Existential Twits and the Case for Lying Through Their Teeth

I have always been fascinated by language and how flexible and nuanced our communications could be. Growing up with television, radio and magazine ads became an endless game of “what are they trying to make you think they are saying” and “what are they really saying”. “Who benefits” detectives ask when analyzing a possible crime. It was good clean fun!

But now the BS and word-juggling that we are used to are being replaced by an influx of Middle-Eastern style political and commercial speech; in a nutshell, blatantly lying through your teeth is ok as long as your emotional state is extreme. Passion in speech is coming to replace truth as the bottom line for public in the marketplace of ideas. From the speeches of President Obama to the impassioned rhetoric about “consensus” in the AGW pronouncements we see facts being over-ridden by no more than the verbal tantrums of un-elected “leaders” pursuing goals hidden in clouds of misdirection, arrogance and secrecy.

The Trayvon Martin / George Zimmerman case is the poster-child for the new trend in Pravda so, let’s take a look at a recent piece by a poster-child of the new breed of “statesman” whose tongue never fails to drip honey and venom in mixtures so subtle one imagines his words crafted in Ahmadinejad’s most sophisticated laboratory. This piece is fairly typical of Aslan Media’s kinder-and-gentler form of self-righteous character assassination.

Existential Threats And the Case of Trayvon Martin

The first round of the Trayvon Martin saga is finally over. George Zimmerman is behind bars 45 days after the shooting of an unarmed African American teenager — an act that snowballed into a national soul searching crisis that evoked strong and poignant questions about race and racism in America.

It just dawned on me how similar the semantics in this article are to those used by passive-aggressives in deflecting all responsibility onto another party; never admitting who the real actors are/were in any situation.

Instead of revealing the vast and co-ordinated politicization that preceded the arrest or mentioning the slanted audio and video editing and carefully chosen photographs of Martin before his transformation into a blossoming thug as causes for the “snowballing” the author assigns sole blame to the shooting itself. His mind is as made up on the facts as he wants yours to be Virginia!

Activists, celebrities and ordinary citizens stepped up to express their outrage and demand justice. Tweets from Justin Bieber and Spike Lee along with thousands of angry phone calls flooded the airwaves; and civil rights politicians like Reverend Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson came out to denounce the act as an egregious example of racist hate crime.

So? Not one of them has a single fact that the rest of us have not been given;since when does the opinion of a singer whose testicles have yet to fully drop or a racist film-maker with an ax to grind have to do with the truth of what did or did not happen that night in Florida? Or with the dispensing of “justice” in this case?

Oh, and will someone please tell the author that Sharpton and Jackson are not politicians; they both shun standing for office (sad truth, if elected they would actually have to DO something – it is far easier to stand on the sidelines and throw wrenches into the spokes while profiting from the problems).

The Rainbow Push coalition held hands, singing “We Shall Overcome” and the “Million Hoodie March” rallied in cities across America. In a short period of time, over 2 million signatures petitioned for the arrest of George Zimmerman who continued to invoke self-defense under the “Stand-Your-Ground” law, which expands the rights of citizens to use deadly force in any public space if they feel threatened.

Again, so what? All the emoting and hand-holding in the world will change nothing in the facts of the Martin/Zimmerman incident; rule of law is rule of law, not rule of law unless the mob disagrees; no matter how weepy the mob!

The law which has been promoted by the National Rifle Association and Republican politicians has now been passed in 25 States and since its enactment in 2005, “justifiable” murders have increased several fold – 36 in Florida, up from 12 just 5 years ago. Had the other 24 been literally getting away with murder before the law, or are we getting jumpier as a nation?

Everything in the above paragraph is hyperbolic spin and emoting; facts mean nothing, the audience being on his side seems to be the only concern of the author. The author sets himself entirely above the court system by putting scare quotes around justified and changing homicide to murder; he is not content with casting doubt on the justifiable in “Justifiable Homicide”, he wants you to know that it was not only un-justified but murder as well.

The last bit is the kicker though! The author simply assumes that anyone who is free after having avoided prosecution for a defensive killing is getting away with murder! He fails to admit even the possibility that up to 24 people had been shielded from unjust prosecution for an act of self-defense that before the new legislation might have ended with them in prison, and their families devastated!

… The national debate is curiously timely considering the broader global context.

An obviously manufactured “debate” that took weeks of aggressive rabble-rousing to accomplish is curiously timely? R-i-i-i-i-g-h-t!

That was funny, tell me another one!

In the past ten years, since the attacks on the Twin Towers, the U.S. has been increasingly basing its foreign policy narrative on the concept of preventive and pre-emptive attacks.

Over the course of the past decade what started as a deadly attack by a handful of non-state loosely aligned actors in New York City, has lead to the invasion of several countries, the death of hundreds of thousand, and the displacement of millions in the Middle East and beyond as America consistently “stood its ground”.

