“This is a court of law, young man, not a court of justice.”
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
Friday, October 06, 2006
"LIFE IS LIKE A SHIT SANDWICH...."
The more bread you have, the less shit you have to eat.
Those were the words that came to mind as I read the story in today's Daily Crime about Ocean Pines attorney Christopher Llinas. Llinas, a former member of the Ocean Pines board of directors, was sentenced this week for his role in what the federales called a major drug distribution ring based in Salisbury. Two years of probation, with one of those years to be served on home detention. By contrast, his co-defendants caught 70 months and 14 years in the federal system where there's no parole. Relatively speaking, this is less than a slap on the wrist. Hell, the judge just about gave him a rim-job as he was leaving the courtroom.
This is not to suggest, however, I think he should have gotten prison time, only that all those who were convicted should have gotten similar sentences, whether it was a prison cell or a walk in the park..... But that's not how the legal system works in this country. The way it works is that Justice is not blind, it's just myopic and refuses wear a either blindfold or corrective lenses. So, if you come before the court and you're poor then you're a nigger, regardless of skin tone, and will be dealt with harshly. But if you have means, or if you're a cop, the judge will cite the all good you've done with your life, say you just made a mistake and send you home with a relatively minor penalty.... But that's not the truth, is it? The truth is that that lawyer, that cop, that clergyman, that member of congress used his position of trust and power to prey on others, and he should receive a sentence commiserate with that received by the lowest street criminal. ... If you serve up shit to others, you gotta eat a full portion yourself.
Those were the words that came to mind as I read the story in today's Daily Crime about Ocean Pines attorney Christopher Llinas. Llinas, a former member of the Ocean Pines board of directors, was sentenced this week for his role in what the federales called a major drug distribution ring based in Salisbury. Two years of probation, with one of those years to be served on home detention. By contrast, his co-defendants caught 70 months and 14 years in the federal system where there's no parole. Relatively speaking, this is less than a slap on the wrist. Hell, the judge just about gave him a rim-job as he was leaving the courtroom.
This is not to suggest, however, I think he should have gotten prison time, only that all those who were convicted should have gotten similar sentences, whether it was a prison cell or a walk in the park..... But that's not how the legal system works in this country. The way it works is that Justice is not blind, it's just myopic and refuses wear a either blindfold or corrective lenses. So, if you come before the court and you're poor then you're a nigger, regardless of skin tone, and will be dealt with harshly. But if you have means, or if you're a cop, the judge will cite the all good you've done with your life, say you just made a mistake and send you home with a relatively minor penalty.... But that's not the truth, is it? The truth is that that lawyer, that cop, that clergyman, that member of congress used his position of trust and power to prey on others, and he should receive a sentence commiserate with that received by the lowest street criminal. ... If you serve up shit to others, you gotta eat a full portion yourself.
Thursday, October 05, 2006
THOUGHT FOR TODAY
Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable, let's prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all. -Douglas Adams
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
FOLEY DROPS THE OTHER SHOE TO TRY TO EXPLAIN WHY HE WAS DROPPING HIS PANTS
Oh come on, you had to see this coming two miles down range. Seeking perhaps to mitigate his guilt in the eyes of the public, Mark Foley yesterday went public with a claim that he was molested when he was a boy. .... I see. And how, I want to know, does this excuse, mitigate or even explain his behavior? The answer is that it doesn't. The only thing it does is tell the public that his alleged first-hand knowledge of the damage inflicted on the victims would have kept anyone with an ounce of morality from inflicting it on others. The fact that he apparently couldn't resist his sick urges brands him as a sociopath unfit to walk among us. He needs to go someplace special, someplace where people can keep an eye on sociopaths and control their actions, someplace where he can rest, reflect and retire ... the Atlanta Federal Pen leaps immediately to mind.
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
HOLY SHORTS !
We're beginning to see correlations between the catholic church and Republican Party. Foley steps down, leaps from the closet, and goes to hide in an alcohol rehab facility (Oh great, now he's a pervert and a drunk). Priests get caught with their hands in some young boy's pants and are transferred to another parish or sent to a "rest home." Senior officials in both organizations have knowledge of what's going on but are not punished... This sounds like a RICO crime ... Yup, I'm seeing a pattern, here. Both are really uptight, rigid groups, probably because of repressed sexual issues. Both groups could provide a haven for those who struggle with perversions. Both are a closed society of mostly men.... Hmmmmm. Maybe the G.O.P really stands for Gang Of Pedophiles.
And, for all you conservative family-values types lamenting the loss of one of your leaders, fear not. He's just going to check into rehab, do 60 days and then present himself to you guys as healed from the Devil's curse and expect you to return him to the trough. Because he knows you guys are forgiving of his trespasses, as he would forgive you of yours. Can I get an 'Amen?"
... Just one more thing: he's asking if any of y'all have a teenage son who might be willing to work around his house while he recovers from his epic battle with the Devil.
