This woman is doing nothing unusual. She’s hovering close to the baggage screener, overseeing his rummage through her belongings.
The fat, thuggish, affirmative appointees then zero-in on her and proceed to toss her across the room. Then they climb into her.
The lowly subject clearly angered her overlords. A snippy word, perhaps? How dare she!
In a free society NO ONE has the right to lay a hand on another absent a clear threat of physical aggression. Verbal provocation is no excuse for this kind of aggression. As I wrote in “Tasers ‘R’ Us”:
Liberty is a simple thing. It’s the unassailable right to shout, flail your arms, even verbally provoke a politician, unmolested. Tyranny is when those small things can get you assaulted, incarcerated, injured, and even killed.
Did the victim, Robin Kassner, look as though she posed a threat to anything other than her captors’ sense of omnipotence?
Of course, America is not a free country, no matter how many freedom concerts Hannity holds.
Why does the ACLU not tackle the tackling and killing of innocent Americans at airports and elsewhere?
The plenary power of pardon granted to the president is extremely broad.
But so far no word about the possible pardon by Bush of incarcerated Border-Patrol agents, Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean.
The president had set a precedent in the case of Ramos and Compean. For defending their country, and in the process shooting a drug smuggler in the derriere, Bush sicced his bloodhound, U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, on these Border Patrol Agents who, absent a pardon, will remain locked up for over a decade.
Although Bush has yet to pardon Scooter Libby, you’ll recall that he commuted his sentence. Bush had spared his fall guy, Lewis Libby, but locked up these patriotic, heroic agents—Ramos and Compean—ostensibly throwing away the key. No remorse expressed from the Creep-in-Chief in their unjust conviction.
I’ve said it before: Bush would wrestle a crocodile for a criminal alien. Soon into his presidency, I also pronounced George W. Bush bad to the bone.
As have I defended evangelical leader Pat Robertson in the past. But he’s clearly just a cog in the well-oiled, oleaginous, Republican Party machine. Robertson was interviewed today by CNN’s Suzanne Malveaux, who asked him about the pardons.
Robertson put his moral might behind making the case for a Scooter-Libby pardon. Now, as I’ve written, “the ‘crime’ for which Libby was convicted was also the crime for which Martha Stewart went to jail: lying to the FBI. Not for leaking the identity of former (so-called) classified CIA operative Valerie Plame. Richard Armitage did that.”
This was yet another abuse of power by crooked outlaw, US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald.
However, given his role in taking us to war, there was some poetic justice in the conviction of Libby (not that I support such justice).
There was no justice—poetic, or other—in the conviction of Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean.
I’m not even going to bother being legally correct and prefacing this with an “allegedly.” (Okay, I will, if I must.)
Coldplay, a crappy band of unmerry noisemakers, about whom I wrote the definitive piece, “Coldplay’s Contrapuntal Incompetence,” has allegedly ripped off Joe Satriani’s instrumental, “If I Could Fly.” (He sure soars musically.)
Although these knaves claim Frida Kahlo inspired “Viva La Vida,” it’s abundantly clear that coldcrap’s muse came not from the Marxist, Mexican artist, but, allegedly, from a good old American boy’s brilliance.
Listen (and resume reading after the clip):
This is an outrage I feel with every fiber, etc., etc. As when one reader wrote in to say a big-name radio talker was practically reading one of my WND columns on the air, claiming the words (chords) and ideas (chord progression) as his own.
As I once wrote, “The marketplace doesn’t adjudicate the quality of art or pop culture—it does no more than offer an aggregate snapshot of the trillions of subjective preferences enacted by consumers. Aguilera (Christina) probably sells more than Ashkenazy (Vladimir) ever did. Britney outdoes Borodin. For some, this will be faith-inspiring, for others deeply distressing.” (February 7, 2003)
Mediocre minds need to feed on their less-known betters. More often than not, the former have managed to climb to the top by catering to vulgar, popular tastes. (For example: The taste for blood Boobus developed facilitated not only the Iraq invasion, but careers for many a war harpy.)
