Do not — do not — f**** with the Morgan-Man…

Today was my court hearing. It’s a follow-up to what happened here. Below you see my 15-slide presentation I had prepared in electronic form, in letter-size print-out form, and in oversize full-color hard copy ready for presentation on an easel. Sixty dollars worth of Kinko’s product, ready to present in combat against a $204 ticket…written out way, way back in June…

So what do you think happened.

A. The judge was overwhelmed by the sheer power and force of my irrefutable logic, that the sign objectively failed to fulfill the non-negotiable standards imposed on it by Sections 2A.12, 2A.16, 2A.22, 2B.03 and 2B.19 of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, published by the United States Government and customized by the California Department of Transportation.

B. The judge was unprepared for the extremely compelling case I made that it was simply not reasonable or realistic to expect motorists to see such a tiny road sign, around so sharp a bend in the road, amidst such a great multitude of other distractions. The video really put this case over the top when I captured all those cars ignoring the sign that they probably couldn’t see any better than I could anyway. And then of course, as frosting on the cake, there is the matter that the sign is plainly NOT legal.

C. The judge was completely bowled-over by the sensible arguments I made in favor of u-turns being allowed at that intersection. No one can recall who ever made the dumbass stupid decision to prohibit u-turns at that location, but they will make every effort to hunt down the miserable sonofabitch, and may God have mercy on his soul.

D. The judge had the wind knocked out of her sails by my water-tight argument that for 206 years now, it has been ingrained into the spirit of American jurisprudence a neverendingly hostile reaction to any hint of an all-powerful legislature; and, that an all-powerful legislature is precisely what we create when laws lose all force and effect as soon as they they apply to other laws. We are bound to follow the law, be it sensible or not, especially when we enforce that law against others. The judge was particularly impressed when I quoted Chief Justice John Marshall from the Marbury vs. Madison decision of 1803. Surely that applies to the case at hand, does it not, for if a sign is enforceable at 12″ wide and 17″ tall, when the standards plainly state that it should be 24″ square or higher — why stop there? Make it as big as the ticket I was written for disregarding it. Make it as big as a Post-It note. Why not? Where does it end? And for that reason, you must dismiss this case and yank the sign out by the roots…or else the standards have no meaning…and we are living in a tyrannical government of our own making.

E. The judge dismissed the case when the cop didn’t show up.

F. I’m guilty, and sentenced to a dog’s lifespan of bicycling to work.

This little drama has been going on for three months now. And I can safely say that every single person I see on a regular basis…son…girlfriend…co-workers…UPS guy…lady who does our dry-cleaning…is sick and tired of hearing from me about u-turn signs. And curious about how things were going to turn out this morning. Both. Feeling conflicted. And letting it show.

Meanwhile, I have been consumed in an endless morass of obsession over road signs that are unreasonably small. I’ve become quite a difficult person to have in proximity, and occasionally something of an embarrassment.

But that all ends now.

Maybe.

From Top of the Ticket.

Hat tip: Treacher.

The Editors of National Review Online weigh in on the dismantling of the missile defense shield in Europe…

President Obama knows how to put a smile on faces in Tehran and Moscow: This morning, he announced the abandonment of plans to develop a small missile-defense system in Eastern Europe.

This overturns one of the major diplomatic and national-security achievements of the Bush years. When George W. Bush came into office in 2001, the United States lacked long-range missile defenses. Today, Americans enjoy a rudimentary shield against North Korea as it strives to produce intercontinental ballistic missiles. There is no such protection for the United States or Europe against a similar threat from Iran, but agreements to build a powerful radar in the Czech Republic and to base interceptors in Poland had put NATO on a course for preparedness.

And here‘s Mister Wonderful promising just five months ago not to do this very thing. Perhaps that’s why the Prime Minister of Poland won’t take Hillary’s phone calls. Chalk up another foreign policy defeat for President Sottero.