And, for all you conservative family-values types lamenting the loss of one of your leaders, fear not. He's just going to check into rehab, do 60 days and then present himself to you guys as healed from the Devil's curse and expect you to return him to the trough. Because he knows you guys are forgiving of his trespasses, as he would forgive you of yours. Can I get an 'Amen?"
... Just one more thing: he's asking if any of y'all have a teenage son who might be willing to work around his house while he recovers from his epic battle with the Devil.
IN WHICH THE DCCWC INFLICTS REVENGE UPON THOSE WHO WOULD DARE TO CRITICIZE ONE OF THEIR OWN
We came into possession, today, of a letter from Lanny Hickman, chair of the Democratic Central Committee of Worcester County. Seems Lanny and the rest of the crew in Berlin are annoyed with their webmaster, Dave Suznavick, because of his "efforts to personally attack one of our members through the internet." There was no mention of who that member might be, or what form that attack might have taken. In a tersely-worded letter, Lanny fired Dave as the webmaster, saying "the Committee is of the opinion that such actions undermine the efforts of the Committee to build a cohesive, active and vital Democratic Party in Worcester County."
When we talked to Dave this afternoon, he did not appear to be heartbroken. " I haven't done any work for them since the primaries," he said. "It took me nearly 60 goddamn days to get paid for building the website. And they still haven't paid me for August and September."
Dave later forwarded us the email response he sent to Lanny the other committee members.
"Lanny:
I just got your letter relieving me of duty on the DCCWC website.
Perhaps you've noticed that I've not put any new information up on the website since the primary elections. That's because you haven't paid me for August or September, not that I care at this point.
But I'm appalled at your reasons for firing me, because it shows that the local democrats are, in reality, no better than the worst Repiglicans.... You fire me for exercising my First Amendment rights? You fire me because I dared to comment on and criticize the racist propaganda that Eddie Lee disseminated during his political campaign? Am I understanding you correctly? Please, let me ask you why you or any other central committee members didn't comment on or criticize Lee's choice of words? If you didn't comment because you agree with Lee, then you too are a bigot and are unfit for leadership of a political entity. By the same token, if you didn't speak up because doing so might have focused attention on the state of the local party, then you are still not fir to be a leader in the community. You should be ashamed of yourselves. God knows I'm now ashamed to have ever been associated with a political group that claims to uphold the American ideals, yet punishes someone exercising his constitutional rights and engaging in fair political comment and criticism."
Dave also told us about the last committee meeting he attended, during which Eddie Lee created such a furor that then-Chairman Kathy Phillips threw up her hands, saying she couldn't deal with the fighting and turned the meeting over to another member before leaving the building. Dave tells us he called Phillips on her cell phone and suggested she return to the meeting and assume control, and that Phillips was crying, saying she couldn't stand any more of Lee's disruptions. Dave also said Phillips told him that Lee had physically assaulted vice-chairman Tom Widerman at the previous meeting.
But the Democratic festivities were not over, by a long shot, according to Dave. He says that after Phillips returned to the meeting, Eddie Lee returned to hellraising. He objected to Dave being at the meeting and was overruled with a reminder that the meeting was open to the public. He then objected to Dave and his wife passing notes between one another, saying he was offended, and wanted the chair to order them to stop communicating. The chair declined. At the end of the meeting, Dave says he asked to time for public comment, where he reminded the committee of both his First Amendment right of free speech and his marital right to communicate with his with whenever he saw fit. And (drum roll) in the seconds before Hell Broke Loose, Dave says he told the committee that "if Mr. Lee doesn't like it, he can kiss my butt." (Cymbal crash) Well, witnesses say Lee jumped to his feet and charged Dave as if to fight, but was blocked by others. The disturbance was only quelled by committee member Dale Smack, a deputy sheriff, who escorted Lee from the property.
So it seems the Democratic Central Committee has a jump on their goals. It seems active. But the whole "vibrant and cohesive" thing needs some work.
When we talked to Dave this afternoon, he did not appear to be heartbroken. " I haven't done any work for them since the primaries," he said. "It took me nearly 60 goddamn days to get paid for building the website. And they still haven't paid me for August and September."
Dave later forwarded us the email response he sent to Lanny the other committee members.
"Lanny:
I just got your letter relieving me of duty on the DCCWC website.
Perhaps you've noticed that I've not put any new information up on the website since the primary elections. That's because you haven't paid me for August or September, not that I care at this point.
But I'm appalled at your reasons for firing me, because it shows that the local democrats are, in reality, no better than the worst Repiglicans.... You fire me for exercising my First Amendment rights? You fire me because I dared to comment on and criticize the racist propaganda that Eddie Lee disseminated during his political campaign? Am I understanding you correctly? Please, let me ask you why you or any other central committee members didn't comment on or criticize Lee's choice of words? If you didn't comment because you agree with Lee, then you too are a bigot and are unfit for leadership of a political entity. By the same token, if you didn't speak up because doing so might have focused attention on the state of the local party, then you are still not fir to be a leader in the community. You should be ashamed of yourselves. God knows I'm now ashamed to have ever been associated with a political group that claims to uphold the American ideals, yet punishes someone exercising his constitutional rights and engaging in fair political comment and criticism."