What the hell is a “narrative”? Our foreign policy, wise or unwise, has been based on the events and acts of the nations and groups involved. Sorry to have to point it out but, the proper English would be “handful of loosely aligned, non-state actors”.

As to the invasion of Afghanistan, that is what happens when a state decides to make non-state actors into state-actors by shielding them; I never supported the invasion of Iraq.

The rest is more bile and spin all aimed at holding the U.S. responsible as an international criminal for responding in any fashion at all to the hateful and racist thugs that are spilling over the globe from the author’s back yard.

There was one more funny bit; the author casually reveals his racist viewpoint…

more than our European counterparts who seem to prefer sex – thanks to their Mediterranean DNA

There you have it! Europeans are hornier than Americans because they have Mediterranean DNA; culture means nothing, blood is all according to the author of this flight of propagandistic fantasy!

Read it all and be amused, amazed.

Why “A Million Lawyers at the Bottom of the Ocean” is Hardly a Start At All

While political processes are ongoing and never-ending we all tend to measure such changes in terms of our own lives; for me, one of the most significant changes to the worse was in the 1970’s when lawyers were allowed to advertise. The ruling forced lawyers to be known, to have a public reputation, in order to thrive, or even survive as a lawyer. They might have a trickle of new clients from folks in need of legal counsel picking their name out of the white pages but, most of their practice came from referrals and from knowing the people personally; lawyers for decades were very big on joining social clubs, charities, associations and what-not in order to build their network. Gee Virginia, it must have been awful back then, billions of man-hours worth of time and money going to social and charitable causes instead of billboards and Radio/TV ads promising a HUGE CASH AWARD for Your Illness or Injury.

The problem with the old rule was that it was never a law; it was merely a Bar Association ruling of long standing and tradition. You see old school lawyers understood how advertising would cheapen, rightfully, their profession in the public’s perception; they applied the rule so as to prevent very same accurate contempt for the legal profession as now obtains!

It took the Supreme Court to force the national bar association to abandon this tradition with Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977).

Within ten years of the rule being relaxed the population of U.S. lawyers had exploded and the era of Clarence Darrow entered its twilight while the reign of Morris Bart and James T. Sokolov et. al. began!

Now, we have the Supreme Court itself so politicized that one faction used its power to excuse a blatant act of corporate-funded electioneering only to see the other faction’s party take their precedent and run it to Hell and back. I am referring of course to the ruling that allowed corporate “persons” suddenly, after over two hundred years of only having right to commercial speech, to obtain a right to political free speech identical to an individual human citizen.

What is the other party doing about it? Nothing, except rush to set up their own corporate slush funds to further distort the election process and disenfranchise the voting citizen that is.

Voting Public is Asking – Why is My Leader, My Enemy?

“… sometimes, I f-e-e-l, like a motherless ch-i-i-i-ld.”, actually I have lately been feeling like a brother-less moderate; the partisanship is getting thick in here, ma!

On both the Left and Right pundits are increasingly obsessed with avoiding objectivity and demonizing the opposition; which is all the more opposite for having been forced further into toxic polarity by the aggression of “Our Heroes”, whichever party to which they may be ideologically attached. The theme of the first two decades of the new millennium seems to be, “Life in America will be utopia just as soon as we control the herd (also known as citizens) enough to eliminate the opposition party from participation in the body politic!!!”

If you want to know how someone really feels about Free Speech or Censorship simply ask them about a case involving someone or something they themselves oppose; be prepared to be stunned at the number of proto-fascists amongst your friends and family. Very few people today, especially those under 35, seem to care about the basic principals of innocence before guilt or that of protecting minority speech in order to protect your own. Today everyone with a public seems to be in love with the notion that good intentions will always lead ultimately to Heaven, once selfish, nasty evil intentioned bad-guys are pushed from office. The problem is that they abound on both sides of every debate in sight!

I have pointed out many times that the major problems with our system are things that neither side wishes to repair; political “reform” is virtually always a smokescreen for shoving one group out of power while another group takes that same power to use for their own ends.

All the campaign finance reform bills – the voting district gerrymandering acts, the “crime” bills, all the family and child protection “reforms” just hide the hand of one thief stealing from the previous thief who stole from the thief before that something that belongs to the people, namely political power.

All that is needed to repair our government is for the voters to demand an end to all privately financed campaigning. If every candidate for every elective office from town cop to President of the United States drew from a equally divided pools of funds our political horizons would clear within ten years after such a rule went into effect; an additional benefit could be obtained by forbidding anyone from receiving payment for their time (as opposed to just covering their transportation and lodging expenses) while lobbying a government office or official.

The sad fact is that for most of our nation’s history any politician known to have accepted any contribution from a business interest would immediately have been seen as “tainted” in the voters’ eyes and been highly unlikely to be elected, or if incumbent, re-elected.

The sadder fact, Virginia, is that it is easy to makes evil changes to a society if you take a long enough view.