It’s a funny thing about liberals. One of the many things that makes their decisions wrong much more often than right, is that they’re constantly in search of the “prime time television” moment in which a decision that looks good, instantly, to those who wouldn’t know a good decision if it smacked ’em in the face, has good results immediately as well as in the longer term. This often doesn’t work.

But here’s the twist: This “hawk versus dove” thing comes up, and then they manage to land on the wrong side of both of those goals — which, in other walks of life, are so often mutually exclusive from each other. They manage to make an enormous tactical mistake while looking like dorks. And the “smartest” among them seem clueless about it. It’s as if they really do expect you can disarm yourself, place the blade of the enemy’s knife against your own throat, and everyone all over the place will think that’s a really cool move. Well, here’s some truth for you. It’s not a cool move; nobody thinks it is; you look like a nimrod when you do it; and as far as wise decisions go, it’s boneheaded. To say nothing of dishonorable, when it sends our allies up the creek without a paddle.

I don’t need to elaborate on any of that. Announcing His own decision yesterday, The Holy One used one of my most-deplored phrases…I have no idea where I read it…but I could just go on that. “After an extensive review” or “After an extensive process” or some such.

I recall my mother, who is long dead by now, had another favorite: “At this time” or “At this point in time.” She was a very wise, perceptive woman, and made a point of noticing someone was always up to skulduggery and shenanigans anytime she heard some variant of that phrase. And if you were stupid enough to use “At this particular point in time” around Mary Ann Freeberg, something would be slammed in your face, probably. The door, if it was there, or the phone call would be dropped after a terse but courteous forever-farewell.

I didn’t think much of this at the time. But in the years that have passed, I see she was on to something. There are some sequences of words that honest people have no business using. There are some sequences of words that, if you hear them, you know someone’s snookering you. You’d be ahead of the game just terminating the conversation on the spot. President Obama’s decision, and His way of talking about it, reminds me that my favorite most-loathed phrase does indeed belong in the top slot — I think it does. When’s the last time you heard someone in a position of authority say “After an extensive review”…and then whatever comes afterward is a good idea? No, that hasn’t happened to you. Hasn’t happened to anyone. You know why? Because if it’s a good idea there’s no reason for him to say how extensive the review was — is there? If it leads to good results, the guy in a position of authority can wait, and then point. If it makes a lot of sense when people first hear it, he can stand on that. “After an extensive review” is a phrase used by those who know, down to the marrow of their bones, they’ll be deprived of both of those advantages. And they know you know. And they’re trying to make you forget.

Sorry Mom, I like my phrase better than yours. Living in different times, I guess. I’ll still give you credit for a good idea though.

In fact, I’ve decided to add on to the list…

1. After an extensive process
2. Let me be clear
3. At this ((particular) point in) time
4. In service of a more well-rounded education
5. To serve our increasingly diverse community
6. Smacks of racism
7. Let me (just) say this about that
8. Heteronormative
9. Patriarchy
10. Stereotyping
11. Blue-ribbon panel (commission)
12. Basically
13. Totally
14. Thought/hate crime
15. Separation of church and state
16. His oil buddies
17. (Wall Street) greed
18. Common good
19. Will of The People
20. Disappearing middle class
21. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer
22. Mental/verbal abuse

When there’s time, I’ll go over the What Gave You Away? list of things stupid people say, to put others on the alert to the fact that they’re stupid. Then I’ll go over the list of Words I Totally Hate. There may be redundancy, or there may be far less overlap than I’m hoping…since the Gave-You-Away list is for stupid folks, and this one is for dishonest ones.

Wonder if I missed anything?

Anyway, there’s little point to debating this decision. It’s a disaster. President Obama Himself knows it to be a disaster. You can tell by the way He talks about it.