Dave also told us about the last committee meeting he attended, during which Eddie Lee created such a furor that then-Chairman Kathy Phillips threw up her hands, saying she couldn't deal with the fighting and turned the meeting over to another member before leaving the building. Dave tells us he called Phillips on her cell phone and suggested she return to the meeting and assume control, and that Phillips was crying, saying she couldn't stand any more of Lee's disruptions. Dave also said Phillips told him that Lee had physically assaulted vice-chairman Tom Widerman at the previous meeting.
But the Democratic festivities were not over, by a long shot, according to Dave. He says that after Phillips returned to the meeting, Eddie Lee returned to hellraising. He objected to Dave being at the meeting and was overruled with a reminder that the meeting was open to the public. He then objected to Dave and his wife passing notes between one another, saying he was offended, and wanted the chair to order them to stop communicating. The chair declined. At the end of the meeting, Dave says he asked to time for public comment, where he reminded the committee of both his First Amendment right of free speech and his marital right to communicate with his with whenever he saw fit. And (drum roll) in the seconds before Hell Broke Loose, Dave says he told the committee that "if Mr. Lee doesn't like it, he can kiss my butt." (Cymbal crash) Well, witnesses say Lee jumped to his feet and charged Dave as if to fight, but was blocked by others. The disturbance was only quelled by committee member Dale Smack, a deputy sheriff, who escorted Lee from the property.
So it seems the Democratic Central Committee has a jump on their goals. It seems active. But the whole "vibrant and cohesive" thing needs some work.
Monday, October 02, 2006
THOUGHT FOR TODAY
Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it. - Thomas Paine
EVER THE SELF-PROMOTER, EDDIE LEE HAS PROMOTED HIMSELF STRAIGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE
Local racist Eddie Lee apparently has gained the notice of the land sharks in the Maryland Attorney General's office for the cavalier fashion in which he posted the Authority Line on those racist political mailings when he was running for a seat on the Democratic Central Committee of Worcester County. According to the state board of elections in Baltimore, a complaint was forwarded to the AG's office on Sept. 5.... no word yet on the possibile penalties. Meanwhile, there's still no word from the national office of the NAACP on a complaint that was sent to them regarding Lee's bigoted comments. .... Maybe the NAACP thinks racism is only a bad thing if a black person is targeted, and not a bad thing if the president of one of their local chapters is the one spewing the hatred.
Sunday, October 01, 2006
THOUGHT FOR TODAY
You have to be realistic about terrorism. Certain groups of people, certain groups, Muslim fundamentalists, Christian fundamentalists, Jewish fundamentalists, and just plain guys from Montanta, are going to continue to make life in this country very interesting for a long, long time. - George Carlin
COPS, KIDS AND POLITICAL INTRIGUE IN SNOW HILL
We had a visit from the Snow Hill police last night, two in fact. The first came after our neighbor called us and said she had witnessed a carload of kids steal several political signs from our front yard. We called the police and made a report.
The second visit came less than 30 minutes later when there came a knock on the door with such force, you might have thought it was warrant service. Answering the door we met the police officers with two teenage girls from Snow Hill High School in tow. They were busted. And not only did they have ours signs, but the officer said a search of their car turned up 50-60 other political signs they had stolen from other yards. Their intent, they said, was to prank the high school by putting them in the front yard of the school. As it turned out, the trick was on them, as the officer forced the girls to return to every residence, knock on the doors tell the people they had stolen the signs, apologize and repost the signs. We don't know if the girls were charged, but the officer told us they could be under federal rules. "It's the same as stealing mail," he told us. Yikes.
We think this presents an excellent opportunity for educators to impart an object lesson. Specifically, this issue raises questions about political free speech and what law enforcement authorities might view as attempts to suppress that speech, and not to mention why laws forbid posting political signs on government property. In fact, there's a whole class period of lessons here on the Bill of Rights. Educators should seize the opportunity to teach it.
The second visit came less than 30 minutes later when there came a knock on the door with such force, you might have thought it was warrant service. Answering the door we met the police officers with two teenage girls from Snow Hill High School in tow. They were busted. And not only did they have ours signs, but the officer said a search of their car turned up 50-60 other political signs they had stolen from other yards. Their intent, they said, was to prank the high school by putting them in the front yard of the school. As it turned out, the trick was on them, as the officer forced the girls to return to every residence, knock on the doors tell the people they had stolen the signs, apologize and repost the signs. We don't know if the girls were charged, but the officer told us they could be under federal rules. "It's the same as stealing mail," he told us. Yikes.
We think this presents an excellent opportunity for educators to impart an object lesson. Specifically, this issue raises questions about political free speech and what law enforcement authorities might view as attempts to suppress that speech, and not to mention why laws forbid posting political signs on government property. In fact, there's a whole class period of lessons here on the Bill of Rights. Educators should seize the opportunity to teach it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