They can steal with impunity from their betters, who’ll never attain the power to be able to sue.
But now the parasite has enraged the host.
Satriani’s law suit is gratifying, although I don’t expect Coldplay to lose face. They’ll be graced, rather than disgraced–much like Paris Hilton after copulating in public.
For fans of good, neoclassical, instrumental rock, I’ll ask the spouse, a formidable composer and instrumentalist himself, to say a word or two about Satriani. He agrees, though, that I’ve covered Coldplay quite adequately.
“Coldplay plays only one or two chords. When they get going, the band musters three. It’s the equivalent of ‘Baa, Baa, Black Sheep,’ maybe ‘Three Blind Mice,’ although these nursery rhymes reveal better melodic progression. Indeed, some harmony might have helped Coldplay’s caterwauling, but consonance, like counterpoint, is nowhere apparent in their ‘music.'”
“The front man also fancies himself a keyboardist. He doubles over the instrument with immense concentration, leading the listener to expect some virtuosity. The sounds that escape from beneath stiff digits are as tortured as a toddler’s hammering away on a play-play piano.”
“Slackers like Coldplay deserve cold contempt. Colorlessly they drone on, sustaining one or two pitches and exhibiting zero proficiency on any of the instruments they belabor. The bassist picks notes in a pedestrian fashion and the guitarist strums simplistically, producing a cacophony with almost no melodic momentum or variation. At the guitarist’s feet lie 10 to 15 effects pedals. But a slight echo in the monotone is the only evidence that he makes use of these sonic supports.”
“The singer openly boasts that to record one of their trills, the band needed hundreds of takes—so many that they eventually gave up. Incapable of playing such simple dirge from beginning to end, our towering talents resorted to a computer to help them piece the bits together. Audiences cheer their admission of incompetence much like they revel in the president’s unfamiliarity with the English language.”
I’m pleased Bill O’Reilly is targeting the left-liberal governor of Washington State. Seldom do I identify with any of the causes BO champions, other than his offensive against sanctuary cities and criminal aliens. I appreciate his passion over those issues. For the rest, he might as well be speaking Greek.
(I’ve noticed BO’s “theories” about Big Bad Oil have taken a back seat of late since market forces combined with an induced recession to render gas prices at an all-time low.)
I also defended BO effectively when he took the unpopular stance of personal responsibility with respect to Shawn Hornbeck.
But notice that BO always argues from the stance of the positive law. There is no such thing as natural justice in his universe, although his righteous anger about crime, by illegals or others, comes close.
In the case at hand, the odious Governor Gregoire sanctioned an atheist diatribe alongside the traditional holiday display of the Nativity scene in the state capitol building. BO defends Christmas on the grounds that it’s a federal holiday. Logical consistency, then, compels him to defend every foul federal holiday, including Martin Luther King’s dedicated day. (I’m sure there are other more ludicrous that the last.)
Since nobody notices how poorly written his columns are, no one will be the wiser about BO’s poorly constructed arguments. (Except those who read this space.) However, his fans would do well to think through how deficient BO’s argument against Gregoire really is.
Think about it: if Christmas were not a public holiday, would the vile, rude display this uncouth woman sanctioned be justified? How do you justify Christmas with reference to this country’s founding faith if you defer to State law that has banished that tradition from the public square?
You can’t! You always come short when you argue from the positive law.
As I’ve written (it’s under Quotables–and you have to attribute), “sometimes the law of the State coincides with the natural law. More often than not, natural justice has been buried under the rubble of legislation and statute.”
How much legislation? A lot:
We labor under over 56,009 pages of laws in the U.S. Code; 134,488 pages of regulatory laws in the Code of Federal Regulation, and more than 68,107 pages of laws in the Federal Register. There are upwards of 2,756 volumes (and counting) of judicial precedent. Correct me if I’m wrong. (Where is my good friend Jerri Ward when I need her?)
