I’ve been reading as much as I can (a killer migraine that set in after a weekend of too much booze and coffee and tension and too little sleep finally knocked me on my ass Monday) about this underwear bombing nonsense, and how this somehow proves BUSH ROOLZ OBAMA DROOLZ or something.
Because having a thwarted terrorist attack on your watch means you suck at thwarting terrorist attacks. Obama being president makes us such a nation of pussies that Americans managed to stop this moron from lighting his balls on fire by kicking his ass on the plane.
And now we can’t try this or any other fuckwit who pulls something on a plane because that will give the terrorists what they really want: an episode of Law and Order?
I’ve been waiting for eight years for the judiciary as a whole to stand up and say, “Enough with casting us as either useless or completely fucking useless, you power-crazed lunatic military fetishists,” but I have a feeling that’s a train not coming. Am I getting this? I’m still kind of drugged up.
A.
It’s all political posturing, and that’s something that the judiciary, ahem, and I say with reservations, is supposed to be above.
That may be part of the reticence. Surely, the other part is that the moment a judge pops up saying, “this is the way the judicial system is supposed to work,” the bloody shirt-waving wingnutz start screaming, “oh, you mean like the Moussaoui trial?” And, then they start a symbolic campaign to have the judge impeached because he or she is “soft on terrorists.”
It’s a no-win situation for the good jurists, and the bad ones enjoy seeing their competent counterparts skewered.
Are we going to have to remove our underwear to get on a plane now?
The Repubs have a hard on for torturing people. If they can get “terrorists” tried outside of the US Justice system they get to imagine all sorts of weird things they can do to the guy, involving electric shocks, hot irons, even copies of their favorite hard porn. I suspect this opportunity to let their fevered imaginations loose is behind the desire to “try” this guy outside of our regular courts. But, didn’t we all know that a group that would vote for GWBush and again for Sarah P. has to be deviant, at best.
how about the gnews not letting returds get away with lies?
Madness you say? Just because Obama’s TSA nominee has been held up by the SC Demint for over 1/2 a year? Just because this is being used as a push for body screens (even though one could secrete munitions within their body)? etc. etc.
This is why you need backbench members of your party to be kind of assholes. Where is Alan Grayson saying ‘if some spoiled rich kid lighting his own testicles on fire in an Al-Qaeda success, we’re close to winning this damn thing’. It shouldn’t just be bloggers making jokes about Ball-Qaeda losing one of it’s own.
Well, unplug your precious brain. It is drawing down the power supply. Courts, we don’t need your stinking courts. We got 6 out of 9 Supreme Joke justices that worship a dress wearing Prada shoed probably homosexual in Rome. You need to realize that these clowns actually express a belief that this Nazi youth is infallible. That is the company line and they will toe it.
I screamed when the 5th catholic asshole was on the court.
I died away in screaming laughter when the sixth catholic joined the joke.
When you start to understand that the Pope will oppose or support every single case before the court then you will understand why there was a reformation.
If you think that anything that you want has to be approved of by the pope, then you will understand why there was meant to be a division between church and state. This is just exactly why the founders stated it so specifically.
Oh, those huge settlements against the catholic for their lying, thieving, baby raping, raping boys and women will disappear. Pope doesn’t pay if he owns the court. Cappice?