Eureka, zounds, and shaz-z-z-zam-m-m, you have stumbled, tumbled, fumbled, and bumbled your way in the environs of the Giddy Gang to (or maybe been attacked by) the TRUTH – there should be NO amendment banning flag-burning (Lexington Herald-Leader – June 26). The creatures of the congress (called by some the “lost lagoon”) are already in 2006-election mode, however, so what better to do than wave the flag, never realizing that the idiot who burns it only furnishes the opportunity for more electioneering patriotism? You even scored well by condemning the Supremes for approving the right of Lexington entrepreneurs to bulldoze your house when it suits, confirming at the same time, of course, that if strict constructionists are not soon placed on the Court, the nation will suffer in the extreme. Obviously, you will be rooting for Scalia or Thomas to take over the Chief’s seat if Rehnquist retires. Nah! You probably will go looking for Anita Hill, like the Metzenbaum and Kennedy hatchet guys did in 1991, though old Clarence is on the Court and Anita is well…where is Anita? Collecting those royalties (or is it speaking fees?) maybe, if her experience still sells.
Then, you came up with this gem of wisdom: “Condemn it so the public owns its own water system? Hell, yes.” Have you thought about carrying that little statement to its logical conclusion? Apparently you have, or you wouldn’t have made it. So…the electricity company(ies) and phone company(ies) should by all means be condemned so the public will own its own vital power and communication systems. Right? After all, not a gallon of water could be pumped or processed without electricity, so condemning the power entity actually is more important than condemning the water company, just the bunch of pipes and process through which electricity makes everything possible. Do you also think the public should own all the vehicles driven on publicly owned highways? If so, look out Toyota and General Motors…Boy Columnist (Keeling) is on your trail. Just keep following this line of thought to its logical conclusion and – bingo – you have the public owning everything…another Soviet thing, in other words. Yuk!
As for the lead editorial…PDA (taking it from the poor [us] and giving it to the rich [the horsey gang, among others]) puts the paper in an awkward position…sorta condemnation by stealth (or actually stealing) rather than constitutional fiat. Besides which, bribery has always been sorta frowned upon. I would gladly take $$$ for promising not to put a trailer in my backyard, but who cares? But…eating up some more green stuff for a resort hotel, huge arena, huge swimming pool, and huge other amenities and huge parking lots for everything from mobile homes to maybe a runway for private jets (the Horse Park Paradise) – ah, that’s okay, never mind the World Monuments or whatever…like that Bluegrass Area that simply must be preserved at all costs! I’m sure you don’t see an inconsistency here…or do you, perhaps? Perhaps, considering the need for new housing for an ever increasing population, you would be willing for the government to just build a couple stories on top of your house, or at least over the backyard and patio. Just think of the income!
And so it goes!!!
Jim Clark
No comments:
Post a Comment