web analytics

It’s good to have friends


One law for them, one for us.


Comment from S. Weasel
Time: July 5, 2016, 9:17 pm

Some British guy is selling this notecard:

That is all.

Comment from Skandia Recluse
Time: July 5, 2016, 9:28 pm

Ya, sure, go ahead and mock US. Just you wait until Rule 50 of the Lisbon Treaty of 2007 is never invoked.

(insert smiley blinky gif here)

Comment from Gromulin
Time: July 5, 2016, 9:44 pm

whats the code for down-twinkles again?

Comment from bikeboy
Time: July 5, 2016, 9:56 pm

I knew all along it was just more of that vast right-wing conspiracy stuff.

Ms. Rodham Clinton is above reproach – a Statesperson, if there ever was one.

/heavy sarcasm

Comment from S. Weasel
Time: July 5, 2016, 9:58 pm

Sigh. I have lost my down-twinkles. And Skandia is probably right…

Comment from Anonymous
Time: July 5, 2016, 11:01 pm

I have said for a long time that the fix is in, and so I am not surprised. Hillary will be installed ahem, elected. Seriously, did you expect the director of the FBI to take the responsibility of impacting a presidential election?

I had purchased a “Giant Meteor 2016” bumper sticker,
but now I’m looking for a LET IT ALL BURN sticker.

To change the subject, isn’t amazing how many swamps the Clintons manage to stroll through with getting dirty?

Comment from OldFert
Time: July 5, 2016, 11:49 pm

Anonymous — Regarding getting dirty: Oh, they get dirty all right. They just don’t care. And neither do their enablers and serfs.

Comment from Feynmangroupie
Time: July 6, 2016, 12:13 am

It’s not dirt when it’s the American Aristocracy…it’s haute couture.

Comment from Subotai Bahadur
Time: July 6, 2016, 8:11 am

Yes, she has friends. And she and her friends have a growing number of mortal enemies. The late lamented rule of law had more than one purpose. Under the Constitution, it protected us from them. But it also protected them against us. And there are a lot more of us. Americans no longer have a MORAL obligation to obey the law. They do have a practical need to appear to obey the law, not because of any legitimacy of the government and the laws, but because the State can deploy more deadly force against citizens at the moment. In the absence of the rule of law and a legitimate government, the eventual recourse is going to be to cancel out that adjective “more”. It is what happens when there is no consent of the governed.

Comment from technochitlin
Time: July 6, 2016, 1:36 pm

SB is right. I never thought that, on my downhill slide towards the twilight of my life, I would be witnessing the disintegration of the greatest experiment in self-government ever conducted. But there it is. Heinlein, in a way, was right. These ARE the ‘Crazy Years’.

I too feel the practical obligation to get along. When the moral obligation asserts itself will be determined by future events.

Comment from Wolfus Aurelius
Time: July 6, 2016, 1:51 pm

Heinlein, in a way, was right. These ARE the ‘Crazy Years’.
Oh, RAH was right . . . but he was off by several orders of magnitude. The “Crazy Years” he showed us headlines from in Methuselah’s Children are to our current insanity as a mild compulsive neurosis is to savage paranoid schizophrenia.

Comment from Wolfus Aurelius
Time: July 6, 2016, 5:15 pm

Oh, and Stoaty, this story from your old territory: http://boston.cbslocal.com/2016/07/06/westerly-walmart-rabies-rhode-island-rabid-animal/ “At least two people were reportedly bitten by a small black mammal that might have been a ferret, mink or weasel[.]”

Comment from S. Weasel
Time: July 6, 2016, 8:14 pm

Hurrah for the rabid weasel!

What happened to my ratings thingie? I went to uprate Sabotai Bahadur and it was gone.

Must investigate…

Comment from tomfrompv
Time: July 6, 2016, 8:53 pm

I hate to be a grump, but while Sabotai made an emotionally compelling point, in reality its pretty much meaningless.

I mean, what are you going to do? Run a stop sign at 3AM? BFD. You still have to pay every tax or you lose your property or go to jail or be killed by the police. You still have to accept illegal immigrant criminals. You still have to drive on crap roads because the tax money is spent on things the ruling class wants. You still have to watch your country being looted by the likes of Hillary.

Face it, Hillary and Ryan and McConnell and 100s of others in the elites couldn’t give a damn about you or the country. They all us all by the short ones, they know it too. Witness Comey, the arrogant SOB couldn’t even take a question.

I’m in this grumpy mood because of an interview I heard on SkyNews on the uselessness of the Brexit vote. When the govt fails to implement it, so what? The elites have the Brits by the short ones too.

Comment from AliceH
Time: July 7, 2016, 12:21 am

Well, I, for one, am being given my 10th opportunity to serve on a jury (I’ve already served on 5). If the defendant isn’t an outright scumbag danger to society, I will be thinking long and hard about nullification. Either equality before the law applies to us all, or it applies to none.

Comment from Subotai Bahadur
Time: July 7, 2016, 6:04 am

Comment from AliceH
Time: July 7, 2016, 12:21 am

I commend that course of action wholeheartedly. In fact, in a newspaper column I will be writing tomorrow, that is one of several steps I am going to be recommending. If the government lies to us about the equal application of the law, we have the right to lie right back to them on the same subject. With the caveat about the active dangers to society, nullification is one of the best weapons.

Comment from S. Weasel
Time: July 7, 2016, 2:48 pm

Tom, they’re making a lot of noise about ignoring the referendum, which was technically non-binding. But if they do that, the implications are genuinely huge. Even many Remainers would have a big problem with that.

Comment from Ric Fan
Time: July 7, 2016, 4:04 pm

If you want to announce in open court that you believe in jury nullification, I have no problems with that. However, you will of course be excused from the jury. A lot of time and effort go into presenting a case to a jury and I dont think it is fair to the people involed to throw the case.

Comment from Nina
Time: July 7, 2016, 6:43 pm

Times like these I’m tempted to say screw it, dump the chemo, and let the bastard just take me down.

But then I remember that my sister is taking me to Disneyland for my 60th birthday in the Fall, and I think I don’t want to miss THAT. And I’ve already booked my flights to Vancouver next month to see the HK grandbabies; I don’t want to have to change that booking, either.

Better hang around until Christmas, just in case. 😜

Comment from tomfrompv
Time: July 8, 2016, 3:38 am

So it turns out the FBI has no transcript of Hillary’s interview with the FBI, so the public has no idea what was and wasn’t asked. So that renders the Congress impotent when it comes to PERJURY charges against Hillary for all those lies she told to Congress, under oath. Nice.

Meanwhile, Paul Ryan complains about 6 pointed stars, but says nothing about perjury charges.

Given this, why not lie all the time to courts, FBI, and everyone else in govt. Jury nullification sounds perfectly OK – if it suits your purpose, do it.

Write a comment

(as if I cared)

(yeah. I'm going to write)

(oooo! you have a website?)

Beware: more than one link in a comment is apt to earn you a trip to the spam filter, where you will remain -- cold, frightened and alone -- until I remember to clean the trap. But, hey, without Akismet, we'd be up to our asses in...well, ass porn, mostly.

<< carry me back to ol' virginny