal used by the Salon writer doesn’t really hold up either.
[QUOTE=Knorf]
What McCain is non-stupidly responding to, is stupid. Was that not clear?
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but in the context of this thread it would have made more sense to link to the stupidity itself, rather than McCain’s response.
For context, I think it’s not bad to point out the occasional example of Republican non-stupidity.
I guess it’s not like it needs its own thread. 
The irony is that most Republican non-stupidity these days involves contradicting or confronting Republican stupidity.
As a newbie, I found this thread for the first time today. I then had to go back to the beginning, to get up to speed. 60 pages!? I’ve spent the whole day (well, except for napping, and eating) reading this stuff, and I’m not even halfway through!
Why oh why did I turn up my nose at the Evelyn Wood course?
Still, it was too good to miss.
The thread gets better and better as the Republicans get worse and worse, or perhaps dumber and dumberer.
Yeah, I’m chagrinning from ear to ear.
I’d be chagrinning to if they weren’t being elected far too often.