In what kind of world is this an excuse?

Hot Air (via Instapundit), in discussing Attorney General Eric Holder’s admission that he has not read the Arizona law that he is claiming may warrant a constitutional challenge, asks the following:

 Here’s the money question, prompted not just by Holder’s ignorance but the fact that Hillary criticized the statute without having read it either: Are they deliberately not reading it so that they have an excuse to walk back their criticisms later if this gets too hot politically?

So, I ask in response: The bill is 18 pages long.  This man is the attorney general of the United States; he is our highest ranked legal authority.  Hillary Clinton, while not serving in a law based position, is also a trained attorney.  Will the public really accept “I didn’t read the bill before I criticized it” as any sort of excuse whatsoever?  Really? 

My town has been in the mist of a very controversial criminal trial which included frequent complaints that the defendant was getting a raw deal.  One of my friends, who is not an attorney, asked me what my thoughts were on it.  I answered her, but made sure to state very clearly that I was only basing my opinion on what had been offered in some of the main media outlets, and that I had not examined the evidence or studied the proceedings unfiltered.  I specifically said that my answer was only applicable if the coverage I was reading was accurate and complete. 

Now, I don’t get paid to answer legal questions to facebook friends, and she was in no way relying on my answer other than to satisfy her own curiosity, so I can do that without all of the facts.  But, even so, I am an attorney, and she asked me because of my experience; I felt that I owed it to her to answer with the caveats or to give a completely informed answer.  Attorney General Holder owes us a lot more, and he is not following through.

Related: NRO is also outraged, calling this “the most transparently irresponsible administration in history.”


“Barack Obama doesn’t care about country people”

That was the facebook status update of a former classmate or mine who now lives in Nashville. 

Personally, I think he cares alright, just not in the good way. 

More on the media silence about this disaster from Hot Air, Knoxville News Sentinel, and

Update: I guess it’s catching.  Disrupt the Narrative has “Barack Obama doesn’t care about southern people.”  “Perhaps we need Jeff Foxworthy to pull a Kanye West.”

Why are California police detectives acting like 13 year olds?

East Palo Alto Police Det. Rod Tuason apparently posted the remarks on his Facebook page in response to a friend’s status update, which suggested that gun advocates who carry unloaded weapons openly — which is legal in California — should do so in places like “Oakland, Richmond and East Palo Alto” and not just in “hoity toity” cities.

“Haha we had one guy last week try to do it!” Tuason replied. “He got proned out [laid face-down on the ground] and reminded where he was at and that turds will jack him for his gun in a heartbeat!”

Several comments later, the detective suggested shooting the gun rights advocates, some of whom have carried firearms openly in recent weeks in California’s Bay Area, particularly at Starbucks locations.

“Sounds like you had someone practicing their 2nd amendment rights last night!” Tuason wrote. “Should’ve pulled the AR out and prone them all out! And if one of them makes a furtive movement … 2 weeks off!!!” — referring to the modified duty, commonly known as desk duty, that typically follows any instance in which an officer is investigated for firing his weapon.

Now, I don’t think that this is any real threat to our Second Amendment rights; it’s just some idiot blowing off steam.  But it reveals a shocking lack of respect and forethought by a person who we entrust with protecting that right and others who should have known better. 

Is or is not, there is no should

See full size image




There’s a thing that the cool liberal kids on facebook are doing these days, where everybody repeats the following:

(Name) thinks that no one should die because they cannot afford health care, and no one should go broke because they get sick. If you agree, please post this as your status for the rest of the day. See full size image




So, I don’t know what gets to me more, the mindless repetition (one and then the other and then the other, like dominoes, only putting less thought into it), or the unrelenting faith in what “should” be. 

OK, who am I kidding?  Repetition is boring, but what can I say about it?  We already knew that libs love mindless slogans.  It’s the shoulds that get me. 

You hear it every day.  The man should be attracted to what’s on the inside.  People that try should get ahead.  People shouldn’t judge you on your appearance.  It shouldn’t matter how much money you make.  We should be able to trust our elected officials.  Guess what?  This is the real world.  The should world is a myth, a fantasy.  You dwell on what should be, and you miss what is.  You keep on telling yourself that something should be, and next thing you know you’ve convinced yourself that what should be, can be (if only the government would DO something), and you’re ignoring the real world.  The world where government intervention into healthcare leads to rationing and sub-par care.  Maybe it shouldn’t, but it does.