Update 9/19/09:

From Dad…

23. Let’s move on/Time to move on

From my favorite gal…

24. Trust me
25. (Why) would I lie (to you)?
26. Capiche?

From Blogger Friend Phil…

27. Dialectic

From me…again…

28. Sit down and talk out our differences with our enemies
29. Save money and save the planet (Hey…if the planet’s a goner, what do you care how much $$$ you have??)
30. Xtians
31. Sky fairy/Spaghetti monster

From me, inspired by what Dad said…

32. Distraction
33. Private life separate from his public service

From me, after browsing Feministing looking for some more ideas…

34. Hostile work environment
35. (Basic) human right(s)
36. Loving couple
37. Glass ceiling
38. Making inroads
39. Representative of the community
40. Social justice

It’s only obvious what the old boy is trying to set up…

Guys on the radio are betting by the end of the day, he’s got to eat his words.

I’d take that bet. democrats have no history. Their scandals bother them a little bit for a day or two; they don’t take ’em down.

And Carter will never do anything to give us a better cause to stop taking him seriously, than his one term as our President. Anyone who can forget that can forget anything.

Like, on a hot stove (hat tip to Cassy).

[Olympia] Snowe (Maine), who was one of three Republicans who backed the $787 billion economic stimulus package, was being lobbied heavily by the White House, and some centrists view her refusal to strike a deal with Baucus as troubling. But concerns about how the plan would be paid for prompted her to back away in the hours before its release.

“I do have concerns and I’m not sure they can be addressed before he issues [legislation] tomorrow,” Snowe said.

This leads to an interesting discussion about the readiness, willingness and ability — or lack thereof — of the democrats to use fancy procedural moves to pass the bill through the Senate by simple majority, thereby leaving an indelible fingerprint of the democrat party on our nation’s brand new health care plan.

“Brace yourselves!”

Blogsister Daphne at Jaded Haven: The word “racist(m)” has been bludgeoned into shapelessness, beyond any form of possible usefulness. Just like “shit,” “piss,” “ass,” “fuck” and “damn” lose meaning if you throw them around too carelessly. Now that we’ve elected a President who’s going to get us past all our racial-tension problems for good — Hah! — we find the R-word has been worn out like no other word has ever been worn-out before.

James Taranto has some more thoughts on this.

Neo-Neocon has come up with a new word for people who use the R-word against anyone who might possibly disagree with them, for whatever reason: “Racers.” I like it. Like it a lot. Truthers…birthers…racers. Hat tip again to Gerard.

Update 9/16/09: Jimmy Carter is helping to wear it out too.

Racer.

Sowell.

Hat tip to Linkiest.

Boortz.

Compare and contrast: That oh-so-classy Alan Colmes who gets oh-so-many extra props for being oh-so-civilized and observing proper rules of decorum and enjoying sophisticated good-natured calm cool and collected exchanges of ideas with his good friend Hannity…is indulging in Maher humor. And when people call him on it he says it’s their problem.

CNSNews.

Gateway Pundit.

Hat tip to Sister Toldjah.

Throughout all of my mortal life, conservatives have been on the defensive about two things: That they lack compassion, and that they think of and treat people “different” from themselves as inferiors. Time after time I see a prominent conservative granted the opportunity to do the right thing, and take a pass on doing it, only because doing the right thing would reverse some of his “progress” in trying to deny or refute one of those, or both. They are “When did you stop beating your wife” questions: Once you are accused, any action you take to address the accusation in any way whatsoever, only does more damage. Denying it does the greatest damage.

I’d like to see liberals become defensive about something: Their tendency is to make bad decisions, because they aren’t motivated to understand why someone might disagree with what they propose to do. To them, it’s always something that begins with “you’re”: You’re stingy, you’re cold-hearted, you’re mean, you lack compassion, you’re a racist, you’re a homophobe, you’re just a jerk, you cling to your gun and your Bible…

For the good of the country, I’d like to see liberals placed under suspicion for this, everywhere they go, just as conservatives are placed under suspicion of being racists and sexist pigs — and are never, ever finished proving that they aren’t these things. I’d like to see liberals caught on a spinning hamster-exercise-wheel of trying to disprove this thing about themselves, that they cannot intellectually grapple with an opposing argument, and the ad hom is their only refuge. Because in many cases, from what I’ve seen, it’s true.

Update: Gerard wants to push the definition all the way out:

“A raaaaacist is anyone who’s winning an argument with a liberal.”